Discussion in 'Chit-Chat' started by fenderman, Nov 3, 2018.
Good for her.
I had just read that a bit earlier. You go girl!
Like to see it without the edit. I assume he kicked the door in?
If so, I support her actions.
Don't care either way...was a good shot. You think the cops didn't see the entire video? Every news article says he kicked in. I take her word for it. Criminals don't get the benefit of the doubt.
South Carolina mother-of-3 shoots home invader: ‘I would’ve killed him if I had to’
If That was in NY she would be charged and her firearm would be taken away, then a POS lawyer would sue her for shooting that poor crackhead because he is just trying to earn his living the only way he knows how.
Same in California, but with special enhancements if the guy is a member of a protected class.
Gotta appreciate her tactics, stayed behind cover
Here in the Great Nanny State, you have to offer them a cookies and milk or you'll get arrested instead of the intruder.
If my car's in the driveway, lights are on, TV screen glare dancing on walls and windows plus audio and you break in my house we'll see if you can dodge all 18 of the 9mm's coming at you until I heard your carcass hit the floor.
If you're out only to rob you wait 'til it's apparent no one's home; if not, it means you're don't care about my welfare any more than I care about yours.
I'm not trying to start a political debate and I hate to say it brother but judging by your state's recent mid-term election results, I don't see that changing any time soon...
You're absolutely right, Tony. The stupidity here knows no bounds.
Wow....and I thought I had a lot with $2k worth of .223 / 5.56, 9mm, .380 ACP and .22LR...I'm a lightweight, it seems.
@NoneYa44 , you might appreciate this, it was sent to me by a retired cop.
Spider webs. Hmmm, must be a bullet cam!
I'm so glad I live in Wyoming. I'm sitting in the Doctor's office waiting for my mom to get a radiation treatment. Guess what's in my pocket? And probably a number of other folks here.
Hope your mom has a great outcome.
Compare that to California where grown "men" get the vapors at the sight of a gun.
It's a little to early to tell what all is involved with him. As a Vietnam vet myself much of me feels sad for him and of course, everyone that was killed or wounded in that bar. There has to be a better process to spot those that are in trouble with PTSD or other mental issues, inside and outside of the military and certainly, when purchasing any firearm. It becomes next to impossible to change the outcome when the firearm was purchased in the past or borrowed. Clairvoyance is not a common human trait. But with what we can control, we have failed too often up to this point. Sure, many have been spotted but just one getting by or overlooked is one too many, especially when it has the outcome it had like in Thousand Oaks. The results are often horrific.
It's easy to Monday-morning quarterback and look back with that perfect retrospect...I'm as guilty of that as anyone. But I sure hope something positive comes out of this...it has to. The cost is too high. Both sides of the aisle must reach across and join in and find some middle ground to help end this carnage. It will not be overnight and it will be a process that needs a lot of attention, not just from the media and their inflammatory diatribe. I mean something that works. I wish I knew the answer.
Five off duty police officers were in the club that night, not one of them armed. I'm sure there is probably a Cali law that prevented them from carrying.
Around here, the sheriff's office encourages all officers to continue to carry off duty.
In the trunk wouldn't have done much good.
We are talking California here....
We're also talking a bar and some States have restrictions that cover off duty carry in a bar. Basically makes a bar a "gun free zone" and shooting gallery for anyone whose crazy enough. Robert Heinlein, scifi author, had a great line.."An armed society is a polite society."
I think even us gun enthusiasts must agree that a gun is a dangerous device designed for a purpose that makes it extremely helpful or useful for someone bent on murder and mayhem.
Many devices are like that, though, and there are many ways that someone can attack an unprotected "soft" target. Vehicles, knives, bombs, "powders", gasses, arson, etc., seem to be used frequently by people to carry out these sorts of attacks (or fake attacks).
Nonetheless, guns are often used in these attacks for a number of reasons. Still it always seems that the outcry to ban something is only heard when it is a gun that is used. You never hear any outcry to ban trucks or cars or other useful devices even though they can be misused for mayhem.
And call me paranoid, but it ends up seeming that some of those calling for a ban on guns are not actually worried about saving innocent lives as much as they are trying to further an agenda of disarming the average citizen.
I do understand how guns, by doing their job well, make them very attractive to someone wishing to perpetrate such an attack. The very characteristics that make a gun good for defense, hunting, target shooting, etc., are likely to make it effective for a "bad guy" as well.
Then again, an automatic transmission makes a huge truck accessible to anyone, even a bad guy. Should we ban that feature because it makes it easy for a criminal to use when committing a mass murder?
Of course none of us want to see would-be terrorists or unbalanced people aided in their crimes by highly efficient, well-designed arms or devices of any sort.
But many of us strongly feel that a well-armed citizenry is desirable to help assure that tyranny cannot easily come to power. Distributing effective weapons among the general population seems prudent, and should have a moderating effect on would-be tyrants as well as criminals. We see throughout history that the first step undertaken by despots who want to rule unopposed is to disarm the population. So a lot of people see disarmament of the population as a huge red-flag, and tend to distrust those in government who push for this.
But if we accept that we do not wish to disarm the masses because having the masses armed is such a good check against a tyrannical government and against rampant unopposed crime, etc., then, as we are discussing above, the real problem becomes how to prevent people from committing undesirable acts aided by the very devices we tout as being the means of protecting us all from evil.
