Gun Control: Bill to Ban Clips Over 10 Rounds

@CoastalRat,

CoastalRat wrote:

Problem with your thinking here Set, is that those who legally carry have firearms training. And guess what? We would not be shooting wildly into a crowd of people as this guy was. We would have targeted only him and been sure of the target before firing. It is called responsible gun ownership. Could there be the possibility of missing the target and hitting someone else? Of course, only a fool would claim that could never happen. But I still bet the odds would have been much better for everyone involved had there been someone there with a firearm.

What a complete and total crock of ****. Seriously.

If you took the time to be 'sure of your target' before firing, just as many people would be dead and injured. Do you not realize that the whole thing took 15-20 seconds?

If you are claiming that you are going to draw your concealed piece, click the safety off, accurately identify WHO is shooting - it may not immediately be obvious - draw sight on a moving target and hit him - within 15 or 20 seconds? You're ******* kidding yourself. Or confusing life with a movie.

Multiply this times a whole crowd of people and the bloodbath would have been truly enormous. I just can't imagine the mindset that thinks that this would be a better alternative.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

That is possible Cy. To be honest, other than knowing the basics, I'm unaware of the time frame involved in the shooting. Given what you have written, someone with a concealed gun probably would not have been able to stop him prior to his stopping to reload. I will concede that point gladly.

0 Replies

@CoastalRat,

That is another implicit assumption. The perpetrator was a legal gun owner. There is not good reason to assume that because someone has been trained, they will use a firearm effectively in a time of stress. Have you ever been in combat? I have, it changes everything. There is no requirement to have firearms training to purchase a firearm in Arizona, and no requirement for training or a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The perpetrator bought his gun at a gun show with an instant background clearance, and he was good to go.

You really shouldn't make claims which are not based on the truth of the situation. It could easily have been the shoot out at the OK corral if there had been several armed people present. Do you remember the Doctor who was targeted for performing abortions, and murdered in the street? He was accompanied by a volunteer body guard, who was armed, a retired police officer. The perpetrator shot them both dead.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

See my post above written while you were writing your response. I concede your point on the time frame and the ability of someone to have stopped him and made any difference quicker than what occurred.

1 Reply

@CoastalRat,

CoastalRat wrote:

See my post above written while you were writing your response. I concede your point on the time frame and the ability of someone to have stopped him and made any difference quicker than what occurred.

Ok, cool.

I think in the vast majority of gun crime cases, things happen SO FAST that you don't have time to respond in the fashion you might wish to. Highly trained police and military guys who are on alert - yeah. You or me, focusing on something else? Not so much. This is my biggest complaint with the 'arm everyone!' movement...

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

There's another factor the gun crowd always ignore, and it affects even soldiers and police. The shooter knows he is going to shoot--you don't. That's how a shooter was able to kill the doctor and his bodyguard before the bodyguard could respond with his gun.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Even I admit that there are and always will be instances where being armed would not make a difference. Only a fool claims otherwise. I may be a clown, but I'm not a fool. lol But there are instances where being armed would make a difference. And that is why I am a proponent of concealed carry laws. For the times it would make a difference.

Gotta run to a meeting that I would just as soon miss. Enjoyed the discussion. Almost always do with you and Set. Even when we each think the other is an idiot. lol Take care guys.

Edit: Not that we think the other is an idiot in this case. Gosh, I'm gonna stick my foot in my mouth again. You know what I mean, right? (note to self...Oh crap, just shut up Wayne and walk away.)

0 Replies

There was an armed bystander at the Giffords event. He almost shot one of the guys who tackled Loughner.

source

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

He almost shot one of the guys who tackled Loughner.

The armed bystander must have been a liberal.....

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cyclo, in this type of situation even 10 seconds is a really long time for those that are aware of their surroundings.
Nothing you have ever posted leads me to believe that you're even slightly aware of your surroundings outside of your comfort zone.

Also, promise all of us that you will never/ever pick up a Glock pistol.
The safety is built into the Glock trigger, there is no clicking the safety off, you just pull the trigger.

0 Replies

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/dense

Quote:
2. stupid; slow-witted; dull.
3. intense; extreme: dense ignorance.

Cyclotroll

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

It was exactly the requirement to change chips which led to the guy getting captured.

Cycloptichorn

LOL,
did he switch from corn chips to potato chips?

BTW dumb ass, you may be a super liberal, but unarmed people tend to
wait for the mag change before making their move against a shooter.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

their move, mister master speller...

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

their move, mister master speller...

Rockfish, you are dense.

1 Reply

@H2O MAN,

if one is to make fun of another's grammar errors, it is wise to check his own post first for same...

(dence?)

Shocked

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Rockfish, sounds like you mixed up your medications again... get some rest.

0 Replies

I think someone needs to spend some of their ammo money on a spellcheck program...

1 Reply

@Rockhead,

Just drink yourself a beer, sit back and relax... the effects will wear off in a few hours.

0 Replies

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

What is your opinion of the proposal as a gun enthusiast?

The first thing I noticed is that there was no mention of "assault weapons". Previous magazine limits were buried in the middle of a ban on assault weapons.

It seems that, either they recognize that banning cosmetic features on guns (like a pistol grip on a rifle) will not pass Constitutional muster, or they recognize that the NRA will successfully defeat any federal assault weapons ban.

Anyway, on the large-magazine ban itself, I guess my feelings are mixed. I don't really like it. But on the other hand, unlike measures that seem designed solely to hassle gun owners, this one is aimed at something that might limit some shooting sprees.

So I guess I'll stand neutral on the question of whether it should pass.

But I'll be very surprised if the NRA allows the House of Representatives to pass the bill.

0 Replies

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

your arrogance is topped only by your ignorance, dave...

I don't see any ignorance or arrogance.

What could possibly be wrong with wishing her husband had been able to defend himself?

0 Replies

Gun Control: Bill to Ban Clips Over 10 Rounds

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know