What is wrong with the nanny state?

[Wolseley]

Why were they unarmed?!?!?! Normal people don’t want to carry around a heavy, dangerous hunk of metal with them everywhere they go.

You really don’t know very much about firearms, do you?

You can obtain handguns that are extremely lightweight, you know. The magazine and grip/receiver on a Glock, for one, is composed of weapons-grade plastic, and weighs hardly anything at all. The only weighty parts are the slide/barrel/recoil-spring assembly, and the ammunition. Even at that, it’s still lighter than, say, a Colt M1911 or a Smith & Wesson .38 sixgun.

As for being dangerous, a firearm is no more dangerous than a fork. I can leave a loaded, cocked firearm sitting on a table, and as long as it is not disturbed by any outside agency (an earthquake, an airplane falling out of the sky, a house fire, a dumb human being who knows nothing about firearms), that weapon will sit there until the sun goes nova, and it will not hurt a soul. Guns do not go off by themselves. They are only as dangerous as the person using them. Same as cars, same as hammers, same as gas stoves.

Do you honestly think every person on the street should be carrying a gun? Crazy:whacky:

Unless they are a minor, a criminal, or mentally deficient, yes.

Next time someone gets mugged, someone gets hit from behind, instead of hand over your wallet and your watch, it’ll be hand over you wallet, your watch and *your gun. *

And if you’re stupid enough to hand it over to him instead of using it, then you have worse problems than a dislike of firearms. Any punkoid moron who mugs me and is dumb enough to stand there while I reach into my pocket to bring out my valuables will be in for a real big surprise. “You want my gun, too? Oh, sure, here you go. Just stand right there with your hand out, just like that. That’s good, don’t move. You can have the top two rounds in the magazine first, at full velocity.”

What is the average person going to do, quickdraw and fill em full of lead with their six shooter? It’s a fantasy.

You don’t even have to draw. You can fire the weapon through a pocket, and at the range the average mugger is going to be standing from you, it’ll be impossible to miss. And no, you don’t have to fill them full of lead; one or two rounds will be more than sufficient, especially if you’re using hollow-point dumdums, something that’ll make a nice mushroom shape as it hits its target.

Thanks to your liberal gun laws, you’re more subject to these loonies than I am, or someone living in the U.K. If they don’t have a record yet, they can get one legally. If they do, they can buy one from a gun fair where people make private sales, or get one elsewhere just as easily, because there are just so many in circulation. It’s like purchasing marijuana, except much easier.

Which is why everybody should be packing. Criminals are not stupid, but they are lazy. If they think you’re going to put up a fight, they won’t challenge you. If they think everybody is going to put up a fight, they’ll be in a real quandry as to who they think its safe to rob.

That particular scenario may be fantasy, but what is not fantasy is the scenario of the would be mugger stopping beforehand because the prospective target may be armed.

Precisely. As I said before, imagine a scumbag walking into a bank with 40 people standing in line, yelling “Okay, nobody move!”, and suddenly finding himself staring down 40 gunbarrels.

Why, the very thought is enough to make him give up bank robbery and go into other lines of criminal behavior, like corporate law or being a campaign manager for liberal political candidates.

 

[Al_Masetti]

Read “Mexican Martyrdom; 1926 -1935: Firsthand Experiences of the Religious Persecution in Mexico” by Fr. Wilfrid Parsons, S.J.

Available from TAN Books.

www.tanbooks.com

tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/283/keywords/mexican+martyrdom/

Here’s the description from TAN Books:

True stories of the persecution of the Catholic Church in Mexico from 1924-1928, when some 2,000 Catholics and 50 priests were put to death under Calles, including Fr. Miguel Pro. In a country 97% Catholic, an anti-Catholic government rules–even today! An inspiring witness to Catholic fortitude. Proves that hatred for the Catholic Church exists even in our times and can still flare into open and bloody persecution in this our so-called enlightened 20th century. 304 pages. Paperback. Price: $12.50

There also was extensive confiscation not only of Church properties but also of farms belonging to Mexican citizens.

Even now, the nationalized Mexican oil fields are failing because of poor management and there is on-going debate because some folks don’t want to bring in expertise to upgrade and perform deferred maintenance.

 

[vern_humphrey]

He was a student there. He was taking revenge on them for his own various, insane, self-pitying reasons - and a relatively free access to handguns allowed him to do it.

No. It was forbidding the victims’ access to weapons that allowed him to do it.

By the way, we know you’re not an expert in guns or in self-defense, but have you ever been to Blacksburg? My oldest daughter graduated from Virginia Tech. There are lots of students livnig off campus, and lots of places in town where students congregate.

