# Firearms



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

I'm somewhat curious as to how many people routinely carry a firearm and if so, I would be interested in your reasoning and if not, I'd still be interested in your reasoning. 

I have no desire to pass judgement or start a debate on gun control, it's simply a topic I find interesting.


----------



## Jim Bunton (Mar 16, 2004)

I do not carry a fire arm, because I have never felt the need to. I do wholeheartedly support the right to carry.
Jim


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I do not carry because there is no need for me to do so. I do support the right to own guns tho.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

You may not get a lot of answers, as people who carry generally do not advertise the fact.

I do carry. Depending on the season and the situation, anything from a 9mm to a .25 ACP. If you've ever been in a really tight situation, such as the mass shooting which occurred yesterday, it will change your perspective forever.

Some will say that the only way to prevent such things is to ban firearms. Well, the shooting yesterday took place in a gun free zone. The criminal payed no attention to the law.

Other folks will understand the only chance you have against somebody wielding a gun, is if you are able to defend yourself with a gun of your own. I am not a sheep. If I must go down, I will go down with teeth barred and fighting for my life and for the lives of those I hold dear.


----------



## no really (Aug 7, 2013)

Living where I do, yes I carry most people I know do. 

My job takes me to some parts of the world where we are required to carry.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

I carry a 9mm Beretta every day. I have an eviction at 9:30 today so I will have to disarm. 

Between dad and I we rent to over 50 tenants . That's a lot of money coming into the office each month. Word gets around its almost all cash.

I carried almost $150,000 to the bank last week of fiat paper to get a cashiers check to buy 42 acres beside the farm.

In the case of defending myself or property I don't discriminate.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

I carry on occasion.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

I carry, people that know me know I have something with me. I follow the law if I " have" to go to place that the state says I can not carry. I just never go there. I ignore any other
sign or request that says no guns . So if your don't like gun don't invite me over because I WILL be armed when I come in your house.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Jolly said:


> You may not get a lot of answers, as people who carry generally do not advertise the fact.
> 
> I do carry. Depending on the season and the situation, anything from a 9mm to a .25 ACP. If you've ever been in a really tight situation, such as the mass shooting which occurred yesterday, it will change your perspective forever.
> 
> ...


Haven't ALL the mass shootings been in 'gun-free' zones?


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Jolly said:


> You may not get a lot of answers, as people who carry generally do not advertise the fact.
> 
> I do carry. Depending on the season and the situation, anything from a 9mm to a .25 ACP. If you've ever been in a really tight situation, such as the mass shooting which occurred yesterday, it will change your perspective forever.
> 
> ...


Can I like this 1,000 times please.


----------



## TMTex (Apr 5, 2013)

I don't carry, but I still feel safe enough. A lot of my friends and family carry and they're better shots than I am. (I'm considered an "expert" by the military, but that's pretty easy to achieve). 

I support gun ownership for law abiding citizens. I'd carry if I had a compelling reason to, but I don't.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Tricky Grama said:


> Haven't ALL the mass shootings been in 'gun-free' zones?



Tricky Grama, Im gonna have to call you out on that. You see not all gun free zones are the same. You have good gun free zones and then you have radical gun free zones. If we learned anything yesterday was that when we put groups together just because a few bad ones are there its not fair to the ones that have not done anything wrong. Shame shame, But welcome to da club :rock:


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

What is the difference between good and bad gun free zones?


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> What is the difference between good and bad gun free zones?


bad gun free zones- This is where the zone did not do its job. These places are designated by the gov to be gun free and its supposed to work like a force field because if the sign is posted people are supposed to just lay down there weapon. 

good gun free zone- these zone are doing their job. no one is entering with a weapon------------------------YET.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Ahhhh, ok, thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

I carry a Remmy 870 12 gauge once in a while for hunting. Otherwise I just shoot other peoples guns for practice. I support the right to carry. But not in my house or on my property without a prior conversation and a good reason...involving hunting. Because I don't care how good everyone else thinks they are with their guns. It's my house. These are my family/friends and their kids. My guns are locked up so accidents don't happen on my property. Yours will be too, or you can take your you-know-what on home.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

wiscto said:


> I carry a Remmy 870 12 gauge once in a while for hunting. Otherwise I just shoot other peoples guns for practice. I support the right to carry. But not in my house or on my property without a prior conversation and a good reason...involving hunting. Because I don't care how good everyone else thinks they are with their guns. It's my house. These are my family/friends and their kids. My guns are locked up so accidents don't happen on my property. Yours will be too, or you can take your you-know-what on home.


I respect that, When If come visit we will just meet at the coffee shop. LOL


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

M5farm said:


> I respect that, When If come visit we will just meet at the coffee shop. LOL


Much respect my friend. And the alternative is, you come hang out when it's just us gun loving fools out back making cans fall over. Okay not out back, where I live right now that would get us all arrested, but you know...theoretically.


----------



## ninny (Dec 12, 2005)

TMTex said:


> I don't carry, but I still feel safe enough. A lot of my friends and family carry and they're better shots than I am. (I'm considered an "expert" by the military, but that's pretty easy to achieve).
> 
> I support gun ownership for law abiding citizens. I'd carry if I had a compelling reason to, but I don't.


The People at the college probably felt like they didn't have a "compelling reason" either until yesterday, unfortunately for 9 of them it's too late.

.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I usually keep one handy.. Out here, there's just no telling.. I've had to shoot a deer someone left laying half alive in the middle of the road... Also, we've got a lot of meth freaks out here, plus you just never know... Been lots of incidents out here with people out of control.. 

Funny thing.. yesterday we went to butcher a hog, then to another spot to butcher a cow.. I'm the only one that had a gun, and neither animal was mine. I felt funny being the only person bringing a gun to a gun fight..


----------



## mnn2501 (Apr 2, 2008)

I'd like to say I only go into safe areas, but sadly no place is totally safe.
While I do not carry most of the time at work or at church, I know people who carry in both places. There are 3 people who sit at desks within 30 feet of mine that are always carrying and since I sit in the back, any shooter would need to get past them first. 
I do carry if I am going to out of the ordinary places or places I am unsure of.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> I felt funny being the only person bringing a gun to a gun fight..


You should be proud


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Thanks for your answers. Aside from personal safety, I've encountered situations were it would have been helpful to have even had my .22 with me.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

My wife and I both carry a 45acp 100% of the time because a cop is too heavy to carry.

We also have fire extinguishers in our home and vehicles, not because we're afraid of having a fire, but because we want to be prepared in the unlikely event that a fire could possibly happen.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

wiscto said:


> I carry a Remmy 870 12 gauge once in a while for hunting. Otherwise I just shoot other peoples guns for practice. I support the right to carry. But not in my house or on my property without a prior conversation and a good reason...involving hunting. Because I don't care how good everyone else thinks they are with their guns. It's my house. These are my family/friends and their kids. My guns are locked up so accidents don't happen on my property. Yours will be too, or you can take your you-know-what on home.


Your home, your call.


----------



## TMTex (Apr 5, 2013)

ninny said:


> The People at the college probably felt like they didn't have a "compelling reason" either until yesterday, unfortunately for 9 of them it's too late.
> 
> .


Good point, but apples and oranges. Like I said, a lot of my friends and family carry, so I'm protected by proximity. If most students and teachers were carrying, this wouldn't have been as bad.


----------



## Jolly (Jan 8, 2004)

Cabin Fever said:


> My wife and I both carry a 45acp 100% of the time because a cop is too heavy to carry.
> 
> We also have fire extinguishers in our home and vehicles, not because we're afraid of having a fire, but because we want to be prepared in the unlikely event that a fire could possibly happen.


Just a side note...

I was working in a Sheriff's office last week and all of the deputies were carrying Glocks except for one older deputy, who was carrying a 1911.

When I asked him about it, he told me, "I can't make plastic point right".


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

I carried quite often even before it was legal in Illinois. Often it was just a little .22 auto or in winter with bulkier clothing I carried a S and W 38. Just bought a SIG P238 that I really like for carrying.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

ninny said:


> The People at the college probably felt like they didn't have a "compelling reason" either until yesterday, unfortunately for 9 of them it's too late.
> 
> .


I'd really rather not turn this thread into a discussion about what somebody else should have done or didn't do. 

My reason for asking the question I did was purely out of personal curiosity and not political or intended to judge.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

I've carried in the past when I traveled a lot including some places that if something had happened I'd have had a chance of staying alive but I would have been in deep kimchi with the authorities afterwards. 

Nowadays not so much except special occasions.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

M5farm said:


> Tricky Grama, Im gonna have to call you out on that. You see not all gun free zones are the same. You have good gun free zones and then you have radical gun free zones. If we learned anything yesterday was that when we put groups together just because a few bad ones are there its not fair to the ones that have not done anything wrong. Shame shame, But welcome to da club :rock:


Post of the day award!


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

TO some I suppose carry could be considered vehicle carry. and WILL NOT travel in a vehicle without one. I have access right now in my truck to 3 more handguns and several boxes of ammo. Each has a purpose and a specific duty. I get questioned often if I am expecting trouble and always reply "NO! if I was expecting trouble I would bring my shotgun loaded with buck shot" It is VERY VERY common in our community to see the same thing from other individuals that are prepared if the need arises. Im sure some of you find this ludicrous and are searching me on the interweb because you think I'm a LOON. I pray I never have to use a gun to defend My life or someones elses. but I would not be able to live with myself if I had a chance and didn't take it.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

I carry for one reason, to protect others. Because that is my only reason I will not use the weapon if it can harm those I protect. If my motivation was self/personal I would probably not be to concerned with the consequences much like the number of people who have been killed in high speed law enforcement chases. I won't shoot a gun if harm can come to those who need protecting nor will I hurl a vehicle down the road all to stop a bad guy.

They have this thing called radio's that travel at amazing speeds that can place people in the right place at the right time without killing anyone.

I'd be more likely to use the gun as a bludgeon than a boom.

People who say they have no need to carry need to grow up and give a fig about others who may need them. That's the whole problem today, no concern for anyone else.


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

Nope don't live my life in fear. And of course we can't up here.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

I personally do not carry. ....I would be the last to volunteer. I can but mainly I am at home. When the need arises I go out not alone and with someone with a gun .

I am live with a lot of bears.
rogram; ... State of Alaska Â© 2015 Webmaster ...
Kenai Bear Attack (Hope: 2015, cabin, rated) - Alaska (AK ...
www.city-data.com &#8250; City-Data Forum &#8250; U.S. Forums &#8250; Alaska
LAST UPDATED: AUG 11, 20158 POSTSFIRST POST: AUG 05, 2015
Kenai Bear Attack (Hope: 2015, cabin, rated) User Name: Remember Me: Password : Please ... Bear attacks are so few and far between, ...
Bear Safety - Kenai Fjords National Park (U.S. National ...
www.nps.gov/kefj/planyourvisit/bear-safety.htm
Aug 05, 2015 Â· ... (and the safety of the bear) depends on you! Kenai Fjords is home to both brown and black bears, ... -Most attacks 

They walk my driveway ..

My neighbor packs as his whole family is trained and practices... simply call them and have a few guns when having to walk into my woods. 

