Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

[unofan]

Go **** yourself.

Stay classy, San Diego.

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

Stay classy, San Diego.

I'm not the one accusing 1000s of people of plotting murder. That is you.

[unofan]

I wouldn't consider someone who accuses 1000's upon 1000's of law abiding citizens of practicing for killing people a high quality poster. Its trolling at best.

But telling someone to go **** themselves is a great form of argument. The highest. You use the best words. Trump like words.

[leswp1]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

Its not surprising. Many people that buy a gun to commit a crime know that they're going to use it for crime when they make the purchase, at that point, they wouldn't want their name attached to it, like it would be in a normal legal purchase. Also if they're repeat offenders, and felons, they wouldn't pass the background check anyway. I would imagine they are mostly black market weapons, stolen or smuggled in through Mexico.

Too lazy to look but from what I have read we don't need to import guns. Just go over the border to one of the states with lax laws. Pretty sure some of the mexican guns are acquired in the US but again I am too lazy to look for the states.

Murders happen every day. And yet, we don't get this response after each one. So why should this one be any different?

Gee, I don't know. Maybe because so many of them happened at once? As in more than ever before? That might be a liiiiittle clue to how this is different.

Why is that "more garbage." It seems unofan is interpreting the 2nd Amendment in the context of its original intent.

But it isn't PC to interpret it that way

I wouldn't consider someone who accuses 1000's upon 1000's of law abiding citizens of practicing for killing people a high quality poster. Its trolling at best.

I don't agree with everything he said but reading thru the last several pages I see a lot of assumptions that are reactionary interpretation of what he is saying. How you get some of the things you say he is saying out of what he posted is beyond me. You might not agree with what he says but why not refute it with logic rather than deciding he is saying all sorts of crazy things he isn't and then taking your ball to go home?

(OK, here I am being foolish. I know logic is not supposed to enter into things and it is fun when people just 5hit on each other but~ sometimes I would really like to see a logical argument to refute what is being said)

[unofan]

I'm not the one accusing 1000s of people of plotting murder. That is you.

The average cop, who will shoot thousands upon thousands of bullets at a shooting range over a career, will most likely never have to fire once while on duty.

Despite that, the purpose of their carrying a sidearm isn't for shooting targets at the range.

That's the point I'm trying to get across.

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

But telling someone to go **** themselves is a great form of argument. The highest. You use the best words. Trump like words.

You removed yourself from a conversation with me. I won't engage in a conversation with a person like you. You aren't smart enough for me to listen to what you say.

[St. Clown]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

Yeah, but you don't aim unless you're willing to shoot what your aiming at, and once you pull that trigger there's a strong likelihood you will seriously injure or kill the target. You don't fire a warning shot because who knows what that stray bullet will hit.

That's not at all true. I've listened to gun safety experts state, those training people under conceal-carry, that when pulling your gun out of its holster the hope is it will cause people to flee without having to fire your weapon. In more dire circumstances, a warning shot into the ground is the next best thing, and only after that should you aim it at the person threatening you. The absolute last resort is to pull the trigger while aiming at that person, if only to save yourself a whole world of legal headaches. Not all circumstances lend them to that progression of action, but it's what you should hope for, short of the final step.

You're operating under a great deal of false assumptions as to how people who carry a sidearm are trained to use them.

[Kepler]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

You're operating under a great deal of false assumptions as to how people who carry a sidearm are trained to use them.

I thought it was an expression so common as to be cliche among gun trainers that "you never pull your weapon unless you are willing to use it," and that pulling your weapon in order to intimidate was "brandishing" and a big no no?

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

You're operating under a great deal of false assumptions as to how people who carry a sidearm are trained to use them.

I think he's operating under a great deal of false assumptions about gun ownership and gun owners.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

I thought it was an expression so common as to be cliche among gun trainers that "you never pull your weapon unless you are willing to use it," and that pulling your weapon in order to intimidate was "brandishing" and a big no no?

Yeah, it's a big no no to brandish a weapon because you're neighbor keeps sunbathing nude in the middle of his yard.

If someone is coming at you with a knife, I feel like brandishing a weapon is probably appropriate.

[unofan]

That's not at all true. I've listened to gun safety experts state, those training people under conceal-carry, that when pulling your gun out of its holster the hope is it will cause people to flee without having to fire your weapon. In more dire circumstances, a warning shot into the ground is the next best thing, and only after that should you aim it at the person threatening you. The absolute last resort is to pull the trigger while aiming at that person, if only to save yourself a whole world of legal headaches. Not all circumstances lend them to that progression of action, but it's what you should hope for, short of the final step.

You're operating under a great deal of false assumptions as to how people who carry a sidearm are trained to use them.

I'm not saying that once you aim you have to fire, but like Kepler said, it's a maxim that you don't aim at something unless you're willing to fire.

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

I thought it was an expression so common as to be cliche among gun trainers that "you never pull your weapon unless you are willing to use it," and that pulling your weapon in order to intimidate was "brandishing" and a big no no?

Willing to use it, and wanting to/actually doing it are 2 different things. If you pull the gun, you have to be willing to use it, but that doesn't mean it still isn't the last resort.

[unofan]

Willing to use it, and wanting to/actually doing it are 2 different things. If you pull the gun, you have to be willing to use it, but that doesn't mean it still isn't the last resort.

Which is why I said "willing to."

Yeah, but you don't aim unless you're willing to shoot what your aiming at

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

Which is why I said "willing to."

I wasn't talking to you.

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0 - II

Good for him...guess what other people feel different.

I'll go there; you won't. Isn't that what makes America great?