A Little Hard Data to PO the Anti-Gun Crowd
Some “gentle souls” out there think all guns should be banned. They are indeed ignorant and misguided fools.
They’re probably beyond education on this point. But I’ll try to enlighten them anyway.
There are many reasons the 2nd Amendment recognizes an individual’s right to keep and bear arms. Some are related to liberty. But one even more near and dear to all of us is personal protection.
Here is a short, “quick and dirty” list of average police response times to emergency calls (generally defined as violent crimes in progress requiring an immediate police response) in major cities in the US. In smaller towns and rural areas, the response time can be expected to be longer.
- Minneapolis - around 8 minutes
- NYC - a bit over 9 minutes
- Denver - from 14 to 17 minutes
- Chicago - between 3 and 4 minutes (allegedly)
- DC – between 7 and 9 min (old data)
- Atlanta – 11+ minutes
- Phoenix – between 4 and 6 minutes
- Dallas – about 6 minutes
- Houston - about 5 minutes
- Seattle – about 6.3 minutes
- Detroit -24+minutes!
- LA - 5.7 miutes
Nationwide Averages: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus/previous/cvus107.pdf
I’ve read somewhere that the average violent crime takes on the order of 1-2 minutes. That’s eminently believable; I damn well know someone with a knife can carve another person up like a steak to the point they won’t survive in a minute or less. A baseball bat can do the trick even quicker. So that means in only a small fraction of the cases (far less than 10%) would the police even be able to arrive during the crime – much less in time to prevent it, or to prevent injury of the innocent.
There’s a good reason for the old saying “When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.” It happens to be true.
Anti-gun fools, I don’t much care if you want to help criminals and make yourselves easy targets incapable of defending yourself against an armed attacker. But I take exception to you making it impossible for me to defend myself and my family.
And so does the US Constitution.
December 17th, 2012 at 12:41 pm
Don’t forget, the cops don’t even have any obligation to protect you: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html
December 17th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
That is the problem. They don’t care what is in the Constitution. They believe the all power government will protect them. How’d that work out for victims of Sandy and Katrina?
December 17th, 2012 at 12:48 pm
And after you’ve waited for the NYC cops to arrive, you’re more likely to be shot than the crook.
December 17th, 2012 at 12:50 pm
Hondo…the AP is reporting that mass murders are on the decline. Cannot find the cites for the article but I saw the “facts” on the Blaze–
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/associated-press-story-believe-it-or-not-mass-killings-are-not-on-the-rise-they-are-on-the-decline/
December 17th, 2012 at 12:54 pm
Detroit takes so long to respond because they send the SWAT out on every call. It takes some time strapping yourself up in all that high speed gear.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:04 pm
Me and my Sig P225 ended up standing between my neighbor with three broken ribs and her Marine ex-boyfriend who had just broken both doors to our apartment building. I was just taking out the trash and happened to have not taken my sidearm off.
911 was called. Despite being in the heart of our downtown, reporting a domestic violence call, and telling dispatch I had a gun and a carry permit they still took 5 to 10 minutes.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:19 pm
You forgot to include Memphis, a war zone unto itself.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:34 pm
Note: Those times are from dispatch to 10-23 (arrived on scene). Which usually means the officer is pulling up to the address – not face to face with the victim. I’d add another minute or two to those times.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:36 pm
Anonymous: likely the case in reality. I elected to report the data I found vice adding any corrections I couldn’t substantiate.
The reported data is bad enough.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:38 pm
We had a case where a person was being threatened in his home and the cops took over two HOURS to show up.
What most people don’t realize is that in my town of just over 30,000, there are at any given time SIX officers (two of whom are dispatchers) to cover an area of over 50 square miles.
The running joke around here is if someone calls in to report being beaten/raped/murdered (although no murders here in 10-plus years) the cops will say, “Can you come down and make a report?”
December 17th, 2012 at 1:39 pm
http://i1102.photobucket.com/albums/g450/law5876/2012-11-19095321.png
Not my pic, but one of a fellow gun board member who lives in WV.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:40 pm
Right. I appreciate your post and research and certainly wasn’t intending to be critical. Only trying to add some context from my patrol experience.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:42 pm
Spade: must be a Photoshop job, amigo. Everyone knows you don’t use that kind of gun for hunting!
