If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Denver Post)   Gun sales in Colorado have jumped more than 41 percent since Friday   (denverpost.com) divider line 619
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

5851 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jul 2012 at 12:19 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



619 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-25 11:59:41 AM

snocone: Wolf_Cub: ronaprhys: jayhawk88: OK, you know what? You want to pack heat at the library or supermarket? Fine. Go pass an FBI weapons training course. The same one they give to agents. You do it at your own cost too. If it's that damn important to you, if you really feel like your life is in danger every time you enter a Denny's, this should be no problem for you.

Which of our other specifically-enumerated Constitutional rights should come with a similar requirement? Freedom of speech? Only if you take a government-sponsored and controlled course to teach you how to properly speak so as not to offend anyone. Right to vote? Only if you can demonstrate to a public authority that you've properly researched all of the relevant facts from approved sources.

Fact: one is free to act as one would like, but one must also pay the consequences if that injures another party.

Just out of curiousity, can you site a single incident where the use a Freedom of Speech ended with 15 people dead? How about people voting? Can't come up with one? If you can't then your argument is both stupid and invalid.

As for all the CCW fans who thing they would have shot James Holmes and stopped this tragedy, Something to actually think about. Most of you, if you have any training at all, have been trained at center mass shots. Holmes was wearing Body Armor. The best you would have done is break a rib or two and slowed him down. Oh and turned yourself (unprotected as you would have been in a theater, unless you wear body armor everywhere you go) into the next target/victim. You wouldn't have stopped him...you would have died or been severly injured at best. And that is assuming you HIT him, and not a fellow citizen who was running through the tear gas to try and get out themselves. And if you hit a fellow citizen and killed them...YOU would also be up on charges for manslaughter at the very least, because under the circumstances YOU opening fire on the nutjob could and would be consider depraved ...


Thank you for fully proving my point. My having been in or not in a fire fight has absolutely nothing to do with the situation. I also haven't had sex with another may but I have an opinion on that to. Maybe I shouldn't.

So can you even answer the question? has anyone did from Freedom of Speech or voting or are you just a moron?
 
2012-07-25 12:08:31 PM

ronaprhys: .

No, in no instance could someone defending themselves be legitimately construed as depraved indifference, assuming they didn't just ...


I respectfully disagree, opening fire in a situation with innocent people running around in a tear gas filled enclosed space would definitely be construed by a prosecutor as depraved indifference at the very least. That doesn't mean that the Jury would agree, but that is the point of a trail now isn't it. And I never accused YOU of saying you would definitely doing it, I was saying that if you did it under the circumstances as they have been described in the media, you would be nuts.

I have no problem with people feeling the need to own a weapon or want to have a CC permit. I am simply saying this isn't a situation from what I have read that I think that armed citizens in the theater would have made the situation better, but worse.
 
2012-07-25 01:04:57 PM

ronaprhys: I disagree that it's fear. It's not fear that causes me to have a fire extinguisher. Or one of those handy tools for getting out of a wrecked vehicle. Or having a first aid kit on me when we go hiking, mountain biking, or driving (I've got one in my Xterra). It's preparedness. Two totally different things.


I think it's a semantic discussion based on how strong the emotion is. Fear > Concern. Are you concerned that, if a fire broke out, you wouldn't be able to put it out, or are you afraid that as a result of not being able to put it out, you'd lose everything you owned, including possibly your life and the lives of loved ones? Regardless, "preparedness" is the response to that fear or concern: "I am prepared, therefore, I no longer need to be afraid or concerned." The other possible responses are denial ("it won't happen to me") or deferment ("I know it could happen to me, but if it does, I'll deal with it then").

I know I can't be prepared for everything, but I try to cover as many scenarios as possible based on a combination of logic (what is most likely to occur?) and emotion (what scares me the most?). But I also don't think fear is a bad thing. It's how you face your fears that's important.
 
2012-07-25 01:15:42 PM

Wolf_Cub: ronaprhys: .

No, in no instance could someone defending themselves be legitimately construed as depraved indifference, assuming they didn't just ...

