login
3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon (Page 7)
-
No new posts
|
 2012-12-12 1:54 PM in reply to: #4532554 |
Pro  6767      the Alabama part of Pennsylvania |  Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in OregonSous - 2012-12-12 2:19 PM gearboy - 2012-12-12 2:01 PM powerman - 2012-12-12 1:52 PM ... GB, I also said there were cannons but those were not protected. It was discussed at the time and recognized by Constitutional solars. There is only so much two sentences can say. It is up to the SCOTUS to determine meaning and they have consistently determined it to mean everyday weapons available to the common man. Tanks, M60s, rocket launchers, and nuclear weapons... regardless of your cute article, or fighter jets or "Man of War" ships are not commonly available to the average man. I don't know if canons were allowed or not. I am going based on your comments. And you stated that most people could not afford canons, not that canons were not allowed. And yes, individuals generally cannot afford the things you listed. But if it is not specifically forbidden to have private ownership of a tank (for example), then what is to stop a small group of people from pooling their resources and buying one? If what you are trying to say is that your initial statement about "best weapons of the time" is a mis-statement, that is different. Maybe you want to clarify what you meant. I believe in "well regulated militia", and I believe the intent was to not have a standing army, but to be able to round up forces quickly in the event of hostile forces trying to impose their will on us. Which is different than many (not you, per se) seem to think, where the belief seems to be that they need their guns so the government won't come and take over. Ummm, you realize that you can buy a tank right? I checked. Mrs. gearboy said I can't. |
| 2012-12-12 1:54 PM in reply to: #4532590 |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. |
| 2012-12-12 1:54 PM in reply to: #4532623 |
Champion 34263 Chicago | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:48 PM mr2tony - 2012-12-12 11:41 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM And this takes me back to ... what are you SO AFRAID OF that you feel you need a gun to protect yourself? Did something happen to you that makes you so paranoid that you feel you need a firearm to go outside? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. It's a tool that a 5ft woman can use to prevent a 6ft man from raping, robing or committing other violent acts upon her. It's a tool that can used for sport shooting, hunting, self defense or to commit murder. If a person is killed by a gun, throat slit by a scalpel or run over by a car, they are dead, their family will suffer the same loss either way. A government who passes laws that prevents people from protecting and defending themselves and their loved ones is not a government I want to be a part of. There are governments to our north and south that deny their citizens that freedom, I'm not sure what the immigration polices are for those who so desperately want to part of that type of society. How did you come to the conclusion that I am "SO AFRAID"? Why do you feel the need to call me paranoid? Where did you get the idea that I need a firearm to go outside? Why are you so concerned that people own guns? You said you don't want to be a part of a government that doesn't allow you to protect yourself. I'm trying to figure out what is such a big threat out there that you feel the only way to protect yourself is by having a gun. Mexico and Canada allow people to protect themselves, just not with a gun. Explain because I just don't get from where this paranoia comes. |
| 2012-12-12 1:57 PM in reply to: #4532630 |
Member 5452 NC | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. Someone needs to call Kim Rhode and get those medals back because she didn't kill anything. Period.
|
| 2012-12-12 2:06 PM in reply to: #4532639 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Goosedog - 2012-12-12 1:57 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. Someone needs to call Kim Rhode and get those medals back because she didn't kill anything. Period.