Locals carry big time all over the area.. all activities with youth going out doors had skilled person with guns... but for the short time we had a gun feared youth paster...but most parents complained so everything was indoors...no hike,camping or gathering wood for elders.

Look.. people pack their drivers license when then drive... because you might need it..people pack a gun for the same reason.

Might have to put a moose down that met with a rig.
Might find a bear or moose in a bad mood.
Might find a meth head and you have no cell so the normal hour wait for a trooper is going to be longer.


----------



## gundog10 (Dec 9, 2014)

I carry 24/7. I have been asked many times "why". My response is always the same. There will be one time in your life when you will wish you had a gun to protect your family. I worked in the federal prison system and many of the crimes committed were beyond words. I have met several on the streets after they were released. They avoid me, they know I know and they also know I am armed as there were no secrets in prisons. Be safe out there because they are just looking for their next victim.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

keenataz said:


> Nope *don't live my life in fear*. And of course we can't up here.


 We don't either.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

I am "ALMOST" always armed. Generally with Rifle or shotgun. Sometimes a handgun and either a Rifle "OR" a Shotgun.

On any given day:

I figure a 5% chance of altercation with a human.

I figure a 10% chance of altercation with a moose.

I figure a 85% Plus chance of altercation with Grizzly or Black Bear.

And yes, I have had all three altercations........Generally several per year.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

keenataz said:


> Nope don't live my life in fear. And of course we can't up here.


"Fear" has nothing to do with it, any more than having insurance or fire extinguishers. 

It's about being prepared for all contingencies with the best available tools.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

keenataz said:


> Nope don't live my life in fear. And of course we can't up here.


Do you live in fear because you have fire extinguishers in your house? Because you wear your seat belt? Because you keep jumper cables and a 1st aid kit in you vehicle?

If not then why would you imply the only reason to carry a firearm is because you are living in fear?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Tricky Grama said:


> Haven't ALL the mass shootings been in 'gun-free' zones?


No. The Oregon college was not a gun free zone and there were CC people with guns there at the time of the shooting. Amazingly the good guys with guns did not run out and save everyone. There were at least 2 armed military members at the Naval station shooting. Same thing, no miraculous rescues.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

The only time I have a gun on me is here on the farm and I am either target shooting or need it for some purpose like dispatching meat animals or critters attacking livestock. 

I have no problem with guns, I learned how to use one in the military and our family owns several. I do not have a CC license and have no intention of ever getting one. I have lived for almost half a century now and have never run into a situation where I needed one. I highly doubt I ever will.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

There actually was a time when I would have preferred to be armed and the RCMP and I did have serious concerns about my personal safety. 

I reported a knife fight that turned into a gunfight when I was working in town quite a few years ago and it turned out to be a gang related drug debt issue that resulted in considerable public threats made regarding my personal safety to discourage testimony. 

People can play the justice system well and trials can can be delayed for a long time but during that year, a great deal of time and energy was spent on intimidation tactics and being a single mom, I lost a fair bit of sleep worrying about the safety of my kids.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Okay I have to say now that you mentioned your story wr that my husband did have to fire an employee a few years back who made some threats. I didn't worry about it overmuch but I did have a description of the guy and his vehicle and I did keep an eye out for him. We do keep a gun where we could easily access it here at home. If he had showed up at my front door I would have called the police. Shooting another person would never be my first choice.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Patchouli said:


> No. The Oregon college was not a gun free zone and there were CC people with guns there at the time of the shooting. Amazingly the good guys with guns did not run out and save everyone. There were at least 2 armed military members at the Naval station shooting. Same thing, no miraculous rescues.


according to this link THEY ARE A GUN FREE ZONE. 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...mpqua-college-in-oregon-10-dead-gunfree-zone/


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

M5farm said:


> according to this link THEY ARE A GUN FREE ZONE.
> 
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...mpqua-college-in-oregon-10-dead-gunfree-zone/


I already posted a link in one of the multitudinous threads of an interview with a student who was there with his gun. Your link is wrong.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

NO ! Ill admit if i'm wrong. but here is a link to the college website . If you take the little arrow that you control with your mouse and move it on to the "dangerous device " tab it will open and you can read it. If its wrong the school is wrong for posting it online. 

https://web.archive.org/web/20150316175339/http://umpqua.edu/safety-security-information


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Patchouli said:


> I already posted a link in one of the multitudinous threads of an interview with a student who was there with his gun. Your link is wrong.


Shocking that someone breaks the rules and takes a gun into a "gunfree zone" you should expect the said student to be persecuted for breaking the law.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Patchouli said:


> It wasn't a gun free zone. There were people there legally with CC guns.
> 
> [YOUTUBE]7mOJf9HW2Zo[/YOUTUBE]


If you start at minute 2 he talks about having a gun himself and the Oregon laws.It was Not a gunfree zone and CC is LEGAL there on campus.


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

Patchouli said:


> No. The Oregon college was not a gun free zone and there were CC people with guns there at the time of the shooting. Amazingly the good guys with guns did not run out and save everyone. There were at least 2 armed military members at the Naval station shooting. Same thing, no miraculous rescues.


I heard a radio report to the contrary, that the policy at the college was to be gun free. I tried to look at their web site myself but it wouldn't come up, probably on the verge of being crashed due to all the sudden attention. 

Unless the CC people were in close proximity to the shooter, no, they wouldn't be able to "save" anyone from across the campus. And even if they were close, they might freeze up and not take action. We never really know how we will react to a situation until we face it. We all like to think we'd be collected in our thoughts and actions, but in the heat of the moment it's not so easy. But having legal, responsible CC carriers on the campus wouldn't hurt anyone and might have been able to help them. It's a safer situation overall than a gun free zone where only a sign protects the unarmed. 

I intend to get my CC permit, just haven't got around to it yet and don't feel an urgent need for it. I was actually enrolled for the class once but then gave up my spot to DS because it filled up so fast. DH holds his permit and except for work we are usually together, so having mine is not critical but I would still like to get it.


----------



## kuriakos (Oct 7, 2005)

I carry every day. In a previous job I locked up a lot of people with violent tendencies, and many of them remember me when they see me around town. I've had more than a few come at me with threats over the years, never any real attempts to hurt me, but you never know.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

My question was based on a conversation the big guy and I had the other evening about a specific situation and was interested in other people's reasons. 

He lived on his own on a trapline from the time he was 14 and because he hunted for food as well as the obvious dangers kasilofhome also stated, firearms are a necessity of life for him. While discussing a situation that occurred, I asked him if our gun laws were different, if he would do anything different than he does now and I was a little surprised by his answer.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

watcher said:


> Do you live in fear because you have fire extinguishers in your house? Because you wear your seat belt? Because you keep jumper cables and a 1st aid kit in you vehicle?
> 
> If not then why would you imply the only reason to carry a firearm is because you are living in fear?


because they have no fear they will ever regret not being able to help someone in need as they just don't care.

Sounds harsh, but it's founded in history. People have always had a problem loving their neighbor so much so that early governments here had to pass a law mandating people go about armed so they could force others to protect each other.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Well, did I miss the his answer...so I multi task... reading and posting between radio station breaks


----------



## keenataz (Feb 17, 2009)

watcher said:


> Do you live in fear because you have fire extinguishers in your house? Because you wear your seat belt? Because you keep jumper cables and a 1st aid kit in you vehicle?
> 
> If not then why would you imply the only reason to carry a firearm is because you are living in fear?


I think I should clarify. I wouldn't carry a gun here even if I could because I feel safe where I live. I know that is false security. 

And yes I have a fire extinguisher because I get an insurance discount.


----------



## 7thswan (Nov 18, 2008)

keenataz said:


> I think I should clarify. I wouldn't carry a gun here even if I could because I feel safe where I live. I know that is false security.
> 
> And yes I have a fire extinguisher because I get an insurance discount.


Once that feeling of being safe has been shaken, there is no going back.You would never look out a window again without scanning the woods for who might be looking at you.
ps. I love being alone in the woods,cabin,yard, ect. so I won't stop because I'm afraid, to arm myself is my only option.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I highly doubt I ever will.


I think you are wrong. Ever hear that compounding a penny daily story? I think we're living in the day when troubles do that.

Question has always been, what will you do when...? The answer has always been the same, just what people should be doing that avoids that day. Few are doing what they should so...if you live through the days do you want to live with the regrets, the faces of those who looked to you and you did nothing but live through it.

People in days gone by had some what of an excuse, they didn't know world history, we don't have that excuse, we know what people will do to each other.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kasilofhome said:


> Well, did I miss the his answer...so I multi task... reading and posting between radio station breaks


You're asking me or someone else?


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

keenataz said:


> And yes I have a fire extinguisher because I get an insurance discount.


summed up and boiled down your only concern is for yourself. If a small minority is of that mindset, no real problem, if a nation has that mindset, a big problem.

If anyone cares to seek some wisdom on why it's a big problem look into the history of the Saxon's and why they were wipe of the map centuries ago. I think Lincoln used that history while fighting the Civil War.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

wr said:


> You're asking me or someone else?


Yea you said the big guys view surprised you.... what were they


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

kasilofhome said:


> Yea you said the big guys view surprised you.... what were they


The discussion was pretty specific and in relation to a specific incident but the question I asked was simply if our laws were different, would he carry a handgun. 

I guess I figured that because he spent so many years using them as a means to provide his own food, income and protection in the bush that it would be so second nature that it would be something he would have different thoughts on.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

beenaround said:


> summed up and boiled down your only concern is for yourself. If a small minority is of that mindset, no real problem, if a nation has that mindset, a big problem.
> 
> If anyone cares to seek some wisdom on why it's a big problem look into the history of the Saxon's and why they were wipe of the map centuries ago. I think Lincoln used that history while fighting the Civil War.


This is a member who lives in a different country with a much different culture and again, I would prefer we don't start telling other people how they must do things.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> No. *The Oregon college was not a gun free zone* and t*here were CC people with guns there *at the time of the shooting. *Amazingly the good guys with guns did not run out and save everyone*. There were at least 2 armed military members at the Naval station shooting. Same thing, no miraculous rescues.


Guns are allowed "on campus" but not necessarily in the buildings.

Oregon state law prevents them from banning them "on the property" so people are able to leave weapons in their cars. They CAN prohibit them inside many buildings

There's no evidence the *one* person I've heard about who claims he was "at school with a gun" was anywhere near the shooter on that 100 acre campus.

If he had been in the room with the shooter, the numbers may have been lower, since in the end, it *was *a "good guy with a gun" who stopped the killing within minutes of their arrival


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

M5farm said:


> according to this link THEY ARE A GUN FREE ZONE.
> 
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...mpqua-college-in-oregon-10-dead-gunfree-zone/


Notice it says (in the part that was circled)
"Except as expressly authorized by law"

Legal weapons are allowed on some parts of the campus

State law prohibits public colleges from totally banning the legal possession of guns "on their property"


----------



## gapeach (Dec 23, 2011)

Gun Free Zones are pretty dumb. You can't expect a crazy criminal to obey the Gun Free Zone signs, or the law for that matter. 