And that is a problem that is not easy to solve. Someone bent on hurting others can find innumerable ways to accomplish mass injury or murder.
I am always saddened when one of these attacks is carried out, regardless of the weapon used.
But it is particularly troubling to me when they choose to use a gun because it not only helps them with their destructive purpose, but also gives those who would prefer to see the citizens disarmed another anecdote they can use to further that agenda. And the gun-grabbers surely seem to love it when a mass shooting takes place. They gleefully grasp at these incidents to further their agenda of disarmament. But they never seem to come up with any solutions that might actually help curb such incidents.
@J Sigmo , VERY well said. +10 likes if I could.
Most anti gunners don't understand that an extremely small percentage of legal gun owners ever commit an evil act. You know murder is against the law allready, but doesn't seem to deter many.
We have hundreds of gun laws on the books that are NOT being enforced.
Once upon a time we had a mental health system that might have helped curb incidents in todays world.
The news media needs to stop ever mentioning the bad guys name or anything else about him, ever. And not obsessively report on the incident for a week.
Not to be callous, but more people are killed in one summer weekend in south Chicago than in this last incident. Where's the outcry there?
A moto often repeated "always carry, never tell".
Now it's revealed that the gunman paused to post on facebook....the perfect time to have taken him down.
Since most all of these attacks occur in gun free zones, that's a place to start, as some schools already have.
Great post @J Sigmo
To me a gun free zone is the same philosophy as never locking your house or car and putting a sign on them saying everything is unlocked. It's nothing more than an invitation for those wanting to do evil to do their thing.
Yep, Same reason why I don't open carry in a state where it's allowed unless specifically prohibited under certain conditions....I don't want to announce to some nut job "Hey, shoot me first!"
I carry concealed EVERYWHERE except the county courthouse and the VA...those are clearly posted at the entrance "NO Guns, Knives or weapons of any kind allowed on these premises".
I must confess however.....it wasn't with me when I got my colonoscopy a couple of months back....no where to conceal it!
Yep. Open carry has been legal here for as long as I can remember. But I never "carried" except to go shooting, until concealed carry became legal even without a permit.
Why give up the tactical advantage of surprise? And why risk making people nervous if they're the type to be made nervous when seeing that someone is carrying? (Not that many people here are skittish about guns).
I'm not totally opposed to open carry. It just doesn't fit me most of the time.
When they made it legal here for anyone who can legally possess a gun to carry concealed without a permit, it made a lot of things less complicated. Before that, it was always something of a puzzle to be sure you were not breaking any law when you loaded up some guns to go out shooting in the boonies or went to the range, etc.
Even if you never really "carry", it is a lot more convenient for shooters, hunters, etc. And it is less hassle for police, game wardens, etc.
Regarding bans, we all know how well bans/outlawing have worked on heroin, cocaine etc. If people really want something, they will find a way.
To further your point... last year when that Florida high school got shot up and everyone was crusading to stop gun violence because 17 people died... over 3000 people died in that same week in the US alone due to the common flu. I do a lot of travelling and I haven't seen even a single PSA on preventing the spread of the flu. You'd think if they really wanted to save some lives they'd hand out face masks or hand sanitizer at the airport. Maybe if dying from the flu was more gruesome or emotional it might get more attention...
Amen to that! The lack of any awareness of how disease spreads is another pet peeve of mine.
Schools give "Perfect Attendance awards". Businesses think highly of people who persevere and come in sick.
And yet, that's exactly the thoughtless, selfish, dangerous, antisocial behavior that should be discouraged.
If I ran a school, if someone came in sick, they'd be suspended and get "F" grades in all of their classes or any tests scheduled for that day.
Come in sick to my business, endangering the other employees, and wrecking our overall productivity by infecting my workforce, and you're fired!
Endangering everyone else at a business, school, or in public is borderline criminal.
But back to the subject at hand:
You make a good point that people's perceptions of danger, and ability to assess risk is horrible.
Over 5,000 people die every day from smoking related causes. Less people than that were killed in the 9-11 attacks. And yet, we've engaged in a decades-long war over that. But do we do much of anything about smoking? 5,000 people per DAY! But the slow, gruesome ways people die from smoking aren't nearly as dramatic or "Breaking News" worthy, I guess.
Now we have "The Opioid Crisis". But how many is it killing? Probably not anywhere near as many as cigarettes.
News outlets and politicians love to get all worked up about all of those "gun deaths". But the statistics are weak, especially when you subtract suicides and legitimate police or citizen shootings of bad guys, and criminals shooting each other.
As a normal law-abiding citizen, your chances of being killed by one of these shooters of innocent people is remote in the extreme. Yet the media and gun-grabbers make it sound like it's an epidemic while staunchly ignoring the real epidemics surrounding us.
Wear your seat belt. Quit or don't start smoking. Watch your diet and get some exercise. Get a flu shot. Wash your hands after going out shopping. Now you've covered 99% of your risks.
Being shot in one of these random shootings is so far down on the list of actual risks that we face as to be trivial at best. A risk unworthy of wasting even seconds of your day considering.
And yet, what dominates the news?
Anything spectacular. Plane crashes, shootings, flaming bus plunges. If it bleeds, it leads.
It's always been that way, I guess. People love anything sensational. And the media makes its money by keeping people tuned in. So we get the news we want.
Separate names with a comma.