Florida shooting...

[sman]

I wouldn't ask what they rely upon but rather "DO they consciously rely upon anything for the defense of their lives?"

Do you wake up in the morning and get in your car and say to yourself "I need to be careful driving to work because WHAT IF a drunk driver is on the road"? You probably don' because like many people that's not a concern that crosses your mind in the morning as it is more a case of "what If or what are the odds?"

Believe it or not there are many and I would argue more people that live in this country white, black, young, old, rural house, city house, blue state, red state, that do not own a fire arm. They don' live their lives with that concern of defense. Even if they live somewhere where crime is on the news everynight.

Crime is random in the sense that it can happen to anyone at anytime but the reality is also that as random as crime is, crime is also very isolated in its elements. You are more likely to be mugged at 2 a.m. than 2 p.m. You are more likely to get shot at if you participate in gang activity or drug activity in your neighborhood than you are if you are a working person minding their business. Those elements make something random like crimes simultaneously isolated. So for many people playing it smart, being alert, exercising common sense, and just living a decent life doesn't make them concerned to the point where they feel they need to “personally” defend themselves from the “what if.”

As sad as school shootings are, we have learned that they are very random i.e. location, from Ohio to Connecticut to Florida, yet they are also very isolated in there elements - kids were bullied or had mental issues that required doctors or police involvement. I find banning all guns to be as ludicrous as arming a teacher in every school. Both are extreme reactions or responses. I believe raising the age limit and banning AR 15’s are more moderate responses.

Would you also ban the Ruger Mini 14?

As you can see, one looks like a regular old hunting rifle (as it is) and the other looks like something the military would use. In reality, they fire the same ammunition and both require the trigger to be pulled each time it is fired.

I'm seriously not trying to stoke the flames here. I'm genuinely asking someone who is for banning the AR-15 their thoughts on weapons that fire the same ammunition at the same rate. Also keep in mind, most hand guns are semi-automatic and will fire as quickly as you can pull the trigger (same as the AR-15 or the Mini 14), do we ban those as well? According to 2016 FBI statistics, 7,105 people were murdered with a hand gun and 374 were killed with a "rifle" (the AR-15 would fall in that category). The Columbine shooters used two sawed-off shotguns, a 9 mm and a rifle (not an AR-15). Counting the two shooters, 15 people were killed. Not much different than the numbers at the most recent shooting.

My point is, the AR-15 isn't the problem. Ultimately, the mass shootings are a cultural issue. There are people who just don't value life anymore. We live in a culture where we don't have absolutes. No right and wrong. I mean hell, we've got people who are defending the FBI and Sheriff's department over their failures. One would think with all the warning signs that most of the country could agree that both departments failed in this area. We have people who get offended if you "assume" their gender. We don't name winners and losers in little league sports. And God forbid a person in authority like a teacher point out little Johnny's abhorrent behavior. If little Johnny is failing, it's obviously the teacher's fault. It can't be that Johnny doesn't apply himself and that his parents don't put requirements on him.

Anyway, I really would love to hear your thoughts on if we also ban a gun like the Mini 14 along with the AR-15. Or all weapons that fire that same caliber?

As for not wanting people in your community to carry a weapon, while I don't personally carry one (although I do have a concealed carry permit), I know several people who do and you'd never know it. The holster goes inside their waist band area and the gun is hidden away. One of my closest friends is a retired police officer who now works for the Department of Homeland Defense and he loathes when someone open carries (meaning they have the holster and gun on their hip for all the world to see).

 

[Robert Barney]

and why would that make national news? what's the story outside of what that news outlet ran?

I think it is pretty obvious that the right of an individual to own an AR-15 is a national topic and debate right now. There are MANY people, predominantly on the left side of the political spectrum, who wonder what possible reason would there be for any civilian to need an AR-15. This story is a perfect example of why and yet the national media ignored, and continue to feed us information that argues individuals shouldn't have access to AR-15's. To sum up the story, if 3 people come after you with firearms, as occurred in this case, a musket is not going to cut it, even if all they have are muskets. The AR-15 gave the innocent victim the edge, and let him put down the 3 bad guys trying to kill him.

