Conn. school shooting

[Derron]

It wasn't somebody breaking into the house.
It wasn't jack-booted government agents breaching your security perimeter.
It wasn't somebody coming at you with a knife.
It was some intruder beating on a family member. Try to remember this.

In real life, you do not get to pick and choose your threat scenarios like you do on your video game console. Try to remember that.

[Derron]

Also, we have old fat mr bionic hip dude. let's say the perp is 24, 6' 1, 215 lbs and probably just a little more practiced in the art of hand to hand combat.

Thinking about this before you have to face the buffed out, jacked up on meth perp is good.

A sensible middle aged dude, especially one broke down enough to have a fukkin' C-bag knows better. He rather have his friends Mr Colt and Mr Smith give him a hand.

Exactly. I am too old to take or give an ass kicking. Simply not capable of hand to hand combat and expect to prevail. A hand to hand battle likely would not end well for me. Therefore, you avoid those situations at all times and costs. I will be teaching a tactical class for "older" armed persons this spring .

I was approached by an individual in my driveway 2 weeks ago. He told me that he was lost, but he now knew where he was and needed a ride to town and would give me $ 20 for a ride. He was about 25 feet away from me I told him I did not know who the fuck he was, that town was about 2 miles that a way. He said I really need a ride and stepped towards me. I stepped back 3 steps, told him to get the fuck off my property right now, and pulled my jacket up and put my hand on my 9mm. He stopped, wife heard me yelling and came out on the porch holding on to a snarling German Shepard, and dude moved on. He went about 100 yards, got on his phone and some tweaker car came flying by and picked him up.

1. Intent. He had formulated intent.
2. Interviewing. He gave me a bullshit story and asked a question.
3. Positioning. He advanced towards me.
4. Execution. In the act of advancing towards me, that was the first step in his execution plan.
5. Violence. In order to complete execution, violence would have been needed to get me to comply with his intent.

You have multiple opportunities to stop the threat. Taking charge and ordering a perp away between step # 2 and #3 is the best. If it advances to step # 3, you have to make a tactical move to stop the threat at this point. This is a go or no go point. You have to gain complete control of the situation at this point, and stop the threat.

Understanding situations you could be place in makes a huge difference in how you react and come out of the situation.

[mvscal]

So, if you come home, or wake up, or whatever, and find an intruder beating up a family member are you going to pull a out an M16 or even a 9 mm and start shooting? Good luck with that and be prepared to kiss your family member goodbye. Yeah, I know, you can shoot with pinpoint accuracy and can hit a 4 inch circle on a moving target from 10 or 15 feet 100% of the time. Most people probably can't though.

Since you were planning on hitting him in the head with a hammer anyway, wouldn't it be just as easy to put the gun against the side of his head and pop his melon? No worries about accuracy from that range, right?

You also don't need to be a fucking Navy SEAL to give him a little "chin music." A shot over his noggin will redirect his attention away from pummeling your spouse and then you can play it from there.

Gotta like all these 'either or' idiots like you who think they've got all the angles covered.

[Mace]

I used to have stickers on all of my doors saying "Insured by Smith & Wesson", as did most of my neighbors, and we had zero crime in our neighborhood. I'm sure that most of the criminals in the area knew my profession and rightly assumed they'd have a .45 caliber dot on their forehead if they broke into my residence.

[Mikey]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

[smackaholic]

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

racist bastard

[Sirfindafold]

......and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

No crime? You've been stealing oxygen since Hector was a pup.

Guilty as Charged you fuckin' jerkoff.

[Derron]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

Don't be so sure of that .

https://www.crimereports.com/

[Mace]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

The point being, Mikey, is that almost everyone is this part of the country owns guns and would-be burglars know that. They don't enter a house unless they have a death wish that the homeowner will be more than willing to grant them. Hence, very few burglaries because they know their life expectancy would be that of a 10 point buck on opening day.

