Gun Control Debate #2

[anonypotomous]

Deleting. Not even worth arguing

 

[rsd1200]

In the begining how much time would you say it took you to feel ok in terms of training ?

Well, I've had some sort of firearm since I was about 19-20 years old and that's been a very long time ago. There's a huge difference in going from say an older, heavier, revolver to the new lightweight ones. There's also a learning curve in going from a pistol to a .22 rifle to an AR style rifle.

It kinda depends on how much you handle one. I tend to treat mine with a great deal of respect. It's really hard to say, as you get more adept, and comfortable, over time. Even as a 19 y/o I never assumed my firearm was unloaded. Ever.

I'll put it like this, I'd owned a firearm of some sort, for over 30 years, but only went for my CCP a few years back. There were folks there who had recently purchased their very first firearm. At the end of the training, which was about 8-9 hours, most everyone in the class was comfortable with taking their firearm apart, cleaning it, reassembling it, passing their written test, going out to the warm up target shoot, and passing their final test (which was the second target shoot). We had to hit within a certain range (torso). All of us in my group passed. I liked the CCP course and would recommend it, especially to those who are new owners.

 

[human]

My boss has many guns, likely ones you’ve described, and is a law abiding citizen. Conspiracy theorist, yes I’d say so. He would never, ever turn in his guns. So I disagree that any law abiding citizen would turn them in. And it’s not bc they intend to commit mass murder.

I don’t think anyone predicted Paddock would be a mass murderer. No one knows. Who knew Lanza. Nobody. He lived in his basement.

 

[human]

https://www.myajc.com/blog/get-scho...yet-want-arm-teachers/mDBlhDtV6Na4wJVpeu58cM/

The New York Police Department is the nation’s largest police force and among the best trained, yet its own study showed between 1998 and 2006, the average hit rate was 18 percent for officers in a gunfight.

Here are some of the interesting research findings I found with source links after each one so you can read the stuff:

The primary purpose of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of academy firearms training, as well as the accuracy of individuals without any handgun firearms experience or training. The results of this study demonstrated that individuals who had completed standard, law enforcement academy firearms training were not more accurate in their shooting than those who had not had any law enforcement handgun training. As well, they were only moderately more accurate than individuals who had minimal firearms and little to no handgun experience …this study's results indicate an alarming need for improved firearms training for officers. Further investigation is suggested to examine the possibility of a skill transfer in weapon manipulation between long-barrel firearms and handguns as well as officer accuracy under combat shooting conditions. The New York Police Department (NYPD) reported an 18-20% degradation of accuracy skills once an officer becomes involved in an actual gunfight (Vila and Morrison, 1994). This suggests that such motor skills are subject to degradation during levels of high stress.

 

[rsd1200]

[FONT=&quot]The Oregon legislature passed a bill Thursday banning anyone with a domestic violence conviction from owning a firearm,

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The state has banned those with domestic violence or stalking convictions from owning guns since 2015, but a loophole in the law allowed abusers who aren’t living with, married to or have children with the victim to have their guns, according to [/FONT]OregonLive[FONT=&quot].[/FONT]


http://thehill.com/homenews/state-w...es-bill-banning-people-with-domestic-violence

 

[Inthedetails]

Enterprise car rental company (which also owns Alamo and National) and First National Bank of Omaha have severed marketing ties with the NRA.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-movement-gains-steam/?utm_term=.ba1fbb2f8be5

 

[Hatfield]

I am "comfortable" with my little .38 special revolver. It has six chambers, is lightweight, double action (I don't have to *advertiser censored* the trigger, it doesn't even have one), fits nicely in my front pocket and I usually have a t-shirt to cover it and it also fits in the space between vehicle's seat and console for easy access when traveling out of town.

With that said, I am comfortable with it, but, as far as target shooting, I can hit my target, but I'm no Annie Oakley. I don't get to shoot as often as I'd like, especially in the winter. However, I'd not practiced for awhile when I went for my CCP, and had no problem passing my test, or hitting my targets. The more you shoot, the more you become comfortable with your firearm. Also, it took me about three tries to find a firearm that I liked. I had a semi auto pistol but it wasn't comfortable, in my hand, so I traded it at the shop, and finally ended up w/my .38.

JMO
You made a wise choice IMO with the revolver. That is also what I have for home protection. I have a S+W 357 that is near where I sleep if I ever get woken up by a prowler in the house. We have no children so its a little easier for me to be safe.

Revolvers to me are a safer and more reliable weapon than a semi-auto because they dont jam and when you want to fire a revolver you always know it. I have always been fond of revolvers.

