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.

(KATU)   A "concealed weapons" permit doesn't mean you can hide it under the seat in a movie theater   (katu.com) divider line 153
    More: Dumbass, concealed weapons  
•       •       •

5343 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Dec 2012 at 5:24 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-21 08:46:43 AM  
"In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man is a hero and a responsible gun owner.


/get ready for more and more of this
 
2012-12-21 08:49:15 AM  
Quackenbush can reapply for a concealed-weapons permit as long as criminal charges aren't pending, Long said.

"He shouldn't apply for it soon," Long said.


Well then, he needs to tell Sheriff Long to go pound salt, and just legally open carry instead. Problem solved.
 
2012-12-21 08:51:05 AM  

Aces and Eights: Whole Wheat: Mitch Mitchell: fusillade762: A 7th-grade student found the weapon on Wednesday with a round in the chamber and the safety off.

Glad they pulled his CC license.  The guy is an idiot.

True that.

Other than having his CCW where he shouldn't have, and the safety off, I don't see what was wrong about having a round in the chamber. That is standard practice. The hammer (which is internal on most CCW pieces) can only be cocked by pulling the trigger.

The fact that he "forgot" his gun in a theater is reason enough, though. I guess you're right....

It might be standard practice for law enforcement, but grandpa has no business keeping a round in the chamber. It only takes a split second to chamber a round if it's needed. Keeping a round in the chamber increases exponentially the possibility of an accidental discharge.

And without the safety on, this was an accident waiting to happen.


An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.
 
2012-12-21 08:51:26 AM  

Ghastly: RickN99: Ghastly: FTFA:"In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

If you're that freaking paranoid you are exactly the kind of person who should not be carrying a firearm... nor leaving your house.

Good point. What kind of paranoid whacko thinks someone might come into a theater looking to shoot people. That hasn't happened since, uh, Sunday?

Paranoid enough to carry a chambered round with the safety off? Sorry but that's all kinds of farking stupid. He's lucky he hasn't shot himself or someone else already.


He sounds like just the kind of "hero" we should have firing rounds from a .380 in a dark room full of innocent bystanders.
 
2012-12-21 08:52:06 AM  

Carn: Everyone agrees that someone like this should have his weapons taken away from him. What's interesting is that not everyone agrees that we should try to keep someone like this from getting weapons in the first place.


Judging by the number of gun fans on Fark, if that was the case, you'd be trying to keep guns away from the majority of the American population.
 
2012-12-21 08:52:58 AM  

Ghastly: Paranoid enough to carry a chambered round with the safety off? Sorry but that's all kinds of farking stupid. He's lucky he hasn't shot himself or someone else already.


Some guns don't even have a safety that can be turned on or off. If it's a CCW you always have around in the chamber. You know all those cops you see, if they own a glock the have the safety "off" and a round in the chamber too.

/you don't know what you are talking about.
 
2012-12-21 08:59:15 AM  

Basily Gourt: dickfreckle: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Is he a teacher?

Armed elementary school teachers are the true wave of our future safety. With their lengthy amount of firearms training and invariably innate steely-nerved and stoic actions, our problems here will soon be over.

Fark you, you piece of shiat.

I mean really. I get this is fark.com, the home of the truly demented. But I think you just pole vaulted over whatever line in the sand they draw here for maintaining some type of decency.

Anne Marie Murphy-"Church bells tolled Thursday for a brave Sandy Hook Elementary School teacher who died while trying to protect the student in her arms."

Victoria Soto- who was buried on Wednesday also died trying to protect her students. Seven kids she hid in a classroom closet survived the slaughter.


Holy crap, man, did you not the blatant sarcasm of my post? Not a single word was intended to be taken seriously. You may have over-reacted.
 
2012-12-21 09:01:31 AM  

MagicMissile: not all teachers, but senior teachers and staff should be given concealed firearms and be trained like police officers. After all, they are guarding your kids.


We had cops in my high school. It was a big school, and they were there just in case. They were all generally pretty cool guys. One of them used to act in the school musical every year. Perhaps putting an actual cop in a school would be safer?
 
