|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 07/23/2012 : 08:54:28 [Permalink]
|
| They'll make you crazy! |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 09:19:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Sometimes, evil people do premeditated things. 13 dead and 50 wounded. CCW carriers abided by a "no gun zone" for the theater. Police were minutes away. |
They responded within 90 seconds, from what I heard.| Had a law abiding CCW carrier had his weapon, there would have been a chance that his victim count would be down significantly. |
Had someone started shooting back, there would also have been a "chance" for even greater carnage. We can't assume that CCW carriers all have good aim.
And as Mooner noted, there were hundreds of "chances" for the victim count to be lower, had people attacked the shooter en masse instead of running away. Not that I blame any of them, this is just to point out that guns weren't necessary to take this guy down.| And you can make the same argument for cars. One crazed individual with a car can maim and kill many if they drive into a crowd. It has happened. There was a drunk driver that plowed into a group of bicyclists. Killed 8. A rash of elderly plowed into crowds. Yet we did not hear of people screaming for cars to be banned. |
Did I miss the existence of a huge, nation-wide organization that lobbies the government to loosen or eliminate car registration requirements and advocates in favor of "Ram-Back Doctrine" laws? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 10:23:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
And as Mooner noted, there were hundreds of "chances" for the victim count to be lower, had people attacked the shooter en masse instead of running away. Not that I blame any of them, this is just to point out that guns weren't necessary to take this guy down. |
Yeah, I don't blame any individual for not taking the guy on. Heroics should never be a requirement of citizens in a civilized land. But still. Someone should have tried to blindside the mad bastard. Old and limping as I am, I would have tried to find the opportunity, and I am not the heroic type. Some of the passengers of United Airlines Flight 93 had the same basic idea: Better to die fighting than die cowering.
There were one or more life-saving acts of heroism in that theater, which should be honored. But apparently nobody tried to attack the gunman, and that was the one thing that could have probably saved the most lives. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 07/23/2012 10:34:57 |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 10:45:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by HalfMooner
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
No, it can't. That is the AR-15's fully automatic sibling the M-16. The AR-15 is a semi-automatic. One trigger push, one bang. Can you pull a trigger in excess of 13 times per second while dealing with recoil? |
No, and I stand corrected on that point of rate of fire. I've never used either weapon, and was just going with a quick Wiki search. So how many times the rate of fire does the AR-15 have, as compared of a late 18th Century musket?
|
You could ask the same question when it came to the invention of the Henry Repeating Rifle in the 1850's. The flintlock and wheellock muskets took 30 seconds to a minute to fire a single round. The AR-15 and the Henry both can have a rate of fire of multiple per second increasing the rate of fire by an order of magnatude or two. (Henry 2 sps, AR-15 2-4 sps depending on compentcy of shooter)
| Bullets travel fast and far. 22LR bullets break the sound barrier and will travel a full mile. Yet these are not the subjects of bans. Note how the AR-15 gets all the press and not the shotgun or two pistols. |
Indeed, I was just trying to keep things simple with a flintlock vs AR-15 comparison. Any one of those weapons carried by the shooter would have outclassed the old "coal-burners" by a mile. Weapons now and at the time the Second Amendment was put into the Constitution must be one or two magnitudes apart in brute killing power.| Sometimes, evil people do premeditated things. 13 dead and 50 wounded. CCW carriers abided by a "no gun zone" for the theater. Police were minutes away. Had a law abiding CCW carrier had his weapon, there would have been a chance that his victim count would be down significantly. |
Sometimes is too often. And CCWs or no, people should have mobbed him from behind. His peripheral vision in his gas mask couldn't have been too good. Knock him down, and kick him until he stops moving. |
Fear is a powerful motivator. Pulling a gun takes less effort of will than charging an armed and randomly firing whackadoodle.
| But the ability of a legal gun owner carrying for defense was. I'll just point out in Florida where two firearm wielding thugs were engaged by a 71 year old CCW holder and were stopped before they could hurt anyone. |
I watched what I think is that video. That old guy seemed to be firing rather wildly. He kept firing at the robbers' backs after they were already running to get the Hell out of Dodge. I think he was lucky the robbers were spooked and didn't start firing back. And that he didn't hit a bystander when firing after them out the door.| And you can make the same argument for cars. One crazed individual with a car can maim and kill many if they drive into a crowd. It has happened. There was a drunk driver that plowed into a group of bicyclists. Killed 8. A rash of elderly plowed into crowds. Yet we did not hear of people screaming for cars to be banned. |
And which of us is screaming for a ban on firearms?