[Mikey]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

Don't be so sure of that .

https://www.crimereports.com/

Interesting. That map doesn't cover my neighborhood, unfortunately.

This one does (San Diego County Sheriff). My house is near the center and the map shows one car theft (on the main highway), one burglary (about five miles away) and one fraud within the past six months. Nothing anywhere near my happy domicile. There was one high profile kidnapping/murder in Oceanside early this year where they came and searched the suspect's former home, which is about a mile from where I live. Created quite a stir in Mayberry.

http://www.crimemapping.com/map.aspx?ll ... 12/20/2012

[Mikey]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

The point being, Mikey, is that almost everyone is this part of the country owns guns and would-be burglars know that. They don't enter a house unless they have a death wish that the homeowner will be more than willing to grant them. Hence, very few burglaries because they know their life expectancy would be that of a 10 point buck on opening day.

That's nice Mace. Glad to hear you all are well protected.

No burglaries here because...there just aren't. Prolly a few guns around, maybe more than a few, but we keep our ag workers happy.
Actually, we have an excellent Sheriff's station here and they seem to keep all the crime bottled up "downtown".

I guess i should go and invest in a Derron-style arsenal, though, just in case. Maybe put up a Smith and Wesson sign so my neighbors can laugh at me.

[mvscal]

I guess i should go and invest in a Derron-style arsenal, though, just in case.

I guess you should do whatever the fuck you want to in reference to your personal security and let other people do the same without imposing your idiotic worldview on them. Or is minding your own fucking business too much to ask out of you people?

[Derron]

I used to have stickers on all of my doors saying "Insured by Smith & Wesson", as did most of my neighbors, and we had zero crime in our neighborhood. I'm sure that most of the criminals in the area knew my profession and rightly assumed they'd have a .45 caliber dot on their forehead if they broke into my residence.

Keeping one of these nailed up on my range about 300 feet down in the field, but clearly visible from the road sends the right message,



Of course if I lived in the Peoples Liberal Republic of Mexifornia near Mikey, I would have this one up:

[Derron]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

The point being, Mikey, is that almost everyone is this part of the country owns guns and would-be burglars know that. They don't enter a house unless they have a death wish that the homeowner will be more than willing to grant them. Hence, very few burglaries because they know their life expectancy would be that of a 10 point buck on opening day.

That's nice Mace. Glad to hear you all are well protected.

No burglaries here because...there just aren't. Prolly a few guns around, maybe more than a few, but we keep our ag workers happy.
Actually, we have an excellent Sheriff's station here and they seem to keep all the crime bottled up "downtown".

I guess i should go and invest in a Derron-style arsenal, though, just in case. Maybe put up a Smith and Wesson sign so my neighbors can laugh at me.

Go right ahead. 2 gun dealers I have talked to had their best sales day in over 20 years last Saturday.

[Mace]

Yesterday I read that gun sales are up 48% in the wake of the election and recent mass shootings.

I like the idea of putting the target up in the field and I like the yard sign. My next door neighbor is a Deputy Sheriff who works the day shift, so it doesn't hurt that his squad car is parked on the street every night. A former college wrestling coach with 4 small children live across the street and I'm sure any intruder would welcome a bullet to the head as opposed to what he'd do to them in a hand-to-hand battle. Of course, being an avid hunter, he's got a large arsenal of weapons in the house too, but he might want to play with them and have a little fun with them before putting them out of their misery.

[Mikey]

Of course if I lived in the Peoples Liberal Republic of Mexifornia near Mikey, I would have this one up:

Never said i wanted to "ban all guns" but apparently that's all you're capable of hearing.

Oh, and feel free not to "protect" me with your guns. I'm very comfortable with that thought.

[smackaholic]

Of course if I lived in the Peoples Liberal Republic of Mexifornia near Mikey, I would have this one up:

Never said i wanted to "ban all guns" but apparently that's all you're capable of hearing.

Oh, and feel free not to "protect" me with your guns. I'm very comfortable with that thought.

