Rob's Lobs

[Lyehopper]

Lets face it, if someone is so disturbed that they're intent on doing harm, there's not much anyone can do unless luck is on their side. Those little girls in that Amish school house....it wouldn't have helped much if they were armed.

I agree that a criminal will act out regardless of any gun laws on the books.... There is no law (that I know of) that allows for "little Amish girls" to "concealed/carry".... So you are right, they were doomed from the start. There is however one that allows me (and you) to!

In this particular case at Tech, lives could indeed have been saved if someone with a legal concealed/carry permit had been in one of those classrooms. PERIOD!

A person who goes to the trouble of qualifying and to be allowed to "carry" is very proficient with their firearm. They fire hundreds of rounds in regular practice, if not thousands. They are trained to assume a defensive posture to make themselves a harder target and to shoot at a human threat until it's over.... and trained where to aim for most effective stoppage. Is it possible that Cho would have shot the guy with that concealed gun first? Is it possible that fear could overwhelm the guy with the concealed gun? Sure it is!.... But it's also possible that he could have prevailed and killed Cho first, perhaps as he reloaded, or at least frightened him and made him retreat. Think about it, if only one (1) life had been saved, it would have been worth it.

I know you (and Park) think all those who decide to arm themselves for defense are a bunch of "low IQ", cowardice, paranoid, bumbling idiot, "fantasy living" yahoos.... but that's just not the case. Those living a fantasy are the ones who think that taking away my firearms (and those like me), will make them safer.

[Tatnic]

I agree that a criminal will act out regardless of any gun laws on the books.... There is no law (that I know of) that allows for "little Amish girls" to "concealed/carry".... So you are right, they were doomed from the start. There is however one that allows me (and you) to!

In this particular case at Tech, lives could indeed have been saved if someone with a legal concealed/carry permit had been in one of those classrooms. PERIOD!

A person who goes to the trouble of qualifying and to be allowed to "carry" is very proficient with their firearm. They fire hundreds of rounds in regular practice, if not thousands. They are trained to assume a defensive posture to make themselves a harder target and to shoot at a human threat until it's over.... and trained where to aim for most effective stoppage. Is it possible that Cho would have shot the guy with that concealed gun first? Is it possible that fear could overwhelm the guy with the concealed gun? Sure it is!.... But it's also possible that he could have prevailed and killed Cho first, perhaps as he reloaded, or at least frightened him and made him retreat. Think about it, if only one (1) life had been saved, it would have been worth it.

I know you (and Park) think all those who decide to arm themselves for defense are a bunch of "low IQ", cowardice, paranoid, bumbling idiot, "fantasy living" yahoos.... but that's just not the case. Those living a fantasy are the ones who think that taking away my firearms (and those like me), will make them safer.

No, that's not my point at all. My point is that handguns are dangerous and easily obtained by very disturbed people.

Hey, here's another true story for you. Some guy in my town in Maine got pulled over by the cops for some minor traffic thing. He gets out of the car with a toy gun, but the cops can't tell its a toy, they yell at him to drop it but he comes at them. They unload their 9mm glocks into him, I think they hit him at least with 15 shots total. They didn't kill him just put him in the hospital. They never figured out why this nut job came at them with a toy gun and why he wasn't killed. He wasn't wearing any vests, just your standard issue plaid thermal shirt (common garb here in Maine most of the year). My point is that these highly trained cops were scared and not able to shoot straight enough to kill this nut, just wound him. I guess eventually he hit the ground if nothing else from the weight of the lead in him. Like I said earlier, your average, law abiding joe/jill packing heat will not be able to react coolly enough to take down some extremely disturbed nut job in a split second. This aint the movies....we americans watch too much tv and too many violent movies where shooting and killing are made to look like child's play. That's not reality. Jane or John doe are not going to stop nut jobs like Cho in 99% of the cases.

[ParkTwain]

I know you (and Park) think all those who decide to arm themselves for defense are a bunch of "low IQ", cowardice, paranoid, bumbling idiot, "fantasy living" yahoos.... but that's just not the case. Those living a fantasy are the ones who think that taking away my firearms (and those like me), will make them safer.

There's no reason for you to speak merely hypothetically about this. Simply look at other nations that have changed their laws to prohibit or drastically restrict the sale and possession of handguns. Look at the results and the numbers. Then cynically keep choosing to elect U.S. representatives who don't have the spine to be reasonable and say "no" to the gun shop lobby.

