100% of Florida Sheriffs Refuse to Enforce federal Gun Bans

[Cor_Cordis]

Yes!

When will we address all these “assault knives” and “assault body parts”?

FBI: Yes, more people murdered with knives, body parts and blunt objects than rifles in 2011

fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

 

[scipio337]

I carry a model 22 Glock, CatholicGeek. The standard magazine that comes with that handgun holds 15 rounds. It takes me about one full second to drop an empty magazine and replace it with a fully loaded magazine. If Obama’s silly proposal to limit magazines to 10 rounds were to actually become law, it would take me one full second longer to fire 30 rounds using 3 magazines instead of two. Will that extra second make you sleep soundly at night?

Incidentally, any weapon that is used against you is an “assault weapon.” Just saying …

And when another shooting occurs with 10 round magazines (which is what was used for a majority of the Virginia Tec shooting), the goalposts will be moved to “why does anyone need larger than a 5 round magazine??”

Emotional responses not based in any real solution will continue, (and proposed legislation will continue to fail).

 

[Irish_Cabbie]

Catholic Geek, don’t you realize that the gun-grabbers are all too prepared to work incrementally? If they can limit magazine sizes to 10 rounds, in a few years they will be saying that no one “needs” to fire 10 rounds that quickly. Accordingly, they will then be calling for a new round of “sensible” and “reasonable” gun control laws. They will then be saying that no one but the police should own semi-automatic “assault handguns.” Those who are hostile to the Second Amendment will be saying that a homeowner doesn’t “need” anything but a revolver to defend his family and property.

I am one gun owner that has seen too many of these “reasonable” slippery slopes. I’m opposed to any changes in existing law that would ban what isn’t already banned or otherwise restricted.

 

[Gricken]

Actually, the Kentucky Rifle is a far superior weapon to the Brown Bess. It is lighter and far more accurate. The Bess (or Land Design Service Musket) was faster to load, but its effective range was about 50 yards. An experienced shooter (hunter) with an American Long Rifle could easily be lethal out to 200 yards.

Hate to be “That guy” But the Kentucky rifle, while indeed more accurate and faster to load, had one glaring issue. It could not use a bayonet, which accounted for most deaths at that time. This is why the Brown Bess was still used more often than rifles by regular infantry, while the Kentucky rifle was used by sharpshooters. It was deadly, but it wouldn’t help you in hand to hand like a brown bess with a bayonet did. Almost all battles back then would end with both sides drawing bayonets and engaging in melee.

huh. I guess even back then sharp objects killed more people than bullets.

 

[Irish_Cabbie]

And when another shooting occurs with 10 round magazines (which is what was used for a majority of the Virginia Tec shooting), the goalposts will be moved to “why does anyone need larger than a 5 round magazine??”

Emotional responses not based in any real solution will continue, (and proposed legislation will continue to fail).

Well said, Scipio. As you can see, we think alike. I was about 10 seconds behind you expressing the same sentiment.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

And when another shooting occurs with 10 round magazines (which is what was used for a majority of the Virginia Tec shooting), the goalposts will be moved to “why does anyone need larger than a 5 round magazine??”

Emotional responses not based in any real solution will continue, (and proposed legislation will continue to fail).

Perhaps Muskets will be less “assault-y” for the Left.

And after that - mere kitchen knives and forks.

Then - butter knives.

And finally - sticks and rocks.

Utopia is not very far away, I’m sure.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Yes, your position is one of mere opinion based on a politically manufactured “trend” that bears no effective relevance to murder rates in general. And in fact, your politically motivated talking points ignore the most salient “trend” of all - the trend of HAND GUN murders.

So once again:

According to FBI data, in 2010:

6,009 murders were committed with HAND GUNS

358 were committed with rifles (of various types not limited to “assault” rifles)

washingtonexaminer.com/if-you…6#.UNOSLrb4-pF

So again I ask you, why the emphasis on the politically defined and maligned “assault weapons”?

Hand guns are a problem as well. I have addressed this post on another thread.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Police do in fact kill people under rather dubious circumstances.

cato.org/raidmap

Interesting case of a veteran with a CCW killed by the Las Vegas police. Read all the articles and I think you may find it interesting.

statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/category/erik-scott-case/

And another about a Marine veteran mowed down in his own home. The number of shots fired by the police Keystone Cops, sorry- tactical response team- is truly frightening. Amazing no neighbors were killed. Can’t remember if any of the articles include the video, but it’s on you tube and any competent officer I’ve talked to about it finds it appalling.

statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/category/jose-guerena-case/

For those who believe that the police are somehow superhuman instead of ordinary human beings like us, it may be shocking. Some police departments train very well, some very poorly, some individual officers train professionally regardless of their departments philosophy-- similarly some officers do the absolute minimum. In some major police departments that’s just shooting once annually from a fixed position with stationary targets.

Oh, as a side note, I do realize what police face. The dynamics of a gun fight. Times to draw, reaction times etc., here’s an interesting site. If you look at the interactions you’ll see that the person in the reactive mode (trained officer times on the site) is always at a disadvantage to the person in the active mode. (Think OODA loop- action beats reaction)The disadvantage becomes even greater when you realize the officer motions were based on time to react to a light-- a very simple shoot/no shoot/stop shooting decision vice the much more complex actual response to a subjects motions. That is the orient/decide portion of the OODA loop becomes more complicated and takes longer.

forcescience.org/demos.html

You’ll need to read the papers to understand how they measured the action times, as well as how many rounds can be fired in the relevant time periods.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Hand guns are a problem as well. I have addressed this post on another thread.

Would you like to ban HAND GUNS?

