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.

(Westword)   Coloradoan decides to test the state's open-carry firearm law, apparently not realizing the law does not allow carrying in an establishment where liquor is served. Yes, it's a theatre   (blogs.westword.com) divider line 331
    More: Dumbass, James Mapes, firearms, establishments, Thornton Police Department  
•       •       •

9780 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jul 2012 at 2:26 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-07-30 03:38:45 PM  

LandOfChocolate: Why bother with open carry? Unless you're in law enforcement, you look like a complete tool.


Perhaps for the same reason that some women in cities where it's legal have organized topless days? If you have the right to do something that some would find extreme or offensive, exercise it now and again. It's a way of celebrating your right to do it, I guess, and also of normalizing it. There are lots of people who suffer from an irrational fear of guns and prejudice against those who own them. It might help if people got used to seeing guns on hips every time they went to the grocery store or movie theater.
 
2012-07-30 03:39:41 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Never, in the history of mas shootings, has an armed civilian or intended victim altered the outcome of a mass shooting.

Never. Never. Never.

Got it?
Good.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

How about the civilians that returned fire and helped keep Charles Whitman pinned down?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Whitman

So yeah, you're full of shiat.
 
2012-07-30 03:40:06 PM  

Farkin_Crazy: From his own letter to the editor:

Just one concealed-weapon holder in a classroom where a random criminal attempts to shoot the occupants could and would reduce the casualties, as they would either take out the offender or at least distract them while others managed to get distance from the shooter.

Can someone point me to an instance where somebody packin' saved dozens of people by taking the shooter out?


Yea, it's Fox news...
 
2012-07-30 03:40:44 PM  

IamAwake: joonyer: If your life is threatened by a holstered pistol, then my life is threatened by a parked car.

That is a stupid statement. Absolutely stupid. Handguns were made for killin' - they ain't no good for nothin' else. Cars, on the other hand, are made for transporting. If you're doing anything other than killing a human being with a handgun (anything proper, at least) you are merely practicing so as to be more effective at killing a human with a handgun. Almost all cars, on the other hand, completely fulfill their purpose for their entire serviceable lifetimes, without ever killing someone.


Killing someone may be a perfectly legitimate activity.
 
2012-07-30 03:41:30 PM  

frankencj: Farkin_Crazy: From his own letter to the editor:

Just one concealed-weapon holder in a classroom where a random criminal attempts to shoot the occupants could and would reduce the casualties, as they would either take out the offender or at least distract them while others managed to get distance from the shooter.

Can someone point me to an instance where somebody packin' saved dozens of people by taking the shooter out?

Yea, it's Fox news...


Fox News =/= Fox affiliate
MSNBC =/= NBC affiliate
 
2012-07-30 03:41:50 PM  

cryinoutloud: InternetSecurityGuard: James, James, James. You need to check out Thunderwear:
http://www.thunderwear.com/holsters.asp
Either that or cut the pretense and start carrying a murse:
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/BAG-070
I have been carrying one of these around for several years now. So folks have gotten used to seeing me with it. Externally it has radios, GPS and cameras. But folks have no idea what is in the hidden pcket.

But how's he supposed to shoot the liberal shooter if his gun is concealed in a secret pocket? Dammit, when the man needs to shoot someone, he needs to do it NOW.

Also, he looks exactly like what I'd expect a guy like him to look like:

[blogs.westword.com image 380x480]

Ignorant and proud of it.


It's the eyes. They all have those beady little eyes.
 
2012-07-30 03:42:35 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Never, in the history of mas shootings, has an armed civilian or intended victim altered the outcome of a mass shooting. Never. Never. Never. Got it? Good.


So, therefore, allowing people to arm themselves will not mitigate such an event in the future. Never. Never ever.
 
2012-07-30 03:42:43 PM  

rhino33: serial_crusher: It's slightly possible that he didn't know they sell alcohol there? Most crappy movie theaters don't.


actually most theaters have corporate "no weapons" policies in place. it's up to the CCW holder to do the research before hand. it similar for places like Target and Walmart. Target doesn't allow weapons, but Walmart does.