I respectfully disagree, opening fire in a situation with innocent people running around in a tear gas filled enclosed space would definitely be construed by a prosecutor as depraved indifference at the very least. That doesn't mean that the Jury would agree, but that is the point of a trail now isn't it. And I never accused YOU of saying you would definitely doing it, I was saying that if you did it under the circumstances as they have been described in the media, you would be nuts.

I have no problem with people feeling the need to own a weapon or want to have a CC permit. I am simply saying this isn't a situation from what I have read that I think that armed citizens in the theater would have made the situation better, but worse.


Of course the prosecutor would portray it that way - that's why I used the word legitimate. To just assume that it's depraved indifference, though, is wrong. If the CCW person happened to be 10' away, clear shot, no one in the background then there's simply no case. Folks running around behind them don't figure into the equation. If same guy was across the theater with all sorts of panicked individuals between them and the shooter, different story. In there lies the key difference.

That's addressing this particular situation. However, my point was broader than that. Defending oneself cannot be legitimately construed as depraved indifference, assuming they didn't just shut their eyes and open fire wildly. Note that I qualified that statement (something you didn't include in the quote). It's that qualification that draws the line.
 
2012-07-25 01:37:39 PM

Bit'O'Gristle: I'm not surprised. I wish someone if not someones in that theater were carrying that night. The chances of innocent people getting shot in the crossfire would have been more than offset by the chances of a trained (range time) law abiding citizen throwing a few in the X ring of this douche's chest. Innocent people were dying anyway, and if i had been at that place at that time, i would have chosen to be able not only to defend myself and my family, but the other innocents there too. Better chance having a gun you can use than just cowering back in fear and waiting to get shot like a dog.


While i tend to agree, a chest shot would not have stopped this. Remember he was wearing body armor. High powered rounds would be needed
 
2012-07-25 01:53:29 PM

Netrngr: Bit'O'Gristle: I'm not surprised. I wish someone if not someones in that theater were carrying that night. The chances of innocent people getting shot in the crossfire would have been more than offset by the chances of a trained (range time) law abiding citizen throwing a few in the X ring of this douche's chest. Innocent people were dying anyway, and if i had been at that place at that time, i would have chosen to be able not only to defend myself and my family, but the other innocents there too. Better chance having a gun you can use than just cowering back in fear and waiting to get shot like a dog.

While i tend to agree, a chest shot would not have stopped this. Remember he was wearing body armor. High powered rounds would be needed


He was wearing a tactical vest. Even if he were wearing body armor, a round to the chest is going to make him patently aware of exactly how many ribs he has in his chest.
(ie it's going to hurt a farkload). It might even knock him over.
 
2012-07-25 02:21:20 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: snocone: A good stout piece ash will do very well against a bear.
I carry a whittled ax handle in the woods.
Or a machete if out of the park.

Yes, tried and true just outside of Deadhorse. That bear recognized/respected the club. Not so much my bodyguard's gun.

why not the whole axe? Seems like it would be a pretty useful thing against more than just bears. Like gathering firewood, cutting wood to build an emergency shelter, etc.


Axehead is a heavy biatch.
And loses the advantages of the stick.
Handle is much more versatile and I'm not building a cabin.

twist between two uprights to gain a handhold climbing
thump a step before you take it
catch your balance w/o fallling
sit on it between two stumps to take a crap

just have fun whacking and poking
 
2012-07-25 02:29:18 PM

redmid17: It might even knock him over.


Do his guns magically stop working because he's on his ass? How many ribs does it take for him to lose the use of his index fingers? How many cinema goers who have concealed weapons, and the skillz to use them, also carry gas masks and IR/nightvision goggles?

Moot points are moot.
 
2012-07-25 02:33:09 PM

snocone: Mitch Taylor's Bro: snocone: A good stout piece ash will do very well against a bear.
I carry a whittled ax handle in the woods.
Or a machete if out of the park.

