Machine gun fire into Las Vegas crowd at Route 91 music Festival

[Ridgerunner]

Don’t you make a political point from your haven on a farm somewhere and tell the people of the poorer parts of our cities that they have to suffer through gun violence just so you and others can exercise your “freedoms.”

Gun violence in the cities is not due to the existence of guns, but to the existence of extremely violent criminals and the difficulty law enforcement has in protecting the law-abiding in such places. I very much favor honest citizens in such places being able to defend themselves with guns.

If the criminals are able to import tons of heroin into this country, adding a few guns here and there to the cargo should present no difficulty. And of course the law-abiding will have no means of defense because some in this society think of themselves as invulnerable supermen and demand that all citizens likewise regard themselves as bulletproof, knifeproof, etc.

 

[Jig_Saw]

Bad stuff happens.

All the time.

Everyone needs to prepare.

You just never know.

Because Israel is just like the US.

 

[F_Marturana]

That picture isn’t of a teacher. It’s a security guard escorting kids on a field trip. Israeli teachers aren’t armed. They do have armed security at the entrances of schools though.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Of possible interest. Even Rahm Emanuel has complained that part of Chicago’s gun violence problem is that the judges won’t impose prison terms on criminals who use guns in their crimes. Of course, the judges are liberals, so naturally they wouldn’t want to punish criminals harshly.

 

[exnihilo]

Your comment about armed guards on the roof is similar. It shows people in authority being armed - not the untrained public.

There are two concepts here, training and authority. Being in authority doesn’t mean you are trained. Not being in authority doesn’t mean you aren’t trained. Lots of citizens are much better trained with firearms than police and others granted the right to carry.

 

[Theo520]

Got to get that notebook.

Your example only shows the presence of the weapon ended the fight without further harm. That’s a good thing, right?

The police will sort out if she did so in self defense or as an aggressor, then our existing laws will be applied.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

There are two concepts here, training and authority. Being in authority doesn’t mean you are trained. Not being in authority doesn’t mean you aren’t trained. Lots of citizens are much better trained with firearms than police and others granted the right to carry.

The two concepts are somewhat linked in this way: To ensure that those who have access to guns are properly trained, it is necessary to have some legal enforceable mechanism for requiring such training and ensuring that it was properly done. If all citizens who had guns were required to prove they were properly trained, including recurrent training (which authorities also must do), that would go a long way to improving the situation.

I am a private pilot, and before I could get legal authority to fly an airplane over crowed cities and land at busy airports I had to get lots of training. To fly though clouds I needed even more training to get an instrument rating. Beyond that I have to submit to a flight test every two years where I must demonstrate to an authorized flight instructor that I still have the competence to fly. The only reason we don’t have similar requirements for guns is the second amendment. If we got rid of the second amendment we could institute such requirements, and we could still have nearly as much freedom to own and use guns as we have now. The NRA would still be there, advocating for gun rights. If the people value gun rights they can advocate for them. They just will be deprived of their nuclear weapon which is the second amendment.

 

[Jig_Saw]

Your example only shows the presence of the weapon ended the fight without further harm. That’s a good thing, right?

The police will sort out if she did so in self defense or as an aggressor, then our existing laws will be applied.

Congratulations, you just won the internet with the most interesting take on someone pulling a firearm in a Walmart over a notebook. It stops the fight, right? What if someone behind her was armed, determined that she was about to murder a person that can no longer defend herself and blew her brains out? Or, she accidentally shot the person who took a notebook?

Really, if that looks justified to you in any way, there is something severely wrong with the gun culture in the US.

 

[Theo520]

In the vast majority of ‘gun incidents’ no shots are fired.
The police will sort out whether she was allowed to carry, and whether she’s guilty of crimes.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

Got some stats to back that up?

You said

In the vast majority of ‘gun incidents’ no shots are fired.

 

[Roseeurekacross]

That picture isn’t of a teacher. It’s a security guard escorting kids on a field trip. Israeli teachers aren’t armed. They do have armed security at the entrances of schools though.

This , People.

Not a teacher.

Monte is it possible to reflect the accuracy of her job role in that meme?

 

[Jig_Saw]

In the vast majority of ‘gun incidents’ no shots are fired.

The police will sort out whether she was allowed to carry, and whether she’s guilty of crimes.

And when they are, someone may end up dead as opposed to a physical confrontation between two woman that may end in a scratch. Again, you seem to act like this is no big deal.

 

[Inisfallen]

Armed guards on the roof … counter snipers … would have helped.

That’s a lovely vision of our country – armed guards everywhere, and snipers on the roof.

Yes, that’s the country I want to live in.

 

[Inisfallen]

And when they are, someone may end up dead as opposed to a physical confrontation between two woman that may end in a scratch. Again, you seem to act like this is no big deal.

It isn’t a big deal to the gun nuts. This is the world they want to live in, where disputes are settled at gunpoint. It’s a fantasy, of course, and most of them would come completely unglued if someone pointed a real gun at them in the real world.

I’ve had that experience, three times. It’s no fun. You know what, though? I still don’t want a gun.

 

[Jig_Saw]

It isn’t a big deal to the gun nuts. This is the world they want to live in, where disputes are settled at gunpoint. It’s a fantasy, of course, and most of them would come completely unglued if someone pointed a real gun at them in the real world.

I’ve had that experience, three times. It’s no fun. You know what, though? I still don’t want a gun.

Personally, I think the Walmart situation is an example of how not to handle it, but I find it interesting that even in that case, the gun owners here can’t say, yep, that’s wrong, she should go to jail.

 

[Inisfallen]

Personally, I think the Walmart situation is an example of how not to handle it, but I find it interesting that even in that case, the gun owners here can’t say, yep, that’s wrong, she should go to jail.

Agreed. Any rational person would say that lethal force is only an appropriate response to life-endangering situations. Which a couple of women in a physical altercation at a Wal-Mart is not. But it’s all part of the fantasy.

Also, reminds me that I’m glad we don’t have Wal-Mart stores in NYC.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Correlation does not equal causation. People could also be arming themselves because they live in a dangerous area with plenty of homicides. Furthermore unless I missed it, your study does not differentiate between legal gun owners and those who possess weapons illegally.

 

[Theo520]

Got some stats to back that up?

You said

In the vast majority of ‘gun incidents’ no shots are fired.

I’m not doing google for you now, but yes that is the claim by proponents of the 2nd, that the most common usage is simply to make the other party aware you are armed.

Police numbers alone would probably prove my point, where they draw their weapon but don’t fire.

 

[pnewton]

Correlation does not equal causation.

I never said it did. However, it is evidence. More is needed, which is why the NRA fights repeal of the Dickey Amendment. Why is the gun lobby so fearful of evidence and research?

Hey, at least I linked independent data and not stories picked by a pro-gun blog.

 

[starshiptrooper]

It is evidence of nothing.

I already linked a to study done for that pro-gun group, the Obama regime, admitting that guns are used as often by the good guys as the bad. Not sure if it was in this thread or one of the other ones. I will dig it up again when I have time.