Help me educate the public!

[JB5812]

Look guys,

Whether it be petitions, arguments, or rallies, there have been attempts to show a good side to responsible gun ownership. It's a losing battle with a vast majority of our population uneducated in the subject who just don't want to listen, and won't compromise for anything but "make them all go away".

Whether some of you hard-heads will admit it or not, you've got Facebook! AGAIN, THIS IS THE WAY TO CHANGE THINGS in our social media obsessed culture.

Now, instead of focusing on the gun debate which I am well tired of already, I've started something that I HOPE can spread around some good SOLUTIONS for our nation's problem. Mass violence is not new, but as we all know, these current events have just opened up too much. It is time to change the way our nation looks at these events!

I am certain that people can be educated through Facebook as it's become as commonly integrated into most people's lives as breathing.

What can we do to actually stop this violence? Not a lot, as we can never be sure of an individual. But we can teach people to REACT, MITIGATE, or PREVENT severity of a situation. We as a nation look at the subject of mass violence, like shootings, as a taboo subject. No one wants to talk about the scary and would rather avoid it. Someone had posted an article I read about a while ago from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, and when I saw this again, I was convinced that if average common sense people ACTUALLY saw these solutions, and considered these types of things, it would spread and eventually become EXPECTED.

I created a Facebook page that allows people to discuss events, solutions, and education and prevention methods of mass violence. THIS IS NOT a place to discuss gun bans or laws. It is to discuss how we can incorporate common sense, education, and training into our daily lives as a nation regarding this subject!

I've taken a couple links that have been posted here on the hide and put them on the page. You guys are contributing great stuff to an audience that doesn't need to hear it! I hope you guys that would like to see us break free from the taboo of shootings contribute to it in a positive way. Take a look at the page, and SHARE it! If you haven't, read the articles posted on it.

THIS IS THE WAY TO GET PEOPLE TO STOP FINGER POINTING AND BLAMING, AND WAKE UP AND REALIZE WE NEED TO ACCEPT OUR REALITY.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Mass-violence-education-and-prevention/307284429389179?ref=hl

Thank you, Gentlemen.

 

[pmclaine]

Re: Help me educate the public!

I have never been on facebook and dont have an account. I'm sure you are correct that there is the possibility to connect with a large part of the population.

I also think that it is part of the problem. "Social Media" couldnt be anymore unsocial. The anonymity of the internet gives many the balls to say or do things they would never do in real life. Eventually they think they are the persona they create on the net and bad things may happen.

This from a man typing with no pants on in his mothers basement.

I appreciate your efforts but I apologize that I will not log on as I prefer to let Lowlight monitor my computer surfing rather than Mark Zuckerburg. Meeting the opposition on their turf is a good tactic though. I wish the NRA would stop sending crap to me and use that money to speak informatively to the fence sitters.

 

[opelboy]

Re: Help me educate the public!

checked it out, looks good. hopefully people read the articles and learn from them.

 

[JB5812]

Re: Help me educate the public!

Guys,

The page is coming together nicely with lots of great info I have taken from some well put together articles and studies. I have talked to a teacher that I hope I have inspired to bring up these issues and take action in her school.

I really think this can work.

AT LEAST it would help if even in the littlest way, take some of the attention off of the gun control talk by our citizens, and focus it on the real issues if it becomes big enough. It just seems too many people are throwing in the towel, and those that do want to help, don't know how or what to tell people...

Share the info on this page! AND share info on the page!

Thank you!

 

[Switchblade]

Re: Help me educate the public!

During the Clinton administration there were over 30 such incidents across the nation. During Bush's administration there were over 30 such incidents across the nation. Prior to Clinton there were exponentially less incidents by population density.
As we all know, it is not a gun problem, nor a ban problem for firearms. Educate and Eradicate Liberal Ignorance

 

[Nathaniel4545]

Re: Help me educate the public!

I post everything I can to help our views be expressed. I get some mad replies, some good and most of them just do not understand that a firearm is a tool. I can hand a chainsaw to anyone of my friends and they will not flinch to grab it and know how to manipulate the piece of equipment. I then do the same for a gun and man you should see the heads turn. the problem is that the vast majority of kids are not brought up learning how to use firearms. education is the key to all of it.