Yes, tried and true just outside of Deadhorse. That bear recognized/respected the club. Not so much my bodyguard's gun.

why not the whole axe? Seems like it would be a pretty useful thing against more than just bears. Like gathering firewood, cutting wood to build an emergency shelter, etc.

Axehead is a heavy biatch.
And loses the advantages of the stick.
Handle is much more versatile and I'm not building a cabin.

twist between two uprights to gain a handhold climbing
thump a step before you take it
catch your balance w/o fallling
sit on it between two stumps to take a crap

just have fun whacking and poking


Meh, guess I've seen too many Survivorman shows :-)
 
2012-07-25 02:39:38 PM

uttertosh: redmid17: It might even knock him over.

Do his guns magically stop working because he's on his ass? How many ribs does it take for him to lose the use of his index fingers? How many cinema goers who have concealed weapons, and the skillz to use them, also carry gas masks and IR/nightvision goggles?

Moot points are moot.


No they do not, but if he's keeled over on his back and stationary, he's a much easier target to shoot. Either way, the hypothetical doesn't matter. If you get shot in the chest, armor or no, it's going to hurt a lot, possibly even incapacitate. Body armor isn't some force field that makes on invulnverable.
 
2012-07-25 03:25:18 PM

uttertosh: Do his guns magically stop working because he's on his ass? How many ribs does it take for him to lose the use of his index fingers? How many cinema goers who have concealed weapons, and the skillz to use them, also carry gas masks and IR/nightvision goggles?

Moot points are moot.


You can't go on about panicked crowds and and tear gas making people unable to return fire then pretend that this guy is farking superman, able to just brush off multiple rounds to the chest. The dude isn't Rambo, getting hit is going to slow him down.
 
2012-07-25 03:33:35 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: ronaprhys: I disagree that it's fear. It's not fear that causes me to have a fire extinguisher. Or one of those handy tools for getting out of a wrecked vehicle. Or having a first aid kit on me when we go hiking, mountain biking, or driving (I've got one in my Xterra). It's preparedness. Two totally different things.

I think it's a semantic discussion based on how strong the emotion is. Fear > Concern. Are you concerned that, if a fire broke out, you wouldn't be able to put it out, or are you afraid that as a result of not being able to put it out, you'd lose everything you owned, including possibly your life and the lives of loved ones? Regardless, "preparedness" is the response to that fear or concern: "I am prepared, therefore, I no longer need to be afraid or concerned." The other possible responses are denial ("it won't happen to me") or deferment ("I know it could happen to me, but if it does, I'll deal with it then").

I know I can't be prepared for everything, but I try to cover as many scenarios as possible based on a combination of logic (what is most likely to occur?) and emotion (what scares me the most?). But I also don't think fear is a bad thing. It's how you face your fears that's important.


In 2010, there were 137,000 gun crimes in the US. That same year, fire departments responded to more than 1.33 million fires.

Given your scenario, carrying a fire extinguisher everywhere you go is, by far, the more intelligent of the two options you present.

I'm absolutely certain that accidental or negligent discharge of fire extinguishers doesn't claim anywhere near 600 lives annually.
 
2012-07-25 03:41:10 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Mitch Taylor's Bro: ronaprhys: I disagree that it's fear. It's not fear that causes me to have a fire extinguisher. Or one of those handy tools for getting out of a wrecked vehicle. Or having a first aid kit on me when we go hiking, mountain biking, or driving (I've got one in my Xterra). It's preparedness. Two totally different things.

I think it's a semantic discussion based on how strong the emotion is. Fear > Concern. Are you concerned that, if a fire broke out, you wouldn't be able to put it out, or are you afraid that as a result of not being able to put it out, you'd lose everything you owned, including possibly your life and the lives of loved ones? Regardless, "preparedness" is the response to that fear or concern: "I am prepared, therefore, I no longer need to be afraid or concerned." The other possible responses are denial ("it won't happen to me") or deferment ("I know it could happen to me, but if it does, I'll deal with it then").

I know I can't be prepared for everything, but I try to cover as many scenarios as possible based on a combination of logic (what is most likely to occur?) and emotion (what scares me the most?). But I also don't think fear is a bad thing. It's how you face your fears that's important.

