Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Atlanta Journal Constitution)   Step 1) Pass law allowing people to carry guns anywhere Step 2) ??? Step 3) Have a handgun misfire on a busy street, killing one   (ajc.com ) divider line 370
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

11655 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Aug 2014 at 5:35 AM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-18 09:55:09 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: Just because I choose to be able to defend myself, doesn't in any sense make me paranoid. It makes me prepared in case something does happen. That doesn't mean i walk around with paranoid delusions of being a hero, it just means that i have chosen to be able to defend myself if need be.


You are not prepared, unless you're wearing body armor and are a trained gun fighter. All you've done by carrying a pistol is up the stakes; you can now choose to turn a mugging into a gun fight. This isn't a defensive or protective strategy.
 
2014-08-18 09:56:54 AM  
SquiggsIN:
"if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns."  firearms aren't going away even if you pass a hundred laws banning them.

It works for every other developed countries.
 
2014-08-18 09:57:14 AM  
Serval people touched on holsters, but no one pointed out that there was no mention of one in the article, I'm going to venture to say that I'll bet the pistol was not in a holster.  I don't know that for sure but a good educated guess.  Or it was a crappy POS that doesn't qualify as a holster. Most negligent discharges can be attributed to holster inadequacies coupled with poor trigger discipline. I've seen people that think it's perfectly fine to carry a pistol in their pocket without a holster designed for that purpose.  It is NOT ok.  As said earlier, keep your booger hook off the bang switch until ready to destroy something.

I also agree with carrying it the way it was designed, loaded and ready to fire.  Along with treating every gun as loaded and ready to go boom.
 
2014-08-18 09:57:45 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: /if Michael Brown had not robbed a store and beat a cops face in, he would be alive today. Bad life decisions.

FTFY


If Cliven Bundy had not robbed the Federal Government, and gotten into an armed standoff with law enforcement, he'd be alive today.
Oh, wait.
He is.
 
2014-08-18 09:58:35 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: wow...your logic..well..needs work. So by what you're saying, your "logic" by carrying a sidearm to defend myself, I am making myself a "victim". Hmmmmmm. I fail to see how carrying CCW "begs" people to rob / assault me. But whatever gets you through the day pal.


Sorry, I'm not fluent in word salad so I have no idea what that disjointed, meandering response was supposed to mean.
 
2014-08-18 10:00:24 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: skozlaw: Bit'O'Gristle: No need to label or take it to the extreme right of paranoid.

[movieboozer.com image 523x294]

Go get 'em, shooter.

And, yea, statistically speaking, by carrying a gun around you are choosing to be a victim. There really isn't much more you could do to up your odds of being shot without resorting to running around begging for people to do it.

But. You know. Scary people on the subway or something, I guess.

wow...your logic..well..needs work. So by what you're saying, your "logic" by carrying a sidearm to defend myself, I am making myself a "victim".  Hmmmmmm.  I fail to see how carrying CCW "begs" people to rob / assault me.  But whatever gets you through the day pal.


I am aware of a study of individuals in Philadelphia that found that individuals who carried a firearm were more likely than those who were not carrying a firearm to be shot during an assault. So obvious was the causation that the study authors felt no need to differentiate between individuals who carried lawfully and those who carried unlawfully, nor was any further demographic analysis conducted to determine whether the act of carrying a firearm was itself the causative factor or whether a common causative factor existed for both carrying a firearm and being more likely to be shot in an assault.

When a result is so obvious, meaningful statistical analysis is unnecessary.
 
2014-08-18 10:00:33 AM  

meintx2001: keep your booger hook off the bang switch until ready to destroy something


These complicated directions are infringing on my rights.
 
2014-08-18 10:02:49 AM  

skozlaw: Bit'O'Gristle: wow...your logic..well..needs work. So by what you're saying, your "logic" by carrying a sidearm to defend myself, I am making myself a "victim". Hmmmmmm. I fail to see how carrying CCW "begs" people to rob / assault me. But whatever gets you through the day pal.

Sorry, I'm not fluent in word salad so I have no idea what that disjointed, meandering response was supposed to mean.


We are aware that you choose to willfully ignore information that does not agree with your worldview.
 
2014-08-18 10:02:52 AM  

Dimensio: When a result is so obvious, meaningful statistical analysis is unnecessary.


