I think everyone should have the right to carry a handgun, concealed, anywhere except a school if they are not an ex-con and can pass a simple psychiatric test.

 

Please read your own quote. Do I feel slighted because you excluded schools? Why did you exclude schools? I presume because, as you said, your wife and mom teach in public schools. But, according to your statement, it's everywhere except schools. What was your motivation for excluding schools and how does the absence of firearms in schools make it a safer environment versus everywhere else you are advocating carrying handguns?

 

From your post, one could glean that the safest places are those where firearms are not allowed.

I'm having trouble understanding your point about my view.

 

I don't think schools are in danger. I don't want to send my kid to a place where there may or may not be a gun. Who says the gun is on the teacher's person at all times?

 

Who says the teacher wouldn't use a gun as intimidation?

 

Who says the teacher wouldn't threaten with said gun.

 

That closed environment is not the place for a weapon.

 

Again, sorry my opinion doesn't jive with yours.

In the "what if" situation that was given of 2 shooters and the ensuing confusion.......

 

Things like this can and have happened. It happened on a college campus within the last 2 or 3 years or so (a Florida campus). An off duty officer who was enforcing underage drinking got into a disturbance with a large group of students and drew his firearm.

 

Another off duty officer (a reserve officer I believe) saw the off duty cop do this and he shot and killed the officer (they worked for different agencies and Im sure several policy changes have been put in place since to better communication).

 

But the point is it can happen. FWIW, Reserve Officers have no business pulling their firearms out and shooting people unless they are 1000% sure what is going on.

 

With all that said, the possible confusion is a necessary evil and sometimes bad things will happen. In most cases, like Fox mentioned, it will be very clear who the maniac is and who the potential hero is in a shooting scenario. 95% of the people involved will have severe tunnel vision and experiencing severe "flight or fight" anyway so its not like everyone will be pulling out guns left and right.

 

Interesting example. As expected based on the issue, I find myself agreeing with penguino on this. These situations are, generally speaking, pure chaos. Let's say we are in the mall, I hear gunshots, and I grab a baseball bat, because you know, I'm a liberal(baby eater). Let's say I'm hiding behind something, and I see a guy walking out with a gun hiding and moving behind things and I have a clear ability to bash his brains in....why would I hesitate?

 

And I know accord is a marine, but come on. He sees a hippie looking person-who is to say he doesn't "accidently" take out the person he thinks is the bad guy. :shifty

Why would the shooter be discrete and hiding behind barriers?

 

Did you see the security photos from the Omaha shooting? He was walking around in wide open spaces, and taking zero precautions. Why? Maybe because he knew no one else was allowed to carry a gun on the mall property. Could be because he was a suicidal maniac (which in your scenario is usually going to be the case) or it could be because he was not worried about any other person in the mall shooting at him until the cops arrived and then he was going to do himself in anyways.

 

Your using the behavior of a maniac in a situation where there is no conceal and carry law to support how a maniac might act if there was a conceal and carry law. If he was worried about another peson in the mall shooting at him because of conceal and carry laws, do you think he would duck and move from spot to spot or would he walk openly and free? Aren't you basically agreeing that he wouldn't walk openly and freely if there was a conceal and carry law? If that's the case, the hypo then still exists and people have to decide to shoot or attack someone they don't know is or is not the maniac.

 

And we are talking about maniacs here. I don't think they consistenly act a certain way.

 

Can we also trust that the average citizen is well trained enough to use deadly force? I mean how many times do cops shoot the wrong guy? And they have extensive training and experience.

The fact of whether of not she accepts pay is completely meaningless.

Penguino is right on this point. I am not a paid firefighter but I am certainly a PROFESSIONAL firefighter. I carry NYS certifications [in addition to some Federal courses I took] that I would not need to retake if I suddenly became a paid firefighter. I am, in fact, on a "career path" towards becoming a NYS Fire Instructor. As a Fire Instructor, I would instruct both Volunteer and Paid firefighters. As a CPR instructor, I already do.

 

The reason this is important is because I was also required to take a certain level of medical training. Based on my level of training, I am allowed and expected to have a certain level of competence. If I screw up during the course of treating someone and they die, my level of training and competence will ultimately determine how culpable I am in the eyes of the law.

 

If someone is a retired police officer or MP and chooses to become a security guard as a second career, they are still professionals paid or otherwise. That's my stance, anyway, and I think one that a court of law would concur with.