Okay, if I made the laws and everyone was agreeable, here's what I'd do: Make owning 18th Century shoulder weapons legal to anyone without a violent criminal background, and who is of sound mind, after taking a required course in musket safety. Ban and turn in all civilian-owned high-powered weapons using modern smokeless powder. Do I think this would work? No, because 1) I do not make the laws, and 2) Everyone's disagreeable, and many would fight before turning in their weapons. So my own best idea is essentially only good for washing swine. So I don't advocate that idea. (Though I do think coal-burners are a lot more fun to fire than modern weapons.)
|
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 10:52:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Sometimes, evil people do premeditated things. 13 dead and 50 wounded. CCW carriers abided by a "no gun zone" for the theater. Police were minutes away. |
They responded within 90 seconds, from what I heard.
|
After he had been shooting for 9 minutes before the police were called.
| Had a law abiding CCW carrier had his weapon, there would have been a chance that his victim count would be down significantly. |
Had someone started shooting back, there would also have been a "chance" for even greater carnage. We can't assume that CCW carriers all have good aim. |
As the 71 year old individual showed, accuracy is not always necessary although preferrable. The thought of going up against an armed opponent is deterrent enough to possible make the whackadoodle back off and retreat from the theater.
And as Mooner noted, there were hundreds of "chances" for the victim count to be lower, had people attacked the shooter en masse instead of running away. Not that I blame any of them, this is just to point out that guns weren't necessary to take this guy down.
|
Because the effort needed to oppose force with force is with the best tool available. The armed opponent isn't going to play by rules made up by the victims.
| And you can make the same argument for cars. One crazed individual with a car can maim and kill many if they drive into a crowd. It has happened. There was a drunk driver that plowed into a group of bicyclists. Killed 8. A rash of elderly plowed into crowds. Yet we did not hear of people screaming for cars to be banned. |
Did I miss the existence of a huge, nation-wide organization that lobbies the government to loosen or eliminate car registration requirements and advocates in favor of "Ram-Back Doctrine" laws?
|
There are some organizations which lobby the government against a Real ID card for driver's licenses. This requires quite a bit of documentation to prove who you are. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 10:54:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
So Kil can't be in favor of better laws which might, say, mandate better tracking technology for both weapons and ammunition while simultaneously saying that we cannot prevent legally sane non-felons from purchasing legal firearms?
I don't see how those things are in any way contradictory or irrational. The former deals with catching bad guys, the latter with not treating good guys like bad guys.
Neither one would actually apply to the Aurora case, since the perp illegally used his legal weapons and then failed to high-tail it out of there, so there was nothing to track. No matter how many laws we put it place, we'll never be able to protect the public from people who just "snap," but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to better protect ourselves from career criminals and/or those who successfully flee, leaving behind nothing but spent casings and fired bullets.| Guns in the hands of law abiding citizens are not the problem... |
What's funny is that's essentially a No True Law-Abiding Citizen fallacy. After all, as soon as an otherwise law-abiding citizen (say a responsible gun owner for 50 years) cracks at his neighbor's latest insult, he may very well stop being a law-abiding citizen and then the gun in his hands becomes a problem.| ...and better legislation cannot prevent this type of tragity from happening. |
Do you also think that better legislation will be unable to help catch crooks?