It is actually meaningless from a certain perspective.
i18.photobucket.com
 
2014-08-18 10:04:10 AM  
That woman's family probably thank God she died free of oppressive firearms regulations.
 
2014-08-18 10:08:25 AM  

LazyMedia: Bit'O'Gristle: Just because I choose to be able to defend myself, doesn't in any sense make me paranoid. It makes me prepared in case something does happen. That doesn't mean i walk around with paranoid delusions of being a hero, it just means that i have chosen to be able to defend myself if need be.

You are not prepared, unless you're wearing body armor and are a trained gun fighter. All you've done by carrying a pistol is up the stakes; you can now choose to turn a mugging into a gun fight. This isn't a defensive or protective strategy.


/sure it is. First of all, i am highly trained in the use of arms. ARMY, Police, etc.  Second of all, i don't agree with your "up the stakes" comment.  A mugger is going to be armed, generally with a knife, or even a gun.  If i had no weapon to defend myself, i would be forced  to do one of two things. 1. hand him my cash, and hope he doesn't kill me as a witness, or 2. use my fists and hope he doesn't kill me with his gun / knife.   This option makes you the "victim" no matter if you win or not.  You are pretty much at his mercy.  Now, if i have my sidearm, and he has a knife or gun, i at least have a chance to defend my life and property. Sure, i could still get shot or stabbed, but i could get shot or stabbed if i had no weapon in the first place.  At least this would give me a chance to fight back.  And muggers are generally cowards. Same with those scumbags that rob convenient stores. They want the cash, and no struggle.  Look at the youtube vids.  Every time the owner pulls out a firearm to defend his life, and his property, the robbers run like the little cowards they are.  They want a nice compliant non combative victim. It really comes down to if you are willing to defend yourself or not. It's totally up to you.
 
2014-08-18 10:10:11 AM  
Kill a wedding party with a bomb.

"Unfortunate consequence of war"

A swat team raids a home based on a false lead or simply goes to the wrong house and kills someone.

"Unfortunate mistake that lead to the lose of a life."

Your government does this shiat all the time. Not only do they do this, it is ridiculous calling someone a mass murder when governments appear to *be* the leading cause of mass murder.

It is unfortunate. One person gets shot from an accidental discharge and "WE SHOULD BAN GUNS! ENOUGH ALREADY."

Isn't this weird:

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/11/11662345-german-police -f ired-just-85-bullets-total-in-2011

"German police fire 85 bullets in one year."

People, this is Germany. GERMANY! You know the people that had secret occult societies, relationships with Aliens, Created anti-gravity, plotted to overtake the world, killed millions of people ( or so the "Hilter Channels" on cable told us). You are more likely to be killed by an American police officer over a bungled SWAT raid or a routine traffic stop.

We should ban swimming pools because you could drown.
 
2014-08-18 10:10:19 AM  

heili skrimsli: cwolf20: cwolf20: heili skrimsli: cwolf20: heili skrimsli: cwolf20: Why... do people forget one of the standard safety rules.  Have one less round in the gun that it carries, and make sure the empty is the first thing that will attempt to fire.  That way if there is an accident, only an ominous click will sound.

Because that's not one of the 'standard safety rules.'

Keeping your farking finger off the trigger, however, is one of them.

It's standard with most of the war veteran gun owners I know, and those they taught it to.

I wasn't taught to short magazines or keep the chamber empty. I was taught to carry the firearm in the manner that it is intended to be carried: with one in the pipe and a proper holster.

Never said they learned it on active duty.  My vietnam veteran uncle carries a Ruger, which has no safety.  One chamber empty.

Just in case someone says "I saw a ruger with a safety".  His does not have one, next?

There are lots of things that old timers do that doesn't make sense. Things like decocking a 1911, which is more dangerous than carrying as it was designed to be carried - cocked and locked.

It is my considered opinion, after thirty years of firearms experience, that if you're doing anything special so that you can pull the trigger and expect something other than a round being fired, you're doing it wrong.