 

[no1special]

Re: Help me educate the public!

you cannot educate a person that is not open to learning.

 

[jmtgsx]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: truman</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you cannot educate a person that is not open to learning. </div></div>

Doesn't mean you give up. The next person may be open-minded enough to actually try to think for himself.
Props to the op.

 

[SilentSniper7]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Switchblade</div><div class="ubbcode-body">During the Clinton administration there were over 30 such incidents across the nation. During Bush's administration there were over 30 such incidents across the nation. Prior to Clinton there were exponentially less incidents by population density.
As we all know, it is not a gun problem, nor a ban problem for firearms. Educate and Eradicate Liberal Ignorance </div></div>

I agree with you Switchblade.

You guys in the USA should fight
for your gun rights while
you still can.

Believe me people in the USA and Canada have it
easy when it comes to owning firearms,count you're
blessings.

In my home country of South Africa u can only
have one gun for self defense,either a handgun or
a shotgun and if you are a dedicated hunter you
may own more than one rifle.

We are not allowed to own semi-auto rifles,only in special cases are licenses granted for semi-auto rifles.

We also have to take firearm competency courses
and exams,then we are issued with firearm competency
certificates and cards by the Police.The firearm competency cards as well as our firearm licenses expire after a
few years and then one has to go and reapply.
(What I mention here is the short version of
what hell one has to go through to own a firearm)

When you apply for a firearm license for self defense
you have to write an "motivation"essay on
why you have to have a firearm for self defense
and if they don't think your reasons are
valid(according to their opinion)they decline your application.

What is worse is that sometimes they decline
your application for a firearm license and then
you have to get legal help to appeal their decision.
(Which costs a lot of money)

 

[Mead]

Re: Help me educate the public!

BOOM. This was taken from a comment on the Volokh Conspiracy:


We see from FBI NICS reports since 2000 we have gone from 8 million background checks to 16.5 million projected checks for 2012, which translates per the Brady Bunch to 4.5 million new firearms in civilians hands each year.

We see that since 1997 per FBI UCR, that violent crime has gone from 611 VCR (Violent Crime Reported) per 100k people to 403 VCR per 100k people in 2010.

That is a 38% reduction in violent crime. Did I forget to mention that the same data shows a 26% reduction in murders?

At the same time we see 16 more states reinstate concealed carry to 49 states total, and 35 states reinstate concealed carry in eateries that serve alcohol. Four states and 200+ universities have reinstated concealed carry. Not to mention self defense outside ones own home reinstated in 25 states with Stand your Ground, 24 with Castle Doctrine (five pending change to Stand your Ground).

All without the predicted and much cried about blood baths predicted by pundits. Those anti-gun soothsayers really suck at predicting violence and mayhem to the law-abiding citizen, every single time. Hope they aren’t trying to make a living as a soothsayer, they are starving if they do.

So much for more guns in civilians hands equals more violence.

Of course there are other countries that have recently tried gun bans, what effect did that have on their violence?

1997; Australia, Canada, and England.

Australia in 1997 had 629 VCR per 100,000. In 2007 it rose to 1,024 VCR per 100k, with a 32 person reduction in murders by firearms, exactly replaced by murders with knives. Funny how that trend was mirrored in England (ref www.aic.gov.au)

Canada in 1997 had 980 VCR per 100,000. In 2010 it rose to 1,282 VCR per 100k people, while murder rose from 560 to 610 (Ref Statcan)

Canada has a $2 billion dollar plus registry, that hasn’t solved one crime, and has traced 47 firearms to prove, why yes, they were stolen. The long gun portion of the registry was defunded in 2012, such a common trend.

England

In 1898 England began keeping crime data; 1.0 murder rate per 100k people, no gun control.

In 1997 there was a 1.3 murder rate per 100k people, and 820 VCR per 100k people, England then implemented strict gun control.

In 2010 there was a 1.3 murder rate per 100k people 1,977 VCR per 100k people, murders have finally reduced to 1997 levels after a 25% increase. (ref Home Office UK)

So explain again how gun control reduced violence, oh wait, it didn't.

So much for less guns in law abiding civilians hands equals less violence. Trends found in every single gun ban country, prove otherwise. Oh, use government data to try if you want, the above references ARE their government databases.