She killed dreams. |
| 2012-12-12 2:06 PM in reply to: #4532605 |
Master 2725 Washington, DC Metro | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon mr2tony - 2012-12-12 2:41 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM And this takes me back to ... what are you SO AFRAID OF that you feel you need a gun to protect yourself? Did something happen to you that makes you so paranoid that you feel you need a firearm to go outside? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. It's a tool that a 5ft woman can use to prevent a 6ft man from raping, robing or committing other violent acts upon her. It's a tool that can used for sport shooting, hunting, self defense or to commit murder. If a person is killed by a gun, throat slit by a scalpel or run over by a car, they are dead, their family will suffer the same loss either way. A government who passes laws that prevents people from protecting and defending themselves and their loved ones is not a government I want to be a part of. There are governments to our north and south that deny their citizens that freedom, I'm not sure what the immigration polices are for those who so desperately want to part of that type of society. Afraid is a poor choice of words. Prepared, realistic, cautious??? all maybe better options. The 2009 violent crime rate was 429.4 per 100,000 inhabitants. In 2009, the murder rate was 5.0 per 100,000 inhabitants. You've got a waaaaaaayyyyyy better chance of being murdered and/or the victim of a violent crime than you do of winning the powerball, yet so many folks still buy powerball tickets. |
| 2012-12-12 2:10 PM in reply to: #4532605 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon mr2tony - 2012-12-12 12:41 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM And this takes me back to ... what are you SO AFRAID OF that you feel you need a gun to protect yourself? Did something happen to you that makes you so paranoid that you feel you need a firearm to go outside? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. It's a tool that a 5ft woman can use to prevent a 6ft man from raping, robing or committing other violent acts upon her. It's a tool that can used for sport shooting, hunting, self defense or to commit murder. If a person is killed by a gun, throat slit by a scalpel or run over by a car, they are dead, their family will suffer the same loss either way. A government who passes laws that prevents people from protecting and defending themselves and their loved ones is not a government I want to be a part of. There are governments to our north and south that deny their citizens that freedom, I'm not sure what the immigration polices are for those who so desperately want to part of that type of society. What are YOU so AFRAID OF about people being able to buy guns? Do you know the statistical chance of you being involved in a mass shooting? Were you involved in a public shooting that you think that is going to happen to you by me owning a fire arm? |
| 2012-12-12 2:13 PM in reply to: #4532630 |
Master 2725 Washington, DC Metro | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. |
| 2012-12-12 2:16 PM in reply to: #4532673 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? |
| 2012-12-12 2:18 PM in reply to: #4532673 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Sous - 2012-12-12 1:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Seriously, that is some creative gymnastics. A gun is a weapon capable of delivering deadly force. If all you want to do is wound or injure, there are many more tools for that job. Guns are for a purpose... just because some choose to use them as a hole punch does not change what they are. |
| 2012-12-12 2:18 PM in reply to: #4532682 |
Member 5452 NC | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Attacks how? I think the kids call it getting dissed.
|
| 2012-12-12 2:24 PM in reply to: #4532682 |
Master 2725 Washington, DC Metro | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? Attacks in a way in which I feel my life is in imminent danger and I have no other means of recourse... they have indicated intent and capability, and I have no other option. |
| 2012-12-12 2:27 PM in reply to: #4532695 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Sous - 2012-12-12 1:24 PM Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? Attacks in a way in which I feel my life is in imminent danger and I have no other means of recourse... they have indicated intent and capability, and I have no other option. Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? |
| 2012-12-12 2:29 PM in reply to: #4532700 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon powerman - 2012-12-12 2:27 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 1:24 PM Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? Attacks in a way in which I feel my life is in imminent danger and I have no other means of recourse... they have indicated intent and capability, and I have no other option. Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? I can't remember, but I think it was a set of keys. |
| 2012-12-12 2:30 PM in reply to: #4532700 |
Champion 17756 SoCal | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon powerman - 2012-12-12 12:27 PM Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? If I really want to disable someone into the fetal position screaming make it stop I just play some Bee gee’s really loudly and it works every time. |
| 2012-12-12 2:31 PM in reply to: #4532700 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon powerman - 2012-12-12 2:27 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 1:24 PM Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? Attacks in a way in which I feel my life is in imminent danger and I have no other means of recourse... they have indicated intent and capability, and I have no other option. Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? I am for the banning of pneumatic assault staplers. They are too efficient and people really don't need anything more than a standard desktop stapler. |
| 2012-12-12 2:33 PM in reply to: #4532683 |