A professor from that college was on Bill O'Reilly's show last night. He said there are 3000 full time students with many part timers too. They only have a couple of security guards. They pictured women guards and they only carried mace. Only one was at the college yesterday.

http://jacksonville.com/news/florida/2015-10-01/story/oregon-college-shooting-adds-urgency-florida-guns-*campus*-debate
*CNN reported the* *shooter posted a message on a social media account that indicated the incident **was premeditated, and that he picked the campus as a 'soft target*.'" ...
​


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Okay I have to say now that you mentioned your story wr that my husband did have to fire an employee a few years back who made some threats. I didn't worry about it overmuch but I did have a description of the guy and his vehicle and I did keep an eye out for him. We do keep a gun where we could easily access it here at home. If he had showed up at my front door I would have called the police. Shooting another person would never be my first choice.


If he had shown up at your front door armed with evil intent and you were not armed all the police would have been able to do is arrest him after he shot you.

I answered the door armed one time only to discover two sheriff's deputies. Surprisingly enough no one got shot nor arrested. AAMOF they very understanding, as well as being lost  They were looking for my "neighbor's" house, I put that in quotes because they lived on the ridge on the other side of the road. Made me feel quite secure knowing the local LEOs might just show up at the wrong place if I ever needed them.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Notice it says (in the part that was circled)
> "Except as expressly authorized by law"
> 
> Legal weapons are allowed on some parts of the campus
> ...



ALL very true but notice the little exclusion just below it. Brandishing is prohibited. what is the state law on brandishing. I know here until it was amended it you shirt exposed your weapon in the holster and it was in public view it could be considered brandishing. stupid I know


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I already posted a link in one of the multitudinous threads of an interview with a student who was there with his gun. Your link is wrong.


Well its clear that its not a firearm free zone, there's 10 dead people to prove it.

The fact still stands they advertised themselves as a firearm free zone. We'll never know if they had been more firearm friendly the nut case might have picked another target.

But seeing how most, every(?), mass shooting has taken place somewhere the shooters were assured the people they'd be shooting would not be able to shoot back you do have to wonder.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Do I carry a gun?
Usually.
But you'd have to scare me pretty bad to find out for sure. :cowboy:


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

Obama keeps looking down and to the left when he talks about gun control.
HE WAS PASSIONATE when he was talking about Syria......relaxed, genuine.

Then when it switched to 'gun control'...............he stumbles over his words, he looks down and to the left often, and he stiffened up.....not relaxed......

He keeps saying "stir up fear" even in places where it makes no sense.
He just referenced Adam and Eve in the original sin.....while talking about violence.

Now, watch as he gets back to congress issues.........

Ok, relaxed, smiling, cracking jokes.......


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> If you start at minute 2 he talks about having a gun himself and the Oregon laws.It was Not a gunfree zone and CC is LEGAL there on campus.


Seems to be some questions about it. It may be legal, my quick research hasn't really proven to me if it was or not, but assuming it was so doing so would violate school rules which could result in being expelled. Sort of like using your cell phone in class, not illegal but the school can tell you to leave and never come back.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Cornhusker said:


> Do I carry a gun?
> Usually.
> But you'd have to scare me pretty bad to find out for sure. :cowboy:


Does scary include the Cousin Itt morning look the angry look you get when you get between Mamma Griz and her babies :rotfl:


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

keenataz said:


> I think I should clarify. I wouldn't carry a gun here even if I could because I feel safe where I live. I know that is false security.
> 
> And yes I have a fire extinguisher because I get an insurance discount.


I keep both because if you ever need either you need them quickly and they can save your life.

I also have both because there have been times in my life I regretted not having them. I was blessed in each case to be able to use other means to solve the problems. But I'm much older now I am just not physically able to do what I used to.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

M5farm said:


> ALL very true but notice the little exclusion just below it. Brandishing is prohibited. *what is the state law on brandishing*. I know here until it was amended it you shirt exposed your weapon in the holster and it was in public view it could be considered brandishing. stupid I know


Why would "brandishing" have anything to do with the fact you are wrong when you claim it's "gun free"

Why ask me what the state laws are, when I'm 99% certain your internet is faster than mine. 

Look it up *first* , and you won't be posting misinformation again.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by keenataz View Post
> I think I should clarify. I wouldn't carry a gun here even if I could because* I feel safe where I live*. I know that is false security.


I live 7 miles from a 1 stoplight town, and about 25 miles from the nearest "city" which is not one of the larger ones in the state.

A few years ago, an armed robbery took place in that city, and after a high speed chase, the perp ended up about a half mile from me when he bailed out of the car.

They had MANY LEO'S, and even a helicopter involved in the search, but they couldn't find him, so most left the area after a couple of hours

Just about dark, he knocked on my next door neighbor's door, wearing a long coat and trying to conceal a sawed off shotgun underneath it. 

Luckily the neighbor looked out a window and saw the gun before opening the door.

If he had come to my door, odds are very good I'd have been armed when I opened it.

They still didn't find the guy until the next morning, and ironically he was found hiding in a Deputy Sheriff's garage

Nowhere is "safe" and never has been.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

wr said:


> This is a member who lives in a different country with a much different culture and again, I would prefer we don't start telling other people how they must do things.


Saxons were in a different country to. The point is world history, men from Mars are excluded.

It's a global issue obviously. ask the Syrians for starters.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

wr said:


> Does scary include the Cousin Itt morning look the angry look you get when you get between Mamma Griz and her babies :rotfl:


Even a mama black bear almost scared the poop out of me. Nothing like having a cub come stumbling out of the brush, make a scared sound when it's just as surprised as you are, and realizing that mama bear can climb a 40 foot tree as fast as you can run 40 feet on the ground.

I'm still here though, and I didn't need a change of pants or anything.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

I carry a Springfield XDM 9mm. I chose this for several reasons. It holds 19 rounds so I have no need to carry reloads, it fits my hand well, my arthritic hands can handle the recoil, it has a grip safety which helps prevent me doing something stupid without slowing me down if I ever need to act fast. 

I don't carry in bed, the shower, or the swimming pool, but just about every where else. I follow the law so I don't carry in the courthouse etc. I ignore no-gun signs in public places but won't bring my gun into your home if you make the request. However, few know I carry so very few would ever know to make a request. 

I carry for the same reason my truck holds jerry cans of water, a fire extinguisher, tow chains, and a tool box. The gun is just another tool for a specific kind of job. I just want to be prepared for what ever life throws at me and when I can, to help others. The water saved some guys brand new burning tractor once. While others watched the show, I was able to slow the fire until the fire dept arrived. 

I've never fired my gun in a lethal situation and hope that I never do.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

beenaround said:


> Saxons were in a different country to. The point is world history, men from Mars are excluded.
> 
> It's a global issue obviously. ask the Syrians for starters.


I'm inclined to think you haven't traveled extensively in Canada.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

wiscto said:


> Even a mama black bear almost scared the poop out of me. Nothing like having a cub come stumbling out of the brush, make a scared sound when it's just as surprised as you are, and realizing that mama bear can climb a 40 foot tree as fast as you can run 40 feet on the ground.
> 
> I'm still here though, and I didn't need a change of pants or anything.


It's been my experience that with proper motivation, the average out of shape Canadian can meet or exceed Olympic records. 

I find bears to be fairly predictable and I'm mindful of their existence in the bush but an angry momma cow has been known to provide me with a great deal of incentive.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Patchouli said:


> No. The Oregon college was not a gun free zone and there were CC people with guns there at the time of the shooting. Amazingly the good guys with guns did not run out and save everyone. There were at least 2 armed military members at the Naval station shooting. Same thing, no miraculous rescues.


As we all have witnessed many times, the good guys with guns usually DO run out and save everyone as soon as they can. I know Superman can get there faster than a speeding bullet, but it takes the rest of us a few minutes longer...........



Bearfootfarm said:


> There's no evidence the *one* person I've heard about who claims he was "at school with a gun" was anywhere near the shooter on that 100 acre campus.
> 
> If he had been in the room with the shooter, the numbers may have been lower, since in the end, it *was **a "good guy with a gun" who stopped the killing within minutes of their arrival*







wr said:


> This is a member who lives in a different country with a much different culture and again, I would prefer we don't start telling other people how they must do things.



He wasn't told anything he "must do", he was told the consequences of history.
The choice still remains.


----------



## Shrek (May 1, 2002)

wr said:


> I'm somewhat curious as to how many people routinely carry a firearm and if so, I would be interested in your reasoning and if not, I'd still be interested in your reasoning.
> 
> I have no desire to pass judgement or start a debate on gun control, it's simply a topic I find interesting.


 I have carried since my 21st birthday and I do so for the same reason I carry a pocket knife or my Leatherman multi tools. Sometimes a percussion powered cordless drill is the best tool to fix a situation that arises.

Then as now there were possibility of threats and risk from some who would most likely need killing if they got you backed in a dead end or corner minutes away from a good guy will a gun paid to save your bacon.

There is also the humane dispatch factor. during my lifetime I have watched both LEOs and individuals humanely end the suffering of dogs, horses , deer or cows with a gunshot when the animal had been clearly mortally injured after wandering into traffic and although paralyzed and mortally injured still endured in pain.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

beenaround said:


> I think you are wrong. Ever hear that compounding a penny daily story? I think we're living in the day when troubles do that.
> 
> Question has always been, what will you do when...? The answer has always been the same, just what people should be doing that avoids that day. Few are doing what they should so...if you live through the days do you want to live with the regrets, the faces of those who looked to you and you did nothing but live through it.
> 
> People in days gone by had some what of an excuse, they didn't know world history, we don't have that excuse, we know what people will do to each other.


"When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

beenaround said:


> I think you are wrong. Ever hear that compounding a penny daily story? I think we're living in the day when troubles do that.
> 
> Question has always been, what will you do when...? The answer has always been the same, just what people should be doing that avoids that day. Few are doing what they should so...if you live through the days do you want to live with the regrets, the faces of those who looked to you and you did nothing but live through it.
> 
> People in days gone by had some what of an excuse, they didn't know world history, we don't have that excuse, we know what people will do to each other.





Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


I think you both made the same point. While a firearm makes it a heckuva lot easier to dispatch a psycho killer, it also takes the internal will of a bystander to do so.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


{siren sounds} alert, alert. I'm throwing the male bovine scatological flag on your 50%. Please provide cites. 

In almost all (at least in my memory) of the mass shootings, they are ended when a good guy gunman finally arrives at the scene and confronts the bad guy. Often the bag guy then commits suicide when confronted. 

There was a mall shooting or two where a good guy citizen gunman was on the scene and stopped the bad guy. There have been a few cases of mall cop equivalents with guns on the scenes but they were unwilling to confront the bad guy. So that hardly counts.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

wr said:


> Does scary include the Cousin Itt morning look the angry look you get when you get between Mamma Griz and her babies :rotfl:


Yes it does


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


Sure like to see a link to that


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

I carry, and, like Deke, I often carry where I'm not "supposed to". 

Granted, work takes me overseas where carrying would be a DoS no-no except where I'm specifically opted to draw one, but, when stateside, the only time I don't have one on me or within reach is when I'm in a place where finding it on me would be a jail-time, career-ending event. 