All these referenced government facts, showing what a failure gun control is as it only applies to the LAW ABIDNG in the format the antis wish to push and implement today.

Unless of course you have the government data to refute all that government data, courts, rulings and agencies not controlled by the 80 mil law abiding gun owners or NRA!

So indeed, such a lie repeated as often as an anti breathes, is indeed the act of a mythomaniac, promoting a pathological lie.

Do you need more of an avalanche of facts that the antis have never refuted or proven to not exist or say what has been referenced here?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Help me educate the public!

The ones pushing this don't care about facts or the numbers, I dropped a few posts here or their to correct people and the response has been to tell me to join the military. When I tell them I did, they say they are skeptical and wonder out loud if the person correcting them is perpetrating Stolen Valor, never out right accusing but hinting that is the more than likely the answer so don't believe what I say.

They made up their, they are clinging to Newtown and don't want to know anything. They don't care what the facts are, that the kids was due to be committed by his mother, nothing.

Good luck, but I feel it is an uphill battle.

One thing we do need is smarter people on TV to answer the "why do you an AR" question. This is being poorly expressed. There are a multitude of reasons, and if they (gun control advocates) fall back on "hunting" they need to be educated about predator and nuisance animal hunting. Still the competition side of an AR needs to be expressed. Heck even though NBC cancelled 3GUN Nation, they still signed 3GUN Nation to a TV deal, that is better than trying to explain need an AR against a Tyrannical Government... this is just bringing chuckles to the other side.

Our spokesman needs to solid, credible and not fall back on fighting back the government.

 

[Chanonry]

Re: Help me educate the public!

Savage

The problem is that you are applying a logical view to this problem (and assuming you are correct, but lets ride with that one)

Our experience is that people are overwhelmed by this type of incident and the thinking becomes 'someone has to do something'. In these circumstances what you mean by logic has gone out the window and the politicians will be seem to do something if they can - logical or not. What usually happens here is something is banned irrespective of whether it was a root cause or not.

Nutter shoots people with gun => ban the gun not change the law to stop nutters owning guns.

If you want to avoid a ban on things forget educating joe public (who does not want to be 'educated') and get up close to the policy makers and 'educate' them. You don't do that through Facebook

 

[Timo Turl]

Re: Help me educate the public!

I haven't heard too much discussion on body armor and understand this jackass had it. Today, it seems every mass murder type scenario involves the use of body armor. Even if a teacher had a CCW it would have been an uphill battle (albeit better than no battle) against a scumbag in armor with a semi-auto. I think all body armor sales should be restricted in the same way suppressor sales are. It would help give CCW carry holders and LEO more of a chance to stop the carnage earlier. Something has to be given up and this should be on the list.

To Meade. I hear you on the stats but the truth is really simple.

The UK banned semi autos after the Hungerfood massacre in 1987 when 16 people were killed. I do not believe there has been any deaths via a high power semi auto since outside of terrorism in Northern Ireland.

The UK banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre in 1996 when 16 children and 1 adult where shot in a very similar school scenario with a handgun. There has not been one UK mass shooting with a handgun since in the same vein.

The facts hurt but they sometimes need to be realized.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Help me educate the public!

I believe they are calling Nylon Tac Vests like your run of the mill Blackhawk vest Body Armor.

They initially report this because someone notes a "vest" the reason it drops off the radar is, it's just nylon.

 

[Mead]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

To Meade. I hear you on the stats but the truth is really simple.

The UK banned semi autos after the Hungerfood massacre in 1987 when 16 people were killed. I do not believe there has been any deaths via a high power semi auto since outside of terrorism in Northern Ireland.

The UK banned handguns after the Dunblane massacre in 1996 when 16 children and 1 adult where shot in a very similar school scenario with a handgun. There has not been one UK mass shooting with a handgun since in the same vein.

The facts hurt but they sometimes need to be realized.



</div></div>

I assume you read everything there, since you addressed me.

So you're telling me that increases in violent crime is fine, and that murders are fine as long as it isn't with guns.

Seriously?

 

[Timo Turl]

Re: Help me educate the public!