[/quote]I've tried several attempts to reply but I'm getting "script not responding errors" and my computer locks up trying to do searches. I've lost several write ups having to reboot and have yet been able to finish a reply. Sorry for not being able to respond properly, right now. I'm on a friends computer and can't get into it now. Oh well, maybe latter. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 12:01:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Because the effort needed to oppose force with force is with the best tool available. The armed opponent isn't going to play by rules made up by the victims. |
Nobody's claiming otherwise.| There are some organizations which lobby the government against a Real ID card for driver's licenses. This requires quite a bit of documentation to prove who you are. |
Driver's licenses would be analogous to CCW permits, not to firearm registrations. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 13:04:10 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Because the effort needed to oppose force with force is with the best tool available. The armed opponent isn't going to play by rules made up by the victims. |
Nobody's claiming otherwise.| There are some organizations which lobby the government against a Real ID card for driver's licenses. This requires quite a bit of documentation to prove who you are. |
Driver's licenses would be analogous to CCW permits, not to firearm registrations.
|
I see, so you are looking for someone who opposes vehicle registration. As firearm registration is a one time deal, how would that stop that? Also the NRA is pushing for CCW permits and removal of unreasonable access to firearms. They do go overboard at times. This isn't one of them.
I could probably find one who objects to the "must have insurance" rule for those states that require people who purchase a car have insurance before they roll off the lot. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 13:52:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
I see, so you are looking for someone who opposes vehicle registration. As firearm registration is a one time deal, how would that stop that? Also the NRA is pushing for CCW permits and removal of unreasonable access to firearms. They do go overboard at times. This isn't one of them.
I could probably find one who objects to the "must have insurance" rule for those states that require people who purchase a car have insurance before they roll off the lot. |
You're the one who made the analogy between guns and cars. Yes, they are both tools, and tools which can be purposefully or accidentally misused in ways that will cost many lives.
Where they differ seems to be a matter of scale, then. I suspect (but don't know) that there are far fewer cases of people getting away with vehicular murder per capita than there are cases of people getting away with homicide via handgun. If someone crashes into someone else and flees on foot, vehicle registration and titling generally provide clear leads for police to follow. The same cannot be said for gun violence.
Another way they differ, of course, is that car ownership isn't a constitutional right. Nobody is screaming that vehicle registration is the first step to the government stripping us of our right to drive, simply because there is no such right.
Should guns get such protection? I don't see why. Analogies to the American Revolution simply don't hold up, because the hypothetical tyrannical government gun advocates bring up won't be on the other side of the Atlantic, but instead will have its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and have a massive and highly technological army already stationed all around the country. And given events in the Arab Spring, it seems ridiculous to think that personal gun ownership is either necessary or sufficient to overthrow a dictatorial government.
On the personal-defense front, I wonder if data exist that show that firearms are a more effective deterrent to violence than baseball bats, karate, dobermans, etc. I really don't know, and don't have the time right now to try to hunt down any such evidence. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 19:42:28 [Permalink]
|
Perhaps somewhat off topic, I should have seen this coming, too. To spare those who don't want to bother, the long and short of it is this: A woman in the theater gets hit with a bullet in her head and the bullet goes through her brain. Doctors are not optimistic. But then, amazingly, they discover that the exact trajectory of the bullet coincided with some minor geographical defect (for lack of a better term) within her brain such that the only part of the brain that suffered any damage was that part with this minor defect-- a largely unused part. So she shouldn't suffer and long term effects.
Of course, her pastor (and my more religious friends on Facebook), call this a "miracle" and thank their god for this.
It's been addressed a million times from a million past related events, but given that this event saw a dozen people murdered and scores more tragically scarred in one way or another, wouldn't we expect an omnipotent supernatural god to do a bit better than that when it comes to miracles?!? |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/23/2012 : 20:33:42 [Permalink]
|
| On the ease of buying and owning assault style weapons, I happen to agree with Jason Alexander. Sue me. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2012 : 05:50:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
I see, so you are looking for someone who opposes vehicle registration. As firearm registration is a one time deal, how would that stop that? Also the NRA is pushing for CCW permits and removal of unreasonable access to firearms. They do go overboard at times. This isn't one of them.
