1911Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
18,611 Posts
And people bitch about LEO's being "overgunned"... :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
693 Posts
That was tragic! I have many friends that are LEO's and many have secretly told me that is the kind of situation they fear the most! Too bad the bystanders that held the man didn't rough him up a bit...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Not to minimize this tragic event, but does anyone see the irony of this "evil assault weapon" being fed with politically-correct 10-round magazines? More gun-control-does-nothing fodder that will never be considered by the mainstream press.

And, yes. How DOES this person own guns? Well, when guns are outlawed, only outlaws, well, you know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Oh the criminals can get their weapons no doubt about that.

Its the honest citizens who obtain their weapons and CCW legally that are made to feel like criminals by their friends, co-workers and some police officers.

In many areas "long guns" do not require much at all in the way of background checks.

This nut job must have given warning signs to people he came in contact with though.

I for one never believed that high powered rifles were somthing that average americans needed unless it was for hunting purposes. Since you cant keep one with you at all times they are almost useless for self defense...unless your planning a riot or an Iraqi invasion in your front yard :rolleyes:

My best friend bitterly disagrees with me about his rifles and his "need for them" but I just dont see it personally.

Hand guns and maybe one .12 Gauge per household for self-defense should be all that is needed.

We shouldnt be selling weapons that allow people to hide in tree lines or in unreachable locations and kill with impunity to civilians...but that is just me I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,500 Posts
I for one never believed that high powered rifles were somthing that average americans needed unless it was for hunting purposes. Since you cant keep one with you at all times they are almost useless for self defense...unless your planning a riot or an Iraqi invasion in your front yard
First, welcome to the forum.

I must disagree with your statement above.

What you are proposing has the effect (as has been noted many, many times before) of demonizing the firearm. The gun is not at fault.


We shouldnt be selling weapons that allow people to hide in tree lines or in unreachable locations and kill with impunity to civilians...but that is just me I guess.
What you are proposing here is to ban ALL firearms. Even a .22 can kill at extended ranges, as well as most handguns of all calibers. When I could, I used to shoot bowling pins at 100 yards, offhand, with my .44 Magnum.

Guns are machines; tools; inanimate objects.

In order to have the proper elements of any criminal act, two things must be present: mens rea , the criminal mind (intent to carry out the criminal act, and the acteus reus, the criminal act itself. A firearm--indeed, no inanimate object--is capable of forming criminal intent.

Moreover, using the same logic, should we not then ban automobiles, the leading killers of human beings in this country? After all, who really needs a car that can go above the speed limit?

Guns did not kill those Officers; they were used by a human being for lethal and criminal intent. Think about it.

Again, welcome to the Forum.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,416 Posts
Dr.Data said:


I for one never believed that high powered rifles were somthing that average americans needed unless it was for hunting purposes. Since you cant keep one with you at all times they are almost useless for self defense...unless your planning a riot or an Iraqi invasion in your front yard :rolleyes:

So what guns do you think it is OK for me to own?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
Dr.Data.

If you are suggesting that an "assault weapon" ban and possibly a "hunting rifle" ban would be OK, and that firearms ownership should be limited to handguns and perhaps one shotgun. consider that your handguns and probably your shotgun would be next to go. You may wish to undertake a more detailed study of the Second Amendment and also the general history of gun control efforts, and possibly reconsider your opinion.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,416 Posts
hjk said:
Dr.Data.

If you are suggesting that an "assault weapon" ban and possibly a "hunting rifle" ban would be OK, and that firearms ownership should be limited to handguns and perhaps one shotgun. consider that your handguns and probably your shotgun would be next to go.
I shoot IDPA and 3 gun at a club that sponsors some big Skeet and trap matches. There are several of these shotgunners that wouldn't care one bit if the ATF came across the road and took our rifles and pistols, as long as they get to keep their 12ga over and under they don't care. That has always amazed me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
:D

I understand your points. (had this same discussion with Lee many times)


I guess it has more to do with the fact that I cant find any use for one.

If I cant hit him with my .45 he is not much of a threat to me! (I dont anticipate going up against someone with a long rifile in combat either and if he "snipes" me Im probably dead already)

If they are that far away, Ill take cover in a ditch and wait for them to come to me...then its a .45 in the head for him!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,101 Posts
jrjordan said:
How do you prevent these kinds of senseless acts.
Put paranoid schizophrenics in state mental hospitals for a lengthy period of treatment and observation. If they respond to treatment, and its determined that they are no longer dangerous, make release conditional on continued outpatient follow-up and court mandated anti psychotic medication.