Veteran, cop, or gun store counter jockey, the expectation should always be that pulling the trigger makes the gun fire. Anything else will make a person lax with their trigger discipline and then I'll have to hear their dumb ass saying 'It just went off.'


and, I've reached the extent of my second hand knowledge.  Since I have yet to own a gun, or fire one since R.O.T.C. in high school in 89-93 when most people failed to realize that the students walking to the flag each morning to raise it, and afternoon to lower it.  That said students had live rounds in their pockets. To go with the rifle competition team rifles they were carrying.

Granted, I didn't know that either until 5 or 6 years after I graduated.
 
2014-08-18 10:12:10 AM  
Don't know if it's been said yet, but you don't 'accidentally' fire your gun.  You either discharge it with intent, or discharge it with negligence.  Either way, it's a deliberate act.  This pro-gun owner says the asshole in the article needs to get 10 years (the statutory maximum in GA.)
 
2014-08-18 10:15:38 AM  

skozlaw: Bit'O'Gristle: wow...your logic..well..needs work. So by what you're saying, your "logic" by carrying a sidearm to defend myself, I am making myself a "victim". Hmmmmmm. I fail to see how carrying CCW "begs" people to rob / assault me. But whatever gets you through the day pal.

Sorry, I'm not fluent in word salad so I have no idea what that disjointed, meandering response was supposed to mean.


/it means, that you can 1. carry a weapon to defend yourself, your property, and those you love, or, you can rely on the mugger / rapist / burglar / whatever not killing or farking you up because you have no means to defend yourself. I choose not to rely on the judgement of someone who is bold enough to stick a gun or a knife in my face. You do what you want, i choose to defend myself and not just lay down for it.
 
2014-08-18 10:16:08 AM  

skozlaw: BlindRaise: Cars...

Are a useless analogy since they require an actual level of responsibility and accountability to drive around in public, unlike guns which, in most states, can be carried around by any old random idiot with nothing more than a nice note from the local Sheriff's office.

But don't let the fact you went completely off the rails stop your derp train from rolling.


Actually it is a good analogy, but only if you care about the number of deaths they cause.  Just admit that you dont care that they died, only the method in which they did.  Same goes for swimming pools since they kill more children than firearms.  Because if you truly cared about the loss of life then you would cry and yell just as loud about making cars safer and mandatory lessons & lifejackets anytime the tempurate rises above 85.
 
2014-08-18 10:16:54 AM  

Dimensio: Bit'O'Gristle: skozlaw: Bit'O'Gristle: No need to label or take it to the extreme right of paranoid.

[movieboozer.com image 523x294]

Go get 'em, shooter.

And, yea, statistically speaking, by carrying a gun around you are choosing to be a victim. There really isn't much more you could do to up your odds of being shot without resorting to running around begging for people to do it.

But. You know. Scary people on the subway or something, I guess.

wow...your logic..well..needs work. So by what you're saying, your "logic" by carrying a sidearm to defend myself, I am making myself a "victim".  Hmmmmmm.  I fail to see how carrying CCW "begs" people to rob / assault me.  But whatever gets you through the day pal.

I am aware of a study of individuals in Philadelphia that found that individuals who carried a firearm were more likely than those who were not carrying a firearm to be shot during an assault. So obvious was the causation that the study authors felt no need to differentiate between individuals who carried lawfully and those who carried unlawfully, nor was any further demographic analysis conducted to determine whether the act of carrying a firearm was itself the causative factor or whether a common causative factor existed for both carrying a firearm and being more likely to be shot in an assault.

When a result is so obvious, meaningful statistical analysis is unnecessary.


I know right?  As soon as I find a statistic that helps me prove my point, I stop questioning it.
 
2014-08-18 10:17:01 AM  

socoloco: We should ban swimming pools because you could drown.


My brother was killed in a concealed carry swimming pool accident. Some dick was just walking around with it on the street and next thing I know my bro is at the bottom of the pool, not breathing. Dude didn't even have a permit.

It was a farking tragedy, y'know? You're just minding your own business down at the Try n' Save and BAM! Next thing you know you're at the bottom of some asshole's swimming pool because he wasn't being careful with it in public.
 
2014-08-18 10:17:39 AM  

Jiro Dreams Of McRibs: mcsiegs: "Unfortunate" is when your pants split, you f*cking idiot.  Your husband just offed someone out of stupidity and recklessness,

The tree of liberty must be watered with blood once in a while. She's just happy it wasn't her loved ones' blood.