2012-12-21 09:03:53 AM  

Aces and Eights: Whole Wheat: Mitch Mitchell: fusillade762: A 7th-grade student found the weapon on Wednesday with a round in the chamber and the safety off.

Glad they pulled his CC license.  The guy is an idiot.

True that.

Other than having his CCW where he shouldn't have, and the safety off, I don't see what was wrong about having a round in the chamber. That is standard practice. The hammer (which is internal on most CCW pieces) can only be cocked by pulling the trigger.

The fact that he "forgot" his gun in a theater is reason enough, though. I guess you're right....

It might be standard practice for law enforcement, but grandpa has no business keeping a round in the chamber. It only takes a split second to chamber a round if it's needed. Keeping a round in the chamber increases exponentially the possibility of an accidental discharge.

And without the safety on, this was an accident waiting to happen.


Also,

A situation that becomes critical and would require the use of deadly force to protect myself or another does not escalate gradually over time, it's instant.

Example

How much time did he have to load and make that weapon ready?
 
2012-12-21 09:04:40 AM  
TFA: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.
 
2012-12-21 09:05:39 AM  
Just like all the cops that leave their guns in the shiatter, right?
 
2012-12-21 09:06:47 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Gun owners, you have a are the problem.


FTFY
 
2012-12-21 09:07:01 AM  

Solaris: An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.


Doc Daneeka: This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

 
2012-12-21 09:09:12 AM  

frankenSTEEN: Just in case this turns into a gun rights/2nd Amendment thread...

Can any Fark lawyers explain to me the differnece between 'individual rights' versus 'the people's rights'? I've heard people make arguments based on the interpretation that the 2nd is a 'people's right' and NOT and individual right (i.e. it does not protect an individual's right to bear arms). What I don't get is : how a right can apply to the 'people' but not apply to the individuals that make up the 'people'?

Yeah, that's a serious question and not a troll, so please give a legit answer and not some snarktastic counter-troll. I'd appreciate it.


The problem with the second amendment is that it is an extremely vague, one sentence statement. Try to read this without a "progun" or "antigun" hat on, and tell me it isn't confusing:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It's one relatively short sentence with four commas. The question is whether the amendment's purpose is to protect collective rights - the "well regulated militia" that is necessary to the security of a free "State" -- or whether the purpose of the amendment was to protect each individual citizen's right to own a firearm. It's important to remember that the bill of rights contains provisions to protect the states against federal power, as well as provisions protecting individuals. And at the time, the country was a collection of thirteen sovereign nations, each of which had its own standing militia. So some of the amendments seem silly when viewed by modern society - for example, the third amendment prohibits the quartering of soldiers in homes, which simply isn't a problem in modern society. Today, nobody really cares about the militia part. But plenty of people want to read the second amendment in a way that (arguably) ignores the first half of the sentence.

But at the end of the day, the problem with the second amendment is that it's extremely vague. If you were writing an amendment regarding gun ownership today, what would it look like? Would you say "The right of individual citizens to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?" Well, in that case, what does "arms" mean? Does an individual have the right to own a tank? a nuclear weapon? Or is it just limited to firearms? If it is limited to firearms, do citizens have the right to own .50 caliber machine guns? artillery? The problem is that (1) the second amendment is very short, and very vague, and (2) it doesn't make much sense in the context of modern society.

I am of the view that the Second Amendment was intended to preserve the rights of the states to have well-regulated militias, to ease the concerns of anti-federalists who were worried that the federal government may get too powerful by disbanding the militias and raising a standing army. Why do I think that? Because it is one sentence that immediately announces its purpose - preserving the right of the people to operate "well-regulated militias." A militia is "regulated" by the state, which expresses the will of its citizens. So in that sense, the word "people" as used in the amendment has the same as "we the people" in the preamble of the constitution - it refers to the "people" in the collective sense. The right of the "people" in the second amendment is referring to the citizens of the states (through their state governments).

