Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

I dunno- how about you post an answer? All you do is tell us that other suggestions are wrong. Perhaps your ideas are as equally unworkable.

A licensed concealed carry permit holder should be allowed to carry anywhere in the United States. Flights. Banks. Whatever. In the US. No more soft targets.
The only additional criteria? BAL of 0.0% while carrying. No margin.

To get my ND Class I permit I had to pass both a written and an on-range test. I had to be fingerprinted and have a full background check run. And yet, even with that, most stores could accept my permit to do an immediate sale, yet, choose to run the phone-in real-time background check if I'm looking to make a purchase of a firearm.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

They haven't figured out a way to blame this on gun-toting republicans yet? I'm sure they're already blaming an inanimate object, just like how the car is to blame for DWI...

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Interesting you bring that up- since 1980 when MADD really got into drunk driving laws, deaths from drunk driving have decreased from over 20,000/year to under 10,000/year. http://www.madd.org/drunk-driving/about/history.html

So perhaps we can cut the number of gun deaths in half with good regulation. That would be progress.

The goal of Zero gun deaths or we do nothing is pretty stupid, IMHO.

So has gun violence.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/

In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 — a total of 11,208 firearm homicides.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Again, what do YOU suggest be done to prevent mass killings like this? Or should we just accept them as part of living?

Instead of shooting others ideas down, I'd really like to hear your ideas.

As cold as it may sound, they may just be a part of living.

Keep in mind that mass shootings account for just a tiny, tiny fraction of murder by gun in this country, which is also just a fraction of the total gun deaths or total murders that occur.

In a way it's like large plane crashes. A 747 goes down and we hear about it and talk about it for months or years. But those deaths are just a tiny fraction of deaths from airplane or helicopter crashes that occur each year.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

I'm a concealed carry permit holder. You probably won't like my answer. What I will say is that you should notice that all recent targets have been soft targets (schools, "no carry" theater, a bars/nightclubs).

I'm yet to see someone try to rob the shooting range I frequent.

Perfect solution. Simply have more people firing weapons in the packed night club.

 

[aparch]

So has gun violence.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/

There were also an additional 56 million Americans in those 20 years.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

A licensed concealed carry permit holder should be allowed to carry anywhere in the United States. Flights. Banks. Whatever. In the US. No more soft targets.
The only additional criteria? BAL of 0.0% while carrying. No margin.

To get my ND Class I permit I had to pass both a written and an on-range test. I had to be fingerprinted and have a full background check run. And yet, even with that, most stores could accept my permit to do an immediate sale, yet, choose to run the phone-in real-time background check if I'm looking to make a purchase of a firearm.

On range, but static test, I assume.

But I have seen some good demo videos that illustrate your position of carrying, even openly, would not help. You'd probably have gotten shot, and missed the target on top of that.

It also assumes that there's some kind of very strong mental test to make sure that when you are having a bad day (you, as in the general you of people carrying) you are not going to just open up on some random person that makes you mad. Plus, the training required to actually take down an active shooter- to me, that requirement would be much, much more than a written and on-range test. And some restrictions on what weapon can be brought into places- for instance, your plane idea- there needs to be some kind of power limit to reduce the risk of rapid decompression when you shoot through a window or side. Or at least to prevent a bullet from passing through the target into an innocent person behind them.

You make it sound so easy, when there are as many details that one needs to think about to prevent friendly fire losses.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

As cold as it may sound, they may just be a part of living.

Keep in mind that mass shootings account for just a tiny, tiny fraction of murder by gun in this country, which is also just a fraction of the total gun deaths or total murders that occur.

In a way it's like large plane crashes. A 747 goes down and we hear about it and talk about it for months or years. But those deaths are just a tiny fraction of deaths from airplane or helicopter crashes that occur each year.

And after every plane crash, there's an investigation figuring out what happened to prevent it from happening again. Just because it's a small fraction does not mean nothing is done.

 

[bronconick]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

A licensed concealed carry permit holder should be allowed to carry anywhere in the United States. Flights. Banks. Whatever. In the US. No more soft targets.
The only additional criteria? BAL of 0.0% while carrying. No margin.

To get my ND Class I permit I had to pass both a written and an on-range test. I had to be fingerprinted and have a full background check run. And yet, even with that, most stores could accept my permit to do an immediate sale, yet, choose to run the phone-in real-time background check if I'm looking to make a purchase of a firearm.