You mean like this family:

http://ewn.co.za/2014/04/29/father-accidentally-shoots-son
 
2014-08-18 10:18:41 AM  

skozlaw: socoloco: We should ban swimming pools because you could drown.

My brother was killed in a concealed carry swimming pool accident. Some dick was just walking around with it on the street and next thing I know my bro is at the bottom of the pool, not breathing. Dude didn't even have a permit.

It was a farking tragedy, y'know? You're just minding your own business down at the Try n' Save and BAM! Next thing you know you're at the bottom of some asshole's swimming pool because he wasn't being careful with it in public.


You should try living in Detroit sometime.  Man, some of those guys will throw in a pool just for lookin' at em.
 
2014-08-18 10:19:25 AM  
If the woman had a gun this would not have happened
 
2014-08-18 10:19:45 AM  

cwbysfan: skozlaw: BlindRaise: Cars...

Are a useless analogy since they require an actual level of responsibility and accountability to drive around in public, unlike guns which, in most states, can be carried around by any old random idiot with nothing more than a nice note from the local Sheriff's office.

But don't let the fact you went completely off the rails stop your derp train from rolling.

Actually it is a good analogy, but only if you care about the number of deaths they cause.  Just admit that you dont care that they died, only the method in which they did.  Same goes for swimming pools since they kill more children than firearms.  Because if you truly cared about the loss of life then you would cry and yell just as loud about making cars safer and mandatory lessons & lifejackets anytime the tempurate rises above 85.


We still can't have it both ways.
If guns are like cars and swimming pools, the regulate them as such.
If they aren't, then the analogies are useless.
 
2014-08-18 10:20:15 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: i choose to defend myself and not just lay down for it.


Sounds like you get in a lot of gunfights. Tell us about that. It sounds interesting.
 
2014-08-18 10:22:11 AM  
This is going great, you guys. Finally got the court arranged to your liking so they could start this grand social experiment and it's really been amazing. I think that old saying is "You've got to murder a few by standers "on accident" to make an omelette. A delicious human omelette."
 
2014-08-18 10:23:10 AM  

Mock26: Man gets drunk, runs over child, kills child.  Where is the call to ban alcohol?


Don't you mean ban automobiles? I'm okay with that. Most of you haven't a clue how to drive carefully.
 
2014-08-18 10:23:12 AM  

Publikwerks: way south: Publikwerks: The 2nd doesn't protect the first. The first protects the second. Just look at Ferguson right now. If those protesters were all armed, the police would have had carte blanche to mow em down. If you get into a gun pissing fight with the government, you will lose.

Heres an example of people using their first amendment rights, and the police respecting them.


[img.fark.net image 850x478]

Heres an example of people using their second amendment rights, getting mowed down by the law.

[img.fark.net image 574x369]

Here is the difference in the way the government looks at these situations.
[dl.dropboxusercontent.com image 640x640]

Ultimately you need the whole list of rights, because while the first amendment is a powerful tool for directing change you still need a balance of power and an orderly stage where that change  is allowed to happen.

You need your weapons, and proper representation, and to be counted at the polls, and your privacy, your right be treated fairly at trial, and so on...

Start peeling away at these other rights and the right to free speech no longer matters.
No one in power will be listening. No one in power will care.

And you have proven my point - The protesters in Fergusen might get shot at, but they have a chance at winning. I would say, a pretty good chance.

Clive Bundy is going to lose.

If you think Clive Bundy has won, well, talk to me in a year. Matter of fact, I bet you it happens some time after Nov. 4th. Election years are not good years to get into shootouts.

But after Nov 4th, shiats on. In a years time, he will be in jail or dead, and the government will be auctioning off his shiat.


When you've already suffered hundreds of casualties, after a century of continual bias and abuse at the hands of the law, a legal victory isn't much consolation for that town... and that's not what they'll get.
At best they'll see one officer go to jail for murder, or maybe they wont.
Either way, this nonsense continues. 

/Bundy may lose his legal argument, but he's not the one watching national guard trucks roll into his town.
/Winning indeed.
 
2014-08-18 10:23:46 AM  

IvanTheSilent: Don't know if it's been said yet, but you don't 'accidentally' fire your gun.  You either discharge it with intent, or discharge it with negligence.  Either way, it's a deliberate act.


Uh...
 