But like I said, this is all up for debate. And the reason the second amendment can be interpreted in so many different ways


Throughout our nation's history, the second amendment has never been interpreted by the supreme court as granting an individual right - that is, until the Heller opinion. Before Heller, the Courts have Up to that point, the courts have always understood it as reserving rights to the states to operate well-regulated militias. The Bill of Rights has to be read in context.
 
2012-12-21 09:09:35 AM  
Stricter gun control and stricter breeding control.

/u-farking-topia
 
2012-12-21 09:10:33 AM  
So this happens all the time right? I'm sure it was only reported on this time because of the current 'guns guns guns!' fever.
 
2012-12-21 09:11:35 AM  
"In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

That's the spirit! If only more people followed this example, the US would much safer. Safeties off, everyone!

:-(
 
2012-12-21 09:12:29 AM  

Doc Daneeka: TFA: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.


You are correct. In civilized, sane, societies, citizens submit to the whims of violent attackers.
 
2012-12-21 09:13:32 AM  

Doc Daneeka: TFA: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.



Exactly. I think the problem is that too many people nowadays live and breathe our entertainment culture, and have convinced themselves in their own minds that real life resembles an action movie or video game. So they sit there and daydream about what sort of bold action they'd take if a shooter or group of terrorists walked in. They fantasize that they'd take down the terrorist and be the big hero, just like in the movies. It's absurd, and completely divorced from reality.
 
2012-12-21 09:14:05 AM  

born_yesterday: Solaris: An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.

Doc Daneeka: This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.


I hope all those happy thoughts help maintain civility when someone threatens your life.

It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.

My firearm rejects their attempt to disrupt my civility
 
2012-12-21 09:15:41 AM  

opiumpoopy: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

That's the spirit! If only more people followed this example, the US would much safer. Safeties off, everyone!

:-(


shiat, why holster it at all. You're just cutting into your reaction time! And wouldn't seeing a mall full of people with weapons ready, safety off, and fingers on the trigger discourage you from doing anything crazy?

It's the only way to protect our society from insanity.
 
2012-12-21 09:16:46 AM  

Dimensio: Doc Daneeka: TFA: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

You are correct. In civilized, sane, societies, citizens submit to the whims of violent attackers.


This has got to be rough for you. Your pedantry doesn't play so well when running defense.
 
2012-12-21 09:16:51 AM  

lewismarktwo: So this happens all the time right? I'm sure it was only reported on this time because of the current 'guns guns guns!' fever.


It does. Or at least, it happens a hell of a lot more often than gun being used for any legitimate self-defense purpose.

For every single time a gun is used in self defense, there are:
-four accidental shootings
-seven criminal assaults or homicides
-eleven attempted or completed suicides
(source)

A gun kept in a household is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or a visitor than an intruder.
(source)
 
2012-12-21 09:17:21 AM  

Chummer45: Throughout our nation's history, the second amendment has never been interpreted by the supreme court as granting an individual right - that is, until the Heller opinion. Before Heller, the Courts have Up to that point, the courts have always understood it as reserving rights to the states to operate well-regulated militias. The Bill of Rights has to be read in context.


Which other Amendments of the Bill of Rights "grant" rights to states, rather than recognize and protect rights of individuals?
 
2012-12-21 09:18:12 AM  

Doc Daneeka: lewismarktwo: So this happens all the time right? I'm sure it was only reported on this time because of the current 'guns guns guns!' fever.

It does. Or at least, it happens a hell of a lot more often than gun being used for any legitimate self-defense purpose.

For every single time a gun is used in self defense, there are:
-four accidental shootings
-seven criminal assaults or homicides
-eleven attempted or completed suicides
(source)

A gun kept in a household is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or a visitor than an intruder.
(source)


Overzealous firearms. Non-story.
 
2012-12-21 09:18:16 AM  
FTFA: Police revoked the concealed-weapons permit of a 61-year-old Tillamook man after he wriggled in his theater seat during a showing of "The Hobbit" and shook loose a loaded handgun.