What's often mis-undrrstood is that carrying a weapon in A LOT (not all) "gun free zone"s, is that carrying a weapon is not actually illegal. The illegal act comes when you refuse to disarm or leave. 

In that perspective, I believe that I'll never actually encounter the repercussions of being armed in a defense-free zone unless I either do something stupid or need to defend myself. 

If I do something stupid, and someone finds out I'm armed, then I did something stupid and will either disarm or leave. 

If I need to defend myself or others, then I couldn't really give a ---- if I face the repercussions of being armed where they want me to be disarmed. If I face a situation where I am called on to defend myself or another, I'll care a whole lot more about what The Judge has to say about the matter than what the judge does.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

wr said:


> It's been my experience that with proper motivation, the average out of shape Canadian can meet or exceed Olympic records.
> 
> I find bears to be fairly predictable and I'm mindful of their existence in the bush but an angry momma cow has been known to provide me with a great deal of incentive.


Fear is a great motivator. Humm. . .maybe releasing a caged bear at the sound of the starting gun. . .nah won't work, after all in that case you wouldn't have to out run the bear you just have to out run the slowest guy.

You know what you do if you are scuba diving and see a great white? You stab your dive partner and swim away.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


Ah. . .you got data to back up that stat?


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


FYI, here's a link to a web page which list 9 recent cases where an armed person stopped an "active shooter".

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/10-potential-mass-shootings-that-were-stopped-by-someone-wit#.mdaQ45BZqx


----------



## Fennick (Apr 16, 2013)

watcher said:


> Fear is a great motivator. Humm. . .maybe releasing a caged bear at the sound of the starting gun. . .nah won't work, after all in that case you wouldn't have to out run the bear you just have to out run the slowest guy.
> 
> *You know what you do if you are scuba diving and see a great white? You stab your dive partner and swim away.*


Speaking of people living in different cultures and having different attitudes about fear, in this case Canadians, I couldn't help but laugh when I saw this. Please bear with me because I'm going somewhere with this to make a point about fear. What I'm about to tell you are all true things that have happened on an almost daily basis lately and make the news nearly every night.

Guess what Canadians do if they're in the water and they see a great white shark, or a pod of orcas or grey whales, or a super pod of dolphins, or a herd of massive sea lions - any of which could be in a feeding frenzy. This is the truth - Canadians take their paddle boards or kayaks closer so they can get right into the middle of all the action and record it on their phones to post it on the news, on youtube and facebook.

They do the same thing when bears come into their back yards for a swim in the hot tub or swimming pool or for a swing in the hammock. Get out there and take pictures and videos. If a bear attacks a dog in the back yard because the dog was protecting the garbage cans and if the dog's owner doesn't have a gun handy the owner jumps on the bear's back wielding the garbage can lid or a 2X4 from the shed or a kitchen knife from the kitchen. (That happened 3 days ago here where a teenager attacked a bear with a kitchen knife because the bear had his dog). 

Now here is something that happens very frequently and the newspapers are full of common incidents like this - Cougars. If a cougar comes into town and stalks a child or attacks or grabs up a dog while out for a daily walk the person with the child or dog attacks the cougar with fists and feet and beats and kicks the crap out of the cougar until it gives up and runs away. Even little old ladies in their 80's have been known to do that to cougars.

Now speaking of guns and Canadians - and again this is stuff that has happened but very, very rarely and could be verified by you if you doubt it. If somebody (usually a drunk who is showing off) with a gun is brandishing it in a threatening manner at another person then the threatened person or somebody else there will risk being shot and walk right up to the threatener with their hand out and say "hand it over". If the threatener doesn't hand it over the other person will snatch it out of their hand. There's a few times there's been accidental, none fatal shootings when that kind of situation has happened but it hasn't happened often. 

Gang shootings and gang related violence with guns is a whole different kettle of fish from all of the other incidents mentioned above. Nobody thoughtlessly messes with gangs with guns but it's still not uncommon for a bystander to put theirself in harms way to intercede on behalf of another person, even a stranger.

The point I'm making with all of the above stories, and hopefully it will explain Keenataz's comment about "feeling safe" and "not living with fear" is that it's a cultural thing, it's a different mindset of a different people who do not, can not, will not allow themselves to give in to fear or to rely on firearms for protection. Canadians will do things that seem utterly insane and foolhardy to non-Canadians (as demonstrated with newsworthy anecdotes above) but they really DO feel safe and they ACT like they are safe even when faced with real danger that could be fatal for them. The mind set is there that there is no such thing as danger and fear is a person's worst enemy that will get them into the most danger if they give in to fear. It's a cultural thing and the attitude varies from province to province and from coast to coast to coast depending on what the population, territory and environment and its inherent hazards are.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


There have been instances of legally armed people stopping active shooters before it became a "mass shooting"

If one is armed, at least there is a chance of success

I think your 50% figure is misleading without the details, and it gives the false impression that just because a defender didn't have an opportunity to act that they never would. 

They can only help when they are in close proximity to the shooter.

An armed student halfway across campus is hardly evidence that guns on campus are useless. It shows there needs to be more


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DEKE01 said:


> {siren sounds} alert, alert. I'm throwing the male bovine scatological flag on your 50%. Please provide cites.
> 
> In almost all (at least in my memory) of the mass shootings, they are ended when a good guy gunman finally arrives at the scene and confronts the bad guy. Often the bag guy then commits suicide when confronted.
> 
> There was a mall shooting or two where a good guy citizen gunman was on the scene and stopped the bad guy. There have been a few cases of mall cop equivalents with guns on the scenes but they were unwilling to confront the bad guy. So that hardly counts.


Well first I said "about" which implies this is my personal guesstimate based on the stories I have read not actual stats.  To the best of my knowledge all of the good guy gunmen have been law enforcement correct? No CC heroes? 

The first one that came to mind on bystanders tackling or slowing the shooter was the one in AZ where Gabby Giffords was shot. There were armed people in the crowd but the men who took the shooter down were not armed. There have been so many this year I can't even sort them out in my head. I just went and looked at a list for this year alone and it was depressing. 

Okay so here is the one I was thinking of, it just happened 2 days ago:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...stant-principal-hero-principal-shot/73109680/


> HARRISBURG, S.D. â A high school assistant principal tackled a student gunman Wednesday after the principal of the 600-student school was shot in the arm, police said.
> No students were injured, and moments afterward the incident just before 10 a.m. CT, Principal Kevin Lein came on the intercom to tell students that the building was on lockdown and that he was hit but fine.
> A 16-year-old student, whose name has not been released, entered the school and went into Principal Kevin Lein's office. A struggle between the student and Lein ensued and a gun went off, said Sam Clemens, Sioux Falls Police information officer.
> Assistant Principal Ryan Rollinger heard the shot, which injured Lein in the arm, went to help and was able to subdue the shooter, Clemens said. He and athletic director Joey Struwe held the student, who was believed to be acting alone, as police were called.


I will see if I can find some stats but like I said I am just going on my memory of recent stories. I freely admit 50% may be wildly off. But the only incident I can think of off the top of my head where shooters were stopped by a bystander who was armed was that attempted attack over the idiotic make fun of Mohamed thing in TX? And I want to say that person was an off duty cop? I am sure some of y'all remember the story better than me.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

watcher said:


> FYI, here's a link to a web page which list 9 recent cases where an armed person stopped an "active shooter".
> 
> http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/10-potential-mass-shootings-that-were-stopped-by-someone-wit#.mdaQ45BZqx


It's really pretty common, but doesn't get the wall to wall news coverage that bleeding bodies do, and it doesn't give BO a chance to call a press conference so his scripted reporters can ask him about "gun violence".

When that happens, he gets to poke out his lip and act all teary eyed while talking about "common sense gun safety laws" and how the "criminals have access to more powerful guns than the police"

Oddly, all the police I saw had M4 variants, which is pretty much the identical weapon the perp allegedly carried.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> To the best of my knowledge all of the good guy gunmen have been law enforcement correct? No CC heroes?


Police almost never stop an active shooter before they kill or wound lots of people.
There have been civilians that stopped them before anyone got shot at all.



> I will see if I can find some stats but like I said I am just going on my memory of recent stories. I freely admit 50% may be wildly off. But the only incident I can think of off the top of my head where shooters were stopped by a bystander who was armed was that attempted attack over the idiotic make fun of* Mohamed thing in TX*? And I want to say that person was an off duty cop? I am sure some of y'all remember the story better than me.


That was an armed security guard.

The armed people at the Giffords shooting didn't have a clear shot because of the crowd and the distance, but the shooter had to change mags so some were able to get to him during the lull


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> FYI, here's a link to a web page which list 9 recent cases where an armed person stopped an "active shooter".
> 
> http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesth...-that-were-stopped-by-someone-wit#.mdaQ45BZqx


I would quibble a bit with recent since the first 2 are almost 20 year ago. But like I mentioned in my last post most of these are Police officers. 6 out of 9 were off duty police or military.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

It's been several years since a freind of mine stopped a mass shooting here in metcalfe county. A fellow had already shot 2 by the time my friend could put a stop to his nonsense. Luckily both survived,,,, the shooter was dead within seconds thanks to one of those nasty assault rifles. Police were on the scene about half hour after the last shots were fired.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> "When" isn't coming. And even if I do go to a movie theater and there is a gunman or a college campus or a political rally or even a church I still don't think me having a gun will make any difference. At about 50% of the mass shootings in the last few years there have been people with guns and it made zero difference. The people who generally do make a difference are not armed at all. They act using nothing but their wits and bodies.


Link?


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> I would quibble a bit with recent since the first 2 are almost 20 year ago. But like I mentioned in my last post most of these are Police officers. 6 out of 9 were off duty police or military.


Good guys with guns


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> I would quibble a bit with recent since the first 2 are almost 20 year ago. But like I mentioned in my last post most of these are Police officers. 6 out of 9 were *off duty police or military*.


They were *people*, legally carrying concealed weapons in many cases.

I know lots of LEO's that are pitiful shots compared to many "civilians" I know.

The LEO's who like to shoot are as good as civilians, but many only shoot when they have to. (and still manage to get the job done most of the time)

It's a myth to think the average LEO has access to better training than anyone else


----------



## AmericanStand (Jul 29, 2014)

watcher said:


> Fear is a great motivator. Humm. . .maybe releasing a caged bear at the sound of the starting gun. . .nah won't work, after all in that case you wouldn't have to out run the bear you just have to out run the slowest guy.
> 
> 
> 
> You know what you do if you are scuba diving and see a great white? You stab your dive partner and swim away.



Oh watcher the key is in the moma cow. I bet WR. Knows a cow moose is nuts and will quite happily run along side hundreds of people in a race just to stomp the smithereens out of some random judge sitting on the sidelines.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

point still stands, people just don't care about others unless it effects them personally.

I have news, the freedom we enjoy has a demand that cannot be avoided, if anyone wants to keep their own freedom they must put the freedoms of others above their own there by ensuring their own. Doing nothing is not an option. 

You are warned and it does effect you personally.