 

/tangental point

I'm having trouble understanding your point about my view.

 

I don't think schools are in danger. I don't want to send my kid to a place where there may or may not be a gun. Who says the gun is on the teacher's person at all times?

 

Who says the teacher wouldn't use a gun as intimidation?

 

Who says the teacher wouldn't threaten with said gun.

 

That closed environment is not the place for a weapon.

 

Again, sorry my opinion doesn't jive with yours.

 

I believe this has come up with past shoots and the same arguments are presented for average person having a handgun as with teachers at schools having handguns. I'm pretty sure I had this debate with Accord after Vtech.

 

What seperates a teacher from the average person?

Your using the behavior of a maniac in a situation where there is no conceal and carry law to support how a maniac might act if there was a conceal and carry law. If he was worried about another peson in the mall shooting at him because of conceal and carry laws, do you think he would duck and move from spot to spot or would he walk openly and free? Aren't you basically agreeing that he wouldn't walk openly and freely if there was a conceal and carry law? If that's the case, the hypo then still exists and people have to decide to shoot or attack someone they don't know is or is not the maniac.

 

And we are talking about maniacs here. I don't think they consistenly act a certain way.

 

Can we also trust that the average citizen is well trained enough to use deadly force? I mean how many times do cops shoot the wrong guy? And they have extensive training and experience.

I will concede that. Your logic in that hypothetical situation is appropriate, mine was not. Good point.

 

While I don't think the average person that has a CCW license is trained well enough to justify their use of deadly force in the hypotheticals we are using I do think anyone with a CCW license knows how to use their gun and the vast majority of people are using it for their own protection and not to use it carelessly.

 

I do think we are making a foolish example of the use of a concealed weapon where we are just using it to talk about a made up shootout situation. The fact of the matter is the probability of that happening is so rare for the people that use a CCW and shouldn't be used as a talking point for or against the ability to have a CCW. I think we've taken that farther than it really should go because the probability of it is so low.

Your using the behavior of a maniac in a situation where there is no conceal and carry law to support how a maniac might act if there was a conceal and carry law. If he was worried about another peson in the mall shooting at him because of conceal and carry laws, do you think he would duck and move from spot to spot or would he walk openly and free? Aren't you basically agreeing that he wouldn't walk openly and freely if there was a conceal and carry law? If that's the case, the hypo then still exists and people have to decide to shoot or attack someone they don't know is or is not the maniac.

 

And we are talking about maniacs here. I don't think they consistenly act a certain way.

 

Can we also trust that the average citizen is well trained enough to use deadly force? I mean how many times do cops shoot the wrong guy? And they have extensive training and experience.

I will concede that. Your logic in that hypothetical situation is appropriate, mine was not. Good point.

 

While I don't think the average person that has a CCW license is trained well enough to justify their use of deadly force in the hypotheticals we are using I do think anyone with a CCW license knows how to use their gun and the vast majority of people are using it for their own protection and not to use it carelessly.

 

I do think we are making a foolish example of the use of a concealed weapon where we are just using it to talk about a made up shootout situation. The fact of the matter is the probability of that happening is so rare for the people that use a CCW and shouldn't be used as a talking point for or against the ability to have a CCW. I think we've taken that farther than it really should go because the probability of it is so low.

 

Agreed. It is hard to gauge one way or another because gun issues tend to rotate around hypos and not statistics. It's hard to get statistically effective data in these fields.

I am seldom a proponent of the use of deadly force. These are some pretty extreme examples. Obviously, I would have been happy to snipe the Omaha Mall shooter but I don't think that is very realistic. I am also not a fan of every random Joe walking the streets with their own personal assault rifle. There needs to be a middle ground.

 

Maybe mall cops SHOULD be trained and licensed to carry a weapon? Maybe campus security should do the same? Where do we draw the line, though? Schools? Houses of worship? My dentist's office?

Or mabye American society needs to cowboy the f*** up and stop being such pussies? Buy a gun, learn to use it, and employ it as a last resort for self presevation. I don't care what your political affiliation is, you have the god given right to defend your life if it's threatened and no one can ever take that away from you, and a firearm is the most reliable way of doing so. It's quite simple.

