Guns

[Jackpine Savage]

Ok, let him back it up. I'm willing to throw down. I have three degrees. Two in science.

[Yorkshire pud]

Less than 50 people in America last year were killed with rifle rounds fired from weapons equipped with 30 rd magazines.

Is that included in the other 12000 or so?

More than that were struck by lightning and died of toothpaste poisoning: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-05-15-panama-toothpaste_N.htm

yep...this man is sure using up a lot of straw... 57 died from pulling vending machines on top of themselves in one year...But of course that's what vending machines are designed to do. Funny though you link to the very media you despise?

However, I can guarantee you just about every single US and NATO soldier and contractor killed by rifle rounds fighting freedom fighting insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan was killed with a rifle equipped with a 30 rd mag.

Yeah; but you play to your strengths. If you don't have UAV's, Humvies with 50 cal on the roof, A10's, A1's, a propaganda machine that covers up the murder of civilians by the very politicians and people sent to fight 'the war on trrrrrrerrr', you use an AK47.

Now tell me again why the Feds want to ban them. And give a real good reason this time.

I know why I would: Because a lot of people don't have the aptitude to wipe their own arse. To suggest they've suddenly developed the intelligence to evaluate and execute a strategy that involves things that go bang at one end to 'fight' this fictitious dystopian totalitarian government (who have the A1s, the A10s, the Humvies, the UAVs etc) is frankly barking mad. It only works in the minds of wannabee Rambos who go play at soldiers at weekends and shout "hell yeah" everytime their boyfriend takes a dump.

[Yorkshire pud]

Ok, let him back it up. I'm willing to throw down. I have three degrees. Two in science.

I think he has three; including a PhD. The notion he's retarded is ridiculous. He obviously isn't, and he's dismissed because he asked why some want all sorts of guns, all the time...Seems a reasonable question to me.

[RealCool Daddio]

Any/all types: Large Capacity Magazines :
You may be confronted by an angry mob, disappointed by a Jury Trial Decision that wants to take out their anger on you.

You are a fucking pussy.  A real man would only need a tube of toothpaste, or an extension cord, or a swimming pool to defend himself against marauding negroes.

[Afixer]

You are a fucking pussy.  A real man would only need a tube of toothpaste, or an extension cord, or a swimming pool to defend himself against marauding negroes.

Damn

[/size]

[stevesh]

[Sardondi]

This is why I want "all guns all the time": "An escaped convict broke into the home of a southwest Iowa couple Monday night and held them at gunpoint for several hours before one of the hostages shot and killed the intruder". The escapee had earlier shot and wounded a deputy sheriff. About 10:30 pm the escapee broke into the home of a retired prison guard and wife and kept them in their bedroom as he ransacked the house gathering supplies to assist him to continue to evade law enforcement.

*Editorial note - I love this quote from the USA Today article*: "As the situation wore on, a decision was made by the Mauderlys (the hostages) that they were going to defend themselves," This is a necessity for survival in any deadly confrontation. The victim must decide that s/he will do whatever it takes to keep the criminal from taking his or her life.**

Remember: when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/20/des-moines-prison-fugitive-killed/2675733/



**I have watched heartbreaking dashcam video of uniformed law enforcement officers who simply were not prepared to meet a deadly confrontation. I am convinced that in one incident that the young officer was so fearful of the administrative and publicity backlash of a police shooting incident that he simply allowed a situsation to get out of control to the point the criminal knew he had the moral upper hand, and knew the officer wouldn't kill him. A shootout ensued in which the officer was killed. When the criminal was later asked why he killed the officer he replied, "Because he let me." Heartbreaking. I'll try to find the video online.

[Yorkshire pud]

This is why I want "all guns all the time": "An escaped convict broke into the home of a southwest Iowa couple Monday night and held them at gunpoint for several hours before one of the hostages shot and killed the intruder".

Could have been worse, Iowa you say? I think the phrase is "You really can't make this stuff up!"

http://freakoutnation.com/2013/09/08/what-could-go-wrong-iowa-is-granting-gun-permits-to-the-blind/

Driving and pilot licenses on the cards I wonder? After all, we got to have inclusivity!

