Mass shooting

[Signals.Cpl]

Bullshit…….Let’s say I have 50 firearms within my home, if I doubled said number, how would society be more violent?

More people that have guns means that more guns are available for those who shouldn't have them, I am not talking about doubling the number of rifles in the hands of collectors but rather increasing the number of weapons in the hands of even more people many of whom should not be trusted with spoons let alone firearms.

[bush_cheney2004]

Or if there is any substance to his claims of rot within the LAPD………Serpico?

Ask Rodney King...oh wait...he be dead !

[bush_cheney2004]

More people that have guns means that more guns are available for those who shouldn't have them, I am not talking about doubling the number of rifles in the hands of collectors but rather increasing the number of weapons in the hands of even more people many of whom should not be trusted with spoons let alone firearms.

Doesn't matter...they have the right to vote...and bear firearms. The NRA did not cut funding for mental health, nor did it declare schools as "gun free zones".

[Guest Derek L]

Might be hard to compare as on one hand you have the police officers who run towards the gun battle while the CCW get involved if they happen to be in the immediate area, but its only a matter of time before someone decides to be a hero.

Is this a hunch or evidence based?

Wrongful death by police could be used as a means to improve the standard, learn from the mistakes of the past but when we consider people who have CCW ≈ 2% of the US population and climbing the actions of a CCW holder in a state on the east coast most likely will not result in any improvement.

I don't follow.

But the end result would be that you still have LEO who need more training and you now have CCW holders who are well trained but one does not do the job of the other. Having something like 6million well trained CCW holders in the US does not negate the need for the ≈ 700,000 LEO that is unless you intent to press CCW holder in to police duties.

I’ve never suggested CCW as a means for policing……….As to the CCW training itself, said courses are paid for by the applicant……..If a person is willing to pay for an equal safety course to that of what we train LEOS with taxpayer dollars, where’s the problem?

What? Unless you have firearms to feel big and strong it would be for protection and common sense dictates that when shooting at someone they duck unlike most targets.

So you have no evidence of a pandemic of wrongful deaths at the hands of CCW holders?

I provided one link earlier, in one of the various threads, from the Texas State Government with the numbers, and of all their CCW holders, one had been charged with murder and a handful with aggravated assault.

My point is that a CCW holder has none of the information and in fact will make it that much harder for the police to act, if the CCW holders were to be effective they need to act fast and you might be fast on the range but when the bad guy is not entirely too obvious the benefit of having a CCW decreases.

Again, evidence doesn't suggest that.

So your position is to train civilians to the standard of police officers instead of hiring more police officers and giving them better training?

No, allow civilians to purchase equal training to that of a level of LEOs……….As I’ve said, CCW is not a means for policing, but personal defence, but has stats have proven, CCW lends a deterrence factor that alone could play an effect on crime rates in a given area.

[Guest Derek L]

No, I am suggesting that the NRA is tripping up every suggestion that might help the situation because they are terrified of losing any of the guns that define them.

More BS.......The NRA has been lobbying since the the late 90s for the States to release mental health records to the FBI for background checks........

[Guest Derek L]

More people that have guns means that more guns are available for those who shouldn't have them, I am not talking about doubling the number of rifles in the hands of collectors but rather increasing the number of weapons in the hands of even more people many of whom should not be trusted with spoons let alone firearms.

So you acknowledge more physical firearms doesn’t play an effect on crime rates, but “bad people” having access to them does……..perfect…….Please explain that to the gun grabbers.

[Guest Derek L]

Doesn't matter...they have the right to vote...and bear firearms. The NRA did not cut funding for mental health, nor did it declare schools as "gun free zones".

Nor does the NRA enforce the already 9000 firearms related laws on the books.......The same laws the VP admitted Government can't already enforce.

[eyeball]

If either of my children (The eldest an RPAL holder and youngest a minor’s licence holder) developed a disease that could cause them to potentially become a danger to society I feel both through our family and the State measures and safeguards should be in place to restrict their access to firearms, coupled with treatment.

So do I, we just disagree on what those safeguards and measures will look like.

If one of my children became suicidal and/or homicidal, restrictions to firearms though is not the endgame.

I agree again, restrictions should be at the front of the queue, putting them at the end is too late. We're a little far apart on that page that for sure

With all that being said, neither of my children (or members of my extended family) are in such a state, as such, they shouldn’t be punished or penalized for illnesses that have inflicted others, nor the crimes committed by them.

I haven't said anything about punishing or penalizing, just safeguards and measures.

What I find hypocritical of you’re stance relating to mental illness is that a person possessing firearms does not have a psychoactive reaction take place on their usage, yet you advocate a pastime that does ferment ones brain with usage.

What do you call your own stated support and preference for an end to prohibition?

[eyeball]

Not quite, “my side” wants the ability for “good people” to posses firearms if they so desire……….

I'm on your side here too, we're on a real roll now! Who would of thunk it?

[GostHacked]

So can we make sure the cops are doing their job as well? Some of them are a little trigger happy.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/ex-cop-manhunt-newspaper-delivery-women-shot.html

Two women who were shot by Los Angeles police in Torrance early Thursday during a massive manhunt for an ex-LAPD officer were delivering newspapers, sources said.

The women, shot in the 19500 block of Redbeam Avenue, were taken to area hospitals, Torrance police Lt. Devin Chase said. They were not identified. One was shot in the hand and the other in the back, according to Jesse Escochea, who captured video of the victims being treated.

It was not immediately known what newspapers the women were delivering. After the shooting, the blue pickup was riddled with bullet holes and what appeared to be newspapers lay in the street alongside.

And it happened again!

A second shooting, involving Torrance police officers, occurred about 5:45 a.m. at Flagler Lane and Beryl Street in Torrance. No injuries were reported in that incident.

Chase said that in both instances police came across vehicles they thought were similar to the one Dorner is believed to be driving. Neither vehicle was Dorner's.

"Now it appears neither of them are directly related," Chase said. "In both of them, officers believed they were at the time."

The truck they are looking for is grey .. the truck they shot was blue ... are they colour blind?

[The_Squid]

Psychos chasing a psycho!! Shoot first, check the corpses' identities later... What great police work!

They are looking for a blue Nissan pickup.

They fired on a Toyota pickup and a Honda pickup that wasn't even the right colour. It would be funny if it weren't so seriously stupid.

Edited February 8, 2013 by The_Squid

[cybercoma]

Do you really think a criminal gives a crap about gun laws or gun control?

People are not necessarily "criminals" before they commit and are convicted of a violent act. You're only talking about people with forethought and planning, which would be first-degree murder. First degree cases are a hell of a lot less common than second-degree and manslaughter. You're talking about individuals that live lives of crime, which is such a small percentage of everyone, and not even the majority of those who are convicted crimes.

Do you really think everyone that uses a gun in a crime fits your ill-defined category of "criminal"? Absolutely not. I doubt even the majority of people that use guns in crimes are career criminals, since that is what you mean, isn't it? I presume you're not making a point as pedantic as saying anyone that uses a gun and is convicted is a criminals, since that goes without saying.

[Guest Derek L]

So do I, we just disagree on what those safeguards and measures will look like.

I agree again, restrictions should be at the front of the queue, putting them at the end is too late. We're a little far apart on that page that for sure

Yes, your proposed safeguards are unrealistic and unenforceable………….You wish to limit the object, not who can access it.

GPS and central armouries will never happen, as such, you’d best rework your safeguards………feel free to borrow from any of the ones suggested by me, an actual gun owner.

I haven't said anything about punishing or penalizing, just safeguards and measures.

From your perspective…………

What do you call your own stated support and preference for an end to prohibition?

Realistic..........I have no problem with restricting firearms ownership by the mentally ill……….Even if they got ill from a lifetime of smoking the reefer

[GostHacked]

Psychos chasing a psycho!! Shoot first, check the corpses' identities later... What great police work!

They are looking for a blue Nissan pickup.

They fired on a Toyota pickup and a Honda pickup that wasn't even the right colour. It would be funny if it weren't so seriously stupid.

The truck they fired on was blue, the truck they were looking for was grey. Vehicle recognition is part of their skill-set right?

[GostHacked]

Do you really think everyone that uses a gun in a crime fits your ill-defined category of "criminal"?

Actually ... yes. Even if they don't use a gun to commit a crime, they are still criminals.

I really can't do a good argument against the rest of what you said. Maybe I will try again later.

[Guest American Woman]

Good point.....Canada's rate doubled in a year....and tripled that of the general population. Must be all those laughing terrorists.

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...cide-rates.html

The terrorists were quite pleased with themselves when they killed 2000+ civilians. I really don't get the "terrorists are laughing because vets commit suicide at a higher rate than they are killed off in fighting" scenario. As I said, perhaps they should be embarrassed regarding their ineptness at killing 'infedels' other than innocent, unarmed civilians; but since they delight in killing civilians, I don't get why they would be more "amused" at military suicides than any other - and in both instances, vets and non-military, Canada is right there with the U.S. statistically.

But in the U.S., the proportion of suicides involving vets has declined in the past 25 years; veterans account for fewer suicides proportionately than they did 25 years ago - the percentage of suicides that involve veterans is 21%, down from 25 % in 1999.

[Bonam]

But in the U.S., the proportion of suicides involving vets has declined in the past 25 years; veterans account for fewer suicides proportionately than they did 25 years ago - the percentage of suicides that involve veterans is 21%, down from 25 % in 1999.

I would assume that that would simply be due to veterans comprising a smaller and smaller chunk of the population as many veterans from WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam die off, and more recent conflicts created far far fewer veterans than those ones.

[Guest American Woman]

I would assume that that would simply be due to veterans comprising a smaller and smaller chunk of the population as many veterans from WWI, WWII, Korea, and Vietnam die off, and more recent conflicts created far far fewer veterans than those ones.

Recent conflicts created far far fewer casualties than those wars, too.

[Bonam]

Recent conflicts created far far fewer casualties than those wars, too.

Of course, that goes without saying.

[Guest American Woman]

Of course, that goes without saying.

Yet I feel it needs to be said in light of the "more vets are committing suicide than have died in Afghanistan/Iraq" cries that are being made.

[Guest Derek L]

Found this interesting little factoid:

http://www.examiner.com/article/disabled-marine-rifles-at-inauguration-signal-shift-administration-policy

The first Presidential inauguration parade ever in which the USMC had to march with disabled rifles……..As can be seen here, the Marines M14s have had their bolts taken out, rendering the rifles unable to fire:

My question, why does the United States Secret Service not trust the Marines with functioning rifles? Is the USSS, and by extension, the Obama administration, worried about the Marines?

Here's another former Marine that didn't exactly have a stellar relationship with POTUS:

Then of course, there are these guys:

http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God

[The_Squid]

More paranoid gun nuts stroking each others fear about Obama...

All sorts of things wrong with that article... Obama administration did this? Really? The gun nut knows this for certain somehow?

How is this different than previous parades?

The issue of parade rifles carried by honor guards being disabled in a different fashion under previous administrations, such as having their firing pins removed, is not being argued here, although it should be—not that it didn't happen, but that it does. But that’s not the thrust of this article. Here’s what is:

Unlike in 2009, in the 2013 inaugural parade, someone in authority made the decision to change that and order the Marines to march with visibly disabled guns.

Apparently, even the paranoid gun nut article admitted that they were disabled before.... but just differently! GASP!! The bolts were removed and not just the firing pins???? Even for paranoid gun nuts, this conspiracy is idiotic.

[Guest Derek L]

More paranoid gun nuts stroking each others fear about Obama...

All sorts of things wrong with that article... Obama administration did this? Really? The gun nut knows this for certain somehow?

How is this different than previous parades?

Apparently, even the paranoid gun nut article admitted that they were disabled before.... but just differently! GASP!! The bolts were removed and not just the firing pins???? Even for paranoid gun nuts, this conspiracy is idiotic.

The charging handle is forward and there is a "big open space" where the bolt would be........Clearly this was a order issued to ensure the weapons state was clearly obvious…….unlike removing the firing pin or the QM simply not issuing ammo………….

This begs the question, why doesn’t the Obama Administration trust the Marine Corps?

Even Hitler trusted the SS:

[bush_cheney2004]

The charging handle is forward and there is a "big open space" where the bolt would be........Clearly this was a order issued to ensure the weapons state was clearly obvious…….unlike removing the firing pin or the QM simply not issuing ammo………….

This begs the question, why doesn’t the Obama Administration trust the Marine Corps?

No big deal, as it is common practice to drill with disabled firearms. I drilled with an M1 Garand for four years (WW2 surplus) and not only were the firing pins removed, but the barrels were obstructed. We could still cock and release the action by trigger, which was mocking fun at the right point in parade formation (loud clicking sounds). Curiously, we were still directed to fix and drill with real bayonets.

It is just too much work and downright unsafe/unsecure to issue and properly store fully functioning weapons, as ammo is readily available and easily concealed.

[Guest Derek L]

No big deal, as it is common practice to drill with disabled firearms. I drilled with an M1 Garand for four years (WW2 surplus) and not only were the firing pins removed, but the barrels were obstructed. We could still cock and release the action by trigger, which was mocking fun at the right point in parade formation (loud clicking sounds). Curiously, we were still directed to fix and drill with real bayonets.

It is just too much work and downright unsafe/unsecure to issue and properly store fully functioning weapons, as ammo is readily available and easily concealed.

Oh, I agree, parade and drills with unloaded rifles, or even rifles with dewat barrels or firing pins is a no brainier from a safety perspective……….But these conditions are not apparent on visual inspection, hence a factor of “trust”………….

Removing the bolts from a M14, hence visually being able to confirm said rifle is deactivated, a clear example of lack of trust of an elite company of Marines…….What’s next, putting corks on the tips of their M6?