Again, I think we should allow people to have firearms, but I think there needs to be a heavy background check each time you do it. There is no scenario where someone like Accord, who has probably 5 or more guns, would need a gun in less than 5 days. The only people who might need a gun without the waiting period are people who probably should not be getting guns. It isn't unconstitutional, it is a safety net to prevent bad things from happening.

Like woman who just got restraining orders on their husbands with no other means of self defense and must survive on their own for between 5 and 30 days depending on the state without any means of protecting themselves? Happens everyday.

 

Nearly all firearm related crimes are committed with STOLEN weapons that are already illegal. It is a fact that waiting periods do absolutely nothing to curb crime, it's nothing more than feel good legislation.

Or mabye American society needs to cowboy the f*** up and stop being such pussies? Buy a gun, learn to use it, and employ it as a last resort for self presevation. I don't care what your political affiliation is, you have the god given right to defend your life if it's threatened and no one can ever take that away from you, and a firearm is the most reliable way of doing so. It's quite simple.

 

Are you going to judge me if I choose not to own a firearm? Huh? Am I a p***y because I'm old enough to own a gun and yet choose not to?

Again, I think we should allow people to have firearms, but I think there needs to be a heavy background check each time you do it. There is no scenario where someone like Accord, who has probably 5 or more guns, would need a gun in less than 5 days. The only people who might need a gun without the waiting period are people who probably should not be getting guns. It isn't unconstitutional, it is a safety net to prevent bad things from happening.

Like woman who just got restraining orders on their husbands with no other means of self defense and must survive on their own for between 5 and 30 days depending on the state without any means of protecting themselves? Happens everyday.

 

Nearly all firearm related crimes are committed with STOLEN weapons that are already illegal. It is a fact that waiting periods do absolutely nothing to curb crime, it's nothing more than feel good legislation.

 

Seriously? You are going to use that extreme case as the reason why waiting periods are silly? I bet you'd get pissed off if I then went ahead and used the "what about the husband who wants to kill his wife who just got a restraining order on him?" argument, huh? I bet you would. And it would be sooooo cute.

In the "what if" situation that was given of 2 shooters and the ensuing confusion.......

 

Things like this can and have happened. It happened on a college campus within the last 2 or 3 years or so (a Florida campus). An off duty officer who was enforcing underage drinking got into a disturbance with a large group of students and drew his firearm.

 

Another off duty officer (a reserve officer I believe) saw the off duty cop do this and he shot and killed the officer (they worked for different agencies and Im sure several policy changes have been put in place since to better communication).

 

But the point is it can happen. FWIW, Reserve Officers have no business pulling their firearms out and shooting people unless they are 1000% sure what is going on.

 

With all that said, the possible confusion is a necessary evil and sometimes bad things will happen. In most cases, like Fox mentioned, it will be very clear who the maniac is and who the potential hero is in a shooting scenario. 95% of the people involved will have severe tunnel vision and experiencing severe "flight or fight" anyway so its not like everyone will be pulling out guns left and right.

 

Interesting example. As expected based on the issue, I find myself agreeing with penguino on this. These situations are, generally speaking, pure chaos. Let's say we are in the mall, I hear gunshots, and I grab a baseball bat, because you know, I'm a liberal(baby eater). Let's say I'm hiding behind something, and I see a guy walking out with a gun hiding and moving behind things and I have a clear ability to bash his brains in....why would I hesitate?

 

And I know accord is a marine, but come on. He sees a hippie looking person-who is to say he doesn't "accidently" take out the person he thinks is the bad guy. :shifty

As a Marine, I exist to protect American's. Hippie, liberal, conservative, whatever... it makes no difference to me anymore. American's are American's, some may be a little more misguided than others, but they're still American's and as a Marine I don't disciminate.

As a Marine, I exist to protect American's. Hippie, liberal, conservative, whatever... it makes no difference to me anymore. American's are American's, some may be a little more misguided than others, but they're still American's and as a Marine I don't disciminate.

 

'Twas, I believe, a joke.

saying you want to be there in the mall is like saying i wanted to be in the towers on 9/11...