All this is academic now, but the suspension of consequences for actions has happened before. A people cannot butcher their most innocent, the unborn, call it good and legal in the multiple millions, many so they can ensure their own prosperity and not suffer a greater fate. World history says the day will come. The history of the Aztec's paints a very vivid picture of this, Prescott is said to have written the work on it all others use and the history of how Prescott put it together, a blind man, an interesting story in itself.

The truths are self evident in everyday life and this globes history filled with examples. If your on this ball they apply.


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

Patchouli said:


> I would quibble a bit with recent since the first 2 are almost 20 year ago. But like I mentioned in my last post most of these are Police officers. 6 out of 9 were off duty police or military.


Both groups have a handicap, they are trained and tainted in a system that is highly inefficient and grossly abusive of power, government. Neither was ever meant to be the people's answer to life or liberty. They were put into place to regulate freedom, to choke it till those who abused it were throttled back. 

None of the above is an excuse for anyone who wants to live free. This vet in Oregon who took 7 hits demands we all do what we can and trust me, if he could say something he would not be kind about not being prepared. You want someone to take 7 for you? You want to live with that? This is the kind of talk that's grossly missing. All we hear is hinder everyone from being prepared.

Did you see the guy who saw a shark take a kids arm and then beat the shark to death retrieving the arm? That's the kid of action patriots should be taught in schools.

If anyone wants a shot in the arm find books written over a century ago by G.A. Henty. History books for boys. This is exactly what's missing today.

The "militia" spoken about in our documents was needed because people had to be forced to be concerned for the freedoms of others to protect freedom for all. Many of the people back then learned to read from the bible and later well learned in world history and why they said what they said. People today haven't that foundation so they just come up with whatever allows them an iphone.

Prosperity is a tough thing to live with, people aren't forced by outside circumstance to do right, it all comes from inside.


----------



## TripleD (Feb 12, 2011)

Bearfootfarm said:


> They were *people*, legally carrying concealed weapons in many cases.
> 
> I know lots of LEO's that are pitiful shots compared to many "civilians" I know.
> 
> ...


I never shoot around LEO's or former ones that cant keep their mouth shut. Get asked tooooo many questions.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

And the congregation said, "Amen".
:goodjob:


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

I don't CC because I don't have a CC permit because I don't want the gooberment to have records of my gun ownership. If I felt I was going to be in a dangerous situation I would CC without the benefit of the gooberment's blessing. 

I do have loaded guns scattered around the house but no kids. I am more worried about a home invasion, living alone out in the boonies, than needing to defend myself on one of the few occasions I am away from my place. 

I think it was Patchouliwho said something to the effect that the fact there were armed civilians on campus, and they didn't stop the shooter, shows that good guys with guns don't stop bad guys with guns. There may have been people on the campus with concealed guns. There is no requirement for them to deploy their weapon and run to the sound of gunfire. The most reasonable response is to retreat and keep yourself and those around you safe while you do. On the other hand, if you are within range of the shooter the reasonable response is to draw your weapon and defend yourself and others.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

TripleD said:


> I never shoot around LEO's or former ones that cant keep their mouth shut. Get asked tooooo many questions.


Most of them I shoot with enjoy shooting and hunting anyway.
Any questions are related to those topics, and I've known most of them at least 20-30 years


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Nimrod said:


> I don't CC because I don't have a CC permit because I don't want the gooberment to have records of my gun ownership. If I felt I was going to be in a dangerous situation I would CC without the benefit of the gooberment's blessing.
> 
> I do have loaded guns scattered around the house but no kids. I am more worried about a home invasion, living alone out in the boonies, than needing to defend myself on one of the few occasions I am away from my place.
> 
> I think it was Patchouliwho said something to the effect that the fact there were armed civilians on campus, and they didn't stop the shooter, shows that good guys with guns don't stop bad guys with guns. There may have been people on the campus with concealed guns. There is no requirement for them to deploy their weapon and run to the sound of gunfire. The most reasonable response is to retreat and keep yourself and those around you safe while you do. On the other hand, if you are within range of the shooter the reasonable response is to draw your weapon and defend yourself and others.



And the better question might be....."How many of those with arms are alive today and how many without are dead?"
Hmmmmmmmm


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

AmericanStand said:


> Oh watcher the key is in the moma cow. I bet WR. Knows a cow moose is nuts and will quite happily run along side hundreds of people in a race just to stomp the smithereens out of some random judge sitting on the sidelines.


We take out a tourist every now and again because they have some notion that moose that wander onto golf courses are domesticated and friendly. 

Were you aware that moose nose soup is somewhat of a delicacy to some Canadians? I'm not one of them because I can't quite get past the idea of boogers in my feed dish.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Cabin Fever said:


> My wife and I both carry a 45acp 100% of the time because a cop is too heavy to carry.
> 
> We also have fire extinguishers in our home and vehicles, not because we're afraid of having a fire, but because we want to be prepared in the unlikely event that a fire could possibly happen.


Post of the year award.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> I would quibble a bit with recent since the first 2 are almost 20 year ago. But like I mentioned in my last post most of these are Police officers. 6 out of 9 were off duty police or military.


so what is your point? That we need more people carrying than the reported <1% of the population? I agree. We simply don't have enough willing people with guns in the right place. 

The anti-gun side has done a great job of painting the CCW crowd as nutty in one form or another, cop wanna-bees like G Zimmerman. And the anti-gun crowd has effectively removed CCWs from the places they have been needed most, schools, colleges, movie theatres, malls, etc. The cops/DAs/courts in many jurisdictions treat CCWs as a criminal when ever they act. In northern VA, if a CCW fires his gun in ANY circumstance, he goes to jail. 

You'll see many here in HT recommend a CCW do nothing unless his own life is in danger because the the average CCW spends $10K defending himself when he is arrested and charges are eventually dropped and $50K defending himself if it goes to court and he wins. (figures are from memory, not guaranteed, probably an NRA source). So don't fault CCWs for not being there when needed or willing to jump into every fray to defend those who despise him.


----------



## Laura Zone 5 (Jan 13, 2010)

http://www.infowars.com/armed-air-force-vet-was-prevented-from-stopping-oregon-gunman/


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> http://www.infowars.com/armed-air-force-vet-was-prevented-from-stopping-oregon-gunman/


Really?
Why would he listen to "school staff" if he really wanted to go to the shooter?



> &#8220;Immediately the school staff stopped us and told us to get inside of the building&#8230;.essentially the staff wouldn&#8217;t let us go to assist,&#8221; he added.


It's Alex Jones


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

beenaround said:


> Both groups have a handicap, they are trained and tainted in a system that is highly inefficient and grossly abusive of power, government. Neither was ever meant to be the people's answer to life or liberty. They were put into place to regulate freedom, to choke it till those who abused it were throttled back.
> 
> None of the above is an excuse for anyone who wants to live free. This vet in Oregon who took 7 hits demands we all do what we can and trust me, if he could say something he would not be kind about not being prepared. You want someone to take 7 for you? You want to live with that? This is the kind of talk that's grossly missing. All we hear is hinder everyone from being prepared.
> 
> ...


Oy vey the histrionics! I am not a wuss. I am perfectly willing to take seven bullets to save someone else and no I am not asking anyone else to do it for me. Doesn't mean I have to carry a gun everywhere to save the world. Like I said before plenty of bad guys have been taken down recently by UNARMED saviors. 

http://www.startribune.com/france-3-people-wounded-in-shooting-on-high-speed-train/322530791/


> PARIS â A gunman opened fire on a high-speed train traveling from Amsterdam to Paris on Friday, wounding two people before three American passengers subdued him, according to officials and one of the Americans involved.
> French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve, speaking in Arras in northern France where the suspect was detained, said one of the American passengers was hospitalized with serious wounds.
> Two of the Americans were in the military, according to their traveling companion and childhood friend Anthony Sadler, a senior at Sacramento State University. He told The Associated Press that the injured American was Spencer Stone of the Sacramento area and the other was Alek Skarlatos of Roseburg, Oregon.
> "We heard a gunshot, and we heard glass breaking behind us, and saw a train employee sprint past us down the aisle," Sadler said from France, describing the drama. Then, they saw a gunman entering the train car with an automatic rifle, he said.
> "As he was cocking it to shoot it, Alek just yells, 'Spencer, go!' And Spencer runs down the aisle," Sadler said. "Spencer makes first contact, he tackles the guy, Alek wrestles the gun away from him, and the gunman pulls out a box cutter and slices Spencer a few times. And the three of us beat him until he was unconscious."


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DEKE01 said:


> so what is your point? That we need more people carrying than the reported <1% of the population? I agree. We simply don't have enough willing people with guns in the right place.
> 
> The anti-gun side has done a great job of painting the CCW crowd as nutty in one form or another, cop wanna-bees like G Zimmerman. And the anti-gun crowd has effectively removed CCWs from the places they have been needed most, schools, colleges, movie theatres, malls, etc. The cops/DAs/courts in many jurisdictions treat CCWs as a criminal when ever they act. In northern VA, if a CCW fires his gun in ANY circumstance, he goes to jail.
> 
> You'll see many here in HT recommend a CCW do nothing unless his own life is in danger because the the average CCW spends $10K defending himself when he is arrested and charges are eventually dropped and $50K defending himself if it goes to court and he wins. (figures are from memory, not guaranteed, probably an NRA source). So don't fault CCWs for not being there when needed or willing to jump into every fray to defend those who despise him.


My point is that police officers and military members are trained in how to act in these situations. Most people's first and very natural reaction is to duck and cover or run. Nothing wrong with that. It's an instinct that is there to save your life. Military and cops are trained to do the opposite and they frequently do exactly that. That's why out of 9 situations where people were saved by someone with a CC license the vast majority were police or military. One was the owner of the facility who had a shotgun to deal with problem causers. Probably wasn't his first time doing it either. 

These dudes are not going to save you or I if a bad guy shows up. I'll take my bare hands over people like this any day.  It's not us making y'all look bad here.....


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> http://www.infowars.com/armed-air-force-vet-was-prevented-from-stopping-oregon-gunman/


That's a little different spin than he was running in the video I posted of him yesterday. It's in one of these threads. He said they chose to stay where they were to protect their classroom and because they were concerned police might confuse them with the shooter.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Laura Zone 10 said:


> http://www.infowars.com/armed-air-force-vet-was-prevented-from-stopping-oregon-gunman/


For those that won't believe something because they don't like the source, this story originated on Hannity FOX news......

http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2015/10/01/what-do-know-about-oregon-college-shooter/

*HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." This is a Fox News alert. Joining us now, John Parker. He's an Air Force vet who was on the Oregon campus at the time of the shooting. And he did have a concealed weapon on him. He was not allowed to go to the scene. John, thank you for being with us. How many years did you serve in the Air Force, sir?

JOHN PARKER, STUDENT AT UMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE: Just over four years.

HANNITY: All right, so you go to school. You're there. You're a student now, right?

PARKER: Yes, sir.

HANNITY: How far away were you from where the shooting occurred?

PARKER: At first I was probably about 200 yards away in another building across a large field.

HANNITY: So you know a shooting's going on. You know that you're armed with a weapon, and based on your training in the Air Force I would assume you probably wanted to assist, is that right?