Yes, I was being sarcastic. (smile)
December 17th, 2012 at 1:51 pm
Some idiots also think alien lizard people have infiltrated the government. The larger block of people that are talking about gun rights now aren’t the ones who want to take all guns away, they merely want to have a discussion on what’s reasonable — which, frankly, is a perfectly fine discussion to have.
Nobody is coming to take all your guns, I assure you. Hell, in another few years you’ll be able to print your own gun via a 3D printer — this has already been (mostly) done, and owning weapons for protection, among other reasons, is perfectly reasonable. We’ll never be able to prevent the occasional tragedy where someone just goes off, but if we can reduce the likelihood while not negatively impacting others, that’s a good goal to aim for.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:51 pm
When I took my AR10 on this year’s handcapped Deer hunt. All I heart from the Wardens is they would like to shoot it. Joe
December 17th, 2012 at 1:53 pm
It took an hour for a county deputy to get out to our house when my wife called 911. I confronted a group of trespassers cutting firewood in a National Forrest and using my driveway to haul it off. One of them tried to run me over at my gate. I touched the butt of my 1911 but did not draw it. I could not fire at a jeep that was driving away. We waited for the law and he cited them and chased them off. They were armed and one of them is known to be a bit crazy. Stuff like that happens out here all the time as a result of the meth phenomena. The cop was not the least worried about the .45 on my hip. He did say that it would look bad if I shot someone in the back.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:55 pm
There are those of us who would be willing to consider support for reasonable additional “gun controls” such as the requirement to lock up guns in a house where there is a person residing who has mental disorder(s), in exchange for adequate care and control of such mentally ill persons. Proper diagnosis and treatment for those with mental disorders is woefully inadequate in this country. The inadequate diagnosis and treatment of those with mental disorders is analogous to patients with angina being sent home with nothing but a prescription for a painkiller to control chest pain. The doctor would be sued for malpractice, but shrinks are getting away with psychiatric malpractice every day.
As most of us who read TAH know and understand we already have lots of laws controlling the ownership and use of guns, many written by those with little or no understanding of guns, exemplified by the laughable categorizing of “types” of assault weapons.
Most of us understand that the kindergarten massacre could just as easily have been committed without any weapons except hands and feet in the time it took for police to arrive. We need to more closely control the mentally ill, not the instruments they use.
December 17th, 2012 at 1:56 pm
@14
Exactly how would the “legislation” that is being proposed have stopped the tragedy. You people want to have a conversation, please tell me that.
There was no reason the women who owned the guns shouldn’t have had the guns, and her son was DENIED a gun when he went to buy one. Gun regulations worked. Short of opening up medical records and finding out who is mentally ill and again THE ACTUAL GUN OWNER WASN’T- you wouldn’t have stopped this tragedy.
SO this discussion you want to have has nothing to do with this tragedy which was about mental illness and personal responsibility. It is just another attempt to use something tragic to control people and take away rights.
December 17th, 2012 at 2:09 pm
@18: Let’s be careful with the ‘you people’ notion – I’m FOR gun rights. Maybe there’s more that can be done to make it safer, and maybe that’s worth the cost and maybe it isn’t, I don’t know – hence why a discussion isn’t a bad thing. Lay out all the options, examine them carefully, and go from there.
No gun legislation would have stopped the tragedy – none. Nothing could have done so once the shooter was in the mindset of committing it.
The discussion I want to have is what DO we do – and maybe the answer to that is ‘nothing’, since tragedies like this are going to happen no matter what we do. But maybe we need better training on gun safety? Maybe we look at technology that restricts fire access to owners? Maybe the costs of those are excessive given the millions of gun owners and, thankfully, relatively ‘few’ victims, despite the sadness at their loss. But if you can’t even discuss this without digging in your heels, calling out someone who wants to hear the facts and pointing a finger saying, ‘you people’, … well, that’s just not helpful, in my opinion.
December 17th, 2012 at 2:17 pm
Anonymous (19): your position regarding having a sane discussion is reasonable. But we’re a loooooooong way way from having the technology for stuff like reliable person-locking triggers; requiring something like that today is simply a ban by another name.
The default position for any discussion should be to do nothing unless the proposed solution is demonstrably workable and has a chance to improve the situation without unduly restricting individual freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution. However, that’s not what the left wants here. They want some kind of additional controls, and they’re going to pull out all the stops to try and get them – whether or not they do a damn thing worthwhile.