And this is not some sacrosanct constitutional issue. Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_...s_Constitution . The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the "Miller" case that the states do have the right to legislate regarding the regulation of guns. I've never heard a Right Winger address that case or even acknowledge its existence. Whaddaya know! In that article, I found this to be the key sentence: "The court has consistently refused to review lower court decisions rejecting Second Amendment challenges to firearms laws, despite numerous opportunities to do so." At some point the majority of American citizens will get off their duffs, decide they've had enough of the Right's hypocrisy and cynicism about handguns, and prohibit them for almost all cases.

[ParkTwain]

More handguns in more places at all times= more safety!

It's kinda like the Mutually Assured Destruction theory of intercontinental missiles. Finally, the opinions of the former Cold War combatants have changed about that, and I suspect the argument that "more handguns in the hands of more people at all times" will also go away once a few well placed politicians realize that there actually is a market among the U.S. populace for COMMON SENSE. How many more mass murder events will it take? But hey, it's the guys like Cho who are putting their American freedoms into ACTION, because our society has given it to them with the benediction of the U.S. Constitution! These deranged handgun toters are the TRUE BELIEVERS! God Bless Them!

Where is the NRA PR machine today? Very silent. In the immediate aftermath, they let their surrogates, like the ones posted by Rob and like the talk-radio blowhards, get out the early-reaction propaganda to begin to "probe" for public opinion, to see how the politicians and the grass-roots folks react.

[Lyehopper]

SHEESH MAN! your head is up your butt!

No, that's not my point at all. My point is that handguns are dangerous and easily obtained by very disturbed people.

Hey, here's another true story for you. Some guy in my town in Maine got pulled over by the cops for some minor traffic thing. He gets out of the car with a toy gun, but the cops can't tell its a toy, they yell at him to drop it but he comes at them. They unload their 9mm glocks into him, I think they hit him at least with 15 shots total. They didn't kill him just put him in the hospital. They never figured out why this nut job came at them with a toy gun and why he wasn't killed. He wasn't wearing any vests, just your standard issue plaid thermal shirt (common garb here in Maine most of the year). My point is that these highly trained cops were scared and not able to shoot straight enough to kill this nut, just wound him. I guess eventually he hit the ground if nothing else from the weight of the lead in him. Like I said earlier, your average, law abiding joe/jill packing heat will not be able to react coolly enough to take down some extremely disturbed nut job in a split second. This aint the movies....we americans watch too much tv and too many violent movies where shooting and killing are made to look like child's play. That's not reality. Jane or John doe are not going to stop nut jobs like Cho in 99% of the cases.

You make no sense to me, you really do think everyone (but you) is a stupid nervous wreck don't you? LOL!

So Tatnic, you'd rather be shot like a fish in a barrel than try to fight back? What is WRONG WITH YOU MAN?!!!! OH! and I really love how your "true stories" are never accompanied by any proof. OR Maybe the cops in Maine are just bad shots?..... or maybe they should adopt 45 apc and ditch those 9's... Ssssss!

Here's a recent TRUE news story where a civilian used his handgun to save lives.... and I'll even provide a link to prove it actually happened, not just hear-say.

http://www.nbc10.com/news/11212222/detail.html

I can also post for you many more if you want to see them....

[ParkTwain]

In today's news ... another handgun accident

This must be a "mechanically defective firearm" problem because we're talking here about a law enforcement officer. Awww, those darned guns! Guns don't harm people, people do! But we might be talking about a defective item here. WHICH IS IT, anyway?

//
Bullet fired accidentally strikes three
ASBURY PARK, N.J., April 18 (UPI) -- Police in Asbury Park, N.J., are looking into an accidental discharge of a gun at a local eatery that managed to injure three people with one bullet.

State police were attempting to determine how a single bullet accidentally fired from a law enforcement officer's personal firearm managed to wound three people in their legs at the Posillipo Restaurant, the Asbury Park (N.J.) Press said Tuesday.

Attorney Mitchell Ansell, who is acting as a spokesman for the family of parole officer Lt. Mark Lucia, said the unusual incident was simply an unfortunate situation.

"This appears to be a very tragic accident," Ansell said. "The family does stand ready, willing and able to assist the state in its investigation."

One of the workers remains in a local hospital, while the other two gunshot victims were promptly treated and released.