I have openly carried a sidearm while in a Target. I do not, and will not, shop at a Wal-Mart store.
 
2012-07-30 03:43:07 PM  

IamAwake: joonyer: If your life is threatened by a holstered pistol, then my life is threatened by a parked car.

That is a stupid statement. Absolutely stupid. Handguns were made for killin' - they ain't no good for nothin' else. Cars, on the other hand, are made for transporting. If you're doing anything other than killing a human being with a handgun (anything proper, at least) you are merely practicing so as to be more effective at killing a human with a handgun. Almost all cars, on the other hand, completely fulfill their purpose for their entire serviceable lifetimes, without ever killing someone.


Really? They both have the same potential do they not? Why does it matter what they are "designed" for, instead of what happens when they are used?

Besides, the debate was about holstered versus brandishing. I was pointing out the difference and trying to use an analogy. I thought it fit, sorry it didn't work for you.
 
2012-07-30 03:43:20 PM  

IamAwake: joonyer: If your life is threatened by a holstered pistol, then my life is threatened by a parked car.

That is a stupid statement. Absolutely stupid. Handguns were made for killin' - they ain't no good for nothin' else. Cars, on the other hand, are made for transporting. If you're doing anything other than killing a human being with a handgun (anything proper, at least) you are merely practicing so as to be more effective at killing a human with a handgun. Almost all cars, on the other hand, completely fulfill their purpose for their entire serviceable lifetimes, without ever killing someone.


Yes, completely true. That's why I own a handgun, to kill people. But only certain people, people who don't understand right from wrong. People who think might makes right and it's perfectly okay to murder me, rape me, kidnap my son, etc. If they act on those impulses, then yes, I want to kill them to stop them. Since those people don't walk around wearing black hats and twirling mustaches I need to carry all the time instead of just listening for the sinister music to start.

Of course you're also completely right and practice at the range is not fun at all. Getting better and better at a skill gives people no satisfaction. Those people doing archery or fencing are the same, just practice to kill people, the blood thirsty savages.
 
2012-07-30 03:47:27 PM  

redmid17: You can hunt with handguns too


If you're stupid, yeah. The best handgun is less accurate the worst rifle. You can also decide to cook all your meals on your engine block. Will taste like shiat and you'll get yourself farked up in the process, but HEY...it's possible!

Handguns are only good at short range (hunting != short range) and only have a purpose because of their conceal-ability and quickness.
 
2012-07-30 03:48:23 PM  

PsyLord: Farkin_Crazy: From his own letter to the editor:

Just one concealed-weapon holder in a classroom where a random criminal attempts to shoot the occupants could and would reduce the casualties, as they would either take out the offender or at least distract them while others managed to get distance from the shooter.

Can someone point me to an instance where somebody packin' saved dozens of people by taking the shooter out?

IIRC, Nightline did a little simulation shortly after the VTech shooting where they gave a few students in a classroom a paint pellet gun and told them that someone was going to come in and start blasting. Even with the warning, the students ended up either not getting a shot off before being shot themselves or shooting innocent students that got in their line of sight.


In so doing, Nightline demonstrated that carrying a defensive firearm will be ineffective against an armed assailant who is informed in advance of the identities of individuals who are armed.
 
2012-07-30 03:48:55 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: You can hunt with handguns too

If you're stupid, yeah. The best handgun is less accurate the worst rifle. You can also decide to cook all your meals on your engine block. Will taste like shiat and you'll get yourself farked up in the process, but HEY...it's possible!

Handguns are only good at short range (hunting != short range) and only have a purpose because of their conceal-ability and quickness.


So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!
 
2012-07-30 03:49:39 PM  
Anti-gun bigots sound as bad as Westboro church ignorant idiots.
You really do.

I never have and probably never will own a firearm but I'll fight to insure that I keep my right to if I choose.