2014-08-18 10:23:53 AM  

doglover: Publikwerks: And the Samurai trained for years and years before they were samurai.

Not really. They were samurai so they trained for years. Not vice versa. Caste society and all that.

It wasn't even a chicken or the egg thing. Lots of the more wealthy samurai didn't train so much, and many were giant dick weasels, which is how that whole 47 Ronin thing went down.

And there's no such think as a bokken. It's a bokuto in Japanese. Bokken is an English word made up by wannabes who don't even know the word "waster" already existed in English. And shinai are a relatively new toy invented and popularized during a major decline in the martial activity in Japan toward the later half of the Tokugawa period.

So I must disagree with your attempt at a philosophy on weapons. Especially since my career brings me in contact with a lot of people. I mean like A LOT of them. People are not like computers. In fact, sometimes they maliciously rebel against the system just to be assholes. Those types can even become robbers, murders, and rapists. So I'm tellin' you that if you feel the need for a pistol, you'd best have a round in that chamber or a good life insurance policy because the time it takes you to rack your gun is far longer than it will take you to be robbed, raped, or killed.

Now, if you don't feel the need for a pistol, and honestly why would you in 2014, that's a totally different thing.


First off, lets not nitpick over how to spell wooden sword in Japanese using western characters. It ignores the point that the Samurai, even with a caste system, didn't inherit the ability to draw their swords at lighting speed - they trained. And trained. And trained. They were as good as they were not because their weapons were superior, but because their technique was superbe. And they had wooden training sword because they respected their weapons and the danger of using them.


Thats the point. If you have trained and have a mastery of your handgun, feel free to keep a round chambered. But if I carried, I have way too much respect for the power of a handgun to carry it with a round in the chamber.

BTW - I don't have alot of experience with handguns - does it take more than 1 second to work the action? I mean, I can cycle my remington 1100 in less than 2. Hell, I bet I can load a shell and be ready to fire in less than 2. The reason I ask is that adding 2 seconds, I don't know how critical they are. Unless the person is charging at you, either they are already assaulting you, or you should have enough time to work the action.

I don't think the cost in time is worth the risk.
 
2014-08-18 10:24:10 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: ...i choose to defend myself and not just lay down for it.


I chose not to live in a rejected Mad Max movie script. Seemed easier than your way.

cwbysfan: Because if you truly cared about the loss of life then you would cry and yell just as loud about making cars safer and mandatory lessons


Oh, yea, because if there's one thing that hasn't happened in the last 30 years it's massive advances in automotive safety.

Did you know my car literally can't crash into anything in front of it provided whatever the object is doesn't pull out with less than the minimum space physically required by the brakes to bring the car to a stop? My car is so wildly unsafe it stops itself. Has something like 8 air bags and the front end has been designed specifically to reduce impact injuies to pedestrians should it go off by accident and hit one.

Insane how little we've done in this field, huh?

WHEN are we going to focus on car safety in this country? WHEN!?
 
2014-08-18 10:25:37 AM  

TwowheelinTim: Mock26: Man gets drunk, runs over child, kills child.  Where is the call to ban alcohol?

Don't you mean ban automobiles? I'm okay with that. Most of you haven't a clue how to drive carefully.


Just put all the grammy and pappy McSwervies on special RV only highways and interstates.
 
2014-08-18 10:27:53 AM  
Check out the mean streets of Helen, GA where this responsible gun owner was packing for everyone's safety.

media-cdn.tripadvisor.com www.cabinsinhelen.net cdn.sheknows.com cedarcreekcabinrentals.com


I just thank god he was there to keep everyone safe.
 
2014-08-18 10:30:41 AM  

way south: When you've already suffered hundreds of casualties, after a century of continual bias and abuse at the hands of the law, a legal victory isn't much consolation for that town... and that's not what they'll get.
At best they'll see one officer go to jail for murder, or maybe they wont.
Either way, this nonsense continues. 

/Bundy may lose his legal argument, but he's not the one watching national guard trucks roll into his town.
/Winning indeed.


I dunno, I don't know what will happen to the cop, but the Fergusen PD and St. Louis County LEOs are gonna get shaken up. They are going to be under a microscope, and hopefully will eventually come out of it as better departments.
 
2014-08-18 10:34:10 AM  
So what brand of firearm was it? Was it this one?

i1.ytimg.com

Or was it this one?