Unfortunately, the default for most politicians seems to be, “We MUST do something – we can figure out later if it worked.” Sorry, I just ain’t buying that option. Something about the road to hell’s pavement comes to mind.
December 17th, 2012 at 2:33 pm
@20
You mean something like “we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in the bill”?
December 17th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Good points, Hondo.
Not to change the subject, but for some reason that reminds me of the law-makers in both Washington and Colorado, who seem to be wondering about how best to determine the legal limit of THC in the system for those caught “driving under the influence of drugs”.
Seems to me so subjective. It’s almost as if they thought, “Let’s pass the law, legalizing marijuana possession” without considering the ramifications of doing so over the broader scope of the issue.
Now they’re having to back peddle and consider things they should have considered in the first place, before legalizing it.
“We can figure it out later.” Indeed.
December 17th, 2012 at 2:51 pm
@20: I just brought thumbprint trigger-locks as an example, but to take that and run with it, my position wouldn’t be that we should require that right now, but that if that IS deemed a useful (partial) solution, we should maybe invest in the technology, or at least make it known that in, say, 10 years, that’s what we’re aiming for, which might stimulate some commercial-sector investment in the technology. In other words, we won’t get there without some reasonable understanding that that is a direction we need to move in. Put another way, such methods won’t be built if they’re not going to be used. Solutions, even partial ones, needn’t be immediate.
As for the politicians, I agree that they’re all scrambling to be seen ‘doing something’, which is never, ever good. Unfortunately, given the way tragic events like this are covered in the news, I feel it’s only a matter of time before enough of these happen in a person’s collective memory where the majority sentiment is to support it. Given that, I’d rather jump the gun (so to speak) and make sure that any effort that IS proposed is a reasonably sensible one.
I don’t know what form that takes, mind you – even using the example above of fingerprint locks, that doesn’t stop people from printing their own non-lockable frame in a similar 10-year time-frame. It’s a tough issue, undoubtedly, but I just think it warrants discussion rather than the oversimplification of ‘guns are bad/good’ that it often breaks down to.
December 17th, 2012 at 2:55 pm
@19 I suspect the “do nothing” is probably the most likely outcome. If mom denied to herself that the boy was a nutjob and took him out of public school to home school him thereby avoiding any detection by public officials there was little to be done to stop this.
A reasonable discussion about mental illness in America is difficult, but I believe appropriate at this time. A major question about mental illness is whether or not an effective program is possible without abusing those in its care. Sadly, I also believe we will never find every broken mind before it erupts. I am also convinced that disarming the law-abiding public does little to advance that discussion on mental illness and the appropriate responses.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:01 pm
VOV: sadly, I’m quite positive you’re right. Some problems just don’t have solutions.
Finding every “broken mind before it erupts” would require the ability to perfectly predict an individual human’s reactions and behavior under any and all circumstances. We are no where near being able to do that, today. And IMO, we never will be able to do that.
The other possible solution is an absolute dictatorship that enforces order with an iron hand. And even then, one can argue that just moves the source of such violence from the disgruntled to the ruling oligarchy.
I’ll bass on that, thanks. That cure is worse than the disease. Just ask those who survived the Gulag.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:17 pm
I used to live in Chicago. In fact, I lived there for 30 years, until I moved out to where I am now.
My last apartment was 1.5 blocks from the local police precinct station — walking distance. I was in the north end of the city, commonly known as Rogers Park. My street was pretty quiet most of the time. One night, two guys got into a fistfight out in from of my building, so I called the 911 number, told the dispatcher what was going on and said that a squad car was needed “now”, because those two acted like they were going to kill each other. The noise from them was quite loud.
As I said, I was a block and a half away from the precinct station. I noted the time it took for a squad car to finally pull around the corner and two cops to get out of it — 12 long minutes. In those twelve minutes, one of those guys could have badly injured or killed the other one.
So I moved. But before I moved, I went to the local police station, which is about a mile and a half away, and asked how long it would take them to arrive for a 911 call. They said, depending on distance, about 2 to 5 minutes. They also showed me their log books as confirmation. So I moved.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:19 pm
@24
Exactly right, guns were not the systemic problem in ANY of these shootings.. Mental illness and violence was. Let’s have a conversation on those issues..