Once again, please give us some sort of description of the models or at least type of guns you think are OK. And maybe some sort of explanation why.

[Derron]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

Don't be so sure of that .

https://www.crimereports.com/

Interesting. That map doesn't cover my neighborhood, unfortunately.

This one does (San Diego County Sheriff). My house is near the center and the map shows one car theft (on the main highway), one burglary (about five miles away) and one fraud within the past six months. Nothing anywhere near my happy domicile. There was one high profile kidnapping/murder in Oceanside early this year where they came and searched the suspect's former home, which is about a mile from where I live. Created quite a stir in Mayberry.

http://www.crimemapping.com/map.aspx?ll ... 12/20/2012

Your site and my site seem to be disagreeing about crime in my hood. Your site shows no crime in a 2 mile radius in the last 6 months in my hood. My site shows about 12 or so different types of calls. # of which I had knowledge of without the site, that does not show up on yours.

Just saying. Nice hood you live in anyway.

[Mikey]

For some reason your site only shows the registered sex offenders database in SD County, or at least the northern part.

[Mikey]

Once again, please give us some sort of description of the models or at least type of guns you think are OK. And maybe some sort of explanation why.

I might just answer that, but later and not off the top of my head. I'm not as much of a gun control freak as you may think. I just think that some reasonable controls are warranted that wouldn't unduly restrict peoples' freedom to shoot themselves.

[smackaholic]

Once again, please give us some sort of description of the models or at least type of guns you think are OK. And maybe some sort of explanation why.

I might just answer that, but later and not off the top of my head. I'm not as much of a gun control freak as you may think. I just think that some reasonable controls are warranted that wouldn't unduly restrict peoples' freedom to shoot themselves.

I think you are right. I think that you honestly do believe people have the right to self-defense with firearms. The trouble is, being a good little party bitch, you must tow the party line even if you can't logically defend it.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

The trouble is, being a good little party bitch, you must tow the party line even if you can't logically defend it.

What "party line" is Mikey towing?

[smackaholic]

The Democratic party line which says they don't want to get rid of all guns just the evil assault weapons even though non assault weapons can do the same damage.

Basically, they want to have complete control over our weapons, but know that that won't fly politically. So they go with the assault weapon claptrap.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

The Democratic party line which says they don't want to get rid of all guns just the evil assault weapons even though non assault weapons can do the same damage.

Basically, they want to have complete control over our weapons, but know that that won't fly politically. So they go with the assault weapon claptrap.

I haven't seen Obama go on any "gun grabs" since he's been your Commander In Chief. Did I miss something?

[smackaholic]

The Democratic party line which says they don't want to get rid of all guns just the evil assault weapons even though non assault weapons can do the same damage.

Basically, they want to have complete control over our weapons, but know that that won't fly politically. So they go with the assault weapon claptrap.

I haven't seen Obama go on any "gun grabs" since he's been your Commander In Chief. Did I miss something?

The democrats in general have been on a gun control kick for many decades.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

The democrats in general have been on a gun control kick for many decades.

Republicans only pay lip service to gun lovers.

Trust me. Both parties (which represent your real masters) dread a well-armed proletariat.

[smackaholic]

The democrats in general have been on a gun control kick for many decades.

Republicans only pay lip service to gun lovers.

Trust me. Both parties (which represent your real masters) dread a well-armed proletariat.

Some republicans do, but, not to the extent the dems do.

[mvscal]

The trouble is, being a good little party bitch, you must tow the party line even if you can't logically defend it.

What "party line" is Mikey towing?

Assault rifles...bad. High capacity magazines...evil. Let's have a "national conversation" on gun violence but if you suggest arming teachers, we will suggest murdering you and your whole family.

That party line.

[mvscal]

Did I miss something?

A good crisis to exploit. Lying, bullshit propaganda doesn't get any sicker or more profoundly disturbing than this.