[Foodlion]

So here it is. The British man who owned a gun, and fought back.
The same media that would label him as a gun-toting-redneck-white-trash-baby-killer before the Kenyan mall attack, now labels him a Hero.
Maybe they should apologize for their 30 years of anti-gun ranting for just this once.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2430201/British-hero-mall-massacre-Ex-Royal-Marine-handgun-saved-100-lives-terrorists-ran-amok.html?ICO=most_read_module

[Yorkshire pud]

So here it is. The British man who owned a gun, and fought back.
The same media that would label him as a gun-toting-redneck-white-trash-baby-killer before the Kenyan mall attack, now labels him a Hero.
Maybe they should apologize for their 30 years of anti-gun ranting for just this once.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2430201/British-hero-mall-massacre-Ex-Royal-Marine-handgun-saved-100-lives-terrorists-ran-amok.html?ICO=most_read_module

Let's qualify it before you get all giddy and unnecessary, shall we? He's an ex Marine (It doesn't say, but he may even be SBS-the Navy/marine version of the SAS, same basic remit as the USN Seals). The failure rate in the RM on basic training up to gaining the green beret is about 90%. In fact their own recruitment advertising says 99.9% need not apply.

Now, being a RM means he'll be TRAINED in a LOT of different weaponry. He may even (probably) have active duty experience, involving CQ battle training and real world experience.. All using live rounds, all trained under extreme conditions, all trained whilst being under close scrutiny, and all subject to a great deal of shit hitting the fan if he messes up...

Compare and contrast shall we to the average Joe and Josephine who has NEVER had cause to be in extreme CQ battle or been trained for it. Because they don't have to, they don't need to, because if they did, 99.9999% would be disallowed from having anything more dangerous than a paper bag that goes 'Bang' when inflated and slapped, let alone a firearm...

I think that covers it. I can expand on it even more if you want? As for 'anti-gun ranting'...Hmmmmm. Did you know that more American people (including civilians) have been killed in the USA since 1776, than in all the wars America has been involved in combined in the same period?

Oh, I can shoot, and was trained to do so by RAF instructors.

[Foodlion]

I think that covers it. I can expand on it even more if you want? As for 'anti-gun ranting'...Hmmmmm. Did you know that more American people (including civilians) have been killed in the USA since 1776, than in all the wars America has been involved in combined in the same period?

Knives, poison, vehicles, DUI, fights, and so on...Death is horrible in all forms not just guns, and I'm sure since the population increase in that span would not help curve the murder rate even if this were a peaceful nation. 

Lets talk about Mexico. It's illegal for civilians to own firearms. The armless civilians are not living peacefully I promise you that. Would you prefer Mexico keep it's civilians disarmed?

[NowhereInTime]

... Would you prefer Mexico keep it's civilians disarmed?

Yes, please.

[Yorkshire pud]

Knives, poison, vehicles, DUI, fights, and so on...Death is horrible in all forms not just guns, and I'm sure since the population increase in that span would not help curve the murder rate even if this were a peaceful nation. 

The USA has the highest murder rate per capita in the world; peaceful, mon-peaceful nations included. You don't get many drive by poisonings, knifings, fights. And being pissed whilst driving is wrong, it doesn't justify being killed by a gun though.

Lets talk about Mexico. It's illegal for civilians to own firearms. The armless civilians are not living peacefully I promise you that. Would you prefer Mexico keep it's civilians disarmed?

Oh? I thought you wanted to take about UK anti gun rantings? Mexico is corrupt; it is ruled by gangs. In a situation like that, the gun debate is almost a side show, because it's a symptom of the overall picture. Several other South American countries are similar, and a LOT of African countries.