But in town, they can bear arms.

 

[cynic]

Apparently he was humiliated by one of the lecturers in class. So it makes ‘sense’ that this was where the shooting would take place.

How many students would be bearing arms while in town.

 

[cynic]

You really don’t know very much about firearms, do you?

You can obtain handguns that are extremely lightweight, you know. The magazine and grip/receiver on a Glock, for one, is composed of weapons-grade plastic, and weighs hardly anything at all. The only weighty parts are the slide/barrel/recoil-spring assembly, and the ammunition. Even at that, it’s still lighter than, say, a Colt M1911 or a Smith & Wesson .38 sixgun.

.

Still cumbersome and annoying to have to carry around in a holster. Most people (particulary students) dress light, jeans and t-shirt. Who wants to carry one of those around?

As for being dangerous, a firearm is no more dangerous than a fork. I can leave a loaded, cocked firearm sitting on a table, and as long as it is not disturbed by any outside agency (an earthquake, an airplane falling out of the sky, a house fire, a dumb human being who knows nothing about firearms), that weapon will sit there until the sun goes nova, and it will not hurt a soul. Guns do not go off by themselves. They are only as dangerous as the person using them. Same as cars, same as hammers, same as gas stoves.

.

To use one in a hurry you’re going to have to have the safety off. So having it against your body, in your jacket, wherever, could be dangerous.

And if you’re stupid enough to hand it over to him instead of using it, then you have worse problems than a dislike of firearms. Any punkoid moron who mugs me and is dumb enough to stand there while I reach into my pocket to bring out my valuables will be in for a real big surprise. “You want my gun, too? Oh, sure, here you go. Just stand right there with your hand out, just like that. That’s good, don’t move. You can have the top two rounds in the magazine first, at full velocity.”

.

Most violent crims don’t give their victims the curtesy of a warning. Particularly rapists. If somone hits you from behind there’s nothing you can do… and what do ya’ know, they now have your gun. Perhaps we should make all the bad guys wear black hats so law-abiding citizens can prepare, and get into the firing position…

Otherwise. are you justified in killing someone who is just trying to steal from you? If you caught someone trying to steal your car, could you kill them? I think no.

Precisely. As I said before, imagine a scumbag walking into a bank with 40 people standing in line, yelling “Okay, nobody move!”, and suddenly finding himself staring down 40 gunbarrels.

Why, the very thought is enough to make him give up bank robbery and go into other lines of criminal behavior, like corporate law or being a campaign manager for liberal political candidates.

People in this situation wouldn’t want to risk their lives in a ‘shoot-out’, even in they were armed.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Apparently he was humiliated by one of the lecturers in class. So it makes ‘sense’ that this was where the shooting would take place.

So how come the original killings didn’t take place there?

How many students would be bearing arms while in town.

Quite a few. The Virginia license is easy to get, reasonably priced, and if you want to carry openly, you don’t even need a license. So a lot of Virginians carry.

When I lived in Virginia, there was a waiting list to take the course. And since then, they have more instructors and more courses. And when I visit my daughter in Virginia, I carry on my Arkansas license. My daughter and her husband, of course, have Virginia licenses.

 

[vern_humphrey]

People in this situation wouldn’t want to risk their lives in a ‘shoot-out’, even in they were armed.

And you know this, how?

In point of fact, there was such a shooting on another campus in Virginia, and students with access to guns put a stop to it.

This is all theoretical. More guns equals more guns for criminals.

No, it’s practical – and we have the data to prove it. Allowing the good guys to be armed cuts violent crime.

 

[cynic]

Quite a few. The Virginia license is easy to get, reasonably priced, and if you want to carry openly, you don’t even need a license. So a lot of Virginians carry.

.

Paranoid middle-aged gentlemen maybe. Sorry but I can’t imagine a lot of students packing. Unless of course, it becomes the next trendy fashion accessory.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Paranoid middle-aged gentlemen maybe. Sorry but I can’t** imagine** a lot of students packing. Unless of course, it becomes the next trendy fashion accessory.

That’s your problem – you rely on imagination, whereas others rely on experience.

 

[vz71]

That’s your problem – you rely on imagination, whereas others rely on experience.

And proven fact.
Let’s not forget the facts…

 

[vern_humphrey]

And proven fact.
Let’s not forget the facts…

You just had to use the “F” word, didn’t you?

 

[cynic]

And if I went to Virginia, I wonder how many 20 year olds I would see carrying guns… hmmm… none?

 

[cynic]

Oh, and if it were facts you were wanting… well here we go, again:

All it took was a quick search in wikipedia.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_crime

% Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 popv

United States: 2.97
England & Wales : .12

% homicides with firearms

United States: 39
England & Wales: 8

and more interestingly…

Overall homicide rate per 100,000 pop

United States: 7.52
England & Wales: 1.57

 

[vern_humphrey]

Oh, and if it were facts you were wanting… well here we go, again:

All it took was a quick search in wikipedia.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_crime

% Firearm homicide rate per 100,000 popv

United States: 2.97
England & Wales : .12

% homicides with firearms

United States: 39
England & Wales: 8

and more interestingly…

Overall homicide rate per 100,000 pop

United States: 7.52
England & Wales: 1.57

There was a famous study which compared Vancouver, British Columbia to Seattle, Washington. The study found Vancouver had a much lower homicide rate, due to its strict gun control.

Unfortunately, there is such a thing as peer review. Another scholar reviewed the study and did what the original author should have done – he stratified the population. And when he did, he found that homicide in Seattle is concentrated in one sector of the population – African Americans. Where Seattle had African Americans as its primary minority, Vancouver had Chinese – who are highly law-abiding.

Interestingly enough, it turned out that White Vancouverites are slightly more homicidal than Whites in Seattle.

It’s people, not guns, that commit crimes. And the pre-disposition to commit crimes is cultural.

To reduce violent crime, allow honest people to go armed – that has been proven over and over.

 

[Wolseley]

Still cumbersome and annoying to have to carry around in a holster.

Have you ever carried a pistol around in a holster, or is this more uninformed conjecture on your part?

Most people (particulary students) dress light, jeans and t-shirt. Who wants to carry one of those around?

Somebody who wants to remain alive when the next whacko starts popping caps, maybe? Or maybe it’s better to die, just as long as you don’t look “uncool” by having a weapon on your person for self-defense. Fashion is more important than life, you know.

To use one in a hurry you’re going to have to have the safety off. So having it against your body, in your jacket, wherever, could be dangerous.

Once again, you display your complete ignorance of how a handgun works. Have you ever even handled, ever even looked at a handgun? From statements like these, I have my doubts. It takes all of 3/16ths of a second to switch off the safety on a handgun, and if the punk thinks you’re reaching for you wallet in your jacket pocket in order to hand it to him, you have considerably more time than that.

Most violent crims don’t give their victims the curtesy of a warning. Particularly rapists. If somone hits you from behind there’s nothing you can do…and what do ya’ know, they now have your gun.

Baloney. A woman who is attacked from behind can do plenty----but women are not trained what to do in these situations, unless they’re in the military. She ran reach behind and crush his testicles. She can have her hand on the weapon in her pocket when entering a questionable area, and if pinned, she can cease to struggle; when the perp turns her around, she can fire at him, and since he’s literally right in front of her, she can’t possibly miss. She can play along with him, and say something seductive like, “I want to kiss you,” place both hands alongside his head—and blind him by jamming both thumbnails into his eyes.

You never quit. You never cease to fight back. All of this krappe about, “If you fight back, he will only kill you” is balderdash. Criminals go for easy marks. If you struggle, he will leave and go looking for an easier mark. Even if you fire and miss, it’s going to make him think twice: "Damn, she’s got a gun!"

Perhaps we should make all the bad guys wear black hats so law-abiding citizens can prepare, and get into the firing position…

Once again, you display a total lack of knowledge. Tell me, what, from your vast experience, is “the firing position”?

Otherwise. are you justified in killing someone who is just trying to steal from you? If you caught someone trying to steal your car, could you kill them? I think no.

No, and no. Here, you are correct. A firearm is only to be used in self-defense, in the face of an imminent threat to life or physcial well-being. Let’s say a guy jumps out of an alley with a knife in his hand and threatens you with it. You draw your weapon, and he will either run away, or you will open fire. Either way, he is no longer a threat. Once the threat is neutralized, you cease fire. This will usually be when A) he runs away; B) you hold him at bay until help arrives (least likely of all these); C) he is wounded and incapacitated; or D) he is dead.

People in this situation wouldn’t want to risk their lives in a ‘shoot-out’, even in they were armed.

You speak for everybody now, is that it?
"cynic:

Paranoid middle-aged gentlemen maybe. Sorry but I can’t imagine a lot of students packing. Unless of course, it becomes the next trendy fashion accessory.

Like I said, it’s better to die instead of looking “uncool”. Right?

Oh, and if it were facts you were wanting… well here we go, again:

All it took was a quick search in wikipedia.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_crime

Wikipedia is not exactly what can be considered a reliable source for anything, gun crime included. In this case, they quote from a gun-control organization, a sociology professor at Duke University, and the United Nothings. Not exactly sources that I consider dependable, by any stretch.