If they dont respond to medication keep them there indefinitely. Society cannot allow paranoid people that dont know the difference between fantasy and reality to walk among us.

The same thing should be done with dangerous criminals. Any criminal still dangerous after his prison sentence is complete should be civilly committed.

Dr.Data said:
I guess it has more to do with the fact that I cant find any use for one.
Judging from some of your other comments in this thread your opinion on what is useful or useless is of no value to me whatsoever.

I am comforted by some of the other responses to your babble however.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,493 Posts
Dr.Data said:
:D



I guess it has more to do with the fact that I cant find any use for one.




You may believe that you have no use for anything other than a handgun and a shotgun. That is your personal belief and you are certainly entitled to it. However, others also have their own personal beliefs and personal freedom. You may wish to consider the merit of not depriving them of either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
67 Posts
Dr.Data said:
:D

I understand your points. (had this same discussion with Lee many times)


I guess it has more to do with the fact that I cant find any use for one.

If I cant hit him with my .45 he is not much of a threat to me! (I dont anticipate going up against someone with a long rifile in combat either and if he "snipes" me Im probably dead already)

If they are that far away, Ill take cover in a ditch and wait for them to come to me...then its a .45 in the head for him!
Let us NEVER forget that the 2nd ammendment isn't about hunting, nor is it about home defense in the now-traditional sense. It's about a standing army of people to either defend this country against foreign invaders ar against our own tyrannical government, should, God forbid, it ever come to that. I own military-style weapons only for those reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
No need to be defensive. We are still on the same side.

I may not like military style rifles but that is certainly your perogative (I used to own a pre-ban Ak-47).


I wouldnt expect you guys to change your opinion of the "need" any more than I would expect anyone of convincing me that I "need" a Glock instead of my Kimber and Sig Sauers :D

Sorry about the Babble. :rolleyes:

Maybe Im too young or somthing but the thought of a land invasion being possible seems to me to be about as likely as me winning the lottery tomorrow.

But hey...to each his own (Wolverines!!!)


Edit: Mus I havent checked here but most boards like this have an AUP that strictly prohibits personal attacks. You may want to stick to the topic at hand and avoid falling into pre-teen antics. The moderators here seem pretty active as I noticed I had a post deleted because it had bad word in it regarding what my response would be to a brother in law who was anti-gun.

Regards
Allen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,084 Posts
Dr.Data said:
...(had this same discussion with Lee many times)...
Maybe I missed something here but who is "Lee"?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
877 Posts
Depending on the context, I find the concept of "need" either amusing or disheartening when referring to firearms.

What in the world does "need" have to do with anything? While this isn't the America it used to be, there are still places where you can exercise at least a shadow of the real individual liberty we once had. In America, merely wanting something (and being able to pay for it) is entirely sufficient. Why you want it is supposed to be your own business.

Expectations of justifying why someone "needs" an object are on the early parts of the proverbial "slippery slope."
 

·
In Memoriam
Joined
·
683 Posts
Okay, gentlemen, keep it civil. If you can't remember the rules you agreed to when you joined this board, please go back and re-read them.

I, too, vehemently disagree with Dr. Data's assertion that no one needs "assault rifles" or "high powered rifles," but he has a right to his opinion, even when he's wrong.

Maybe instead of informing someone that we have no use for his or her opinion, we should try educating that person. From what I've seen, Dr. Data has admitted that his opinion was based on the fact that he personally has no need for a rifle, and he seems to be softening his stance.

Dr. Data, pleae remember that on the errornet, it easy to wtie down your thoughts, but hard for others reading your posts to 'read between the lines.' Your initial post could have been seen as inflammatory, and there are some folks who just can't resist taking the bait.

To answer the initial question, the best way to keep incidents like this from happening is for people to take responsibility fo rtheir own safety, and have with them the means with which to defend themselves. Most, if not all, of the mass murders commited in recent years could have been stopped by one of the other people present being armed, and many might have been avoided due to the perpetrator not knowing if any of his intended victims are armed or not.

The LEO Duty board isn't the proper placefor this subject. The police don't make the laws, and we don't "allow" mentally disturbed or emotionally disturbed persons to have guns.

I don't see how this subject can be discussed further without someone getting his ro her feelings hurt, so I'm closing it.

In the future, gentlemen, let's keep it civil.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top