This knot-head makes national news because OTHER PEOPLE are scared... sigh..

He was within his legal rights, his charges will be dropped and his property returned. Mark my words. You know why? Because even though he seems like an asshat in general, he was breaking no laws.

I'm accused of being a liberal on many topics... and even I can see this is just overreaction from a pussified culture.
 
2012-07-30 03:49:42 PM  

PsyLord: You really don't want to know.


Why is that?
 
2012-07-30 03:50:31 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Rostin: A picture of a handgun with the univerisal "NOT ALLOWED" red cross through doesn't cut it as written notifcation.

Because in Texas, right and wrong don't matter, just the law. If it's not explicitly illegal and posted as such, it's legal.

/Texas logics is the bestest logics.


I guess it depends on what you consider "right and wrong." To me, charging an otherwise law-abiding person with a Class A misdemeanor because s/he didn't properly interpret some store owner's idea of clear signage is stupid and "wrong" and would have a chilling effect on concealed carry. The sign requirements are funny in some ways, but they are also completely clear. If a person is guilty of carrying where he shouldn't, it really is no one's fault but his own.
 
2012-07-30 03:50:37 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: You can hunt with handguns too

If you're stupid, yeah. The best handgun is less accurate the worst rifle. You can also decide to cook all your meals on your engine block. Will taste like shiat and you'll get yourself farked up in the process, but HEY...it's possible!

Handguns are only good at short range (hunting != short range) and only have a purpose because of their conceal-ability and quickness.


What is this I don't even....

[facepalm.jpg]
 
2012-07-30 03:52:16 PM  

LaraAmber: Of course you're also completely right and practice at the range is not fun at all. Getting better and better at a skill gives people no satisfaction.


you're stepping outside of practical reasons, and in to subjective preferences. There are people who like to squeeze bananas with their feet and then eat them - I can't argue against preferences. Handguns only have one objective use. Your preferences have nothing to do with whether a parked car is equiv to a handgun.

That said, I haven't disparaged handgun use here, or elsewhere. In fact, I think our slightly-armed populous is practically the only thing keeping our corrupt government in check. That doesn't mean it should be defended with inane arguments, however.
 
2012-07-30 03:52:55 PM  

cryinoutloud: InternetSecurityGuard: James, James, James. You need to check out Thunderwear:
http://www.thunderwear.com/holsters.asp
Either that or cut the pretense and start carrying a murse:
http://www.cheaperthandirt.com/product/BAG-070
I have been carrying one of these around for several years now. So folks have gotten used to seeing me with it. Externally it has radios, GPS and cameras. But folks have no idea what is in the hidden pcket.

But how's he supposed to shoot the liberal shooter if his gun is concealed in a secret pocket? Dammit, when the man needs to shoot someone, he needs to do it NOW.

Also, he looks exactly like what I'd expect a guy like him to look like:

[blogs.westword.com image 380x480]

Ignorant and proud of it.


Your alteration of the image by mirroring one side of his head to the other to make the subject appear unnaturally symmetrical was unnecessary.
 
2012-07-30 03:53:02 PM  
No harm done. Just take all his toys away and make sure he is never allowed anywhere near a gun for the rest of his life.

Anyone incapable of following a few simple rules should be trusted with nothing more than a water pistol.

Easy
 
2012-07-30 03:53:37 PM  

redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!


go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.
 
2012-07-30 03:55:20 PM  

IamAwake: joonyer: If your life is threatened by a holstered pistol, then my life is threatened by a parked car.

That is a stupid statement. Absolutely stupid. Handguns were made for killin' - they ain't no good for nothin' else. Cars, on the other hand, are made for transporting. If you're doing anything other than killing a human being with a handgun (anything proper, at least) you are merely practicing so as to be more effective at killing a human with a handgun. Almost all cars, on the other hand, completely fulfill their purpose for their entire serviceable lifetimes, without ever killing someone.


Ask any LEO what weapons they have at their disposal. Their vehicle will be on the list.
It's a 4000lb killing machine and can be used specificlly for that purpose or kill by accident. Just like firearms.
 