@19
You want a discussion? I gave you a discussion. The problem is discussion leads to legislation, and I am sick of the government trying to legislate personal responsibility. It can’t be done. And I said “you people” want a conversation … Did you not identify yourself as wanting a conversation? I thought I read that.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Maybe I’m black-helicoptering this, but this could be the plan. First an Executive Order type move, or something rushed through Congress (I’m betting some eager beaver already has a candidate bill in hand). This would eliminate or greatly curtail the right to own weapons of the home-defense type.
Then, as crime skyrockets, people will be going to the gov’t asking them for help. Obama’s already got a plan for that.
Remember this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwaAVJITx1Y
December 17th, 2012 at 3:38 pm
Ouch that was a rough one John (but true). In regards to SWAT what happened Jose Guerena’s case?
Also riding NJ/NYC transit for work, i always think of crazy Ivan a with a knife ( see http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/nyregion/13stab.html? )pagewanted=all&_r=0 ).
Of course we all know how 911, Madrid and the London bombings went down.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
@28
Reading some of the boards like at MSNBC I see people calling for Obama to EO it. I can’t believe people would willingly cede control of their Constitutional Rights to one person, but that is just me..
December 17th, 2012 at 3:43 pm
I’ve seen that video, but it was from a campaign speech Bo made in 2008. Nothing has been done. Yes, there’s the NDAA bill, but has anyone seen any kind of uptick in a lean toward martial law? I haven’t. In fact, the laziness of the incumbent, who now gets his second term, has been in the forefront of everything else that I’ve. It’s all ‘yap, yap, yap,” and not much else. And remember, the NDAA was sponsored by John McCain (GOP) and Harry “The Finger” Reid and passed behind closed doors in 2010.
Here’s the full text: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr2647/text
Nothing has happened. The whispered “I’ll have more flexibility after the election” tete-a-tete between Bo and Medvedev might have resulted in — well, something — but nothing has happened. Bo won the election, he’s still the president until Jan. 20, 2013, and he’s had full authority to implement — well, whatever — and has done NOTHING. And he’s NOT going to. He gets re-inaugurated on 1/20/13, for another four years of do-nothing.
So can you get off the panic track for a few minutes? You know, take a breath, pull yourself together, and look around. Nothing’s changed. There’s no secret plot to throw everyone into FEMA camps. It hasn’t happened yet, so when is it going to? On Dec. 21?
The discussion is already in the works. The rebuttal is already in the works. After a few weeks/months of bickering, it will die away until the next mass attack grabs the MSM attention span and then it will start all over again.
My view of the left or libtards, or whatever you want to call them, is that they’re a bunch of little kids who want everything handed to them on a plate, who want NO responsibility for anything, and who want Mommy and Daddy looking after them for eternity.
Well, life is not that way. It sucks and you have to take responsibility for your own life, and take care of yourself on your own. That’s what the grownups do in the real world.
Deal with it.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:55 pm
To address one thing that keeps coming up, the distance to the police department has nothing to do with response times. The PD doesn’t keep a few officers and cruisers on stand-by at the station to respond to calls for service.
The reason that response times are long are multiple, fewer cops on the streets, the computer programs that all dispatch centers run now, that prioritize calls for service. Those programs are written by administrations of the PD’s, people long removed from any common sense.
It’s likely that the officers on the streets are tied up on barking dog calls, domestics, neighborhood disputes, loud music complaints, a drunk driver or two, accidents or the one or two free cars, are located on the far end of the city or county.
So, depend on the government to keep you safe, or depend on yourself.
And, Nik @28, Di-Fi(Feinstein) has already said she’ll have a bill ready to be introduced on day one of the next congress.
December 17th, 2012 at 3:59 pm
For anyone who wants to see exactly what and how many executive orders have been signed into effect since 2001, go to this link:
http://1461days.blogspot.com/
Tons of stuff. Have fun reading it all.
December 17th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
For anybody who cares, over 43 laws were violated by that scum who killed the kids. Do you think another law would help? Do you think gun laws inconvenience anybody but law abiding citizens? Do you think if he couldn’t get guns he wouldn’t have done anything(like a propane tank and a flare gun?)
The 2nd amendment is 2nd only to free speech in how important it was to our framers.
You can have my guns lead first, after prying them from my cold dead hands. Cliche? Don’t care, still applies. Oh and bring a lot of friends, and let them go first…
December 17th, 2012 at 4:52 pm
“The 2nd amendment is 2nd only to free speech in how important it was to our framers”.