I suppose its preference for some to use semi-auto but from a sheer safety and reliability standpoint I have always felt revolvers were a better choice for me. I carry an extra speed loader to fill the revolver chamber with new shells if ever needed quickly. Sort of like an extra clip for a semi-auto.

And with me having a hunting family background I basically have been around weapons my whole life and have been very comfortable with them and learned good safety with them my whole life.

I always treat any weapon like its loaded and never point it at anything I am not intending to shoot at. It took me awhile to teach my Dad that it doesnt matter if a weapon is loaded or not. Just never point it at unintended targets. EVER.

I took the conceal carry course and got my permit many years ago. I agree that the course was very good and anyone that has a handgun should take the course even if they dont intend on ever carrying. The course covered a lot of good information and the shooting part of the course was interesting to meet and get to talk to other gun owners.

Its like you had mentioned. The more you use your weapon the more comfortable you are with them.

With all that said I am fine with a lot of the discussions on some of the changes that can be made to the laws and regulations. I agreed with a lot of them. There are some common sense changes that we can make in the US to help make the country safer.

 

[Hatfield]

One of the many regulation changes that I would agree with is limiting the magazine clip volume to a lower number. Even though a shooter could carry multiple clips it still slows them down a lot.

The current limit of 9 shells or even more in some cases could be lowered down IMO.

There is already a rule for duck hunting shotgun shell limit where a shotgun has to have a plug to limit only 3 shells.

Im not sure of what the right number would be to lower to but I am open to lowering the magazine limit.

The reason I like going after something like the magazine limit is I think its a doable thing for government. I dont think the opposition to something like that would be as bad as limits on some other things. So the government may have a good chance at passing a new rule on that.

It would sure slow down an active shooter if the limit was lower. For someone trying to protect themselves it also limits them so there has to be an agreed upon limit. The current limit of 9 or more does seem a little large to me. All JMO.

Many other things can be looked at too as we have been discussing. Lots of good discussions in past threads.

 

[RANCH]

Watch this video and see if it gives you a better understanding of the usefulness of high capacity magazine bans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCSySuemiHU&t=1s

 

[CARIIS]

He is talking about NRA -- he was not sure of the name of the cop who retired yesterday?? Unsure how many people shot and murdered- it was something like and we had 16 or 17 people shot.

He is in a bind ! He is gonna have to pretend to do something -- apparently the NRA is really against raising the age

No idea what his NRA stuff is -- he wants something with some background checks and he really wants very very very strong schools . What is a strong school? Biceps or abdomen!

He is heading over to NRA lobbyists corporate office to discuss!

Quote "I want to speak with em"


Actually it will be interesting when he comes out what new words he uses - that is usually how it works


Stay tuned!

 

[bluedivergirl]

Worth thinking about, imo, as considerations are made as to added security, adding armed guards, arming teachers.

The Psychological Trauma of Killing

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...h-becomes-us-the-psychological-trauma-killing

And what about the suffering that comes from being the one who does the killing? According to Lt. Col. Dave Grossman in his book, On Killing, it turns out that people, including soldiers are not “naturally born” to pull the trigger.

In Grossman’s view, it has long been a myth that one of the greatest threats to mental health while at war is the fear of dying. At least as distressing is the act of taking the life of a fellow human being, regardless of nationality or circumstance. This can be seen when soldiers put themselves in danger to avoid having to kill someone else, an act that, in Grossman’s experience, occurs more frequently than we think.

(snip)

Killing is often misrepresented in film as far easier than it is. In reality, the “duty” is mentally taxing, leaving most soldiers physically ill in the moment and often haunted by nightmares for a lifetime. Being responsible for ending the life of another human is a significant source of trauma; trauma that is compounded by factors such as proximity to the victim and the type of weapon used.

This is why I posted to Blef that I did not know if I could defend myself by killing someone else. I believe I could to defend my daughter, but myself? Don't know.

 

[Tawny]

I know all through middle school and high school, I never used a backpack, or any kind of bag at all, for my books. I'm not sure anyone did. Maybe, but I just don't recall, it was a long time ago. (mid 80's) We just carried all our books in our hands, didn't seem to be a big deal. Now I see all kids have backpacks, including my kids who are in 4th grade, and 6th grade.

Their books are huge and they have tons of homework these days. Much more than we had in the 80s and 90s. Kids have to take rolling suitcases to school in some districts, it's bonkers. And then to now expect to carry that in plastic grocery bags? Wasteful and unnecessary.