Oh, that's not so bad. Bad in that he didn't have it secure in its concealed location, but sometimes these things happen.

FTFA: Quackenbush said no one answered the phone when he called the theater late Tuesday after he realized the gun had fallen out of his holster.

That is BAD! You shouldn't pat the location of your pistol constantly, because it gives away its location, but it's a good idea to know that your concealed weapon is where you put it, especially when you get up after sitting for a while. :P Lucky dummy.
 
2012-12-21 09:18:28 AM  

Solaris: born_yesterday: Solaris: An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.

Doc Daneeka: This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

I hope all those happy thoughts help maintain civility when someone threatens your life.

It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.

My firearm rejects their attempt to disrupt my civility


Solaris: born_yesterday: Solaris: An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.

Doc Daneeka: This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

I hope all those happy thoughts help maintain civility when someone threatens your life.

It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.

My firearm rejects their attempt to disrupt my civility


This seems appropriate:

i.qkme.me
 
2012-12-21 09:19:20 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Dimensio: Doc Daneeka: TFA: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

You are correct. In civilized, sane, societies, citizens submit to the whims of violent attackers.

This has got to be rough for you. Your pedantry doesn't play so well when running defense.


I was expressing agreement, not "running defense".
 
2012-12-21 09:21:36 AM  

Dimensio: HotWingConspiracy: Dimensio: Doc Daneeka: TFA: "In a time of crisis like somebody barging into a mall or a theater, you don't have time to do a two-handed cocking of the weapon," Quackenbush said. "It is my mindset everywhere I go."

This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

You are correct. In civilized, sane, societies, citizens submit to the whims of violent attackers.

This has got to be rough for you. Your pedantry doesn't play so well when running defense.

I was expressing agreement, not "running defense".


Mmhmm.
 
2012-12-21 09:23:39 AM  

Chummer45: Solaris: born_yesterday: Solaris: An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.

Doc Daneeka: This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

I hope all those happy thoughts help maintain civility when someone threatens your life.

It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.

My firearm rejects their attempt to disrupt my civility

Solaris: born_yesterday: Solaris: An unchambered firearm is a glorified paper weight, useless.

If the purpose of the firearm is for my protection or protecting the life of another, I'm going to need that weapon to function properly immediately, not after I load the magazine and pull the slide back to make it ready (while in an obvious critical situation if I'm needing to use deadly force)

Think a little more about why an officer keeps that weapon ready.

Accidental discharge, is more accurately negligent discharge. The weapon does not fire by accident.

Doc Daneeka: This man represents everything that is wrong with America.

The very idea (which is unfortunately widespread) that we need to be packing a concealed weapon at all times, as we go about our day-to-day lives, represents a rejection of the very idea of civil society. It is a philosophy in which other people are viewed not as fellow citizens, but as potential enemies.

If we need to be going around armed at all times for self-defense, then we have failed as a society, as a country, and as a civilization. If that is true, then we are a failed state.

I hope all those happy thoughts help maintain civility when someone threatens your life.

It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.

My firearm rejects their attempt to disrupt my civility

This seems appropriate:


Nope, I don't have to conceal mine
 
2012-12-21 09:24:13 AM  

Solaris: It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.


I'm told that happens so rarely there is no need to alter our current gun laws. Or so often we should all be armed, I forget which.

I'm not worried, though. If I'm in a theater and need a gun I'll just pick up the one under my seat.
 
2012-12-21 09:28:55 AM  

Chummer45: This seems appropriate:


It would be, yes, if the Aurora theater murders had been done by someone wearing body armor at all.
 
2012-12-21 09:29:07 AM  
Two words:

Shoulder Holster

Another two words:

Sport Jacket

If he'd been wearing them, this dumb shiat wouldn't have happened.
I don't dig people with guns hanging out of their pants. I don't care what any expert thinks...having a loaded gun close to your junk isn't a smart idea, especially if you're getting up and sitting down alot.
shiat wriggles loose!

Button your jacket, no one can see your gun and holster...and it won't fall out when you're sitting and standing.