The “framers” never saw twenty innocent little kids murdered in their classroom.
December 17th, 2012 at 4:56 pm
Look at these pictures and tell me we should maintainthe status quo.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/17/sandy-hook-school-girl-plays-dead-survives_n_2315947.html#slide=1889511
December 17th, 2012 at 4:58 pm
And as I’ve told you elsewhere, Joe: had one member of the staff been armed that day, there’s a pretty good chance that those 20 children would still be alive.
The school was a gun-free zone by legal fiat. So the only one there with a gun was the shooter.
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
December 17th, 2012 at 4:59 pm
OK, here we go – a blatant appeal to emotion in an attempt to steer the subject away from logical discussion.
Transparent as hell, Joe – and an ineffective attempt to boot. We’ve see that tried too many times before for that to be effective. Try again.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:00 pm
@37 Not even a member of the staff. I would venture to say that EVERY one of those parents who lost their child wishes they have been in front of their child protecting them with a gun.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:08 pm
@39. Damn straight. How many of us would have given anything to have been there with a weapon? I know the answer: all but Joe, Insipid, and the John Cole’s juiced balloonists.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:10 pm
@35
Bullshit. Cherry Valley Massacre.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:10 pm
One of the 8 members of John Cole’s worldwide fan club (Bethany) wrote last night that she doesn’t carry anything but mace. Sounds reasonable to me. Glock vs. Mace at 50 feet.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:13 pm
“OK, here we go – a blatant appeal to emotion in an attempt to steer the subject away from logical discussion.
Bulls**t Hondo. The fact that you are willing to continue sacrificing little children on your 2nd amendment altar shows you, like so many posters here, have little empathy. Don’t know if you started out that way or the service made you so cold. But you are on the wrong sideof history.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:13 pm
LEFT BRAIN:
With all that extra time on hand, perhaps in a nation where guns are taken away or restricted from law abiding citizens (wishful thinking by some), we can train everyone on how to reason with the criminal who has a gun.
Problem solved!
RIGHT BRAIN:
Arm responsible adults. Rounds on target.
Probelm solved!
December 17th, 2012 at 5:15 pm
@43 Joe this country is willing to sacrifice babies on the privacy right alter. Let me guess you are perfectly fine with that?
Second evil exists in the world even in a world without guns. Liberals love to dream up their utopian version of the world. Evil will always exist. Protecting ourselves from such evil is a NATURAL God given, creator-given right.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:16 pm
#43 – Joe… Instead of reading into everything posted here with so much misdirected emotion, take a step back and READ what is written. Think and ponder about it for a moment. Maybe you’ll get the point of view that’s being offered instead of jumping to conclusions?
December 17th, 2012 at 5:19 pm
Personally, AirCave, Hondo, et al., it might be more effective to give teachers some kind of defense training that doesn’t involve the use of or need for guns. By that, I mean using whatever is at hand as a deflection or distraction so that there is time for the kids to get to hiding/safety, maybe out of the room. It should be as important as a fire drill.
You don’t do kids a favor by avoiding the issue, either. They’re better off it it’s dealt with directly. I say this because my mother and father had a blunt and very up-front discussion with my sister, my brother and me when Starkweather and his girlfriend went on their rampage. It was also discussed at the grade school I was attending. I think that kids are a lot more sensible about these things than parents are even remotely willing to admit to themselves.
And get over the idea that pleading with a shooter is going to have any effect other than getting killed. Being nice has to go right out the window along with good manners, when someone is attacking you. That’s what self-defense classes taught in the 1970s, and it still holds true today.
What classroom object could you use on a shooter? Oh, a fire extinguisher. A chair or stool. The flagpole in the corner. A pair of scissors, if you can get that close.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:22 pm
I completely disagree the framers didn’t see stuff as horrific as that! What about what cannons did to houses with people who occupied them! What about the families destroyed for supporting the revolution. They sacrificed all! Try again!
December 17th, 2012 at 5:38 pm
What’s next, weapons training for kindergarteners in the name of the 2nd? How much more surreal can it get?
December 17th, 2012 at 5:42 pm
@49
While we appreciate your suggestion, you’re fucking crazy, so let’s just ignore it.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:49 pm
@49. Actually, I skipped BBs with my son when he was 4 and he went straight to a short .22. He’s a helluva shot and, I might add, as safe a weapons’ handler as they come. So, yeah, that’s a good idea, Joey.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:53 pm
35,
The framers saw hundreds of their countrymen murdered by a tyrant, with thousands more to come if they had ceded their means of defense to said tyrant.