Master 2725 Washington, DC Metro | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon powerman - 2012-12-12 3:18 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 1:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Seriously, that is some creative gymnastics. A gun is a weapon capable of delivering deadly force. If all you want to do is wound or injure, there are many more tools for that job. Guns are for a purpose... just because some choose to use them as a hole punch does not change what they are. I completely disagree how many times have you heard on the news of someone getting shot and NOT dying? My guess is plenty. Yes a gun is capable of delivering deadly force and since the only time you should use one is in cases where your life is in danger then I say it is the most appropriate weapon use, but death is NOT the only outcome. On the job you have more options and procedure dictates that you follow a use of force continuum but honestly a private citizen should just walk away in all situations that they can... walk away is always the best option. I would suggest that over nearly all other steps. If you can use verbal commands you can walk away. If you can use open hand techniques then you can walk away, if you can use less lethal then you can walk away. |
| 2012-12-12 2:33 PM in reply to: #4532710 |
Champion 17756 SoCal | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon tuwood - 2012-12-12 12:31 PM powerman - 2012-12-12 2:27 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 1:24 PM Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? Attacks in a way in which I feel my life is in imminent danger and I have no other means of recourse... they have indicated intent and capability, and I have no other option. Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? I am for the banning of pneumatic assault staplers. They are too efficient and people really don't need anything more than a standard desktop stapler. It's not black therefore not "assault" |
| 2012-12-12 2:33 PM in reply to: #4532706 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Big Appa - 2012-12-12 1:30 PM powerman - 2012-12-12 12:27 PM Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? If I really want to disable someone into the fetal position screaming make it stop I just play some Bee gee’s really loudly and it works every time. Totally! Plenty of less-than-lethal disabling weapons out there to choose from. |
| 2012-12-12 2:34 PM in reply to: #4532657 |
Champion 34263 Chicago | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Sous - 2012-12-12 2:06 PM mr2tony - 2012-12-12 2:41 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM And this takes me back to ... what are you SO AFRAID OF that you feel you need a gun to protect yourself? Did something happen to you that makes you so paranoid that you feel you need a firearm to go outside? jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. It's a tool that a 5ft woman can use to prevent a 6ft man from raping, robing or committing other violent acts upon her. It's a tool that can used for sport shooting, hunting, self defense or to commit murder. If a person is killed by a gun, throat slit by a scalpel or run over by a car, they are dead, their family will suffer the same loss either way. A government who passes laws that prevents people from protecting and defending themselves and their loved ones is not a government I want to be a part of. There are governments to our north and south that deny their citizens that freedom, I'm not sure what the immigration polices are for those who so desperately want to part of that type of society. Afraid is a poor choice of words. Prepared, realistic, cautious??? all maybe better options. The 2009 violent crime rate was 429.4 per 100,000 inhabitants. In 2009, the murder rate was 5.0 per 100,000 inhabitants. You've got a waaaaaaayyyyyy better chance of being murdered and/or the victim of a violent crime than you do of winning the powerball, yet so many folks still buy powerball tickets. Afraid is a perfect word. People are afraid, just the way the NRA and the gun sellers like it. Keeps them all in business. But that's what lobbies do, and the NRA is a perfect example. I live in possibly the most violent city in America and I don't walk down the street thinking somebody is going to attack me. What kind of a way is that to live? That said, I am more afraid of some with a legal gun shooting me than a gangbanger from the south side shooting me. Generally gangbangers want to shoot other gangbangers. Muggers usually don't have guns and I can handle myself despite my half-Japanesiosity, or because of my half-Japanesiosity. But dooshbag frat-boy wannabes who have too much money and have seen Boiler Room too many times are always itchin' for a fight, and they don't really care who it's with. And if they have a gun, someone's going to get seriously hurt. Frankly, though, I just go about my business and don't bother anybody. And in turn, people mostly don't bother me. It's a very happy existence, sans gun. |
| 2012-12-12 2:36 PM in reply to: #4532673 |
Champion 7821 Brooklyn, NY | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Oh, c’mon… Last time I checked, the bullseyes on the targets at the shooting range were centered on the head and center of the chest. That’s where you’re trained to shoot, because those are the most likely places where a single shot will kill someone. To say you aren’t “intending” to kill them is disingenuous. It’s one thing to say “I hope that the person who I shoot, however justified I may be, doesn’t die”, it’s another thing to say you aren’t intending to kill them. |
| 2012-12-12 2:36 PM in reply to: #4532700 |
Master 2725 Washington, DC Metro | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon powerman - 2012-12-12 3:27 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 1:24 PM Left Brain - 2012-12-12 3:16 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Attacks how? Attacks in a way in which I feel my life is in imminent danger and I have no other means of recourse... they have indicated intent and capability, and I have no other option. Right, and tool you choose when you have deemed deadly force appropriate is a gun... or was it the stapler? No the tool that I choose has the capability to meet the same level of force that is being used against me. If I feel as though my life is in danger (regardless of what tool the aggressor is using) I will use a tool that meets that level of force. My use of that tool may not end in the death of the other person and in fact there are countless reports of people getting shot and NOT dying. |