In 2010, there were 137,000 gun crimes in the US. That same year, fire departments responded to more than 1.33 million fires.

Given your scenario, carrying a fire extinguisher everywhere you go is, by far, the more intelligent of the two options you present.

I'm absolutely certain that accidental or negligent discharge of fire extinguishers doesn't claim anywhere near 600 lives annually.


There were as many violent crimes committed in 2009 as number of fires responded to (same source). Your assailant doesn't need to have a gun to be dissuaded by one. You know the whole "equalize the playing field for grandma" thing?
 
2012-07-25 03:47:15 PM

uttertosh: redmid17: It might even knock him over.

Do his guns magically stop working because he's on his ass? How many ribs does it take for him to lose the use of his index fingers? How many cinema goers who have concealed weapons, and the skillz to use them, also carry gas masks and IR/nightvision goggles?

Moot points are moot.


Maybe you should look up blunt force trauma. It's a biatch.

Btw a Blackhawk! tac vest such as this shooter was wearing is not a form of armor it's made of nylon.
 
2012-07-25 04:00:46 PM

redmid17: demaL-demaL-yeH: Mitch Taylor's Bro: ronaprhys: I disagree that it's fear. It's not fear that causes me to have a fire extinguisher. Or one of those handy tools for getting out of a wrecked vehicle. Or having a first aid kit on me when we go hiking, mountain biking, or driving (I've got one in my Xterra). It's preparedness. Two totally different things.

I think it's a semantic discussion based on how strong the emotion is. Fear > Concern. Are you concerned that, if a fire broke out, you wouldn't be able to put it out, or are you afraid that as a result of not being able to put it out, you'd lose everything you owned, including possibly your life and the lives of loved ones? Regardless, "preparedness" is the response to that fear or concern: "I am prepared, therefore, I no longer need to be afraid or concerned." The other possible responses are denial ("it won't happen to me") or deferment ("I know it could happen to me, but if it does, I'll deal with it then").

I know I can't be prepared for everything, but I try to cover as many scenarios as possible based on a combination of logic (what is most likely to occur?) and emotion (what scares me the most?). But I also don't think fear is a bad thing. It's how you face your fears that's important.

In 2010, there were 137,000 gun crimes in the US. That same year, fire departments responded to more than 1.33 million fires.

Given your scenario, carrying a fire extinguisher everywhere you go is, by far, the more intelligent of the two options you present.

I'm absolutely certain that accidental or negligent discharge of fire extinguishers doesn't claim anywhere near 600 lives annually.

There were as many violent crimes committed in 2009 as number of fires responded to (same source). Your assailant doesn't need to have a gun to be dissuaded by one. You know the whole "equalize the playing field for grandma" thing?


*snerk*
If you want to "equalize the playing field for grandma", the assailant had damned well better be driving a tank.

/Especially if she's carrying a loaded fire extinguisher.
 
2012-07-25 04:02:11 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: redmid17: demaL-demaL-yeH: Mitch Taylor's Bro: ronaprhys: I disagree that it's fear. It's not fear that causes me to have a fire extinguisher. Or one of those handy tools for getting out of a wrecked vehicle. Or having a first aid kit on me when we go hiking, mountain biking, or driving (I've got one in my Xterra). It's preparedness. Two totally different things.

I think it's a semantic discussion based on how strong the emotion is. Fear > Concern. Are you concerned that, if a fire broke out, you wouldn't be able to put it out, or are you afraid that as a result of not being able to put it out, you'd lose everything you owned, including possibly your life and the lives of loved ones? Regardless, "preparedness" is the response to that fear or concern: "I am prepared, therefore, I no longer need to be afraid or concerned." The other possible responses are denial ("it won't happen to me") or deferment ("I know it could happen to me, but if it does, I'll deal with it then").

I know I can't be prepared for everything, but I try to cover as many scenarios as possible based on a combination of logic (what is most likely to occur?) and emotion (what scares me the most?). But I also don't think fear is a bad thing. It's how you face your fears that's important.