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/02/jim-barrett/why-i-dont-like -t he-glock-and-similar-guns/
 
2014-08-18 10:34:30 AM  

kellyclan: The chance of a modern firearm having a mechanical malfunction that causes a misfire is only slightly greater than the chances of your car starting itself and driving into a crowded playground.

The correct term for this situation is "negligent discharge" and it happens when you put your booger hook on the bang switch.


How cute, you think consumer handguns have kept up with the times. Wake up. They're using the same 200 year old design, where a striker hits a mercury fulminate cap to discharge. Even the safety designs are iffy. My Astra has a funky safety that's supposed to separate the pin from the hammer unless the trigger has been pulled, but I don't assume it works as in the manual.

Accidental discharges are a part of the sample set with firearms. The more samples of people casually interacting with chambered weapons, the more discharges you'll get.
 
2014-08-18 10:37:04 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: AngryDragon: rzrwiresunrise: The Safe Carry Protection Act is passed and a woman's death ensues.

To quote the wife of Lampien, "It's an unfortunate situation."

Unfortunate.

Shooter was a retired judge?

That's the part you're worried about? You must be a member of GeorgiaPacking.org.


Um...no.

"A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Part 3 of Article 4 of Chapter 11 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to carrying and possession of firearms, so as to provide an exemption from certain laws regarding the carrying and possession of firearms by retired judges; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.  "
 
2014-08-18 10:37:19 AM  

Publikwerks: The reason I ask is that adding 2 seconds, I don't know how critical they are.


THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! You don't know so you shouldn't count on them being non-critical.
 
2014-08-18 10:41:44 AM  
A Texas woman died late Saturday after she was struck by a stray gunshot in the town of Helen in North Georgia.

How many Helens agree that this gun law is stupid?
 
2014-08-18 10:44:48 AM  

badhatharry: I would hope that the sheep will rise up before they start droning people.


Hadn't you noticed? Only the black people have the guts to protest when a government "drone" kills one of theirs. What do we white people have to our credit? OWS? That was pretty lame. How many people does the government have to kill at one time before we all collectively say "Enough!"? Are we really so emasculated by our cell phones? Encapsulated by our televisions? Isolated by our internet connections, where we read daily of ever-increasing governmental contempt for the values and rights that made this country the envy of the world, only to shudder and think to ourselves "Okay. As long as it's not MY door they're kicking down. As long as it's not MY infant they're critically injuring with a flash-bang grenade. As long as I'm innocent, I have nothing to fear."

You know, maybe when it comes to governmental contempt, we've earned it with our complacency.
 
2014-08-18 10:47:06 AM  

skozlaw: BlindRaise: Cars...

Are a useless analogy since they require an actual level of responsibility and accountability to drive around in public, unlike guns which, in most states, can be carried around by any old random idiot with nothing more than a nice note from the local Sheriff's office.

But don't let the fact you went completely off the rails stop your derp train from rolling.



Which state exactly will let a person walk around with only a note from the local sheriff's office?

Since your big on "facts" and all.
 
2014-08-18 10:47:09 AM  

HAMMERTOE: badhatharry: I would hope that the sheep will rise up before they start droning people.

Hadn't you noticed? Only the black people have the guts to protest when a government "drone" kills one of theirs. What do we white people have to our credit? OWS? That was pretty lame. How many people does the government have to kill at one time before we all collectively say "Enough!"? Are we really so emasculated by our cell phones? Encapsulated by our televisions? Isolated by our internet connections, where we read daily of ever-increasing governmental contempt for the values and rights that made this country the envy of the world, only to shudder and think to ourselves "Okay. As long as it's not MY door they're kicking down. As long as it's not MY infant they're critically injuring with a flash-bang grenade. As long as I'm innocent, I have nothing to fear."

You know, maybe when it comes to governmental contempt, we've earned it with our complacency.


Eric, is that you?

i.dailymail.co.uk
 
2014-08-18 10:47:40 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: LazyMedia: Bit'O'Gristle: Just because I choose to be able to defend myself, doesn't in any sense make me paranoid. It makes me prepared in case something does happen. That doesn't mean i walk around with paranoid delusions of being a hero, it just means that i have chosen to be able to defend myself if need be.