Re: The Marine; apparently he is SAS, which is the elite. So not the average civilian, well, not civilian at all, but hey, mere details never stopped uninformed tenuous argument.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/09/24/kenya-terror-attack-sas-soldier-hero_n_3981003.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Cuk-ws-bb%7Cdl7%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D210996

[Juan]

The USA has the highest murder rate per capita in the world;

Wrong.  I've linked to this before.  It's actually homicide rate, so it includes more deaths than murders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

[Yorkshire pud]

Wrong.  I've linked to this before.  It's actually homicide rate, so it includes more deaths than murders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Okay.. give you that one. But it's still over 13000 people. UK is less than 800, and about 40 of those were guns. But we also include death caused by dangerous driving (which may or may not involve alcohol, narcotics, prescription drugs), and industrial deaths.

[Juan]

I would think what we call "vehicular homicide" would be included in the US stats - drunk, drugged, criminally negligent, etc.

[Yorkshire pud]

I would think what we call "vehicular homicide" would be included in the US stats - drunk, drugged, criminally negligent, etc.

Sure as do most countries with an accountable legislature. The point though as made in the OP, is that the guy who did what he did in Nairobi isn't just anyone. And anyone couldn't do what he did. If anyone had tried, they'd have probably got themselves killed and many more besides.

Incidentally, get your truck sorted? 

[PB the Deplorable]

About the Kenyan Mall terrorists.  Kenya is just south of Somalia.  Somalia doesn't have a government - or actually, the one it does is in exile and has little power.

Somalia has been without a central government since the 80s.  President Bush I sent the Marines in to provide security for aid groups handing out food because the various armed gangs were stealing it.  Pres Clinton tried to help by escalating our mission to 'nation building' but that ended with the Blackhawk Down situation.

The main gang is al-Shabaab, who has ties to al-Qaeda.  Kenya has had skirmishes with al-Shabaab over the years, as part of an international coalition of African forces involved with fighting them. 

The US has generously allowed thousands of Somali refugees to resettle here and become citizens.
 

News reports are saying that al-Shabaab is responsible for this incident.  US officials estimate at least 50 of these refugees have retuned to Somalia for terrorist training (just as Dzhokhar Tsarnaev returned to Chechnya for his training). They are reporting several of these US citizens originally from Somalia are involved in this attack.

Clearly if people like this are being allowed to immigrate here, then we are either unable to properly vet Muslim immigrants, or aren't doing a good enough job of it.

Because of that, it's very likely only a matter of time until this sort of terrorism become routine here in the US.   

[PB the Deplorable]

... The point though as made in the OP, is that the guy who did what he did in Nairobi isn't just anyone. And anyone couldn't do what he did...

And if you were deciding things, he wouldn't have had his gun with him

[NowhereInTime]

And if you were deciding things, he wouldn't have had his gun with him

Wrong.  This is the point made by gun control advocates that conservatives obfuscate or outright miss.  This person is a trained soldier; someone used not only to operating a weapon but using it under threat.  I have no issue with well trained people who have been drilled to respect their weapon's power and handle these weapons with care.  Well regulated.

[Yorkshire pud]

And if you were deciding things, he wouldn't have had his gun with him

He would. I won't go through why again. But We've all seen the movies, anyone can be that guy! No they can't. But you know that.

[FightTheFuture]

This story serves as a stark reminder that the only way to stop bad guys with guns, is good guys with guns.

Long live a vigorously defended 2nd amendment.

[Yorkshire pud]

This story serves as a stark reminder that the only way to stop bad guys with guns, is good guys with guns.

Long live a vigorously defended 2nd amendment.

Yeah, because 320 million people have been trained by the SAS, SBS, USN Seals, Green Berets, and come up to their exacting standards with discipline, weapon control, Close quarter battle training (all with live rounds in 'kill houses'), in all situations, with instructors scrutinising every last detaill...Oh hang on, damn.. They haven't. Here's a clip from a fictional series from a few years ago, but based on the training they do. The advisor was an ex SAS corporal. But don't his rank cloud it, rank is almost irrelevant in the SAS.


ultimate force season 1 episode 1 part 1

First 4 minutes will tell you enough. As you say, good guys...

[FightTheFuture]

The notion that before a person can carry a concealed firearm, he must first meet the exacting standards of a special operator`s training is so ludicrous as not to even warrant serious discussion. But, please feel free to bloviate away; it makes for good, old-fashioned entertainment.