Problem solved!!!
 
2012-12-21 09:29:54 AM  

duffblue: Is that a .380? Seriously? Guy deserves to have his permit pulled. Talk about being irresponsible.


.45
 
2012-12-21 09:31:04 AM  

Doc Daneeka: lewismarktwo: So this happens all the time right? I'm sure it was only reported on this time because of the current 'guns guns guns!' fever.

It does. Or at least, it happens a hell of a lot more often than gun being used for any legitimate self-defense purpose.


Fun fact: those are stats on the firing of guns. Might seem like a quibble, but stats are not generally kept on how many people are chased off just by brandishing a firearm rather than shooting someone.
 
2012-12-21 09:35:00 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Solaris: It's not a rejection of the idea of a civil society, but a recognition that in this society there are people who may try to disrupt my very existence.

I'm told that happens so rarely there is no need to alter our current gun laws. Or so often we should all be armed, I forget which.

I'm not worried, though. If I'm in a theater and need a gun I'll just pick up the one under my seat.


i307.photobucket.com
 
2012-12-21 09:40:25 AM  

Doc Daneeka: A gun kept in a household is twelve times more likely to result in the death of a household member or a visitor than an intruder.
(source)

"Firearm-related violence vastly increases expenditures for health care, services for the disabled, insurance, and our criminal justice system," writes Dr. Steven Lippmann of University of Louisville School of Medicine, and colleagues. "The bills are paid by taxpayers and those who buy insurance."


Teabagger head asplode?
 
2012-12-21 09:40:27 AM  

RobSeace: Of the movie "The Hobbit," his review in a letter to news media organizations explaining the incident was brief: "Overly long," he said, "and fairly boring."

Well, I'm glad he included that important bit of info, because if there's one movie critic whose opinion you can trust, it's a senile old gun-nut who has abandoned his loaded safety-off weapon in a theater full of children!


I'm curious why TFA mentions that all. Maybe the reporter felt the same about the movie and saw a way to slip in stealth mini-drubbing.
 
2012-12-21 09:40:57 AM  

stevarooni: Chummer45: This seems appropriate:

It would be, yes, if the Aurora theater murders had been done by someone wearing body armor at all.


And if there had been an actual "machine gun" used...

Other than those two little details, Wonka's right.
 
2012-12-21 09:45:20 AM  

GanjSmokr: stevarooni: Chummer45: This seems appropriate:

It would be, yes, if the Aurora theater murders had been done by someone wearing body armor at all.

And if there had been an actual "machine gun" used...

Other than those two little details, Wonka's right.


Wonka doesn't know that I'm am trained in active shooter response, so yes, yes I could have done something. And I would have used a firearm to do it (gasp)
 
2012-12-21 09:48:43 AM  

manimal2878: Ghastly: Paranoid enough to carry a chambered round with the safety off? Sorry but that's all kinds of farking stupid. He's lucky he hasn't shot himself or someone else already.

Some guns don't even have a safety that can be turned on or off. If it's a CCW you always have around in the chamber. You know all those cops you see, if they own a glock the have the safety "off" and a round in the chamber too.

/you don't know what you are talking about.


This gun, VERY likely a Beretta Cheetah model 84, DOES have a safety however.
 
2012-12-21 09:49:39 AM  

Solaris: GanjSmokr: stevarooni: Chummer45: This seems appropriate:

It would be, yes, if the Aurora theater murders had been done by someone wearing body armor at all.

And if there had been an actual "machine gun" used...

Other than those two little details, Wonka's right.

Wonka doesn't know that I'm am trained in active shooter response, so yes, yes I could have done something. And I would have used a firearm to do it (gasp)


Clearly you are representative of the majority of the nation, the majority of CCW permit holders, and the majority of the American population as a whole.

Just to be clear, you know you're in a thread defending the decisions of a man that left a loaded, ready-to-fire weapon in a movie theater, correct?

I feel so much safer, knowing your ever-vigilant ass is out there just waiting to protect the shiat out of someone.
 