PARKER: Well, it was more than just me. There was a few people in the vet center. And when we heard the shooting happened, we got up and we were going to go out and see what we could do. Immediately the staff -- school staff stopped us and told us to get inside of the building. Some of us went to other buildings, but essentially a staff wouldn't let us go to assist.

HANNITY: So John, you were in the vet center with other vets. Were they also armed, do you know?

PARKER: I have no idea. It's none of my business. I just know that I carry and I was willing to help.

HANNITY: So you have a licensed concealed carry permit. From everything I've read the campus is a gun-free zone.

PARKER: The campus -- they might have made a policy overnight all of a sudden, but that's public property and I'm licensed to carry and I'll continue to carry.

HANNITY: And you're a vet. Believe me, I would like to have armed guards at schools, especially where there are schools with a lot of violence and inner cities. I think it is a big mistake, former police officers, retired officers. When you were locked down, did you see, did you hear anything that you can share with our audience?

PARKER: I really didn't. Some of the people had smartphones and they have the police scanner apps where you can listen to active radio communication. One of the instructors ended up turning on the projector on the internet and put on one of our local radio stations -- or television stations that was broadcasting so we could be updated a little bit. But there really wasn't anything that I'd seen or witnessed other than willing to go out there and try to do what I can.

HANNITY: I know you would have if you had the opportunity, John. Thanks for being with us. We appreciate your insight. Thank you so much for serving the country.

PARKER: Thanks for having me.*


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Watch his other video. His story changed. Maybe he felt bad about not doing anything? 



Patchouli said:


> [YOUTUBE]7mOJf9HW2Zo[/YOUTUBE]


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Patchouli said:


> My point is that police officers and military members are trained in how to act in these situations. Most people's first and very natural reaction is to duck and cover or run. Nothing wrong with that. It's an instinct that is there to save your life. Military and cops are trained to do the opposite and they frequently do exactly that. That's why out of 9 situations where people were saved by someone with a CC license the vast majority were police or military. One was the owner of the facility who had a shotgun to deal with problem causers. Probably wasn't his first time doing it either.
> 
> These dudes are not going to save you or I if a bad guy shows up. I'll take my bare hands over people like this any day.  It's not us making y'all look bad here.....




Ever consider that it may not be the training that makes them do it, but the spirit they are born with, that attracts them to their occupations?

Compassionate people go into healthcare.
Argumentative people choose the legal professions.
Technical people may seek engineering.
Talkative people like sales.
Warriors run towards a battle, not away from it.

And not everyone automatically ends up in their "perfect" occupation.

One common theme to every interview I've seen with someone who did a heroic deed, they all say they aren't heroes, just ordinary people.
Go figure.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Patchouli said:


> My point is that police officers and military members are trained in how to act in these situations. Most people's first and very natural reaction is to duck and cover or run. Nothing wrong with that. It's an instinct that is there to save your life. Military and cops are trained to do the opposite and they frequently do exactly that. That's why out of 9 situations where people were saved by someone with a CC license the vast majority were police or military. One was the owner of the facility who had a shotgun to deal with problem causers. Probably wasn't his first time doing it either.
> *
> These dudes are not going to save you or I if a bad guy shows up.* I'll take my bare hands over people like this any day.  It's not us making y'all look bad here.....


and you know these guys or what they might do exactly how? The dude on the right bears a striking resemblance to a freind of mine that did probably save lives by taking out a shooter who was firing into a crowd.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> My point is that police officers and military members are trained in how to act in these situations. Most people's first and very natural reaction is to duck and cover or run. Nothing wrong with that. It's an instinct that is there to save your life. Military and cops are trained to do the opposite and they frequently do exactly that. That's why out of 9 situations where people were saved by someone with a CC license the vast majority were police or military. One was the owner of the facility who had a shotgun to deal with problem causers. Probably wasn't his first time doing it either.
> 
> These dudes are not going to save you or I if a bad guy shows up. I'll take my bare hands over people like this any day.  It's not us making y'all look bad here.....


well, for the sake or argument, let's say police and military are trained on how to handle these situations. I'm not sure why you believe that, it is not really true in what I have seen of general military and cop training, but let's say it is true. Again I ask, what is your point? Are you saying we can disarm America because we can trust the cops and retired military to save us? Are you saying civilians such as myself who have taken more gun skills and situational training than the average cop does should not be armed? Or that there should be more people like me?

BTW - you are cherry picking data. There are an estimated 2M incidences (not all are CCW, many are homeowners) each year where a legal gun owner uses a weapon to save people and/or property. Most of these cases never make the papers. And some unknown number of crimes are stopped before they start because like my BIL, he shows his gun, the bad guys simply turn around and run away, and he reports the incident to no gov't official. 

As to your photo, yeah, their are idiots out there. There are people on all sides of this issue that people find embarrassing. This guy isn't doing you any favors either









the more he talks, the more guns are bought by the American public.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DEKE01 said:


> well, for the sake or argument, let's say police and military are trained on how to handle these situations. I'm not sure why you believe that, it is not really true in what I have seen of general military and cop training, but let's say it is true. Again I ask, what is your point? Are you saying we can disarm America because we can trust the cops and retired military to save us? Are you saying civilians such as myself who have taken more gun skills and situational training than the average cop does should not be armed? Or that there should be more people like me?
> 
> BTW - you are cherry picking data. * There are an estimated 2M incidences (not all are CCW, many are homeowners) each year where a legal gun owner uses a weapon to save people and/or property.* Most of these cases never make the papers. And some unknown number of crimes are stopped before they start because like my BIL, he shows his gun, the bad guys simply turn around and run away, and he reports the incident to no gov't official.
> 
> ...


Link for the numbers of gun owners using their guns to stop crime? 

My point is the facts. The fact, from all of the stories that were linked and the ones that I have read about, is it is overwhelmingly police or military who actually pull out their guns and stop bad guys. That is a statement of fact. No judgments or extrapolations. It just is. Unless you have proof otherwise of people (not including home invasions, actual CC licensed civilians dealing with a situation outside their property) then it seems to me the CC civilians are useless for the most part. 

I don't have a problem with CC so long as the person is intelligent and competent and they don't shoot themselves or bystanders in public out of general stupidity. I also don't think they are a panacea or saviors or anything else. Beenaround has made the argument that I am an evil and useless coward who doesn't care about my fellow man because I refuse to walk around at all times with a gun. I jumped into this to rebut that opinion. So far as I can see I have a better chance of saving the world by tackling a gunman as any civilian with a gun has of actually pulling it out and shooting a bad guy.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> Link for the numbers of gun owners using their guns to stop crime?
> 
> My point is the facts. The fact, from all of the stories that were linked and the ones that I have read about, is it is overwhelmingly police or military who actually pull out their guns and stop bad guys. That is a statement of fact. No judgments or extrapolations. It just is. Unless you have proof otherwise of people (not including home invasions, actual CC licensed civilians dealing with a situation outside their property) then it seems to me the CC civilians are useless for the most part.
> 
> I don't have a problem with CC so long as the person is intelligent and competent and they don't shoot themselves or bystanders in public out of general stupidity. I also don't think they are a panacea or saviors or anything else. Beenaround has made the argument that I am an evil and useless coward who doesn't care about my fellow man because I refuse to walk around at all times with a gun. I jumped into this to rebut that opinion. So far as I can see I have a better chance of saving the world by tackling a gunman as any civilian with a gun has of actually pulling it out and shooting a bad guy.


It is an old study, 1993, FSU Professor: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html

OK, you said your point was the facts but your points are:

1. You don't think CCs have any meaningful value in stopping mass murders. 

But to make that case you have to consider that former military with a CCW don't count. I've found lots of links to other armed citizens stopping crimes but they don't normally state if the citizen had military experience or not. You also ignore the fact that many, (most?) mass shootings take place where CCs are not allowed. At Columbine, VA Tech, and Sandy Hook, it was illegal for a teacher to be armed. So it is hardly a point against CCW that they have not helped where it is illegal for them to carry. 

Also, for the sake of argument, assume you are right. CCWs aren't much use in stopping mass shootings. OK. So what? You do realize that the purpose of 2A, the right to keep and bear arms, is not primarily to have a citizen force to do the job that the gov't is tasked with but has failed to do? 

2. You don't think it CC is a panacea. 

Agreed. Who is it you think is making the case that CC is a panacea and why did you feel a need to say that? YOu've created a strawman. I think most of us who advocate more CCWs in schools is to increase the odds of a willing good guy gunman being immediately at the scene when needed, not because we know it is a guarantee a willing good guy gunman will always be at the scene in all cases. You advocate leaving the job to the cops but their record is not so hot either, is it?


3. you don't think CCW holders are saviors. 

DO you think the cops and military are saviors? People who have had loved ones saved by CCWs, cops, or the military probably think of them as saviors. Aren't you just creating another strawman? 

4. you think you have a better chance of tackling a crazed gunman than using a gun to stop him? At least I think that is what you are trying to say. 

Maybe that's true. Maybe you're such a tough gal that would work. On the French train, it worked for the 3 soldiers with combat training and conditioning, near the age of their peak strength. But what about those folks such as myself who are little older? I can't make a decent fist because of RA. If you think being unarmed is just as good, do you advocate disarming the police as well? 

5. You're not a useless coward.

Agreed. People should not be pushed into CCW. It is a commitment that takes time, money, lots of training, and a certain mindset to do so responsibly. It isn't right for everyone. No one should have called you a coward for not making that choice. In fact, it would be pretty stupid to expect all, or even a majority of us to carry.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> and you know these guys or what they might do exactly how? The dude on the right bears a striking resemblance to a freind of mine that did probably save lives by taking out a shooter who was firing into a crowd.


Nice. Where was this?


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

wiscto said:


> Nice. Where was this?


not nice at all but necessary. It took place here in my county. (Metcalfe) About ten miles from where I live.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Patchouli said:


> It's not us making y'all look bad here.....


Interesting that you divide the American people into "Y'all vs Us"
Exactly what the democratic leadership wants you to do.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Sometimes it's just an average citizen


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

A South Toledo bar patron was shot and killed Thursday night after he fired at employees, authorities said.

Keshawn Groom, 21, of Toledo died from injuries suffered about 9:30 p.m. at the Spigot Bar, 754 Western Ave., police said.

Mr. Groom was patronizing the tavern when he became disruptive and employees removed him. He returned a short time later and fired his weapon, said Lt. Joe Heffernan.

Another employee fired back and Mr. Groom fled. He was taken by private vehicle to Mercy St. Vincent Medical Center for treatment of a gunshot wound and later died at the hospital, Lieutenant Heffernan said.

Two bar employees were struck by the gunfire. They were treated and released for minor injuries. Lieutenant Heffernan declined to immediately identify them.

Charges are being considered but have not yet been filed.