What does it say about your empathy when you stand on the bodies of innocent children and adults alike, and use them as a bully pulpit from which to demonize and defame law-abiding people who had nothing to do with a despicable act of evil. You’re a ghoul, plain and simple.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:54 pm
@35 They had seen entire families destroyed by an oppressive regime Joe, they felt the importance of owning a firearm to protect yourself from crime and the government was a fundamental right of every citizen.
More law doesn’t stop this kind of crime, the only shot (maybe) was if this kid’s mom had taken his illness as seriously as it apparently was and we had a system for dealing with this level of mental illness effectively and proactively. I don’t believe our current system does that however, so I don’t see this crime being prevented. Had this boy no access to firearms he could just as easily walked into the school and detonated himself and a classroom full of children or an auditorium full.
Knee jerk responses make for compelling television and radio soundbites, but typically make p1ss poor policy.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:56 pm
Maybe ghoul was a bit harsh, sorry about that. You’re more like a vulture.
December 17th, 2012 at 5:56 pm
They never saw one wacko with a Bushmaster take out twenty 1st graders in the space of a couple of minutes, I guarantee you that. The 2nd is an anachronism we are beter off without, or at least in a heavily amended state.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:00 pm
55: Joe – are you serious? Cannonball explosions? What happens if that sick had used a propane tank? Would you be outlawing them?
December 17th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
Joe,
They also never saw someone like you instantaneously transmit sheer idiocy to a worldwide audience at the click of a mouse, or the push of a touch screen either. If we follow Joe logic (a contradiction in terms if there ever was one), the world is better off if you limit your exercises of the 1st Amendment to shouting on street corners and writing with feather pens on parchment.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
Apparently those families, including children, were less “dead” because the shooter didn’t kill them quite fast enough.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:02 pm
@55. Okay, Joe, it’s true that George Washington didn’t fire a Bushmaster. He never used a cell phone or a computer either. I’m guessing he never flew in a plane or drove a car, let alone a tank. Chances are George never drove a submarine or a helicopter or even a speed boat. Shall I go on?
December 17th, 2012 at 6:07 pm
What’s it say Power Ranger? It says that myself, and about 300 million Americans, and the rest of the civilized world are sick of apologists who are in favor of allowing 8500 people a year to be slaughtered by guns. That’s what it says.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:07 pm
Air-Cav,
You make a good argument for the constitution as a living, evolving document. Thanks
December 17th, 2012 at 6:08 pm
@60
Your estimation of 300 million Americans is obscenely off.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:09 pm
Joe: what, you don’t like freedom? Then as I’ve also told you before: just freaking move to Europe if you don’t like the US. After you’ve (1) proven you’ve moved, and (2) provided verifiable proof you’ve renounced your US citizenship, I’ll send you some $$$ to help defray the cost of your one-way ticket. It will be money well-spent.
That’s if you can find any Euroweenie country that will have you, of course. Most of them have standards, even if they no longer have balls.
And for the record, since you seem dense enough to need it spelled out for you: no one here is interested in ” little children on (any) 2nd amendment altar”. We just are adults who realize that (1) evil exists, (2) insanity exists, and (3) some things cannot always be prevented without a cure that is worse than the disease. Such massacres by demented jerks don’t happen in absolute dictatorships like North Korea. Such things – and worse – happen at the hands of the government.
You want perfect security? Then kiss freedom goodbye. You want freedom? Then forget perfect security. In the real world, it’s an either/or choice.
If you’d rather be a secure slave than a free citizen, please do so in another nation. We have too many like that already.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:13 pm
I don’t buy into your concept of “freedom”. Yours is a phony, commercially generated version courtesy of Smith & Wesson.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:14 pm
@61. No, Joe, I made no such argument. In point of fact, I made no argument at all. I never even mentioned the Constitution. Nor did I allude to it. I know you are desperate for a confederate, Joe, but do try to maintain some semblance of honesty.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:15 pm
@60 Cars kill more people- lets ban cars.. Abortion certainly kill more kids in two days then guns do all year. Want to go on a ban of things that kill people Joe?
December 17th, 2012 at 6:15 pm
Nik: indeed he is. Latest polls I saw showed the US population favored less gun control – not more.