You are not prepared, unless you're wearing body armor and are a trained gun fighter. All you've done by carrying a pistol is up the stakes; you can now choose to turn a mugging into a gun fight. This isn't a defensive or protective strategy.

/sure it is. First of all, i am highly trained in the use of arms. ARMY, Police, etc.  Second of all, i don't agree with your "up the stakes" comment.  A mugger is going to be armed, generally with a knife, or even a gun.  If i had no weapon to defend myself, i would be forced  to do one of two things. 1. hand him my cash, and hope he doesn't kill me as a witness, or 2. use my fists and hope he doesn't kill me with his gun / knife.   This option makes you the "victim" no matter if you win or not.  You are pretty much at his mercy.  Now, if i have my sidearm, and he has a knife or gun, i at least have a chance to defend my life and property. Sure, i could still get shot or stabbed, but i could get shot or stabbed if i had no weapon in the first place.  At least this would give me a chance to fight back.  And muggers are generally cowards. Same with those scumbags that rob convenient stores. They want the cash, and no struggle.  Look at the youtube vids.  Every time the owner pulls out a firearm to defend his life, and his property, the robbers run like the little cowards they are.  They want a nice compliant non combative victim. It really comes down to if you are willing to defend yourself or not. It's totally up to you.


I just watched a video of a girl who appeared to be on the roof of a parking garage. A male assailant attempted to pull her purse from her. His stance clearly indicated his intention to get the purse and run. Instead, she pulled a pistol from her bag and shot him point blank in the face. According to the comments, this event was cause for great celebration. I thought to myself that it's rather ironic that we consider some countries barbaric because they cut off people's hands for thievery. While here, we see justice in shooting a mugger in the face. I understand why she did what she did, as I've been mugged twice. But I don't see it as cause to celebrate. I'd rather pepper spray a person and skidaddle, than have their blood on my hands over a few dollars.

Consequently, the time I was mugged by an unarmed man who pulled me into a doorway, put his arm over my throat and his knee in my groin was far scarier than the time I was held up by a 14 year old and his friends pointing a pistol in my face. That just pissed me off. I really thought the former assailant had more in mind that a bus ticket and a useless credit card. If I'd had a gun, I highly doubt I would've been in a position to use it on him, but I sure might have.
 
2014-08-18 10:47:53 AM  

HAMMERTOE: Are we really so emasculated by our cell phones?


That's probably a yes. Imagine the Revolutionary War with smartphones.


PotBellyPimp: Sup Jefferson. U wrot the DI?

TommyJ: Not yet, Ben. Three more lives in Ye Olde Candy Crush

 
2014-08-18 10:49:57 AM  

Bit'O'Gristle: I choose not to rely on the judgement of someone who is bold enough to stick a gun or a knife in my face. You do what you want, i choose to defend myself and not just lay down for it.


Are you saying that you would attempt to draw your gun when somebody already had a knife or a gun in your face and demanded your wallet?  I think that it's safe to assume that chances are high that an individual driven to point a weapon at another's face is probably desperate and in the midst of a huge adrenaline rush and maybe not thinking clearly, or is experienced enough to be calculating and thinking very clearly.  Would you pull a gun in that situation?

Now, if said criminal has stated that he is going to kill you, or you have some reason for believing that they want to do more than take your wallet/watch/car then that's understandable.  However, significantly increasing the risk to yourself to protect what are essentially meaningless, insured posessions seems pretty stupid.  Unless you're Doc Holliday you're not going to be able to draw, aim and fire in the time a twitchy nutcase will be able to pull the trigger, are you?
 
2014-08-18 10:52:47 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Check out the mean streets of Helen, GA where this responsible gun owner was packing for everyone's safety.

[media-cdn.tripadvisor.com image 550x412] [www.cabinsinhelen.net image 500x333] [cdn.sheknows.com image 600x399] [cedarcreekcabinrentals.com image 773x571]


I just thank god he was there to keep everyone safe.


Jesus christ, if that town got any whiter we'd have to invent a new color name.
 
2014-08-18 10:54:03 AM  

robrr2003: Which state exactly will let a person walk around with only a note from the local sheriff's office?


Mine.

It took me twenty minutes, I believe it cost $20 and the sheriff's office mailed me a nice little piece of paper less than two weeks later via certified mail.