The main reason I want an AR-15 is because that's what the government has. The military has them, the FBI has them, the state police have them, heck the local cops in town have them in the trunks of their vehicles. If it is completely AOK for those people to have them, why is it wrong for me to have them?

The second amendment's acknowledgement of my right to bear arms was to PROTECT me from a tyrannical government, not to ensure I had a way to hunt food. Listen carefully to this explanation, which is right on:

 

[Robert Barney]

As you can see, one looks like a regular old hunting rifle (as it is) and the other looks like something the military would use. In reality, they fire the same ammunition and both require the trigger to be pulled each time it is fired.

This is EXACTLY the point Rubio was trying to make while he was being shouted down in the CNN town hall meeting. In fact, when you think about it, a revolver is a semi-automatic weapon. Every time you pull the trigger it goes bang and continues to do so until the ammunition is exhausted.

Gun haters rarely understand guns, they're just terrified of them and want them to go away. But they don't seem to grasp that their proposed efforts to ban guns would only result in law abiding people being disarmed, and that the bad guys who unlawfully possess guns would have a bigger advantage than they already do, where only part of the population has self disarmed. At least with some of us bearing arms, we keep the bad guys guessing.

Remember this:

Lynne Russell and husband survive motel gunfight - CNN

Can "good guys with guns" stop gun violence? - CBS News

 

[Thedude]

the difference is the military trains you on how to use a weapon....same with the police (who are all great shots huh). Also, I don't know why you are ignoring the fact I don't want to ban the AR-15? And for every instance like that there's 17 innocent kids getting killed. (okay not every instance but you get the point)

AR is easier to modify and is more reliable. How old do you have to be to have the revolver? How many rounds does the revolver hold? How easy is it to add larger magazines to it?

I would ask you if you understood guns yourself.

 

[Tothetop]

Would you also ban the Ruger Mini 14?

As you can see, one looks like a regular old hunting rifle (as it is) and the other looks like something the military would use. In reality, they fire the same ammunition and both require the trigger to be pulled each time it is fired.

I'm seriously not trying to stoke the flames here. I'm genuinely asking someone who is for banning the AR-15 their thoughts on weapons that fire the same ammunition at the same rate. Also keep in mind, most hand guns are semi-automatic and will fire as quickly as you can pull the trigger (same as the AR-15 or the Mini 14), do we ban those as well? According to 2016 FBI statistics, 7,105 people were murdered with a hand gun and 374 were killed with a "rifle" (the AR-15 would fall in that category). The Columbine shooters used two sawed-off shotguns, a 9 mm and a rifle (not an AR-15). Counting the two shooters, 15 people were killed. Not much different than the numbers at the most recent shooting.

My point is, the AR-15 isn't the problem. Ultimately, the mass shootings are a cultural issue. There are people who just don't value life anymore. We live in a culture where we don't have absolutes. No right and wrong. I mean hell, we've got people who are defending the FBI and Sheriff's department over their failures. One would think with all the warning signs that most of the country could agree that both departments failed in this area. We have people who get offended if you "assume" their gender. We don't name winners and losers in little league sports. And God forbid a person in authority like a teacher point out little Johnny's abhorrent behavior. If little Johnny is failing, it's obviously the teacher's fault. It can't be that Johnny doesn't apply himself and that his parents don't put requirements on him.

Anyway, I really would love to hear your thoughts on if we also ban a gun like the Mini 14 along with the AR-15. Or all weapons that fire that same caliber?

As for not wanting people in your community to carry a weapon, while I don't personally carry one (although I do have a concealed carry permit), I know several people who do and you'd never know it. The holster goes inside their waist band area and the gun is hidden away. One of my closest friends is a retired police officer who now works for the Department of Homeland Defense and he loathes when someone open carries (meaning they have the holster and gun on their hip for all the world to see).

You might mean well but I think your bias clouds you from seeing what I'm saying. For example you talk about conceal carry and how you know folks who personally hate when people open carry. If I had to bet if it was a criminal or law abiding citizen who was the first person to conceal carry in America, I would bet it was the criminal. So it's not an issue of conceal carry as though "out of sight out of mind." What I'm addressing is that folks in inner cities disdain for guns is due to them witnessing them being used appropriately but for malicious purposes. So they may not care for guns period.