Sister of Newtown victim makes gun-control plea in letter to Obama

The tragic shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., have increased the calls for gun control around the nation and in Congress, but perhaps none have been as poignant as that from 10-year-old Natalie Barden, sister of victim Daniel Barden.

Natalie's letter, written to President Barack Obama and read by Anderson Cooper on air, voiced her clear and thoughtful belief that guns did not belong in the hands of most civilians:

My name is Natalie Barden and I wanted to tell the president that only police officers and the military should get guns. If people want to do it as a sport than they could go to a shooting range and the guns would not be able to leave there.

Natalie, a member of the school newspaper, originally had meant to hand the president the letter while he was in Newtown comforting the grieving families, but became too intimidated to give it to him. A friend of the Barden family, Lillian Bittman, spoke with Cooper, who was also in Newtown, and asked him to read it on air. He obliged.

In a recent interview, Jackie Barden, the victim's mother, described her son as an old soul who showed empathy beyond his years.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/and ... 25260.html

That kid's parents just broke my eyeroll button...

[M2]

That kid's parents just broke my eyeroll button...

Why didn't you shoot them ?

[titlover]

No stickers on any doors around here, and no crime that I know of since I moved in almost 14 years ago.

I did have to chase a coon out of my pool once.

i hope you drained it and scrubbed it thoroughly.

they're oily

[Mikey]

~ducking as I hit submit~

A conservative case for an assault weapons ban
If we can't draw a sensible line on guns, we may as well call the American experiment in democracy a failure.

By Larry Alan Burns
December 20, 2012

Last month, I sentenced Jared Lee Loughner to seven consecutive life terms plus 140 years in federal prison for his shooting rampage in Tucson. That tragedy left six people dead, more than twice that number injured and a community shaken to its core.

Loughner deserved his punishment. But during the sentencing, I also questioned the social utility of high-capacity magazines like the one that fed his Glock. And I lamented the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004, which prohibited the manufacture and importation of certain particularly deadly guns, as well as magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The ban wasn't all that stringent — if you already owned a banned gun or high-capacity magazine you could keep it, and you could sell it to someone else — but at least it was something.

And it says something that half of the nation's deadliest shootings occurred after the ban expired, including the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. It also says something that it has not even been two years since Loughner's rampage, and already six mass shootings have been deadlier.

I am not a social scientist, and I know that very smart ones are divided on what to do about gun violence. But reasonable, good-faith debates have boundaries, and in the debate about guns, a high-capacity magazine has always seemed to me beyond them.

Bystanders got to Loughner and subdued him only after he emptied one 31-round magazine and was trying to load another. Adam Lanza, the Newtown shooter, chose as his primary weapon a semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines. And we don't even bother to call the 100-rounder that James Holmes is accused of emptying in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater a magazine — it is a drum. How is this not an argument for regulating the number of rounds a gun can fire?

I get it. Someone bent on mass murder who has only a 10-round magazine or revolvers at his disposal probably is not going to abandon his plan and instead try to talk his problems out. But we might be able to take the "mass" out of "mass shooting," or at least make the perpetrator's job a bit harder.

To guarantee that there would never be another Tucson or Sandy Hook, we would probably have to make it a capital offense to so much as look at a gun. And that would create serious 2nd Amendment, 8th Amendment and logistical problems.

So what's the alternative? Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don't let people who already have them keep them. Don't let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don't care whether it's called gun control or a gun ban. I'm for it.

I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That's why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.

I even say it as someone whose feelings about the NRA mirror the left's feelings about Planned Parenthood: It has a useful advocacy function in our deliberative democracy, and much of what it does should not be controversial at all.

And I say it, finally, mindful of the arguments on the other side, at least as I understand them: that a high-capacity magazine is not that different from multiple smaller-capacity magazines; and that if we ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines one day, there's a danger we would ban guns altogether the next, and your life might depend on you having one.