 

[shipwrkd]

Up in Michigan we call it Soda

That’s your opinion. Over in Minnesota we call it Pop

 

[CatholicGeek1]

So 10 rounds is a morally acceptable body count for you?

However - 11 bodies or more is outrageous and should require legislation?

Well first of all, rounds does not equal body count. Fortunately, most of the people doing the shooting aren’t that good at it. What requires legislation are things that are possible solutions for reducing the number of deaths. I believe this would go in that direction.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Ah, so you don’t recognize the definition of “assault weapon”?

However - the number 10 is morally acceptable for you?

Why?

Because in my opinion less than ten rounds would not necessarily be sufficient for home/self defense, but I believe ten rounds is sufficient in the case of someone trained for using the firearm unless they are going against a larger than normal number of attackers. More rounds than that in a clip/magazine makes it more efficient to kill larger numbers of people without a corresponding increase in effectiveness from a defense perspective.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

When will we address all these “assault knives” and “assault body parts”?

FBI: Yes, more people murdered with knives, body parts and blunt objects than rifles in 2011

fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8

Actually, more people are killed by GUNS, than by all knives, blunt objects, and body parts. Why is this discussion limited to rifles? Is it because it gives you some sort of argument?

Also, we will not ban knives and body parts because they have other uses than killing. The only purpose of a gun is to kill something. Target shooting is just practice for killing something.

 

[CatholicGeek1]

Police do in fact kill people under rather dubious circumstances.

cato.org/raidmap

Interesting case of a veteran with a CCW killed by the Las Vegas police. Read all the articles and I think you may find it interesting.

statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/category/erik-scott-case/

And another about a Marine veteran mowed down in his own home. The number of shots fired by the police Keystone Cops, sorry- tactical response team- is truly frightening. Amazing no neighbors were killed. Can’t remember if any of the articles include the video, but it’s on you tube and any competent officer I’ve talked to about it finds it appalling.

statelymcdanielmanor.wordpress.com/category/jose-guerena-case/

For those who believe that the police are somehow superhuman instead of ordinary human beings like us, it may be shocking. Some police departments train very well, some very poorly, some individual officers train professionally regardless of their departments philosophy-- similarly some officers do the absolute minimum. In some major police departments that’s just shooting once annually from a fixed position with stationary targets.

Oh, as a side note, I do realize what police face. The dynamics of a gun fight. Times to draw, reaction times etc., here’s an interesting site. If you look at the interactions you’ll see that the person in the reactive mode (trained officer times on the site) is always at a disadvantage to the person in the active mode. (Think OODA loop- action beats reaction)The disadvantage becomes even greater when you realize the officer motions were based on time to react to a light-- a very simple shoot/no shoot/stop shooting decision vice the much more complex actual response to a subjects motions. That is the orient/decide portion of the OODA loop becomes more complicated and takes longer.

forcescience.org/demos.html

You’ll need to read the papers to understand how they measured the action times, as well as how many rounds can be fired in the relevant time periods.

I’ve never said that police have not killed people under dubious circumstances. Nor did I say that all police officers were good people or well trained. However, there are FAR fewer instances of negligent killing or homicide by police officers than there are among non-police officers.

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Well first of all, rounds does not equal body count. Fortunately, most of the people doing the shooting aren’t that good at it.

Then why regulate the current magazine capacities?

OR, why not limit fire-arms to single shot muskets?

BETTER YET, why not just ban fire-arms all together - starting with HAND GUNS?

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Because in my opinion less than ten rounds would not necessarily be sufficient for home/self defense, but I believe ten rounds is sufficient in the case of someone trained for using the firearm unless they are going against a larger than normal number of attackers. More rounds than that in a clip/magazine makes it more efficient to kill larger numbers of people without a corresponding increase in effectiveness from a defense perspective.

Uhm … pssst. Most of these mass shooters had MULTIPLE weapons.

And uhm … carrying several 10 round capacity HAND GUNS and simply disposing of the spent one and grabbing a fresh one would actually be faster than reloading - wouldn’t it?

OR, even carrying several hand guns and re-loading with fresh clips is also a pretty fast and efficient method to conduct a mass killing - no?

So what have you really solved?

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Actually, more people are killed by GUNS, than by all knives, blunt objects, and body parts. Why is this discussion limited to rifles? Is it because it gives you some sort of argument?

Actually more people are killed by malpractice or automobile accidents - than guns.

And I’m not the one limiting it to rifles. Which leads to the next point:

You actually want to ban ALL fire-arms … right?

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Also, we will not ban knives and body parts because they have other uses than killing. The only purpose of a gun is to kill something. Target shooting is just practice for killing something.

Uhm … psst:

Guns are also used for maiming and deterring.

In other words:

KILLING is not just for murderers - it’s also for self defense and PREVENTION of murders - no?

Are you seriously that detached from reality?

 

[Brendan]

Because in my opinion less than ten rounds would not necessarily be sufficient for home/self defense, but I believe ten rounds is sufficient in the case of someone trained for using the firearm unless they are going against a larger than normal number of attackers. More rounds than that in a clip/magazine makes it more efficient to kill larger numbers of people without a corresponding increase in effectiveness from a defense perspective.

How a defender know the number of attackers ahead of time?

Would you support the 10 round limit for police as well. You seem to imply that, as you said "I believe ten rounds is sufficient in the case of someone trained for using the firearm "

 

[Brendan]

Also, we will not ban knives and body parts because they have other uses than killing. The only purpose of a gun is to kill something. Target shooting is just practice for killing something.

So the Olympic Biathlon event is simply practice at killing something? Do you feel that the Olympic Committee gives out medals for killing practice?