[NowhereInTime]

The notion that before a person can carry a concealed firearm, he must first meet the exacting standards of a special operator`s training is so ludicrous as not to even warrant serious discussion. But, please feel free to bloviate away; it makes for good, old-fashioned entertainment.

Yes, you're right.  For goodness sakes, guns don't kill people!  Put them in boxes of Cracker Jack! Training?  We don't need no stinking training!  How dare anyone suggest  that in order to possess a weapon they should be trained on its use and care!  Ludricrous!  Absurd!  While we're at it, enough of these "driving tests" - they interfere with my God Given right to do what I want, when I want, how I want because, as the Bible says, "It's ALL ABOUT ME!"
Well put!

[Yorkshire pud]

The notion that before a person can carry a concealed firearm, he must first meet the exacting standards of a special operator`s training is so ludicrous as not to even warrant serious discussion. But, please feel free to bloviate away; it makes for good, old-fashioned entertainment.

My instinct was to treat your comment with the contempt and ridicule it deserves; but no, if nothing else, I'm a reasonable man and willing to explain in simple terms to the hard of thinking, or as A A Milnes' Pooh would have it "very little brain"

But no; I will instead answer with a rhetorical question; How good is your potential enemy? The guy in the OP is a soldier of an elite fighting group; The number in the SAS regiment is classified, but it's rumoured to be about 200 at any one time. To be taken onto selection, means already being a soldier in one of the green regiments (e.g. Parachute reg). To do what it takes to gain the sand coloured beret at the end would kill you or me. As it would almost any civilian, three soldiers died on the selection course in Wales this summer.

Now, the guy who rescued the people in Nairobi, is one of those who didn't fail, and is training almost each and everyday when he's at work if he isn't on OP's.. With many different weapons, so it becomes second nature. Having (with live rounds) to be in training scenarios where he makes millisecond decisions on shooting the baddies and protecting the hostages AND looking out for his team and himself, and assessing the firefight as it evolves if he needs to change tactics halfway though..

Are you seriously saying that anyone who has a gun is capable of making those decisions as and when they evolve? Are you also of the opinion that pilot licenses should be abolished too? Or Medical degrees to practice being a Doctor? If not, why not? Or don't you think being able to shoot in a high stress situation (as in against living people) is a disciplined skill honed from years of training? If most people think like you, it's hardly any wonder there are so many kids being killed by their parent's loaded weapons, they're too fucking stupid to breed let alone have firearms.

[onan]

The notion that before a person can carry a concealed firearm, he must first meet the exacting standards of a special operator`s training is so ludicrous as not to even warrant serious discussion. But, please feel free to bloviate away; it makes for good, old-fashioned entertainment.

Thirty percent of my class shouldn't have been able to get the license.

Paranoia, irrational hatred, and bragging about how he hoped certain people came onto his property.

[Quick Karl]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/new-study-demolishes-almost-every-gun-control-myth/

Link to study http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294?journalCode=rael20#.Usjcg02A3Dd

EDIT: sorry I didn't realize you had to pay to read it, I am already a member so I didn't have t pay.

[Yorkshire pud]

These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level.

Not definitive then? Looking at that the scope is restrictive enough to not include non assault weapons, openly displayed weapons and pretty much anything that wouldn't give them the findings they've come up with.

What it doesn't mention (for example); is incidences of gun deaths from ND's, those with non diagnosed mental illness, or gun crime as a percentage of prison population.

Although the spectacular headline includes 'demolishes' and 'myth', to try and give it some gravitas, it doesn't actually quote any statistics. It doesn't state demographics, it doesn't mention anything other than the quote above.

We can all do studies, but unless the base point, the criteria of the analysis, and a controlled set of statistics can be produced, it's meaningless. 

[onan]

Funny that the CDC can't provide any current data to refute or augment this assertion (they were stopped by congress).




Then there is this.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/author-of-gun-control-demolishing-study-also-proved-forced-ultrasound-laws-work/

The correct way to report on this would perhaps be to say “Economics Professor Claims Study Shows That Concealed Carry Results in Fewer Murders,” unless you’ve actually read the full study.