 

[kittythehare]

Is there a facility in US law for emergency legislation that does not have to go through Congress and the various slow usual mechanisms?
I'm thinking about an all out ban on whatever the killer guns can accurately be called in a way that includes them all?
would a tV ad help sway public opinion?
Showing the effects of the rounds on the human body.. exploding organs, the works?
I see it as a wasted effort persuading the proponents of these lethal weapons that it's a bad idea to have them available and that the world would be safer without them?

So many people are so convinced it can never happen , fatalistic.. no movement.. no change, no options, clinging desperately to a lethal weapon and calling it their rights...
Like heroin to an addict..

Busted up childrens' bodies will not cut it..
The inevitable futility of a sane discussion needs to be replaced by the lawmakers.
will they do it?
I don't see why not.

 

[Tawny]

Nice try but no. It's sickening how they behave like bullies. Much like some people on here.

That's not how "bullying" works. These are teenagers up against grown adult lawmakers. The lawmakers are in the position of authority.

 

[Hatfield]

Their books are huge and they have tons of homework these days. Much more than we had in the 80s and 90s. Kids have to take rolling suitcases to school in some districts, it's bonkers. And then to now expect to carry that in plastic grocery bags? Wasteful and unnecessary.

I saw a video not long ago of a very young child going to school and it was incredible the heavy backpack the poor child was carrying. She could hardly walk with the heavy backpack draped over her shoulders.

It was almost comical to see her try to walk with it and sad at the same time.

 

[Inthedetails]

Is there a facility in US law for emergency legislation that does not have to go through Congress and the various slow usual mechanisms?
I'm thinking about an all out ban on whatever the killer guns can accurately be called in a way that includes them all?
would a tV ad help sway public opinion?
Showing the effects of the rounds on the human body.. exploding organs, the works?
I see it as a wasted effort persuading the proponents of these lethal weapons that it's a bad idea to have them available and that the world would be safer without them?

So many people are so convinced it can never happen , fatalistic.. no movement.. no change, no options, clinging desperately to a lethal weapon and calling it their rights...
Like heroin to an addict..

Busted up childrens' bodies will not cut it..
The inevitable futility of a sane discussion needs to be replaced by the lawmakers.
will they do it?
I don't see why not.

There is the Executive Order. The Executive is the President, and this President would not make such an order. I don't think any President would. But if any did, it would be immediately challenged by the courts.

We have a system of balance - and this issue is not going to disrupt that.

It needs to go through the proper law-making process, as messy as it is.

jmo

 

[bluedivergirl]

Totally they make kids get there hands up al the time but there gonna let some strange teacher they dont know be running around
with a little gun -- they will get blown away by arriving trained people who want to do this kind of thing .

Its rife for more bloodshed and they will never be able to implement it




This is FL Average temp is 121!!! They wear blazers or something !!

Where are female teachers concealing there guns??

This is just a impulsive utterance that has no study behind it , it was an utterance.

Like had anyone ever heard of this notion before ? He spurt it out on fly

There are many methods to carry a handgun concealed. Purses, holsters belly bands ~ google concealed carry purses or holsters.

I live in a retirement community in Fl. We have lots of retired military, and many of them ~ male and female ~ carry. You cannot tell who has what.

I have one friend, a plump little lady with curly white hair who carries. You would never in a million years guess.

 

[bluedivergirl]

I keep thinking that at least 90% or more of the school shooters were able to obtain firearms from a family member's home. Would a PSA about locking up your firearms be worthwhile? Maybe show trigger locks, and/or different safe types? I really think that it needs to start at home. If folks don't keep their firearms away from their kids, we are not going to stop seeing dead children. Toddlers are shooting their mothers, dead, while they are driving down the highway, or shopping in Walmart because of easy access to their purses. Siblings are shooting siblings because they find a firearm in the home. Teens are taking parents firearms to school, or the ones parents bought for them, and killing other children. I think we're leaving out a big piece of the puzzle.

I think PSA's are a great idea.

Trigger locks are good for small children, but IMO, a determined teen could get one off. A safe is a far better choice. Our long guns are in a safe.

 

[CARIIS]

Watch this video and see if it gives you a better understanding of the usefulness of high capacity magazine bans.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCSySuemiHU&t=1s

Interesting ... but gross!!

 

[kittythehare]

There is the Executive Order. The Executive is the President, and this President would not make such an order. I don't think any President would. But if any did, it would be immediately challenged by the courts.

We have a system of balance - and this issue is not going to disrupt that.

It needs to go through the proper law-making process, as messy as it is.

jmo

Thanks. Is there no other mechanism? Nothing?