Read more at http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-F...ired-at-S-Toledo-bar.html#CKtXYciYx6XchYwH.99


----------



## beenaround (Mar 2, 2015)

The most violent country in Europe: Britain is also worse than South Africa and U.S. 
By JAMES SLACK FOR THE DAILY MAIL 
UPDATED: 18:14 EST, 2 July 2009

View comments
Britain's violent crime record is worse than any other country in the European union, it has been revealed.
Official crime figures show the UK also has a worse rate for all types of violence than the U.S. and even South Africa - widely considered one of the world's most dangerous countries.
The figures comes on the day new Home Secretary Alan Johnson makes his first major speech on crime, promising to be tough on loutish behaviour. 
Britain even has a worse violence rate than South Africa
Britain has an even worse violence rate than South Africa (file picture)
The Tories said Labour had presided over a decade of spiralling violence.
In the decade following the party's election in 1997, the number of recorded violent attacks soared by 77 per cent to 1.158million - or more than two every minute.
The figures, compiled from reports released by the European Commission and United Nations, also show: 
The UK has the second highest overall crime rate in the EU.
It has a higher homicide rate than most of our western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
The UK has the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU.
It has the fourth highest burglary rate and the highest absolute number of burglaries in the EU, with double the number of offences than recorded in Germany and France.
But it is the naming of Britain as the most violent country in the EU that is most shocking. The analysis is based on the number of crimes per 100,000 residents.
In the UK, there are 2,034 offences per 100,000 people, way ahead of second-placed Austria with a rate of 1,677.
league of shame


The U.S. has a violence rate of 466 crimes per 100,000 residents, Canada 935, Australia 92 and South Africa 1,609.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'This is a damning indictment of this government's comprehensive failure over more than a decade to tackle the deep rooted social problems in our society, and the knock on effect on crime and anti-social behaviour.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html#ixzz3ndhjbWr2 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DEKE01 said:


> It is an old study, 1993, FSU Professor: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html
> 
> OK, you said your point was the facts but your points are:
> 
> ...



Gaah you write too much! :help:

So on the study you linked it's a survey? They call people and ask them if they ever used a gun to defend themselves? I would put no stock in something like that. Actual reported cases are the only thing I would find remotely believable. Gun stories are like fish stories in my opinion. 

Let's look at where I started from in my argument. It is frequently proposed here that the only way to reduce crime, make schools safer, etc. is for as many good guys to walk around with guns as possible. Many posters here have advocated for arming teachers, doing away with all gun free zones and having as many people as possible carry guns at all times to all places. The specific post I responded to attacked me just for my decision to not carry a gun. 

So my responses have been aimed at 2 things: my personal opinion that I am just as able and likely to take down a shooter without being armed as I would be with and the reality is from the stories I have read the average civilian is unlikely to intervene in a crisis with a gun. My proof has been to show stories where shooters were taken down by unarmed people and to show that the majority of people who do pull out their guns in a crisis are military or off duty/retired police. 

Does that make sense? In my opinion looking at the stories I have seen over the years arming every civilian in America would not be beneficial because there is no track record to show the ones currently armed are doing anything. And again that is not a bad thing. Human nature is self preservation and very few of us will go against nature and run into danger rather than away. Some of us have been trained to run into danger against our screaming lizard brain instincts and it makes sense to arm those people and it makes sense that they respond in those sorts of situations. 

We also know there are a lot of idiots in America. And guns seem to attract idiots. And those idiots carry around guns and shot themselves or other people on accident. Now I don't know about you but I have no desire to die at Starbucks because some numbnuts with a gun doesn't follow any sort of basic safety rules and accidentally fires off a round when he bends down to pick up the straw he dropped. Or some lady with a gun in her purse jostles it getting out her wallet. And those things also happen.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

Cornhusker said:


> Sometimes it's just an average citizen


Hard to tell since they give no info about the guy except he is an Uber driver from Little Italy. But he may very well have been.


----------



## TnAndy (Sep 15, 2005)

I concealed carry any time I'm going off my property, Glock 19 (9mm). I rarely carry here on the farm unless some situation warrants, then it's a pump shotgun, .22 rifle, AR-15, as the situation dictates.

The only public places I don't carry are those with metal detectors (courthouse/etc)....otherwise I carry regardless of laws, signs/etc. My thinking is I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6 if it comes to that. By carrying concealed, it shouldn't be an issue unless use ever is required.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

I don't recall any mass shootings in these schools that allow concealed carry:
http://www.bing.com/search?q=school...=-1&sk=&cvid=d71834d7309144a9aadaa7d34dd0ead3

One who thought they could take out a guy with a gun, while unarmed, was the Air Force vet who was shot 7 times. 

Had he been armed, things likely would have been much different

There won't be as much data about defensive gun uses, because often it doesn't get reported since the crime was prevented, but to discount the many surveys that have been done simply because or how the data was gathered isn't very openminded 

Another reason is it doesn't make the national headlines the way killings do.

To claim one is capable of taking on an armed assailant when they themselves are unarmed is foolish and unrealistic, even if there are isolated instances of it occurring


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Maybe we should all get signs if we have gun control advocate neighbors.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> My point is that police officers and military members are trained in how to act in these situations. Most people's first and very natural reaction is to duck and cover or run. Nothing wrong with that. It's an instinct that is there to save your life. Military and cops are trained to do the opposite and they frequently do exactly that. That's why out of 9 situations where people were saved by someone with a CC license the vast majority were police or military. One was the owner of the facility who had a shotgun to deal with problem causers. Probably wasn't his first time doing it either.
> 
> These dudes are not going to save you or I if a bad guy shows up. I'll take my bare hands over people like this any day.  It's not us making y'all look bad here.....


Not mass shooters but here's some headlines to few stories you probably haven't hear about.

_Bank robber foiled by Right-to-Carry permit holder, The Detroit Free Press, Detroit, Mich. 

Veteran halts gas station robbery, WALB, Albany, Ga.

In Albuquerque, Another One of Those "Rare" Self-Defense Shootings

Pizza delivery driver halts robbery, The Sun-Sentinel, Palm Beach, Fla. 

Woman frightens off knife-wielding robber, The Portland Press-Herald, Portland, Maine 

Right-to-Carry permit holder interrupts shooting spree in Georgia liquor store, WSMV, Nashville, Tenn. 

Right-to-Carry permit holder foils carjacking, KSL, Salt Lake City, Utah 

84-year-old Right-to-Carry permit holder defends himself and his wife from armed attacker

Right-to-Carry permit holder stops meth-addled carjacker_

These are all taken from newspaper reports and I only picked those in which the crime was stopped/prevented by an armed citizen in a public place. I could have posted many about store owners and clerks who used a firearm to protect themselves and about people using firearms in their homes.


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

watcher said:


> Not mass shooters but here's some headlines to few stories you probably haven't hear about.
> 
> _Bank robber foiled by Right-to-Carry permit holder, The Detroit Free Press, Detroit, Mich.
> 
> ...



You should have credited the NRA for your list. That's where I found all of the stories. 

So a couple were military. Most didn't really tell you anything about the concealed carrier at all. The story with the 84 yo sounds mighty fishy. And one of them shot an unarmed man.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Gaah you write too much! :help:
> 
> So on the study you linked it's a survey? They call people and ask them if they ever used a gun to defend themselves? I would put no stock in something like that. Actual reported cases are the only thing I would find remotely believable. Gun stories are like fish stories in my opinion.


I was going to post some studies but it'd be easier for you to go here and check out the links in the footnotes.

https://www.gunowners.org/sk0802htm.htm




Patchouli said:


> Let's look at where I started from in my argument. It is frequently proposed here that the only way to reduce crime, make schools safer, etc. is for as many good guys to walk around with guns as possible. Many posters here have advocated for arming teachers, doing away with all gun free zones and having as many people as possible carry guns at all times to all places. The specific post I responded to attacked me just for my decision to not carry a gun.


Given the fact that there are more good guys than bad guys doesn't it make sense?





Patchouli said:


> We also know there are a lot of idiots in America. And guns seem to attract idiots. And those idiots carry around guns and shot themselves or other people on accident. Now I don't know about you but I have no desire to die at Starbucks because some numbnuts with a gun doesn't follow any sort of basic safety rules and accidentally fires off a round when he bends down to pick up the straw he dropped. Or some lady with a gun in her purse jostles it getting out her wallet. And those things also happen.


Using your logic should we not stop people from driving cars? You are much more likely to be killed by someone doing something stupid in/with a car than them being stupid with a firearm.

BTW, the best stat I could find is there are currently 11.1 million people in the US with CCW permits (keep in mind that four states do not require a permit to carry so the number of people who may be legally carrying is actually much higher). Now seeing as how there are very, very, very few accidents involving CCW holders I think your fear of being accidentally shot by one is a bit over blown.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> You should have credited the NRA for your list. That's where I found all of the stories.


If you check none of the stories came from the NRA they are ALL from news reports. All the NRA does is group them to where they can be easily found. 

You can go here: 

https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/armed-citizen/

And find over 6,000 (660 pages with 10 links per page) factual stories of people using firearms to stop crimes. 

Now you have to realize that there are other times when it happens and it is never makes it into the news plus there are others that are probably reported but no one sends in the info. My sisters used a concealed handgun to convince a large man that he was not going to rape her. Man fled and the story never made the paper. My best friends, at the time future, mother-in-law used one to make two people think breaking into her shed wasn't such a good idea, she never even reported it.






Patchouli said:


> So a couple were military. Most didn't really tell you anything about the concealed carrier at all. The story with the 84 yo sounds mighty fishy. And one of them shot an unarmed man.


Here's a link with a more detailed story about the 84 y.o. 

http://www.newson6.com/story/28557994/84-year-old-man-sends-tulsa-robber-running-in-fear

and if you want to watch it happen here's a link with security camera video of it.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2015/03/21/watch-armed-84-year-old-veteran-turns-tables-robber


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> So on the study you linked it's a survey? ... I would put no stock in something like that. Actual reported cases are the only thing I would find remotely believable. ...
> 
> *Because you are biased. You MUST know that some number of defensive uses go unreported. As I said, my BIL showed his gun, bad guys turned around and left, no report ever made. You read the study. Use what ever estimate you want from the list. I think the lowest one was 100K.
> *
> ...


Yes, there are idiots on all sides of the issue. Of that there is no doubt. But why do you give greater weight to the very few idiots who did idiotic things than to the 100's of thousands to millions of annual uses of guns for their intended purpose.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> You should have credited the NRA for your list. That's where I found all of the stories.
> 
> So a couple were military. Most didn't really tell you anything about the concealed carrier at all. The story with the 84 yo sounds mighty fishy. And one of them shot an unarmed man.


See, this is good evidence of how biased you are looking at this. You discount the data unless it says something you must know it is not going to say. Reporters don't write stories to fit your particular bias. 

_Today a civilian, who by the way was never a cop or in the military, used his gun to save a little old lady. 
_

And you argue cops and military are often the type of people who run to the problem, agreed, but you have never explained what special training you think they have that makes them better able to deal with the situation. For the average cop and military, they do not have any particular training in a mall shooting or convenience store robbery and most of cops train with the weapons very little.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

It does not matter what kind of training a person has. It takes a brave person who has the mental fortitude to want to help other people no matter the consequence. Sadly most people are only concerned with self preservation.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

M5farm said:


> It does not matter what kind of training a person has. It takes a brave person who has the mental fortitude to want to help other people no matter the consequence. Sadly most people are only concerned with self preservation.