The newspaper said the shooting had occurred after a party at the eatery with the accidental misfire luckily happening once most of the event's guests had departed.
//

[Lyehopper]

This must be a "mechanically defective firearm" problem because we're talking here about a law enforcement officer. Awww, those darned guns! Guns don't harm people, people do! But we might be talking about a defective item here. WHICH IS IT, anyway?

//
Bullet fired accidentally strikes three
ASBURY PARK, N.J., April 18 (UPI) -- Police in Asbury Park, N.J., are looking into an accidental discharge of a gun at a local eatery that managed to injure three people with one bullet.

State police were attempting to determine how a single bullet accidentally fired from a law enforcement officer's personal firearm managed to wound three people in their legs at the Posillipo Restaurant, the Asbury Park (N.J.) Press said Tuesday.

Attorney Mitchell Ansell, who is acting as a spokesman for the family of parole officer Lt. Mark Lucia, said the unusual incident was simply an unfortunate situation.

"This appears to be a very tragic accident," Ansell said. "The family does stand ready, willing and able to assist the state in its investigation."

One of the workers remains in a local hospital, while the other two gunshot victims were promptly treated and released.

The newspaper said the shooting had occurred after a party at the eatery with the accidental misfire luckily happening once most of the event's guests had departed.
//

LOL! So now you want to WHAT?.... disarm the freakin' cops too!???? LOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!

[ParkTwain]

god bless you, Lye, but you're once again missing the point. Why did this gun discharge "accidently"? Was it defective? Did the officer not disposition it correctly at that time (no safety set)? If it is the case that this gun is mechanically defective, what quality criteria are the law enforcement agencies requiring of the gun makers? How many "defective" handguns are being proliferated among the public?

[Lyehopper]

Since we're talking about hot topics....

Park, Park, Park.... That's a very funny thing to hear you say.... "god bless you"???? Especially since you've made it clear that you don't believe there even is a God....LOL!.... You love throwing around empty words just for the sake of posting something, don't you dude?

btw, I DO indeed get your "point", loud and clear. I've read your left-leaning posts for so long that I know your EXACT point.

Now Park.... Since you are sooooo into saving lives and keeping folks safe from all these defective handguns flooding the market.... I'll bet you were thrilled to read this today!!!! Think of the lives THIS decision will save! GOD BLESS THE TRULY HELPLESS.... GOD BLESS THE UNBORN!

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OJ5JLG1&show_article=1

[mrmarket]

Who hijacked Rob's thread?

[Websman]

Who hijacked Rob's thread?

How come nobody ever hijacks my thread?

[New-born baby]

How come nobody ever hijacks my thread?

Why, because the VTP cannot possibly be highjacked, of course!!

Look at my avatar: that stupid cop shot up my doghouse, too!

[IIC]

Staying out of the pro/con gun debate...But a few comments to think about.

If guns were outlawed...who would have them?...Who would enforce this?...A "Police State"?

Illegal guns are easy to get...If they were outlawed all that would happen is that the price would go up and people who feel obligated to follow the law would not have them...Criminal types would just pay more. It might reduce the number of Nutso's who get them tho.

Ernie mentioned something like he did not feel a gun was necessary for him to have (correct me if I am wrong)...Now, I'm not advocating that Ernie carry a gun...But, think about this...If Ernie and I were walking down the middle of Manhattan at Midnight...Neither one of us has a gun...Two muggers come up to us with guns to rob us. Who do you think they are more likely to shoot...Me or Ernie???...The answer is easy, they would shoot Ernie before they would shoot me (Unless I opened my BIG MOUTH) because they would consider him more of a physical threat than they would me.

I don't know about the rest of the country...But you used to see a lot more security guards at Banks and other businesses w/ guns 10, 20, 30 years ago around here than you do now...You still see the guards...And even more of them...But most are not armed...'Ya know why???...Because the Banks and others realized that robbers were more likely to shoot if they had to go thru someone w/ a gun...Plus, Banks and other's saw their liability insurance rates go thru the roof when they had armed guards....Why???...Because the Bank or other biz would get sued too often when they were robbed by gunshot.

I don't have the answers...But there is a lot to consider IMO...Doug

[jiesen]

reasons for owning guns will become fewer as "less-lethal" alternatives such as a Taser become cheaper and more commonplace.

[jiesen]

Who hijacked Rob's thread?

if you're gonna hijack something, though, it's still best done with guns.