| 2012-12-12 2:37 PM in reply to: #4532720 |
Champion 17756 SoCal | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon mr2tony - 2012-12-12 12:34 PM Afraid is a perfect word. People are afraid, just the way the NRA and the gun sellers like it. Keeps them all in business. But that's what lobbies do, and the NRA is a perfect example. I live in possibly the most violent city in America and I don't walk down the street thinking somebody is going to attack me. What kind of a way is that to live? That said, I am more afraid of some with a legal gun shooting me than a gangbanger from the south side shooting me. Generally gangbangers want to shoot other gangbangers. Muggers usually don't have guns and I can handle myself despite my half-Japanesiosity, or because of my half-Japanesiosity. But dooshbag frat-boy wannabes who have too much money and have seen Boiler Room too many times are always itchin' for a fight, and they don't really care who it's with. And if they have a gun, someone's going to get seriously hurt. Frankly, though, I just go about my business and don't bother anybody. And in turn, people mostly don't bother me. It's a very happy existence, sans gun. Both sides use fear to get what they want you cannot tell me that the anti gun crowd doesn't use fear to help their cause. |
| 2012-12-12 2:38 PM in reply to: #4532724 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:36 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 2:13 PM Oh, c’mon… Last time I checked, the bullseyes on the targets at the shooting range were centered on the head and center of the chest. That’s where you’re trained to shoot, because those are the most likely places where a single shot will kill someone. To say you aren’t “intending” to kill them is disingenuous. It’s one thing to say “I hope that the person who I shoot, however justified I may be, doesn’t die”, it’s another thing to say you aren’t intending to kill them. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. We train to kill. |
| 2012-12-12 2:38 PM in reply to: #4532714 |
Elite 6387 | Subject: RE: 3 dead in mall shooting in Oregon Sous - 2012-12-12 1:33 PM powerman - 2012-12-12 3:18 PM Sous - 2012-12-12 1:13 PM jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 2:54 PM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:36 PM No, it can’t be used to save a life. It can be used to kill someone . You can argue that by killing a particular person, you may be saving the life of someone else, but that doesn’t change what the purpose of the “tool” is, and that is to kill someone. A baseball bat and a stapler and a scalpel, and a paring knife can all be used to kill someone, but that is not their purpose. A gun has a single purpose—to kill. Period. That some acts of killing may be more justifiable than others does not in any way change the purpose of the gun. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 11:22 AM crusevegas - 2012-12-12 1:11 PM You said scalpel-- I either misread it or someone else used the stapler analogy. Anyway, point is, a gun is a weapon, not a tool. jmk-brooklyn - 2012-12-12 10:20 AM Cruse compared a gun to a stapler What? I think the bigger point is your ability to see what you want to see and hear what you want to hear. A gun is a tool. It can used to take a life and it can be used to save a life. Actually the purpose for the tool, in a self defense realm, is to stop the act of aggression. Once the threat is no longer viable you are no longer "legally" allowed to use the weapon. Now, with that said, when using a weapon in self defense you must be prepared to take a life (i.e. it may be the outcome) but it should NEVER be the intention. Someone attacks me, I draw my weapon and fire. I hit them in the shoulder and they go down writhing in pain, I holster my weapon and call 911. The guy would most likely live. Seriously, that is some creative gymnastics. A gun is a weapon capable of delivering deadly force. If all you want to do is wound or injure, there are many more tools for that job. Guns are for a purpose... just because some choose to use them as a hole punch does not change what they are. I completely disagree how many times have you heard on the news of someone getting shot and NOT dying? My guess is plenty. Yes a gun is capable of delivering deadly force and since the only time you should use one is in cases where your life is in danger then I say it is the most appropriate weapon use, but death is NOT the only outcome. On the job you have more options and procedure dictates that you follow a use of force continuum but honestly a private citizen should just walk away in all situations that they can... walk away is always the best option. I would suggest that over nearly all other steps. If you can use verbal commands you can walk away. If you can use open hand techniques then you can walk away, if you can use less lethal then you can walk away. That's fine if that's how you want to play it.... but I can tell you, if I was to ever pull a trigger on someone, injuring would not be the intent. If they lived, it would be by chance, and not intent. I deemed that deadly force was justified, and I decided to use DEADLY force. If I decide to use less than lethal force, I can use pepper spray or Bee Gees, or a bat... but a gun is a gun.... Police officers use a gun when deadly force is warranted... not for compliance, not to wound, not for harassment... deadly force. So what defense loads do you use... +P hollow points... or light load shot? And to answer your question... a gun only kills a third of the time... of all those shot every year, death only occurs a third of the time. That does not change the fact that it is a weapon for deadly force. |
|
|
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK