|
|
Post by The New Guy on Apr 20, 2009 21:10:56 GMT -5
subdjoe, you will only see this topic your way, funny, i was just thinking the same thing about you. how much training is enough? it doesn't take that long to learn to properly load, fire, disassemble, clean, and reassemble a firearm. and it only takes a few minutes to teach someone that guns are not toys and should only be used in self defense or in defense of others in danger of losing life or limb. so why does he carry? apparently, he not as sure as you that he won't have an incident. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Apr 20, 2009 21:20:30 GMT -5
"In all actuality when would either one of you need to carry a firearm? Who is really gonna mess with either one of you? Really? "
Ah! That's the problem isn't it? We DO NOT know when or if. I never know when or if I will be in a car crash, so even before it became law, I was using the seat belt. I never know if or when there will be a fire, so I have a fire extinguisher. I never know if or when I will need to call the police, so I have a bunch of departments and the sheriffs numbers in my phone.
Good to hear that you do have a firearm. The way you talk, it is easy to assume that you don't. By the way - how much training have YOU had? And how often do you practice? I know you only said that people should go throgh the training and such if they are going to carry, but there have been several proposals in the last few years that seemed to require that even before buying a gun. And, Big Dog check me on this, there was one at the federal level that required a mental health check (Might have just been a NJ or MD proposed law I'm thinking about). But you see where these things go.
As with Big Dog, I'm just your average citizen. Nothing special about me. Small town in S. Cal to small town N. Cal. No special training. Yet you say you don't question my ability to be safe with a firearm. Why should millions of others be denied a basic right to life? And, it boils down to that - the right to life includes the right to effective means to defend it. You may not ever need to do that. I know that I hope I never have to draw on anyone. But if I do, I want to be able to do it. And with something effective, not must my limp gun in my hand. (this is my weapon and this is my gun....)
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Apr 20, 2009 21:23:16 GMT -5
|
|
sunny
Apprentice Member
Posts: 56 
|
Post by sunny on Apr 20, 2009 21:46:29 GMT -5
Hello again.
I don't know why anyone would need a gun. Guns have only been used to kill and fight wars. The worls would be better off without them. Especially when people who are likely to go crazy in an argument of road rage.
When I'm walking through campus at night I do keep my cell phone handy just in case. So far I've not had to use it.
We pay our taxes to have the police ready when we need them. Normal people don't need to carry guns.
That's just the way I feel about it guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Apr 20, 2009 22:20:37 GMT -5
Hello again. I don't know why anyone would need a gun. Guns have only been used to kill and fight wars. Oh? No target shooting? No use without fireing to drive off thugs? I know that hunting is killing, but no hunting? How about clubs - they are designed to kill, period. There is no peaceful use for a club is there? Oh, wait - baseball, golf, hurling (irish sport), juggleing. The worls would be better off without them. Especially when people who are likely to go crazy in an argument of road rage.OK, we need citations on this. Other than gangbangers and other thugs how are barred from owning firearms, please give us a dozen citaitions of this happening. When I'm walking through campus at night I do keep my cell phone handy just in case. So far I've not had to use it.OK, so you call 911 on your cell, it gets routed to Benicia, okr is it Vallejo? It takes you 2 minutes to get an answer, then you get put on hold for 5 to 20 (I'm not exagerating, I've had that when calling in traffic hazards/wrecks). So, you need help RIGHT NOW, and you are on hold. Even if you get through right away, you will likely be 7 to 15 minuts away from help. What are you going to do? Offer the thug tea? We pay our taxes to have the police ready when we need them. Normal people don't need to carry guns.WE also pay to have the fire department. But most people have fire extinguishers in their houses and cars. That's just the way I feel about it guys.OK, so you would abridge the Constitution because of your feelings. Should I be allowed to deny you your civil rights because of my feelings? |
|
|
|
Post by crossride on Apr 21, 2009 11:50:02 GMT -5
What good does this do? How effective is my gun if it's at home when I'm out somewhere? Like you said in another post, you don't think BD would snap and shoot someone over a silly driving error, and you don't question the abilities of BD and subdjoe to handle guns and make decisions regarding their use. Throw me into the mix as well. The fact is that 99.9% of the time, the guy, or girl, who snaps and shoots is not going to follow any laws anyway. It would be a benefit if one of us average, trusted guys happened to be around with a means to neutralize the threat of the bad guy (or girl). You may be fine keeping a gun for home defense, and trusting that the police will be close enough to help anywhere else, but I'm all for being allowed to utilize my extensive training to assist anyone, anywhere, anytime. And I don't want someone taking away that for reasons that have ZERO to do with whether I am capable, and trusted, to have that ability. |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Apr 21, 2009 12:19:15 GMT -5
In all actuality when would either one of you need to carry a firearm? Who is really gonna mess with either one of you? Really? Granted that most things bigger than me are extinct or make millions in the NBA. People often tell me that I still "look like a cop"... whatever that is supposed to mean. But whether or not someone is going to mess with me isn't really the issue. I would choose to carry concealed, if I legally could, for the simple reason than it is far better to have a tool and not need it than it is to need it and not have it. To wit : [/url] By JOHN MONK
The man who shot to death a gun-wielding would-be robber Saturday night at a Five Points Alcoholics Anonymous gathering spot is a well-known local attorney and an AA member who says he’d do it again in similar circumstances.
“I had two choices — maybe get killed and robbed — and I’m not sure what might have happened to the other people with me — or draw my weapon and fire,” said Jim, 61, who spoke to The State in his law offices Wednesday afternoon.
Jim admitted he was the man who fired the gun Saturday night. He asked that his last name not be used until any retaliatory threats against him can be assessed. Police say the possibility of retribution might exist but refuse to be specific.
Since the shooting of Kayson Helms, 18, of Edison, N.J., Saturday night, police have kept Jim’s name secret and released only a sketchy account of what happened when a young man entered the AA center near USC, brandished a gun and demanded money from what Jim said was a group of four people.
<< snipped >>
He graduated from USC’s law school in the 1970s, has had a concealed weapons permit since the early 1980s and practices a variety of civil and criminal law. His voice is gravelly; he smokes three packs of cigarettes a day.
“I didn’t know whether he was going to open fire. He did point and swing his gun this way and that way. We had seven or eight people in the back room.” Those held at gunpoint were in the front room, according to Jim.
Columbia lawyers said Jim — at 6 feet, 3 inches, a big man with a full head of blondish-brown hair — has a good reputation.
“He’s a reputable member of the legal profession,” said Dick Harpootlian, a former 5th Circuit prosecutor. “I’ve tried cases with him and against him. I’m sure the folks down at the AA center Saturday night were glad he was packing heat.”
<< snipped >>
Jim said the incident took “10 seconds, max” to unfold.[/quote] It can happen anywhere, anytime. And that is a very bitter lesson to have to learn the hard way. I would choose to be prepared in hope that it never happens to me, as opposed to simply assuming that it could never happen to me and hoping that if it does I might somehow survive. |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Apr 21, 2009 22:33:00 GMT -5
Hello again. I don't know why anyone would need a gun. Guns have only been used to kill and fight wars. The worls would be better off without them. Especially when people who are likely to go crazy in an argument of road rage. When I'm walking through campus at night I do keep my cell phone handy just in case. So far I've not had to use it. We pay our taxes to have the police ready when we need them. Normal people don't need to carry guns. That's just the way I feel about it guys. wow. and when something does happen to you and you can't make that call or the police take minutes to arrive then what will you think? i imagine you won't wish you had been armed. you will probably think that it's not the perp's fault because he is probably poor or was abused as a child or his mother was a druggy or some moonbatty crap like that.  |
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Apr 22, 2009 16:46:06 GMT -5
subdjoe, to ME, there's a fine line between being cautious, and borderline paranoid. I am a person who already worries about things like flying because I just know the jet I'm on is going to crash, and fears driving over long bridges because of earthquakes and terrorism, and then there's the HWY-101 traffic, OMG! The fear list could get REALLY long and somehow we have to find balance and live life to it's fullest every day. Now, I am speaking for myself, so no name calling please!  You shouldn't be too surprised that we have some sort of firearm since I've posted before that I was raised by a dad that carries WITH a concealed weapons permit, was in the military and Sheriff's Dept, and to add my father in-law was a FBI agent etc. Well, unless you'd just made up your mind that I am a typical @&#%... such and such. And, as far as practicing I would worry much more if people were trying to proficiently aim at a target under duress in the midst of a populated area like restaurants, freeways, parking lots etc. I am sure you'd be good at it, and BD, and crossride has reminded me that he too has experience with firearms, so I'm sure you all would do well, but that's because you have years of experience and training. The AVERAGE person who wants a gun and is a "newbie" probably should keep it at home. |
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Apr 22, 2009 16:50:54 GMT -5
crossride, you're in law enforcement? If so, aren't you eligible to carry with a concealed weapons permit?
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Apr 22, 2009 16:52:33 GMT -5
BD, that's a good story and I'm sure there are a few more out there.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Apr 22, 2009 16:53:53 GMT -5
TNG, my dad carries legally, see my post to subdjoe above...
|
|