No of course it isn't. However, mass massacre violent gun crime of the type we are all talking about can be stopped with aggressive legislation. The question that needs to be answered is what other ways can it be stopped without penalizing all legal gun owners...is there a better solution ? There is no argument that the Brits have proven it can be stopped but can anyone else do it smarter ?

As for the daily murder rate, it is truly awful in the US. There should be a radical rethink of punishment for gun crimes with a focus on illegal ownership and violent crimes involving firearms. Tougher tougher tougher.

 

[lash]

Re: Help me educate the public!

Excerpted from an article in WSJ, 12/17 with addendum added:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Guns, Mental Illness and Newtown
There were 18 random mass shootings in the 1980s, 54 in the 1990s, and 87 in the 2000s.
By DAVID KOPEL
Has the rate of random mass shootings in the United States increased? Over the past 30 years, the answer is definitely yes. It is also true that the total U.S. homicide rate has fallen by over half since 1980, and the gun homicide rate has fallen along with it. Today, Americans are safer from violent crime, including gun homicide, than they have been at any time since the mid-1960s.
Mass shootings, defined as four or more fatalities, fluctuate from year to year, but over the past 30 years there has been no long-term increase or decrease. But "random" mass shootings, such as the horrific crimes last Friday in Newtown, Conn., have increased.
Alan Lankford of the University of Alabama analyzed data from a recent New York Police Department study of "active shooters"—criminals who attempted to murder people in a confined area, where there are lots of people, and who chose at least some victims randomly. Counting only the incidents with at least two casualties, there were 179 such crimes between 1966 and 2010. In the 1980s, there were 18. In the 1990s, there were 54. In the 2000s, there were 87.
If you count only such crimes in which five or more victims were killed, there were six in the 1980s and 19 in the 2000s.
Why the increase? It cannot be because gun-control laws have become more lax. Before the 1968 Gun Control Act, there were almost no federal gun-control laws. The exception was the National Firearms Act of 1934, which set up an extremely severe registration and tax system for automatic weapons and has remained in force for 78 years.
Nor are magazines holding more than 10 rounds something new. They were invented decades ago and have long been standard for many handguns. Police officers carry them for the same reason that civilians do: Especially if a person is attacked by multiple assailants, there is no guarantee that a 10-round magazine will end the assault.
The 1980s were much worse than today in terms of overall violent crime, including gun homicide, but they were much better than today in terms of mass random shootings. The difference wasn't that the 1980s had tougher controls on so-called "assault weapons." No assault weapons law existed in the U.S. until California passed a ban in 1989.
Connecticut followed in 1993. None of the guns that the Newtown murderer used was an assault weapon under Connecticut law. This illustrates the uselessness of bans on so-called assault weapons, since those bans concentrate on guns' cosmetics, such as whether the gun has a bayonet lug, rather than their function.
What some people call "assault weapons" function like every other normal firearm—they fire only one bullet each time the trigger is pressed. Unlike automatics (machine guns), they do not fire continuously as long as the trigger is held. They are "semi-automatic" because they eject the empty shell case and load the next round into the firing chamber.
Today in America, most handguns are semi-automatics, as are many long guns, including the best-selling rifle today, the AR-15, the model used in the Newtown shooting. Some of these guns look like machine guns, but they do not function like machine guns.
Back in the mid-1960s, in most states, an adult could walk into a store and buy an AR-15 rifle, no questions asked. Today, firearms are the most heavily regulated consumer product in the United States. If someone wants to purchase an AR-15 or any other firearm, the store must first get permission for the sale from the FBI or its state counterpart. Permission is denied if the buyer is in one of nine categories of "prohibited persons," including felons, domestic-violence misdemeanants, and persons who have been adjudicated mentally ill or alcoholic.
Since gun controls today are far stricter than at the time when "active shooters" were rare, what can account for the increase in these shootings? One plausible answer is the media. Cable TV in the 1990s, and the Internet today, greatly magnify the instant celebrity that a mass killer can achieve. We know that many would-be mass killers obsessively study their predecessors.
Loren Coleman's 2004 book "The Copycat Effect: How the Media and Popular Culture Trigger the Mayhem in Tomorrow's Headlines" shows that the copycat effect is as old as the media itself. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's 1774 classic "The Sorrows of Young Werther" triggered a spate of copycat suicides all over Europe. But today the velocity and pervasiveness of the media make the problem much worse.
A second explanation is the deinstitutionalization of the violently mentally ill. A 2000 New York Times study of 100 rampage murderers found that 47 were mentally ill. In the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry Law (2008), Jason C. Matejkowski and his co-authors reported that 16% of state prisoners who had perpetrated murders were mentally ill.
In the mid-1960s, many of the killings would have been prevented because the severely mentally ill would have been confined and cared for in a state institution. But today, while government at most every level has bloated over the past half-century, mental-health treatment has been decimated. According to a study released in July by the Treatment Advocacy Center, the number of state hospital beds in America per capita has plummeted to 1850 levels, or 14.1 beds per 100,000 people.
Moreover, a 2011 paper by Steven P. Segal at the University of California, Berkeley, "Civil Commitment Law, Mental Health Services, and U.S. Homicide Rates," found that a third of the state-to-state variation in homicide rates was attributable to the strength or weakness of involuntary civil-commitment laws.
Finally, it must be acknowledged that many of these attacks today unfortunately take place in pretend "gun-free zones," such as schools, movie theaters and shopping malls. According to Ron Borsch's study for the Force Science Research Center at Minnesota State University-Mankato, active shooters are different from the gangsters and other street toughs whom a police officer might engage in a gunfight. They are predominantly weaklings and cowards who crumble easily as soon as an armed person shows up.