2012-07-30 03:55:39 PM  

LaraAmber


Of course you're also completely right and practice at the range is not fun at all. Getting better and better at a skill gives people no satisfaction. Those people doing archery or fencing are the same, just practice to kill people, the blood thirsty savages.


You are completely and utterly wrong.

'Bloodthirsty' is one word.


:-)
 
2012-07-30 03:55:39 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: You can hunt with handguns too

If you're stupid, yeah. The best handgun is less accurate the worst rifle. You can also decide to cook all your meals on your engine block. Will taste like shiat and you'll get yourself farked up in the process, but HEY...it's possible!

Handguns are only good at short range (hunting != short range) and only have a purpose because of their conceal-ability and quickness.


Would like a word with you:
www.scholatutorials.org
 
2012-07-30 03:55:48 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Never, in the history of mas shootings, has an armed civilian or intended victim altered the outcome of a mass shooting.

Never. Never. Never.

Got it?
Good.


Are you able to explain the apparent contradiction between your claim and observed reality?
 
2012-07-30 03:57:24 PM  
Came here to laugh at the Liberals shake their tiny, angry fists at the guy who broke no laws yet still was arrested.

/was not disappointed
 
2012-07-30 03:58:21 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: You can hunt with handguns too

If you're stupid, yeah. The best handgun is less accurate the worst rifle. You can also decide to cook all your meals on your engine block. Will taste like shiat and you'll get yourself farked up in the process, but HEY...it's possible!

Handguns are only good at short range (hunting != short range) and only have a purpose because of their conceal-ability and quickness.


Quickness yes, conceal-ability, no.

People wore handguns openly for centuries. The idea of wearing a full sized gun "concealed" is mainly a 20th & 21st century concept and concealed carry was a novelty (little one shot derringers, etc) before then. Unless you think Hollywood movies are practicing revisionist history by showing all those people during the old west with hip holsters.
 
2012-07-30 03:58:54 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!

go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.


You don't really know anything about hunting, do you?

https://www.google.com/search?q=handgun+deer&tbm=isch
 
2012-07-30 03:59:56 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!

go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.


jesus tap dancing christ on a cracker. Were you born this stupid or did you get training?

Google search of "hunting with handguns"
 
2012-07-30 04:01:57 PM  

JesseL: IamAwake: redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!

go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.

You don't really know anything about hunting, do you?

https://www.google.com/search?q=handgun+deer&tbm=isch


waiting for post claiming that's not their purpose, they are being subverted, something about bananas, and therefore don't count
 
2012-07-30 04:02:00 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!

go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.


Deer hunting with handguns is perfectly cromulent assuming the bullet meets certain standards. Here is an excerpt from the Indiana 2011 Deer hunting guide (where I am licensed to hunt):

"Handguns for deer hunting:

Handguns, other than muzzle loading, must have a barrel at least 4 inches long and must fire a bullet of .243-inch diameter or larger. The handgun cartridge case, without the bullet,
must be at least 1.16 inches long. Full metal-jacketed bullets are not permitted. Handguns are not permitted on any military areas. Some types of handgun cartridges legal for deer hunting include .357 Magnum, .41 Magnum, .44 Magnum, .44 Special, .45 Colt, .45 Long Colt, .45 Winchester Magnum, .35 Remington and .357 Herrett."


Dirty Harry could have picked up a license and bagged a buck on Thanksgiving with what he carried on a daily basis. Now practically speaking handguns aren't tremendously accurate, so you have to a) be a good shot and b) be close to them when you fire. You can either stalk the deer and then fire from close range, but I'm not good enough to do that. IF you do enough footwork before hand it's not too hard to find a close spot to put a deer blind near a rub or a feeding lot. I've had two friends kill deer with handguns. They don't like to use shotguns because "it's to easy" for them. They only hunt with a handgun or a bow. Either way, their range isn't much better than 50 yards, if it is at all.
 