2012-12-21 09:49:47 AM  

gunga galunga: RobSeace: Of the movie "The Hobbit," his review in a letter to news media organizations explaining the incident was brief: "Overly long," he said, "and fairly boring."

Well, I'm glad he included that important bit of info, because if there's one movie critic whose opinion you can trust, it's a senile old gun-nut who has abandoned his loaded safety-off weapon in a theater full of children!

I'm curious why TFA mentions that all. Maybe the reporter felt the same about the movie and saw a way to slip in stealth mini-drubbing.


I think he included that to explain why he was squirming so much he lost his weapon, not as a separate review of the movie. I linked two more stories on this above. There are others as well.
 
2012-12-21 09:52:27 AM  

born_yesterday: Just to be clear, you know you're in a thread defending the decisions of a man that left a loaded, ready-to-fire weapon in a movie theater, correct?


Sorry, who is defending the decisions of a CCW-holder who left his gun in a theater? The guy in the story's an idiot; he didn't keep track of his gun, which even from his own perspective kind of defeats the purpose of carrying.
 
2012-12-21 09:55:50 AM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: And he's a licensed gun dealer. But this won't affect THAT license.


I did not see that in the article. Did I misread?
 
2012-12-21 09:55:52 AM  
Is it a surprise that anyone named "Quackenbush" is a buffoon? He sounds like a cartoon character.
 
2012-12-21 09:56:49 AM  

stevarooni: born_yesterday: Just to be clear, you know you're in a thread defending the decisions of a man that left a loaded, ready-to-fire weapon in a movie theater, correct?

Sorry, who is defending the decisions of a CCW-holder who left his gun in a theater? The guy in the story's an idiot; he didn't keep track of his gun, which even from his own perspective kind of defeats the purpose of carrying.


Do you see any differences between the comments made by the offender regarding the necessity of carrying a loaded, chambered firearm to protect himself and anyone else arguing the same?
 
2012-12-21 09:57:50 AM  

born_yesterday: Solaris: GanjSmokr: stevarooni: Chummer45: This seems appropriate:

It would be, yes, if the Aurora theater murders had been done by someone wearing body armor at all.

And if there had been an actual "machine gun" used...

Other than those two little details, Wonka's right.

Wonka doesn't know that I'm am trained in active shooter response, so yes, yes I could have done something. And I would have used a firearm to do it (gasp)

Clearly you are representative of the majority of the nation, the majority of CCW permit holders, and the majority of the American population as a whole.

Just to be clear, you know you're in a thread defending the decisions of a man that left a loaded, ready-to-fire weapon in a movie theater, correct?

I feel so much safer, knowing your ever-vigilant ass is out there just waiting to protect the shiat out of someone.


I've never claimed to represent anyone. If you read through the thread I've only commented specifically on my belief for keeping a weapon chambered and my abilities. I have not claimed that anything I have done or will ever do, is or will be replicated by anyone who may hold a similar belief.

In regard to the man leaving the weapon in the theater, there really are no words to describe how much this infuriates me to the carelessness and neglect he demonstrated.
 
2012-12-21 09:59:57 AM  

Egoy3k: Jesus that guy got lucky. Two kids finding a weapon with a round in the chamber and the safety off could have gone soooooo much worse. What a moron.


True dat. At least the kids were trained. Why yes, it is "ALWAYS" loaded.
I do not understand why he had the safety off, not that walking out of a theater without it would have been OK if it had been. The phrase is "locked and loaded" right? I have never really thought the safety took that much time to click off.
 
2012-12-21 10:00:41 AM  

born_yesterday: Do you see any differences between the comments made by the offender regarding the necessity of carrying a loaded, chambered firearm to protect himself and anyone else arguing the same?


Oh, that! Yeah, if you're going to carry, carrying with a firearm ready to use makes sense. That decision wasn't wrong, in my opinion. An unloaded weapon is useless, and one without a chambered cartridge is a delay when every moment counts.
 
Displayed 50 of 153 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | 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