Mr. Kopel is research director of the Independence Institute and co-author of the law school textbook, "Firearms Law and the Second Amendment" (Aspen, 2012).
Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A17</div></div>
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The problem is that by the time the police arrive, lots of people are already dead. So when armed citizens are on the scene, many lives are saved. The media rarely mention the mass murders that were thwarted by armed citizens at the Shoney's Restaurant in Anniston, Ala. (1991), the high school in Pearl, Miss. (1997), the middle-school dance in Edinboro, Penn. (1998), and the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colo. (2007), among others.
At the Clackamas Mall in Oregon last week, an active shooter murdered two people and then saw that a shopper, who had a handgun carry permit, had drawn a gun and was aiming at him. The murderer's next shot was to kill himself.
Real gun-free zones are a wonderful idea, but they are only real if they are created by metal detectors backed up by armed guards. Pretend gun-free zones, where law-abiding adults (who pass a fingerprint-based background check and a safety training class) are still disarmed, are magnets for evildoers who know they will be able to murder at will with little threat of being fired upon.
People who are serious about preventing the next Newtown should embrace much greater funding for mental health, strong laws for civil commitment of the violently mentally ill—and stop kidding themselves that pretend gun-free zones will stop killers.</div></div>


This isn’t just food for thought. I have long believed and espoused this very solution, without having all the data to back it up. You’ll notice that a Texas school district has already instituted teacher carry rules, with some others in other states considering the same. Unfortunately, our educational institutions notoriously churn out leftist agenda and therefore teachers whom have been indoctrinated to that agenda. It will be a tough sell in many areas.

This is one of the reasons that it is legal to concealed carry in banks in Florida. It is believed that there is a higher chance that someone with a CWP will be there to thwart a would-be robber than an officer of the law.

Gun control fanatics will ignore these facts simply because they do not meet their agenda. They so fervently believe that gun control will make everything peaceful and rosy, that they will not see any other answer. At least that’s true for those that aren’t actively trying to disarm the American people for nefarious reasons.

The likelihood that Mr. Kopel’s advice will be taken seriously is slim, since his association with a group that is not affiliated with a liberal think tank will disqualify him, as he is “the enemy” of gun control.

This time it’s serious folks. There is a full on press going on in the media, pun intended. I will be shocked if there is not some stricter gun legislation passed in the next three months.

 

[JB5812]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The ones pushing this don't care about facts or the numbers, I dropped a few posts here or their to correct people and the response has been to tell me to join the military. When I tell them I did, they say they are skeptical and wonder out loud if the person correcting them is perpetrating Stolen Valor, never out right accusing but hinting that is the more than likely the answer so don't believe what I say.

They made up their, they are clinging to Newtown and don't want to know anything. They don't care what the facts are, that the kids was due to be committed by his mother, nothing.

Good luck, but I feel it is an uphill battle.

One thing we do need is smarter people on TV to answer the "why do you an AR" question. This is being poorly expressed. There are a multitude of reasons, and if they (gun control advocates) fall back on "hunting" they need to be educated about predator and nuisance animal hunting. Still the competition side of an AR needs to be expressed. Heck even though NBC cancelled 3GUN Nation, they still signed 3GUN Nation to a TV deal, that is better than trying to explain need an AR against a Tyrannical Government... this is just bringing chuckles to the other side.

Our spokesman needs to solid, credible and not fall back on fighting back the government. </div></div>

I've seen a few good interviews, but these are not being pushed by the media obviously. Yahoo! has shown their "balanced" gun control articles and the people they quoted to represent us were the typical "Screw da government! I'll die before they take em!"... NOT a good face for us, and are the only people they will show.

I personally am not familiar with firearm company and policy related PR, so I really have no idea how to go about putting a good face on TV for us.

And for the issue of what I'm doing..

You are all correct. It seems that our resources that CAN do something about it, are folding in like cowards, and the people that care, seem to not be able to do much but in extreme numbers, which is very hard to gather and put together towards one cause. Too many people, even on our side just don't CARE enough to actually do something. They don't want to lose rights and things to change, but are either too lazy or feel "What can I possibly do?". Some just hope it will all blow over.

Okay, yeah, I've noticed that even a lot of the people that completely understand what I'm trying to do, and think the common sense information I'm trying to spread to those that need it would help, still aren't doing anything. I'm doing exactly what I said not to-- spreading this information to people that don't need to hear it. MY GOAL is for THESE people to spread it themselves, which is next to impossible for me to make sure happens, even if they feel strongly about it.

I don't want to give up, and I do think this information can help, but I'll admit that it is quite an uphill battle with too many people taking in the information, and forgetting about it a day later.

But the really disappointing part is the amount of flak I have received from the supposed labeled "responsible gun owners" who laugh at or criticize me for taking this approach. Maybe it's not the MOST effective way to actually change this... Whatever. Does it hurt to spread common sense information and some resources to those that MAYBE DO want to do something? This shows me that there are people on our side that can't and won't stand up for us, and would rather let the bad happen than do anything to help.

We are failing because of quite a number of individuals on our side, really aren't in the grand scheme of things. I'm going to continue to put articles and information on the page, and those of you that can accept that you really aren't going to do anything to help, especially the ones that are quick to criticize, you might as well do SOMETHING and spread some of it to a teacher, administrator, or public building employee.

Thanks

 

[W54/XM-388]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I haven't heard too much discussion on body armor and understand this jackass had it. Today, it seems every mass murder type scenario involves the use of body armor. Even if a teacher had a CCW it would have been an uphill battle (albeit better than no battle) against a scumbag in armor with a semi-auto. I think all body armor sales should be restricted in the same way suppressor sales are. It would help give CCW carry holders and LEO more of a chance to stop the carnage earlier. Something has to be given up and this should be on the list.
</div></div>

So idiots think that not only should people not have guns to protect themselves but now we should also ban totally passive safety devices like bullet resistant vests so that people can be nice easy lambs for the slaughter?

The sheer stupidity of your statement is just plain Wow!

It sounds just like something that comes out of the mouths of evil power mad politicians that hate people surviving and want higher body counts to justify more tyrany.

Here it is... Liberal democratic logic
You shouldn't have a gun
You shouldn't have anything to protect yourself from getting killed by a gun
Please be a good little sheep and die nicely so I can get more power

I guess when you want to tell stories about how great it is in a country where the "top police" execute an innocent man on the train in front of everyone and then say "oops sorry wrong guy" then I could understand yes you want to make sure people don't survive to sue the idiots.

Perhaps maybe if everyone was properly armed and actually had the balls to stand up and fight evil, we wouldn't have to worry about crazed madmen getting very far with their plans.

 

[Timo Turl]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: W54/XM-388</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I haven't heard too much discussion on body armor and understand this jackass had it. Today, it seems every mass murder type scenario involves the use of body armor. Even if a teacher had a CCW it would have been an uphill battle (albeit better than no battle) against a scumbag in armor with a semi-auto. I think all body armor sales should be restricted in the same way suppressor sales are. It would help give CCW carry holders and LEO more of a chance to stop the carnage earlier. Something has to be given up and this should be on the list.
</div></div>

So idiots think that not only should people not have guns to protect themselves but now we should also ban totally passive safety devices like bullet resistant vests so that people can be nice easy lambs for the slaughter?

The sheer stupidity of your statement is just plain Wow!

It sounds just like something that comes out of the mouths of evil power mad politicians that hate people surviving and want higher body counts to justify more tyrany.

Here it is... Liberal democratic logic
You shouldn't have a gun
You shouldn't have anything to protect yourself from getting killed by a gun
Please be a good little sheep and die nicely so I can get more power

I guess when you want to tell stories about how great it is in a country where the "top police" execute an innocent man on the train in front of everyone and then say "oops sorry wrong guy" then I could understand yes you want to make sure people don't survive to sue the idiots.

Perhaps maybe if everyone was properly armed and actually had the balls to stand up and fight evil, we wouldn't have to worry about crazed madmen getting very far with their plans. </div></div>

Why do you need body armor ? If you aren't involved in LE or similar work you have no need for it. If you do, then you should be entitled to buy it with a permit. I am not saying you can't have it but that it should be controlled. Less vests out there in the wrong hands should equate to more policeman and CCW owners going homee to their families at the end of the day.

 

[Teggy1]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: W54/XM-388</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I haven't heard too much discussion on body armor and understand this jackass had it. Today, it seems every mass murder type scenario involves the use of body armor. Even if a teacher had a CCW it would have been an uphill battle (albeit better than no battle) against a scumbag in armor with a semi-auto. I think all body armor sales should be restricted in the same way suppressor sales are. It would help give CCW carry holders and LEO more of a chance to stop the carnage earlier. Something has to be given up and this should be on the list.
</div></div>

So idiots think that not only should people not have guns to protect themselves but now we should also ban totally passive safety devices like bullet resistant vests so that people can be nice easy lambs for the slaughter?

The sheer stupidity of your statement is just plain Wow!

It sounds just like something that comes out of the mouths of evil power mad politicians that hate people surviving and want higher body counts to justify more tyrany.

Here it is... Liberal democratic logic
You shouldn't have a gun
You shouldn't have anything to protect yourself from getting killed by a gun
Please be a good little sheep and die nicely so I can get more power

I guess when you want to tell stories about how great it is in a country where the "top police" execute an innocent man on the train in front of everyone and then say "oops sorry wrong guy" then I could understand yes you want to make sure people don't survive to sue the idiots.

Perhaps maybe if everyone was properly armed and actually had the balls to stand up and fight evil, we wouldn't have to worry about crazed madmen getting very far with their plans. </div></div>

Why do you need body armor ? If you aren't involved in LE or similar work you have no need for it. If you do, then you should be entitled to buy it with a permit. I am not saying you can't have it but that it should be controlled. Less vests out there in the wrong hands should equate to more policeman and CCW owners going homee to their families at the end of the day. </div></div>

You are the problem.

This is the same logic the anti gun advocates use. You don't "need" it. How many times have you heard politicians say "the less ___________ out there, the less available to get into the wrong hands" Give me a break.

As another member of this forum said "Inalienable rights by definition require no justification, what other right would you have licensed and controlled?"

I'll take another forum members response as it is fitting: Free men are able to possess things they don't "need"

ETA: quite fueling the misinformation, it has already been debunked that the shooter was wearing body armor, it was a nylon vest.

I also, by your apparent litmus test, don't "need" to know how to shoot beyond 100 or 300 yds. Therefore maybe only LEO's should be allowed on Snipers Hide.

How many in YOUR opinion, rifles should I possess? Magazines? Ammunition? Handguns? Pocket Knives?

What else do I not need?

What the hell is the matter with some of you?

 

[W54/XM-388]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why do you need body armor ? If you aren't involved in LE or similar work you have no need for it. </div></div>

That is so stupid it makes you sound like an idiot plain and simple, you think the best thing is to make it as easy as possible for people to be killed?

How about because people like to possibly wear things to protect them from harm:

I'm a good driver, I don't go on chases with the police, are you saying I shouldn't have a seat belt in my car because maybe if there were no seatbelts the rare bad guy that gets into a chase with police might die quicker when they crash?

Why do we have lifevests on ships? Would you only want lifevests on a ship if you were planning on blowing it up.

I have a fire extinguisher in my truck, do only arsonists need fire extinguishers?

Why would I need locks on the doors? Do only criminals like to lock their doors? Maybe you next want to get rid of door locks because that would save police a bit of time beating down the door?

If people would like to wear something to help them not get shot so be it, it might help save their lives from some random crazy guy, or might just help them feel safe.

Are you actually stupid enough to suggest that some random bad guy may one day put on "magic body armour" and be suddenly invincible & nobody can stop them? And if they did, do you think your stupid idiotic idea of not letting people wear protective vests would stop bad guys from grabbing 2 plates of metal & putting them on their jacket when they already plan to commit capital murder?

Your statements sound exactly like what is wrong with this country.

Maybe a random bad guy might possibly wear some bullet resistant gear, no problem at all, just tell the police to aim & don't carry whimpy guns.

If you are still hung up on your idiotic idea that everybody should be as easy to kill as possible just to make it maybe easier to kill some hypothetical bad guy, think about this hypothetical situation, if you were all dressed up in your "magic body armour" doing bad stuff, and I was the good guy on the scene with my trusty revolver & an ability to aim (and maybe a brief knowledge of human anatomy) do you honestly think you would walk away unscathed if I got the drop on you before you got around to landing one in a vital zone on me?

Body armour is excellent at protecting you from bad people who usually are poor shots and are firing quickly and moving on, it increases your chance of coming out alive. It is not nearly as good when you are being shot at by someone who knows what they are doing and is determined to stop a rampage.

 

[175G]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Today, it seems every mass murder type scenario involves the use of body armor. Even if a teacher had a CCW it would have been an uphill battle (albeit better than no battle) against a scumbag in armor with a semi-auto. I think all body armor sales should be restricted in the same way suppressor sales are. It would help give CCW carry holders and LEO more of a chance to stop the carnage earlier. Something has to be given up and this should be on the list.
</div></div>

Unbelievable! Hey I have a few D.A.R.K. Angel Medical kits that I have been trained in the use of and am very comfortable with. I am not in the medical profession or an EMT or First Responder of any kind but I am fairly certain if it came to it in a bad desperate situation where time was off the essence and no other help was immediately available I could help save a life/lives. Do I NEED it? Fuck no!

Also I train for active shooter situations, most of these shooters are cowards and if confronted wearing what most likely a paintball or nylon vest will not engage. I will. I might be harmed but the chance is better that I will be better able to place a incapating round. Trust me a few hits in the leg, arm neck or head will certainly put a damper on.

Furthermore, if I had the time for it I could post how many innocent children were killed the same day by cars, and drowning, and fires, and abuse, and suicide. Any of which are tragic and unspeakably horrible. But that's moot.

Frank is right we need better spokespersons, this is getting competely out of control ridiclous! And very few people are being logical at all it's all a bunch of hysteria and stupidity and perfectly playing into their hands. Hey I have an idea let's also go after the 1st Amendment, it seems to cause just as much trouble as the 2nd.

 

[KYpatriot]

Re: Help me educate the public!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: TJ.</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No of course it isn't. However, mass massacre violent gun crime of the type we are all talking about can be stopped with aggressive legislation. The question that needs to be answered is what other ways can it be stopped without penalizing all legal gun owners...is there a better solution ? There is no argument that the Brits have proven it can be stopped but can anyone else do it smarter ?

As for the daily murder rate, it is truly awful in the US. There should be a radical rethink of punishment for gun crimes with a focus on illegal ownership and violent crimes involving firearms. Tougher tougher tougher.</div></div>

Go back to the UK. You don't know what you are talking about. When the crown tells the Brit populace to jump they say "how high sir?" There is absolutely no comparison between the two populations. Passing the exact same law here would not have the same effect, and millions upon millions of guns will remain.

There is absolutely no gun legislation that will stop this problem. Even a draconian door to door confiscation won't work, even if it didn't result in a civil war, which I believe it would.