2012-07-30 04:02:15 PM  

LaraAmber: IamAwake: joonyer: If your life is threatened by a holstered pistol, then my life is threatened by a parked car.

That is a stupid statement. Absolutely stupid. Handguns were made for killin' - they ain't no good for nothin' else. Cars, on the other hand, are made for transporting. If you're doing anything other than killing a human being with a handgun (anything proper, at least) you are merely practicing so as to be more effective at killing a human with a handgun. Almost all cars, on the other hand, completely fulfill their purpose for their entire serviceable lifetimes, without ever killing someone.

Yes, completely true. That's why I own a handgun, to kill people. But only certain people, people who don't understand right from wrong. People who think might makes right and it's perfectly okay to murder me, rape me, kidnap my son, etc. If they act on those impulses, then yes, I want to kill them to stop them. Since those people don't walk around wearing black hats and twirling mustaches I need to carry all the time instead of just listening for the sinister music to start.


Of course you're also completely right and practice at the range is not fun at all. Getting better and better at a skill gives people no satisfaction. Those people doing archery or fencing are the same, just practice to kill people, the blood thirsty savages.


You might appreciate "Zen and the Art of Archery".

about your range comment - I don't play golf. No money and no time for it. I do enjoy going to the driving range though. I can consistently get way out past 300 yards. I do it by warming up carefully and then, when I'm limber I use visualization techniques to visualize my boss's face on that ball. I don't remember feeling or hearing anything else but that face on that ball-and the club in my hands. And then, it's gone . . .
so I guess, just to be contrary, I get an unimaginable amount of satisfaction out of hitting that ball.

sorry
 
2012-07-30 04:03:43 PM  

IamAwake: redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!

go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.


These guys would like a word with you.
 
2012-07-30 04:05:09 PM  

Petit_Merdeux: PsyLord: You really don't want to know.

Why is that?


Because it is scarier when he says it like that.

And I believe he wants you to be afraid.
 
2012-07-30 04:05:20 PM  

TheyCallMeC0WB0Y: Came here to laugh at the Liberals shake their tiny, angry fists at the guy who broke no laws yet still was arrested.

/was not disappointed


Easy there Cowboy, I'm a liberal. ;)

Good luck against Guillard. Liver kick FTW.
 
2012-07-30 04:06:00 PM  

IamAwake: Almost all cars, on the other hand, completely fulfill their purpose for their entire serviceable lifetimes, without ever killing someone.


So do most guns. What's your point?
 
2012-07-30 04:06:08 PM  
You know, there are things you CAN do, and things you SHOULD do. There are things you are legally allowed to do in public, things you can say without fear of repercussion, places you can go anytime you want. However, there are times and places you as a human being should voluntarily censor or restrict your rights, because it's the polite or socially expedient thing to do.

I mean, you CAN tell a small child dressed like a freak, "Hey, kid, you look like a freak!" but in the name of kindness, you should say "My, don't you look nice today!" You CAN drive through Compton with your windows down screaming "N*ggers back to Africa!" but you shouldn't expect to survive if you do. And by the same token, you can certainly own firearms and even have a CCW, but don't you think there are places you shouldn't take your gun even so?

When did we as a nation become a bunch of individuals walking around saying "I got my rights, f*ck yours!" Oh, right, nevermind.
 
2012-07-30 04:10:28 PM  

joonyer: IamAwake: redmid17: So hunting != short range? Those bow-totin' hunters would have been great Longbowmen back in the days of yore then!

go use a handgun on a deer and get back to me on this, troll.

jesus tap dancing christ on a cracker. Were you born this stupid or did you get training?

Google search of "hunting with handguns"


I didn't say it wasn't done, or that it was impossible. I said it was stupid. Lots of people do lots of stupid things.

There's a reason olympic archery is at 70m, and pistols are at 25 and 50m. 'Tis said that english longbowmen had to hit a man-sized target 10 times in 20 seconds at 200 feet for their station. Here we are centuries later, and the USMC qualifies pistols at 7, 15, 25, and 50m.