I agree with you that something is culturally wrong with the U.S. but I believe the problem is on both sides. I think both sides are drinking the same brew of tea called division except one likes theirs hot and the other likes theirs cold. For example, the same people who are bashing the FBI right now are the same people who up until a year ago were bashing the former president for not standing behind law enforcement.

Now when we have a president who is undisputedly bashing our top law enforcement agencies because he feels they are doing injustice those same folks are fine with it. Why? Because it favors their perspective. All the while the same folks who probably bash law enforcement up until a year ago are defending them now by saying that deputy in florida is human so we understand him not barging in. Why? Because at this point it favors their perspective.

Here is my perspective on your pictures and I appreciate you not stoking the flames: they are a bit misleading as the Ruger doesn't have a nice long magazine sticking out. I would have chosen a better Google Image and of course then they would both look like weapons of war. As you know assault rifle is a politicized term. So me saying ban assault rifles is the same as saying ban weapons that seem like they can be used or cause damage like that intended for war. Correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe the AR 15 inspired other military purposed weapons. Now why the AR 15? Because it seems to be the weapon of choice for some mass shootings, both ones that succeeded and ones that were hindered, and because of the ability to hold high capacity magazibes.

That being said the likelihood of you surviving a mass shooting where the shooter is using a hand gun is alot higher than if you used a high capacity rifle spraying bullets...as you said TWO shooters in Columbine killed 15 people while only one killed 17 with a rifle.

 

[DHK]

 

[sman]

You might mean well but I think your bias clouds you from seeing what I'm saying. For example you talk about conceal carry and how you know folks who personally hate when people open carry. If I had to bet if it was a criminal or law abiding citizen who was the first person to conceal carry in America, I would bet it was the criminal. So it's not an issue of conceal carry as though "out of sight out of mind." What I'm addressing is that folks in inner cities disdain for guns is due to them witnessing them being used appropriately but for malicious purposes. So they may not care for guns period.

I agree with you that something is culturally wrong with the U.S. but I believe the problem is on both sides. I think both sides are drinking the same brew of tea called division except one likes theirs hot and the other likes theirs cold. For example, the same people who are bashing the FBI right now are the same people who up until a year ago were bashing the former president for not standing behind law enforcement.

Now when we have a president who is undisputedly bashing our top law enforcement agencies because he feels they are doing injustice those same folks are fine with it. Why? Because it favors their perspective. All the while the same folks who probably bash law enforcement up until a year ago are defending them now by saying that deputy in florida is human so we understand him not barging in. Why? Because at this point it favors their perspective.

Here is my perspective on your pictures and I appreciate you not stoking the flames: they are a bit misleading as the Ruger doesn't have a nice long magazine sticking out. I would have chosen a better Google Image and of course then they would both look like weapons of war. As you know assault rifle is a politicized term. So me saying ban assault rifles is the same as saying ban weapons that seem like they can be used or cause damage like that intended for war. Correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe the AR 15 inspired other military purposed weapons. Now why the AR 15? Because it seems to be the weapon of choice for some mass shootings, both ones that succeeded and ones that were hindered, and because of the ability to hold high capacity magazibes.

That being said the likelihood of you surviving a mass shooting where the shooter is using a hand gun is alot higher than if you used a high capacity rifle spraying bullets...as you said TWO shooters in Columbine killed 15 people while only one killed 17 with a rifle.

And what bias is it that you "assume" I have? Just because I have a conceal carry permit doesn't mean I'm some NRA nut. I'm not a member of the NRA nor have I ever been. I completely get your perspective about seeing the devastation of guns. And have no issues with it whatsoever. I didn't own a gun until about two years ago. And that happened mostly because of a problem I had with someone I hired to do work at my home and wouldn't return some furniture he was working on for us. He eventually started making thinly veiled threats so the police were called. I decided at that time I would purchase a weapon. My friend who is a retired police officer spent hours upon hours with me training my wife and I on proper gun safety and use. He and I go to the range regularly to continue my proficiency training.

As for the picture being misleading, that certainly isn't the intention. But the Mini 14 can accommodate a 30 round magazine. So if I understand you correctly, you would be for banning the Mini 14 as well. Feel free to correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

As for your last comment about the odds of surviving being "A LOT" better with a handgun vs a "high capacity" rifle, I can't be as confident as you since both could kill. And a person holding two 9mm guns armed with multiple magazines can fire just as many bullets as on AR-15 and nearly as quickly.