 

[cynic]

Have you ever carried a pistol around in a holster, or is this more uninformed conjecture on your part?

Somebody who wants to remain alive when the next whacko starts popping caps, maybe? Or maybe it’s better to die, just as long as you don’t look “uncool” by having a weapon on your person for self-defense. Fashion is more important than life, you know.

.

The question here was are people (young people) carrying guns for protection, not what you think they should they be doing. Your argument - that free access to handguns means citizens will arm themselves for protection - is irrelevant if they aren’t doing that.

Once again, you display your complete ignorance of how a handgun works. Have you ever even handled, ever even looked at a handgun? From statements like these, I have my doubts. It takes all of 3/16ths of a second to switch off the safety on a handgun,
.

if you are standing, conscious, able to think quick enough, maybe.

Baloney. A woman who is attacked from behind can do plenty----
.

And what can anyone do about a sharp blow to the skull…

Once again, you display a total lack of knowledge. Tell me, what, from your vast experience, is “the firing position”?
.

legs apart, arms outstretched, something like that…

No, and no. Here, you are correct. A firearm is only to be used in self-defense, in the face of an imminent threat to life or physcial well-being. Let’s say a guy jumps out of an alley with a knife in his hand and threatens you with it. You draw your weapon, and he will either run away, or you will open fire. Either way, he is no longer a threat. Once the threat is neutralized, you cease fire. This will usually be when A) he runs away; B) you hold him at bay until help arrives (least likely of all these); C) he is wounded and incapacitated; or D) he is dead.
.

That’s the problem, you might end up shooting someone who just wanted your wallet (even if they threaten you)

You speak for everybody now, is that it?
.

Seems unlikely

Wikipedia is not exactly what can be considered a reliable source for anything, gun crime included. In this case, they quote from a gun-control organization, a sociology professor at Duke University, and the United Nothings. Not exactly sources that I consider dependable, by any stretch.

To be continued…

 

[vern_humphrey]

Every time I read posts like that, I’m reminded of one of those “how everything works” picture books the British are so good at.

For “Guns” it showed a picture of an M1911A1 and solemnly informed us that this gun was loaded with a “handle clip” and that the tip of the grip safety tang was the “firing pin.”

Let’s face it, guys, we’re dealing with someone who doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and is proud of it.

 

[cynic]

There was a famous study which compared Vancouver, British Columbia to Seattle, Washington. The study found Vancouver had a much lower homicide rate, due to its strict gun control.

Unfortunately, there is such a thing as peer review. Another scholar reviewed the study and did what the original author should have done – he stratified the population. And when he did, he found that homicide in Seattle is concentrated in one sector of the population – African Americans. Where Seattle had African Americans as its primary minority, Vancouver had Chinese – who are highly law-abiding.

Interestingly enough, it turned out that White Vancouverites are slightly more homicidal than Whites in Seattle.

It’s people, not guns, that commit crimes. And the pre-disposition to commit crimes is cultural.

To reduce violent crime, allow honest people to go armed – that has been proven over and over.

So you’re blaming African Americans for your high(er) homicide statistics.

Britain has a large immigrant population, many poor, represent higher crime rates, and there have been race riots. The difference? the general population isn’t awash with guns, you need a license to own one, and you can’t buy handguns or military style arms. Hence the lower homicide rate and gun related crime. But that’s just not something you want to acknowledge.

 

[vern_humphrey]

So you’re blaming African Americans for your high(er) homicide statistics.

Whoop! Whoop! The race card!

The fact is African Americans are vastly over-represented amongst violent criminals and amongst victims of violent crime.

Britain has a large immigrant population, many poor, represent higher crime rates, and there have been race riots. The difference? the general population isn’t awash with guns, you need a license to own one, and you can’t buy handguns or military style arms. Hence the lower homicide rate and gun related crime. But that’s just not something you want to acknowledge.

What is it about your compulsion to come on American forums and tell us how to run our country?

 

[cynic]

Every time I read posts like that, I’m reminded of one of those “how everything works” picture books the British are so good at.

For “Guns” it showed a picture of an M1911A1 and solemnly informed us that this gun was loaded with a “handle clip” and that the tip of the grip safety tang was the “firing pin.”

Let’s face it, guys, we’re dealing with someone who doesn’t know what he’s talking about, and is proud of it.

What is there to know, that’s relevant. ‘Bad guys’ don’t warn their victims, most don’t even bother threatening. They just hit you. Have you ever been punched in the head? It’s like someone’s grabbed your brain and shaken it.

You people have an out of date, cliched idea, ‘punks’ robbing law abiding citizens with pocket knives, like in some bad 80’s movie.