Bows speak to the primitive bit better, and at anything beyond deer-can-hear-your-breathing distances, a bow is more accurate. Rifles are more practical for everything other than quickness (though they gain quickness in refire). Handguns either don't have the stopping power or, when they do, create too much of an exit. They don't have accuracy. It's a completely impractical instrument for the task.
 
2012-07-30 04:10:34 PM  

Gyrfalcon: You know, there are things you CAN do, and things you SHOULD do. There are things you are legally allowed to do in public, things you can say without fear of repercussion, places you can go anytime you want. However, there are times and places you as a human being should voluntarily censor or restrict your rights, because it's the polite or socially expedient thing to do.

I mean, you CAN tell a small child dressed like a freak, "Hey, kid, you look like a freak!" but in the name of kindness, you should say "My, don't you look nice today!" You CAN drive through Compton with your windows down screaming "N*ggers back to Africa!" but you shouldn't expect to survive if you do. And by the same token, you can certainly own firearms and even have a CCW, but don't you think there are places you shouldn't take your gun even so?

When did we as a nation become a bunch of individuals walking around saying "I got my rights, f*ck yours!" Oh, right, nevermind.


Prove to me how my carrying a gun infringes on your rights.
 
2012-07-30 04:10:42 PM  

Gyrfalcon: When did we as a nation become a bunch of individuals walking around saying "I got my rights, f*ck yours!" Oh, right, nevermind.


Are you saying that someone legally carrying a firearm is infringing on someone else's rights? How?
 
2012-07-30 04:11:20 PM  
Farkin_Crazy

Can someone point me to an instance where somebody packin' saved dozens of people by taking the shooter out?
I did that last week and fark's resident hoplophobe immediately called it "cherry picking".
 
2012-07-30 04:13:44 PM  

Gyrfalcon: You know, there are things you CAN do, and things you SHOULD do. There are things you are legally allowed to do in public, things you can say without fear of repercussion, places you can go anytime you want. However, there are times and places you as a human being should voluntarily censor or restrict your rights, because it's the polite or socially expedient thing to do.

I mean, you CAN tell a small child dressed like a freak, "Hey, kid, you look like a freak!" but in the name of kindness, you should say "My, don't you look nice today!" You CAN drive through Compton with your windows down screaming "N*ggers back to Africa!" but you shouldn't expect to survive if you do. And by the same token, you can certainly own firearms and even have a CCW, but don't you think there are places you shouldn't take your gun even so?

When did we as a nation become a bunch of individuals walking around saying "I got my rights, f*ck yours!" Oh, right, nevermind.


Yes. Most places actually. As a gun owner and CCW holder I carry very rarely... really only when walking my dog at night. I do that because although I'm a decent shot, I'm probably don't have the balls to pull it on someone when necessary, and I'd rather not be killed by my own gun.

(It's also nice to be able to drive to and from the range without having to put it in the trunk w/o ammo etc.)

That being said, although I don't subscribe to the "carry everywhere" mantra (and there is good reason to do so, like needing your gun, not having it, and not realizing until after you've opened your mouth), I support those that do. It's their right, and when I see the bulge under their shirt/jacket or they're carrying openly I am not intimidated, because I am an educated adult that understands several important things about our country and society.

The rest of the world can go on thinking we're cowboys, it doesn't bother me. Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

/really I only have it in case of zombie apocalypse
//i am a democrat
 
2012-07-30 04:13:45 PM  

PanzerPants: Philadelphia can suck it on that note, but I can see why they would want to discourage as many guns there as possible being so close and getting the overflow from that cesspool of human garbage that floats over from NJ, more specifically Camden. Cant they just make a REAAAAALLY long bridge to bypass that whole area.


Considering that I-95 is elevated from Center City out to the Betsy Ross Bridge, which crosses into Cinnaminson, not Camden, you could argue that they already have.
 