So your suggestion is to just arm everyone. Those "soft targets" like nightclubs, theaters, and the like. Were you going to bring along some night vision goggles with your guns when you save the day or just shoot blindly?

 

[BassAle]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

I dunno- how about you post an answer? All you do is tell us that other suggestions are wrong. Perhaps your ideas are as equally unworkable.

his answer is more guns

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Perfect solution. Simply have more people firing weapons in the packed night club.

Trained, range qualified shooters, who've been exposed to the concepts of crowded spaces and backgrounds (what's beyond the target).

He asked for my solution. I'm sorry you don't like it. I don't like soft targets that the guano loco crowd seems to prefer.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

So has gun violence.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-gun-violence-in-the-united-states-heres-why/

If that's the case, then you don't need to carry, then, do you? Nor does Trump need to have some kind of filter at the border.

There's no issue, then.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

On range, but static test, I assume.

But I have seen some good demo videos that illustrate your position of carrying, even openly, would not help. You'd probably have gotten shot, and missed the target on top of that.

It also assumes that there's some kind of very strong mental test to make sure that when you are having a bad day (you, as in the general you of people carrying) you are not going to just open up on some random person that makes you mad. Plus, the training required to actually take down an active shooter- to me, that requirement would be much, much more than a written and on-range test. And some restrictions on what weapon can be brought into places- for instance, your plane idea- there needs to be some kind of power limit to reduce the risk of rapid decompression when you shoot through a window or side. Or at least to prevent a bullet from passing through the target into an innocent person behind them.

You make it sound so easy, when there are as many details that one needs to think about to prevent friendly fire losses.

So your suggestion is to just arm everyone. Those "soft targets" like nightclubs, theaters, and the like. Were you going to bring along some night vision goggles with your guns when you save the day or just shoot blindly?

Now who's "shooting down" another's solution?

 

[alfablue]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Trained, range qualified shooters, who've been exposed to the concepts of crowded spaces and backgrounds (what's beyond the target).

He asked for my solution. I'm sorry you don't like it. I don't like soft targets that the guano loco crowd seems to prefer.

You know as well as anyone- there's a difference between conceptual ideas and actual practice of doing it live. Unless you are being trained in a live action situation, it's not good enough.

 

[MaizeRage]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

This is why we can't have a decent conversation on gun control. Comments like yours about about as productive as anything that comes from the NRA.

Sorry, I'll quit pretending that actions have consequences so you can have a really good time.

 

[alfablue]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Now who's "shooting down" another's solution?

You are ok doing it, what's wrong with that? At least everyone is clear of your position and if they think you should even be considered a valid point now.

 

[BassAle]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

No way. I don't have a rifle, but if I go target shooting with someone, I want to be able to bring my own supplies.

FFS, your buddy provides the gun, he has to provide the ammo -- or else you go to a shooting range that would provide ammo for use on site only. You're not even willing to be a LITTLE inconvenienced to make it a little harder for someone with an unregistered firearm (in this hypothetical world where guns are registered and regulated at least to the same degree as automobiles) to obtain ammo for their illegal firearm.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

And after every plane crash, there's an investigation figuring out what happened to prevent it from happening again. Just because it's a small fraction does not mean nothing is done.

Sure. They check to see if there is a mechanical failure that can be corrected in still existing planes, or if there is some sort of pilot training that can be helpful. But, of course, they don't "prevent it from happening again" do they?

There are bad drivers. There are nuts with guns. There are drunk pilots. There are more ways to terminate your life on this planet than you can possibly contemplate, and all we can do is make our way through it dodging bullets (both literally and figuratively, it seems).

 

[BassAle]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

Trained, range qualified shooters, who've been exposed to the concepts of crowded spaces and backgrounds (what's beyond the target).

He asked for my solution. I'm sorry you don't like it. I don't like soft targets that the guano loco crowd seems to prefer.

I bet once you put tons of armed wanna be cops/cowboys everywhere (aka George Zimmermans) it suddenly becomes a lot more common for any altercation or perceived threat (real or imaginary) to be settled with guns. Your ideas are probably more likely to kill someone than they are to stop a mass shooting.

 

[The Sicatoka]

Re: Days Since Last Mass Shooting: 0

You are ok doing it, what's wrong with that? At least everyone is clear of your position and if they think you should even be considered a valid point now.

I just wanted to make sure you realized that you were doing it as well.

You asked for my opinion. I believe there are too many soft targets for the guano locos out there.