No one will know what they will do until they go through it. As one that caries a hand gun all the time and have shot a person up close I have a good idea. But most people don't. It happens so fast and you don't have time to reason it out only to act or not to act. Nobody will stop the shooter before he shoots the first person but he will be able to stop him after the second one or the third one no matter what training he has. Having guns on the scene is not the answer but having guns and some one with training on the scene that is able to stop the shooter with out any waste time is. Just because you say you would pull the trigger doesn't mean that you would.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Old Vet said:


> No one will know what they will do until they go through it. As one that caries a hand gun all the time and have shot a person up close I have a good idea. But most people don't. It happens so fast and you don't have time to reason it out only to act or not to act. Nobody will stop the shooter before he shoots the first person but he will be able to stop him after the second one or the third one no matter what training he has. Having guns on the scene is not the answer but having guns and some one with training on the scene that is able to stop the shooter with out any waste time is. Just because you say you would pull the trigger doesn't mean that you would.


100% agreed, Old Vet. One of the reasons I have zero desire to ever really need to fire for effect is because I fear I might over think the situation. Pausing to consider the rights and wrongs and probabilities and possibilities, even if if just takes 1 second, that one second might be way too long. And then there is the adrenaline factor that ruins your aim. 

Yep, I'll be happy to carry my gun for the rest of my life and say that the only time I fired it for protection was to take out the 4' 7" eastern diamondback rattler that was going after my dog last week in front of the barn.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

DEKE01 said:


> 100% agreed, Old Vet. One of the reasons I have zero desire to ever really need to fire for effect is because I fear I might over think the situation. Pausing to consider the rights and wrongs and probabilities and possibilities, even if if just takes 1 second, that one second might be way too long. And then there is the adrenaline factor that ruins your aim.
> 
> Yep, I'll be happy to carry my gun for the rest of my life and say that the only time I fired it for protection was to take out the 4' 7" eastern diamondback rattler that was going after my dog last week in front of the barn.


That is my hope also. Shooting a person is not like shooting a paper target or a animal and I hope that I never have to do it again.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

> Originally Posted by Patchouli View Post
> You should have credited the NRA for your list. That's where I found all of the stories.
> 
> So a couple were military. Most didn't really tell you anything about the concealed carrier at all. The story with the 84 yo sounds mighty fishy. And one of them shot *an unarmed man*.


An "unarmed" man can easily be a deadly threat, and is also capable of rape, which is a crime that allows the use of deadly force.

Look up "disparity of force" for other instances where "unarmed" is meaningless


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

M5farm said:


> It does not matter what kind of training a person has. It takes a brave person who has the mental fortitude to want to help other people no matter the consequence. Sadly most people are only concerned with self preservation.


Self preservation, when one is allowed the use of the proper tools, has the 
side effect/fringe benefit of protecting everyone else in the scenario.

One lone, armed student in Oregon, protecting "only themselves" could have saved many others


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> You should have credited the NRA for your list. That's where I found all of the stories.
> 
> So a couple were military. Most didn't really tell you anything about the concealed carrier at all. The story with the 84 yo sounds mighty fishy. And one of them shot an unarmed man.


The info wasn't from the NRA, they compiled it.

So, what have you got against the NRA? 

We've shown you thousands of examples yet you remain steadfast. Fine. If you don't want to carry, that's your biz but don't expect others to go along & not carry. 
You have also mentioned that the cops or a military person seems to come along & stop the massacres. Eventually. See, that's our argument! Ever read Watchers tag line? Ever see Cabin Fever post about why he carries? B/c a cop is too heavy. 

In every -nearly-instance, IF a eprson w/weapon had been in the vicinity, the death toll woulda been far less. Sure, may not have stopped it ALL. Ya gotta 1st see it happening.

Ever hear the testimony of a TX woman who was in the restaurant (years ago) when a mass shooter came in & killed so many? Her parents were killed right in front of her. She has a gun in the car which she took out of her purse & left b/c it was a "gun-free zone". It is heartbreaking.

So, I'll ask if you'll just respect our right to carry & we'll hope you never need to.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Self preservation, when one is allowed the use of the proper tools, has the
> side effect/fringe benefit of protecting everyone else in the scenario.
> 
> One lone, armed student in Oregon, protecting "only themselves" could have saved many others


Very True- You know full well what I was referring to but You cant have an argument if you agree , CAN YOU?? 

I am talking about entering the situation on your own without any motivation except trying to help others. Most people are chicken feces.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

M5farm said:


> ... Most people are chicken feces.


And, there are some who are sheepdogs.


----------



## M5farm (Jan 14, 2014)

Cabin Fever said:


> And, there are some who are sheepdogs.



Yes SOME are. But I have seen far to many people that can not even help people in a situation that is not even that dangerous. Thankfully there are people that understand that this world is a bad place and are prepared for most situations.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

M5farm said:


> Very True- You know full well what I was referring to but You cant have an argument if you agree , CAN YOU??
> 
> I am talking about entering the situation on your own without any motivation except trying to help others. Most people are chicken feces.


Most aren't allowed to have the proper tools.
If they were, they would have little reason to be deathly afraid, and conditioned to hide


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

M5farm said:


> It does not matter what kind of training a person has. It takes a brave person who has the mental fortitude to want to help other people no matter the consequence. Sadly most people are only concerned with self preservation.


Not all the time. If a coward is armed and hiding in an office and "active shooter" enters the office and gets shot the shooter is just as dead as if a brave man hunted the shooter down and shot him.

There are a lot of times a cornered cowered is a bigger danger than a brave man in the open.


----------



## kasilofhome (Feb 10, 2005)

Bravery can be the result of fear.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Anyone see the problem w/having ONLY an armed guard at schools? Usually its an older person, a 'security guard' in uniform. Bad guy comes in w/gun, sees the guard & takes him out in a heartbeat. Its happened b/4.


----------



## Old Vet (Oct 15, 2006)

Tricky Grama said:


> Anyone see the problem w/having ONLY an armed guard at schools? Usually its an older person, a 'security guard' in uniform. Bad guy comes in w/gun, sees the guard & takes him out in a heartbeat. Its happened b/4.


You are correct it is better if the shooter doesn't know who has a gun and their fore he must expect it is everybody.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

Cabin Fever said:


> And, there are some who are sheepdogs.


I saw a woman that looked like an armadillo once


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

kasilofhome said:


> Bravery can be the result of fear.


Bravery is being afraid and doing what needs done anyway.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

I believe it is time to burn the straw man of "the NRA only supports gun manufactures" This is a silly statement because the protection of the right of the public to keep and bear arms, of course, would help gun manufactures. What is wrong with that? The unconstitutional and criminal gun ban of the 90's, put in place by the criminal Bill Clinton, hurt manufactures at the same time it infringed on the rights of The People.


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Cornhusker said:


> I saw a woman that looked like an armadillo once


No, you saw an armadillo that looked like a woman. I would say that was the result of too much alcohol and too long out on the range without feminine companionship. 

:happy:


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

DEKE01 said:


> No, you saw an armadillo that looked like a woman. I would say that was the result of too much alcohol and too long out on the range without feminine companionship.
> 
> :happy:


Your date?


----------



## Patchouli (Aug 3, 2011)

DEKE01 said:


> Yes, there are idiots on all sides of the issue. Of that there is no doubt. But why do you give greater weight to the very few idiots who did idiotic things than to the 100's of thousands to millions of annual uses of guns for their intended purpose.


Okay look now I am ticked. Someone in this very thread said we need to arm everyone and anyone who refuses to carry doesn't care about their fellow man. That is NOT a strawman. You hopped into my discussion with them. :nono:

Yes I do give greater weight to the idiots because the idiots are more likely to accidentally kill me than the useful ones are to save me IF we arm everyone. That seems to be the piece you keep missing here. WR asked everyone how they felt about firearms. I threw in my 2 cents and got taken to task for it. 



Patchouli said:


> The only time I have a gun on me is here on the farm and I am either target shooting or need it for some purpose like dispatching meat animals or critters attacking livestock.
> 
> I have no problem with guns, I learned how to use one in the military and our family owns several. I do not have a CC license and have no intention of ever getting one. I have lived for almost half a century now and have never run into a situation where I needed one. I highly doubt I ever will.





beenaround said:


> I think you are wrong. Ever hear that compounding a penny daily story? I think we're living in the day when troubles do that.
> 
> Question has always been, what will you do when...? The answer has always been the same, just what people should be doing that avoids that day. Few are doing what they should so...if you live through the days do you want to live with the regrets, the faces of those who looked to you and you did nothing but live through it.
> 
> People in days gone by had some what of an excuse, they didn't know world history, we don't have that excuse, we know what people will do to each other.


----------



## Tricky Grama (Oct 7, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> Okay look now I am ticked. Someone in this very thread said we need to arm everyone and anyone who refuses to carry doesn't care about their fellow man. That is NOT a strawman. You hopped into my discussion with them. :nono:
> 
> Yes I do give greater weight to the idiots because the idiots are more likely to accidentally kill me than the useful ones are to save me IF we arm everyone. That seems to be the piece you keep missing here. WR asked everyone how they felt about firearms. I threw in my 2 cents and got taken to task for it.


We've only "taken you to task" by showing you the facts. Its been hashed over & over. 
Not even sure what it is that you are advocating...taking away all guns? Everywhere a 'gunfree zone'? Deciding who's mentally ill & cannot have them? Who's to decide?

I'd certainly be for psychiatrists who are caring for folks like the theatre murderer to have more leeway in committing these folks or at least calling attention to authorities. She KNEW & did nothing.


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Patchouli said:


> The topic we were discussing had nothing to do with anything you just mentioned. It's about whether or not those who choose not to carry guns are cowards and are shirking their duty towards their fellow man.


This raises an interesting question. Do you consider those who hid under their desk or stood idly by while their fellow classmates were shot cowards?


----------



## MO_cows (Aug 14, 2010)

The topic we were discussing had nothing to do with anything you just mentioned. It's about whether or not those who choose not to carry guns are cowards and are shirking their duty towards their fellow man.[/quote]

It's only "between Zeke and I" if it was via PMs. Any thread might have a couple people going back and forth responding to each other but others will chime in, too. Like I just did. Do I have to change my handle to buttinski now?


----------



## DEKE01 (Jul 17, 2013)

Patchouli said:


> Okay look now I am ticked. Someone in this very thread said we need to arm everyone and anyone who refuses to carry doesn't care about their fellow man. That is NOT a strawman. You hopped into my discussion with them. :nono:
> 
> Yes I do give greater weight to the idiots because the idiots are more likely to accidentally kill me than the useful ones are to save me IF we arm everyone. That seems to be the piece you keep missing here. WR asked everyone how they felt about firearms. I threw in my 2 cents and got taken to task for it.


OK, to remove ticks, use tweezers. 

Or, I'll try some tick remover on you. I agree it is stupid that EVERYONE should be armed. Those who lack the mental stability, physical ability, or the will to routinely practice, and the will to use it when needed should not be armed. 

More tick remover. I agree it is stupid that you should be criticized for deciding not to carry. If your answer has been arrived at thoughtfully, you should be applauded. 

I never meant to argue those points. It was some of your other comments at the margins with which I disagree. On those issues, you're still the liberal whack-job :lookout: that I love. :kissy:


----------