We had an "assault weapons" ban for 10 years. The DOJ did a study and University of Pennsylvania professor Christopher Koper, author of the NIJ report, said, "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence.”

Lastly, there are nearly 20 times as many murders by way of handgun than those with a rifle. And that includes all rifles, not just "assault weapons". In those same FBI statistics I referenced, there were 4 times as many killed by knives vs rifles. There were 75% more murders by hands/feet vs a rifle. There were 26% more killed with a blunt object vs a rifle. There's a very small percentage of murders committed by way of "assault weapon".

Here are my personal views on what could/should be done. Anyone wanting to purchase any firearm should not only pass an extensive background check, but should also be able to demonstrate proficiency in handling said weapon. Kind of like how we have to pass both a written and driving exam for a driver's license.

Our reporting of crime and mental health information could/should be MUCH better in regards to info disclosed in background checks. This recent shooting is a prime example. With all the news that has come out about the multiple calls to the police department and FBI on this guy, in addition to his social media posts, there is no reason he shouldn't have been disqualified from buying a weapon. These reports to authorities should be linked to any background check. There has to be a way to put that information in the database for when background checks are done.

I believe every school should have a minimum of one armed police officer. Not a security guard. A trained police officer. No, that did not help here as the officer obviously didn't do his job. My brother in law is a former police officer and current Secret Service agent. When I asked his thoughts of this deputy sheriff's actions (or inaction), he replied with "pathetic". My friend who is the retired officer said if that happened when he was still on the force, the officer wouldn't have been very popular among the other officers.

I'm a reasonable and rational person. I will listen to any thoughtful ideas. But I will always err on the side of people's rights not being infringed upon. And before anyone says, "what about the rights of the 17 who were killed", had the sheriff's office and/or the FBI done what most reasonable people believe they should have done, it's likely those 17 people would still be here today. Additionally, we will never be able to stop individuals from infringing upon another person's rights. But we can't and shouldn't expect our government to infringe upon our rights.

There are sensible measures that can be taken without punishing law abiding citizens who are firm believers in the second amendment. I feel this way about all of our rights. For example, while I may not agree with certain things people may say, I will defend their right to say it. As I said, I'm willing to listen to any thoughtful ideas.

 

[FEX Quotes]

YNow why the AR 15? Because it seems to be the weapon of choice for some mass shootings, both ones that succeeded and ones that were hindered, and because of the ability to hold high capacity magazibes.

That being said the likelihood of you surviving a mass shooting where the shooter is using a hand gun is alot higher than if you used a high capacity rifle spraying bullets...as you said TWO shooters in Columbine killed 15 people while only one killed 17 with a rifle.

Banning the AR 15 because of easy mod and high cap is not the answer...

 

[Tothetop]

And what bias is it that you "assume" I have? Just because I have a conceal carry permit doesn't mean I'm some NRA nut. I'm not a member of the NRA nor have I ever been. I completely get your perspective about seeing the devastation of guns. And have no issues with it whatsoever. I didn't own a gun until about two years ago. And that happened mostly because of a problem I had with someone I hired to do work at my home and wouldn't return some furniture he was working on for us. He eventually started making thinly veiled threats so the police were called. I decided at that time I would purchase a weapon. My friend who is a retired police officer spent hours upon hours with me training my wife and I on proper gun safety and use. He and I go to the range regularly to continue my proficiency training.


I don’t assume you have a bias. You showed it in your third paragraph. What you believe is culturally wrong with America, someone just as equally can say to you that your beliefs are what’s wrong with America. I’m not saying that I oppose your beliefs but I do believe the fact you missed my point has to do with the way you think.


As for the picture being misleading, that certainly isn't the intention. But the Mini 14 can accommodate a 30 round magazine. So if I understand you correctly, you would be for banning the Mini 14 as well. Feel free to correct me if my understanding is incorrect.