2012-07-30 04:16:04 PM  

PsyLord: Farkin_Crazy: From his own letter to the editor:

Just one concealed-weapon holder in a classroom where a random criminal attempts to shoot the occupants could and would reduce the casualties, as they would either take out the offender or at least distract them while others managed to get distance from the shooter.

Can someone point me to an instance where somebody packin' saved dozens of people by taking the shooter out?

IIRC, Nightline did a little simulation shortly after the VTech shooting where they gave a few students in a classroom a paint pellet gun and told them that someone was going to come in and start blasting. Even with the warning, the students ended up either not getting a shot off before being shot themselves or shooting innocent students that got in their line of sight.


They also told their "shooter" which student(s) were armed... kinda stacking the deck...
 
2012-07-30 04:16:18 PM  

OnlyM3: I did that last week and fark's resident hoplophobe immediately called it "cherry picking".


Dude, that's because most of your linked articles were just plain ol robberies and there was zero reason to be believe there was going to be shooting of any kind. The church shooter that was stopped, that's an example of a mass shooting that was stopped. A convenience store robbery is not.
 
2012-07-30 04:16:19 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Never, in the history of mas shootings, has an armed civilian or intended victim altered the outcome of a mass shooting.

Never. Never. Never.

Got it?
Good.


Well, if the person intending to commit mass murder is shot and killed by on of their first intended targets, then it would never be considered a "mass murder" would it?


See, I don't think any reasonable person expects a movie-like situation where an armed citizen miraculously saves everyone with one perfect shot.

They key argument is the ability to resist, delay, or prevent the continuation of the violence.

All of these mass murders in the last decade or so all have one thing in common: lack of resistance.

Columbine, no resistance.
Virgina Tech: no resistance.
Auroroa: no resistance.

These all lead to large body counts. Just fighting back could slow a killer down. I remember a case where a high school kid jumped a school shooter and wrestled the gun from his hand. He resisted, and who knows how many he saved.

But as others have already pointed out, Charles Whitman was effectively stopped by citizens returning fire.

There have been MANY, MANY cases of swift, armed resistance cutting violence short, several of which have already been cited. I don't have the time to hunt down the exact cases right now, but I remember a kid with attempting a mall shooting running into an off duty cop who shot him, the female church security guard shooting a crazy guy in a parking lot, and a teacher stopping a school shooting when he ran to his car for his personal weapon.

So, yeah. You are actually, empirically, wrong.
 
2012-07-30 04:16:29 PM  

oakleym82


That being said, although I don't subscribe to the "carry everywhere" mantra (and there is good reason to do so, like needing your gun, not having it, and not realizing until after you've opened your mouth),


This is part of the problem: do not rely on the firearm to get you out of a situation after you shoot your mouth off.

Keep your damned word-hole shut and don't escalate the situation.
 
2012-07-30 04:17:42 PM  

joonyer: Gyrfalcon: When did we as a nation become a bunch of individuals walking around saying "I got my rights, f*ck yours!" Oh, right, nevermind.

Are you saying that someone legally carrying a firearm is infringing on someone else's rights? How?


I didn't say that, now did I? What I said was, your "rights" have become more important than being halfway decent to other people. But if you must: Don't the other 100 people in that theater have a RIGHT to enjoy the film without an awful reminder of a tragedy barely a week ago being shoved in their faces? Why is legally carrying a firearm so goddamn important that it trumps other people's RIGHTS not to have it around?

Why is it so horribly wrong to consider other people once in a while? Because "I got my rights! F*ck you!" seems to be everyone's answer these days.
 
2012-07-30 04:19:38 PM  
Tell me, when you go to get your CCW do they actually require that you show them your tiny penis, or do they just assume you have one?
 
2012-07-30 04:19:41 PM  

OnlyM3: Farkin_Crazy

Can someone point me to an instance where somebody packin' saved dozens of people by taking the shooter out? I did that last week and fark's resident hoplophobe immediately called it "cherry picking".


Your statement incorrectly implies a singular.
 
Displayed 50 of 331 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report