I could probably find one who objects to the "must have insurance" rule for those states that require people who purchase a car have insurance before they roll off the lot. |
You're the one who made the analogy between guns and cars. Yes, they are both tools, and tools which can be purposefully or accidentally misused in ways that will cost many lives.
Where they differ seems to be a matter of scale, then. I suspect (but don't know) that there are far fewer cases of people getting away with vehicular murder per capita than there are cases of people getting away with homicide via handgun. If someone crashes into someone else and flees on foot, vehicle registration and titling generally provide clear leads for police to follow. The same cannot be said for gun violence. |
Except for the case of a stolen car. As I have seen a notice that 95% of gun violence is done with illegally procured firearms, licensing would be useless. I'll find that source and post it here. Again, criminals who shoot others don't get the guns legally and they are unregistered.
Another way they differ, of course, is that car ownership isn't a constitutional right. Nobody is screaming that vehicle registration is the first step to the government stripping us of our right to drive, simply because there is no such right. |
You'd be amazed at how many times that "right" is demanded by people.
Should guns get such protection? I don't see why. Analogies to the American Revolution simply don't hold up, because the hypothetical tyrannical government gun advocates bring up won't be on the other side of the Atlantic, but instead will have its headquarters in Washington, D.C. and have a massive and highly technological army already stationed all around the country. And given events in the Arab Spring, it seems ridiculous to think that personal gun ownership is either necessary or sufficient to overthrow a dictatorial government. |
Since they have that massive and technological army in the field, this is a stronger argument for gun ownership. The Declaration of Independence gives some color to the argument. As my family while I was growing up was working poor, my father often times supplimented our meals with meat from a hunt. And there is the case for self defense.
An extensive list of stories about people defending themselves with firearms
On the personal-defense front, I wonder if data exist that show that firearms are a more effective deterrent to violence than baseball bats, karate, dobermans, etc. I really don't know, and don't have the time right now to try to hunt down any such evidence.
|
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2012 : 05:52:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
On the ease of buying and owning assault style weapons, I happen to agree with Jason Alexander. Sue me.
|
Define "assault style" weapons.
I had an "assault style" 22 Long Rifle. It was deemed an assault style weapon because it had a 15 round capacity. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2012 : 06:12:20 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Except for the case of a stolen car. |
Indeed, but people report stolen cars fairly quickly (while a gun stolen from a closet may not be noticed for a while), and the location at which it should have been parked may offer clues as to the identity of the thief/murderer.| As I have seen a notice that 95% of gun violence is done with illegally procured firearms, licensing would be useless. I'll find that source and post it here. Again, criminals who shoot others don't get the guns legally and they are unregistered. |
Right, we need stronger measures with which to track weapons. The NRA's opinion seems to be that because the measures we have in place don't work 100% of the time, we may as well do nothing at all.| Since they have that massive and technological army in the field, this is a stronger argument for gun ownership. |
The guns people generally own won't do much good.| The Declaration of Independence gives some color to the argument. |
And nobody today would get the home-field advantage.| As my family while I was growing up was working poor, my father often times supplimented our meals with meat from a hunt. |
Other countries have figured out how to allow long-gun ownership and hunting while banning handguns and have massively lower rates of gun violence.A list of anecdotes is not the data I'm looking for, it's not even a good start. How many people have tried to use a gun for self-defense and failed? How many have used other means of self-defense and succeeded or failed? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 07/24/2012 : 07:10:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Originally posted by Kil
On the ease of buying and owning assault style weapons, I happen to agree with Jason Alexander. Sue me.
|
Define "assault style" weapons.
I had an "assault style" 22 Long Rifle. It was deemed an assault style weapon because it had a 15 round capacity.
|
Military weapons or military style weapons designed to do maximum damage in the shortest possible time. Otherwise known as assault weapons.
And by the way. The majority of Americans Support Semi-Automatic Weapons Ban. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Predictably, the gun control debate heats up