My point of what I’m arguing is in the very last two sentences of the very first post you quoted from me. That is we need a moderate well-balanced response. Both sides need to find that middle ground. Either sides extreme response is ludicrous. That is the point I was making to Robert Barney. We need to understand that not everybody thinks as we do and they have good reasons why they don’t. I think you miss this point because you like absolutes. Forget the Ruger. What if someone shoots up a school with a 9mm do we ban those as well? Well we have not gotten there and God forbidd we do but we can’t address those “what if’s.” All we know is what we know right now about assault rifles and AR -15’s so let’s focus on that. I already explained that it seems to be the weapon of choice.


As for your last comment about the odds of surviving being "A LOT" better with a handgun vs a "high capacity" rifle, I can't be as confident as you since both could kill. And a person holding two 9mm guns armed with multiple magazines can fire just as many bullets as on AR-15 and nearly as quickly.

I would believe you would be as confident as me as you brought up the point, not me, that columbine had two folks with 9mm and shotguns and rifles and killed 15 while Florida only had one guy with a rifle and killed 17. The shooting in Las Vegas could not have been done as easily with a handgun.

We had an "assault weapons" ban for 10 years. The DOJ did a study and University of Pennsylvania professor Christopher Koper, author of the NIJ report, said, "We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence.”

Lastly, there are nearly 20 times as many murders by way of handgun than those with a rifle. And that includes all rifles, not just "assault weapons". In those same FBI statistics I referenced, there were 4 times as many killed by knives vs rifles. There were 75% more murders by hands/feet vs a rifle. There were 26% more killed with a blunt object vs a rifle. There's a very small percentage of murders committed by way of "assault weapon".

These statistics are irrelevant as they don’t specifically address mass shootings.

Here are my personal views on what could/should be done. Anyone wanting to purchase any firearm should not only pass an extensive background check, but should also be able to demonstrate proficiency in handling said weapon. Kind of like how we have to pass both a written and driving exam for a driver's license.

Moderate response. I agree


Our reporting of crime and mental health information could/should be MUCH better in regards to info disclosed in background checks. This recent shooting is a prime example. With all the news that has come out about the multiple calls to the police department and FBI on this guy, in addition to his social media posts, there is no reason he shouldn't have been disqualified from buying a weapon. These reports to authorities should be linked to any background check. There has to be a way to put that information in the database for when background checks are done.


Very moderate response. I agree


I believe every school should have a minimum of one armed police officer. Not a security guard. A trained police officer. No, that did not help here as the officer obviously didn't do his job. My brother in law is a former police officer and current Secret Service agent. When I asked his thoughts of this deputy sheriff's actions (or inaction), he replied with "pathetic". My friend who is the retired officer said if that happened when he was still on the force, the officer wouldn't have been very popular among the other officers.

Something already in place in many schools across the country. Armed police officers yes. Armed teachers too extreme.

I'm a reasonable and rational person. I will listen to any thoughtful ideas. But I will always err on the side of people's rights not being infringed upon. And before anyone says, "what about the rights of the 17 who were killed", had the sheriff's office and/or the FBI done what most reasonable people believe they should have done, it's likely those 17 people would still be here today. Additionally, we will never be able to stop individuals from infringing upon another person's rights. But we can't and shouldn't expect our government to infringe upon our rights.

You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Mental health individuals have 2nd amendment rights as well so why do you get to draw the line as to what’s infringement and what’s not? It’s ok to infringe on their rights to buy guns but not everyone else’s rights who don’t have that illness? Even if it’s simply limiting what guns they can buy?

There are sensible measures that can be taken without punishing law abiding citizens who are firm believers in the second amendment. I feel this way about all of our rights. For example, while I may not agree with certain things people may say, I will defend their right to say it. As I said, I'm willing to listen to any thoughtful ideas.

Again, there are many law abiding citizens who have mental health issues. Aren’t they being punished based on your stance. All this to say we need a moderate answer. Everyone is going to have to feel a little offended for this to work.

 

[Tothetop]

Banning the AR 15 because of easy mod and high cap is not the answer...

You are right it is not the answer...by itself that is. The Virginia Tech shooter used 9mm Glock if I’m not mistaken and he killed almost twice as many folks than in Florida. He had mental health issues & he was a foreign student. Those two to me should have hindered him from purchasing a gun. It should be a combination of age, mental health, and weapon choice due to magazines working together to stop events like this from happening. You might be the right age and pick a simple hand gun but your mental health is not on par ergo you can’t get a weapon. Something like that