In 2010, there were 137,000 gun crimes in the US. That same year, fire departments responded to more than 1.33 million fires.

Given your scenario, carrying a fire extinguisher everywhere you go is, by far, the more intelligent of the two options you present.

I'm absolutely certain that accidental or negligent discharge of fire extinguishers doesn't claim anywhere near 600 lives annually.

There were as many violent crimes committed in 2009 as number of fires responded to (same source). Your assailant doesn't need to have a gun to be dissuaded by one. You know the whole "equalize the playing field for grandma" thing?

*snerk*
If you want to "equalize the playing field for grandma", the assailant had damned well ...


I hear that tank tracks are especially vulnerable to ABC extinguisher foam.
 
2012-07-25 05:43:46 PM

demaL-demaL-yeH: Mitch Taylor's Bro: ronaprhys: I disagree that it's fear. It's not fear that causes me to have a fire extinguisher. Or one of those handy tools for getting out of a wrecked vehicle. Or having a first aid kit on me when we go hiking, mountain biking, or driving (I've got one in my Xterra). It's preparedness. Two totally different things.

I think it's a semantic discussion based on how strong the emotion is. Fear > Concern. Are you concerned that, if a fire broke out, you wouldn't be able to put it out, or are you afraid that as a result of not being able to put it out, you'd lose everything you owned, including possibly your life and the lives of loved ones? Regardless, "preparedness" is the response to that fear or concern: "I am prepared, therefore, I no longer need to be afraid or concerned." The other possible responses are denial ("it won't happen to me") or deferment ("I know it could happen to me, but if it does, I'll deal with it then").

I know I can't be prepared for everything, but I try to cover as many scenarios as possible based on a combination of logic (what is most likely to occur?) and emotion (what scares me the most?). But I also don't think fear is a bad thing. It's how you face your fears that's important.

In 2010, there were 137,000 gun crimes in the US. That same year, fire departments responded to more than 1.33 million fires.

Given your scenario, carrying a fire extinguisher everywhere you go is, by far, the more intelligent of the two options you present.

I'm absolutely certain that accidental or negligent discharge of fire extinguishers doesn't claim anywhere near 600 lives annually.


I already carry a fire extinguisher in my car and have two in my home (hmm, I should probably check those...it's been a while). Most businesses are also required to have a fire extinguisher in plain sight with signs that say, "in case of fire, break glass and use this to put it out." So, I have pretty easy access to a fire extinguisher in a lot of places I happen to be. Guns? Not so much.

FWIW, I don't expect to do concealed carry. It's illegal in CA AFAIK and I don't know if I would even if it were legal. But I don't have a gun in my home...yet. Still weighing the plusses and minuses, but I'm leaning toward getting one. If/when I do, I will do my best to prevent an accidental discharge, just as I would secure a fire extinguisher to prevent any accidental discharges.
 
2012-07-25 06:55:07 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: FWIW, I don't expect to do concealed carry. It's illegal in CA AFAIK and I don't know if I would even if it were legal. But I don't have a gun in my home...yet. Still weighing the plusses and minuses, but I'm leaning toward getting one. If/when I do, I will do my best to prevent an accidental discharge, just as I would secure a fire extinguisher to prevent any accidental discharges.


It's not illegal to carry in many parts of CA (with a permit) but getting that permit is certainly more feasible if you happen to know the right people (and donate to their reelection campaigns). Good luck with that if you don't.
 
2012-07-25 08:14:35 PM

Mitch Taylor's Bro: Nytfall: I like the Bond Arms Snake Slayer .410 pistol. Only two rounds, though, so you better have backup close if you miss. When I am in a state where my CCW is valid, it's my backup.

I've heard of .410 shotgun pistols, but don't think they're a good home protection option. Might be fun to shoot, though :-)


It's pretty fun, but it kicks like a motherfarker. If you don't have the right grip, you'll be sorry. It's a lot more challenging to hit clays with, too.
 
Displayed 19 of 619 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report