But if we can't find a way to draw sensible lines with guns that balance individual rights and the public interest, we may as well call the American experiment in democracy a failure.

There is just no reason civilians need to own assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Gun enthusiasts can still have their venison chili, shoot for sport and competition, and make a home invader flee for his life without pretending they are a part of the SEAL team that took out Osama bin Laden.

It speaks horribly of the public discourse in this country that talking about gun reform in the wake of a mass shooting is regarded as inappropriate or as politicizing the tragedy. But such a conversation is political only to those who are ideologically predisposed to see regulation of any kind as the creep of tyranny. And it is inappropriate only to those delusional enough to believe it would disrespect the victims of gun violence to do anything other than sit around and mourn their passing. Mourning is important, but so is decisive action.

Congress must reinstate and toughen the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

Larry Alan Burns is a federal district judge in San Diego.

[mvscal]

Bystanders got to Loughner and subdued him only after he emptied one 31-round magazine and was trying to load another.

How are we supposed to draw a "sensible line" when the people attempting to frame the discussion are lying? And who defines "sensible"?

[Mikey]

Bystanders got to Loughner and subdued him only after he emptied one 31-round magazine and was trying to load another.

How are we supposed to draw a "sensible line" when the people attempting to frame the discussion are lying? And who defines "sensible"?

Why would anybody believe that you know more than the judge that tried the case?

There are plenty of eyewitness reports that confirm this account, whether it was 30, 31 or 33 in the clip is pretty much beside the point. You have better information? Was it aliens with antennae sticking out of their heads? Was it a 1000 round clip? 3 rounds? Regale us with your better info. Please.

[Mikey]

So, if there's an intruder in your house are you going to pick up a 9 mm automatic with a normal size clip, the ARK15-16-17 with a 100 round can or the M60 and sling the ammo belt over your shoulder..

My Glock 19 9mm holds 15 rounds - it's size is perfect for CCD and that's what it's used for

You take your Glock to Catechism?



Father Ramón would not approve.

[Mikey]

CCD is basically the Catholic version of Sunday School. So, you take your Glock to a classroom full of kids, and that's what it's "perfect" for?
Just what, exactly, are your plans?

[mvscal]

There are plenty of eyewitness reports that confirm this account, whether it was 30, 31 or 33 in the clip is pretty much beside the point.

What if was only 16? Would Giffords still be half-turnip today? Yes or no.

[Mikey]

There are plenty of eyewitness reports that confirm this account, whether it was 30, 31 or 33 in the clip is pretty much beside the point.

What if was only 16? Would Giffords still be half-turnip today? Yes or no.

What do you think?

The fact is that he was disarmed while trying to change clips. He might have killed three and wounded six, or fewer, instead of twice that many if he had half the number of rounds.

Nobody knows for sure how many, or who, he hit with his first 16 shots but if he was disarmed after 16 he would have hit at least 2 fewer people.

[Derron]

There are plenty of eyewitness reports that confirm this account, whether it was 30, 31 or 33 in the clip is pretty much beside the point.

What if was only 16? Would Giffords still be half-turnip today? Yes or no.

What do you think?

The fact is that he was disarmed while trying to change clips. He might have killed three and wounded six, or fewer, instead of twice that many if he had half the number of rounds.

Nobody knows for sure how many, or who, he hit with his first 16 shots but if he was disarmed after 16 he would have hit at least 2 fewer people.

I think your spinning your wheels in a very desperate attempt to get some kind of traction with a baseless position.

[Mikey]

I think your spinning your wheels in a very desperate attempt to get some kind of traction with a baseless position.

So what you're saying is that if Loughner had been using a 16 shot clip, and he was disarmed after emptying the first one (and he was in fact disarmed while trying to change clips), he still would have shot 18 people?

No wheel spinning here at all. I think you're in denial, because of some misplaced romantic version of what "freedom" means, that limiting the size of available magazines can and would reduce the number of people shot and killed in at least some these mass shootings.