I'm sure it's lapsed by now. I should probably get it renewed. I have it on good authority that there's just criminals, terrorists and bronies coming out of the goddamn woodwork to get me! Ahh!
 
2014-08-18 10:54:20 AM  

wildcardjack: kellyclan: The chance of a modern firearm having a mechanical malfunction that causes a misfire is only slightly greater than the chances of your car starting itself and driving into a crowded playground.

The correct term for this situation is "negligent discharge" and it happens when you put your booger hook on the bang switch.

How cute, you think consumer handguns have kept up with the times. Wake up. They're using the same 200 year old design, where a striker hits a mercury fulminate cap to discharge. Even the safety designs are iffy. My Astra has a funky safety that's supposed to separate the pin from the hammer unless the trigger has been pulled, but I don't assume it works as in the manual.

Accidental discharges are a part of the sample set with firearms. The more samples of people casually interacting with chambered weapons, the more discharges you'll get.


The link I posted above discusses the difference between pistol designs.
 
2014-08-18 10:55:38 AM  

doglover: Publikwerks: The reason I ask is that adding 2 seconds, I don't know how critical they are.

THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT! You don't know so you shouldn't count on them being non-critical.


I'm not saying they are not critical, but I everything is a risk. And I think the risk that those two seconds are critical is far less that the risk of carrying around a weapon with a round in the chamber.

Again, it's not really something you can measure I think. But since I don't carry a weapon with me most of the time, and even when I do, it's unloaded, action open, it's kinda an untested philosophy.
 
2014-08-18 10:59:02 AM  

Publikwerks: way south: When you've already suffered hundreds of casualties, after a century of continual bias and abuse at the hands of the law, a legal victory isn't much consolation for that town... and that's not what they'll get.
At best they'll see one officer go to jail for murder, or maybe they wont.
Either way, this nonsense continues. 

/Bundy may lose his legal argument, but he's not the one watching national guard trucks roll into his town.
/Winning indeed.

I dunno, I don't know what will happen to the cop, but the Fergusen PD and St. Louis County LEOs are gonna get shaken up. They are going to be under a microscope, and hopefully will eventually come out of it as better departments.


I hope that change will happen... but I gotta say that we've been here before.  We've seen bad PD's revert to their old habits as soon as the shiatstorm died down. This didn't start with the shooting of Michael brown. I doubt it will end anytime soon.

On the other hand, there's Bundy. A situation that could have been negotiated a dozen better ways. 
Yes he's white, but they brought the dogs and the teargas and the sniper rifles with the full intention of pulling the very same paramilitary crap on him.
But he had guns, and he had friends who had guns. Now everyones being polite and respectful at some bizzare teabaggers camp out. The total incident has had zero casualties so far as I've heard.

Maybe the government was only afraid it would turn into another Waco or worse, but its plans obviously changed. Bundy is now going back to court while Ferguson is getting invaded by soldiers.

Its a pretty stark contrast in the governments behavior.
 
2014-08-18 10:59:46 AM  

LazyMedia: Possession and/or discharge of a firearm while under the influence
It is against the law to be in possession of firearm while engaged in hunting and fishing activities or discharge a firearm while under the influence of alcohol or any drug or any combination of alcohol and any drug to the extent that it is unsafe for the person to discharge such firearm except in the defense of life, health, and property;
It is also against the law to discharge a firearm while engaged in any shooting activity while under the influence of alcohol or any drug or any combination of alcohol and any drug.
It is NO defense to violation of this law even if you are legally entitled to use such a drug (prescription).

You can legally get drunk off your ass in Georgia with a concealed weapon on you, as long as you don't fire it, or you're not out hunting.

That may not have been the intention of those who wrote the bill, but they are not the smartest people in the world, or even in the legislature.


I dont know what to tell you man.  I'm looking at my Georgia CCW card right now, and it is clearly printed right on it that you arent allowed to CCW while under the influence.
 
2014-08-18 11:01:43 AM  

Alonjar: I dont know what to tell you man. I'm looking at my Georgia CCW card right now, and it is clearly printed right on it that you arent allowed to CCW while under the influence.


Well, like you guys are always so fond of saying, good thing it's against the law, because criminals never break the law.
 
Displayed 50 of 370 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
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