 

maybe...just maybe...we shouldnt have kids popping depression pills and being able to buy a gun at his local conveinence store when he is clearly f***ED UP...the only thing this country has learned about gun violence is that it is now an acceptable part of life and we wont do a damn thing to change tht

Sorry, but 16 year old kids can't walk into their local convenience store and buy a gun. I'm a 22 year old US Marine and I can't even buy a gun without having to go through a background check and 5 day waiting period every single damn time I buy one, which is often. Your statement and argument is baseless and you have zero experience with anything even remotely close to the topic at hand.

ok accord...since i know you are the most intellient person on the face of the earth...the conveinence store was a metaphor for how easy it is to get a gun in this country...and before you make wild assumptions...please...stfu

Or mabye American society needs to cowboy the f*** up and stop being such pussies? Buy a gun, learn to use it, and employ it as a last resort for self presevation.

Good idea. Let's go ahead and arm my sister's special ed students. Most of them are in their 20's and they are easy targets/victims. Arming them would be a good deterrent. We should also go ahead and arm everyone in my grandfather's nursing home. Who cares if they are senile and/or have bad eye sight - five of them were WWII vets! :thumbup

 

I'm a combat veteran and feel no need to arm myself. I live in a safe neighborhood, I don't hunt, and I have NEVER been in a situation where I felt like "gee whiz - if only I had my .44 Magnum right now!"

 

The bottom line is that - like a lot of people I know - I have very little faith in my fellow citizens. There are SOOOO many stupid people in this country that are going to do something stupid with a gun that I shudder at the thought. They had to make LAWN DARTS illegal because of stupidity, for God's sake, imagine those same people with a 50 cal...

 

Also, for the record, Texas has the most relaxed gun laws in the country. Take a look at their crime statistics and get back to me on what a stellar deterrent a gun is.

 

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm

Or mabye American society needs to cowboy the f*** up and stop being such pussies? Buy a gun, learn to use it, and employ it as a last resort for self presevation.

Good idea. Let's go ahead and arm my sister's special ed students. Most of them are in their 20's and they are easy targets/victims. Arming them would be a good deterrent. We should also go ahead and arm everyone in my grandfather's nursing home. Who cares if they are senile and/or have bad eye sight - five of them were WWII vets! :thumbup

 

I'm a combat veteran and feel no need to arm myself. I live in a safe neighborhood, I don't hunt, and I have NEVER been in a situation where I felt like "gee whiz - if only I had my .44 Magnum right now!"

 

The bottom line is that - like a lot of people I know - I have very little faith in my fellow citizens. There are SOOOO many stupid people in this country that are going to do something stupid with a gun that I shudder at the thought. They had to make LAWN DARTS illegal because of stupidity, for God's sake, imagine those same people with a 50 cal...

 

Also, for the record, Texas has the most relaxed gun laws in the country. Take a look at their crime statistics and get back to me on what a stellar deterrent a gun is.

 

http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm

 

 

 

 

 

OK, I'll bite.

 

 

I think you twisted Accords statement around. He said, "buy a gun, LEARN how to use it, and employ it as a LAST RESORT for self preservation".

 

 

You took that and went all Jeffrey Dahmer with it. He obviously wasn't advocating that special needs individuals start lining up for Colt AR-15's.

 

 

And you made an excellent point about not having faith in your fellow citizens................ALL the more reason to carry a firearm!

 

 

Lastly, crime statistics are highly misleading. More crimes are reported in areas where residents have faith in law enforcement. "Crime stats" going down are not necessarily indicative to "actual" crime going down. That coupled with the fact that the chart you provided also showed a signifigant increase in population as time went by.

 

FWIW, you're one of my favorite posters, so I hope you don't take this as some kind of attack.

I heard something similar happened recently at Town Center Mall too, is that true?

I hope you don't take this as some kind of attack.

It's okay to disagree. To be honest, I went over the top to bring the discussion back to the middle - which is where I actually am on the subject. If you look a couple of pages back I said as much and admitted that I can see both sides of the issue and can offer no solutions.

 

I *DO* strongly believe that a gun in the hands of every American is just all sorts of bad. I also disagree that EVERY American has the right to bear arms. For example, I think anyone convicted of a violent crime has given up that right.

Lastly, crime statistics are highly misleading. More crimes are reported in areas where residents have faith in law enforcement. "Crime stats" going down are not necessarily indicative to "actual" crime going down. That coupled with the fact that the chart you provided also showed a signifigant increase in population as time went by..

 

Yeah, but crime stats are still comparative. And I don't think Texas has different rates, one way or another, than states with high levels of gun control.