But cut Joe some slack. He’s been a bit irrational and edgy ever since the 7th Circuit Court of appeals told Illinois to go pound sand, held that the 2nd Amendment means what it actually says about the right to “keep and bear arms” – and gave them 6 months to fix it. Ever since, he’s been acting like a spoiled child who can’t find his “blankie” at nappy-time.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
2-17, you made a great argument for the constitution as a living, breathing, evolving document, you’re just not aware you did.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:19 pm
@64 Then you don’t buy into the concept of the freedom that this country was founded on. Read Federalist papers number 46 where Madison talks about the difference between the armed citizenry in America and the poor unarmed citizenry of Europe.
I find it funny that you Joe come on here and clammer for “gay rights” and “gay marriage” neither which appears in the Constitution, but you don’t buy into the concept of the ACTUAL FREEDOMS written in the Bill of Rights.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:20 pm
Screw it. Let’s just ban people. No more murder..no more need for home and personal defense…
Oh…wait…
That’s what some folks don’t get. As long as there are people, there is going to be murder. As long as there are people, some of those people are going to be crazy. And as long as some of those people are crazy, there are going to be senseless acts like Newtown. They’ll use whatever means are available to do it, be it guns, explosives, or a kitchen knife (Osaka, Japan – 2001).
So, let’s ban people.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:21 pm
Joe, you really need to read up on US and world history. I understand that you would cash it all in for a warm blanket and a binky. I get that. You are frightened. I get that. We are not and, thankfully, neither were those who settled this land, founded our government, expanded our territory, or preserved our freedom.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
Joe, in Washington’s time period, the favored method of mass slaughter was to herd the offenders into a church or barn, and then set it on fire. Anybody that attempted to run was bayonetted. Mass killing isn’t a new thing; the weapons used to perpetrate it are.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:22 pm
Hey Joe –
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o5GjG6lEXY
December 17th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
2-17 Air Cav: I think Joe was talking to me vice you re: “freedom”.
As Joe freely admits, he also doesn’t agree with the concept of freedom that the Constitution itself defines. Why? Because he very obviously disagrees with what the Constitution itself says in plain and unambiguous language.
Oh, and Joe? Last time I checked, the Constitution predates Smith & Wesson, Colt, Remington, and virtually all other US firearms manufacturers currently in existence – by decades.
Sheesh – I’m damned glad you do IT support vice teach in Durango. You’re clearly not qualified or bright enough to teach anything useful.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
No, Joe, I am quite lucid and sane. If I made the argument, I would certainly know it. What you did was coopt my words and apply them in a twisted fashion to something altogether different. In other words, your presumption is rebutted. I am quite aware of your penchant for silliness and stupidity. You and Insipid are two peas in a pod. You are both hysterics and the very notion that I would engage in a serious discussion regarding the Constitution with either of you is beyond the pail.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:27 pm
PintoNag,
..and (minor point), the effectiveness of those weapons.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:30 pm
I suppose, Joe, that you’re hiding a bunch of those “300 million” Americans in your coat pocket and the ones actually living in all the states are just NRA impostors thwarting our only chance at utopia?
If we take your 8500 number, even give you a numerical edge by assuming that each death occurred with a separate firearm, and apply it to ~80 million privately owned firearms in the US, that doesn’t even come close to 1% of those weapons that are used in negligent or criminal actions. Maybe you should go look at similar numbers for swimming pools, cars, power tools or high rooftops.
You won’t do that though, because it’s much easier to come here and blow hard about something you know nothing about.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
OK 2-17, If the founders had no inkling of a Bushmaster, cellphone, computer, plane, car or tank, how could they have any opinion on them? They wanted to leave some wiggle room for things they could ot foresee. We have a name for things that never change, are inalterable – dinosaurs, and we know how well they did.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:31 pm
Joe: ever heard of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory? Read up on that – or have someone find and read the material to you – and then tell me how less effective fire is as a means of mass killing than a firearm.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:36 pm
78,
That “wiggle room” is the Constitution and the Amendments process. If you really believe what you say about this, be honest about what you want and push for repealing the Amendments you think are too icky for your delicate sensibilities.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:36 pm
It’s kind of funny how Joe just blissfully goes on ignoring those facts that directly contradict what he says.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:43 pm
OK, so the lives of twenty kids are obviously not enough to make you budge one inch on your stance that you, and anyone at all without a felony, anyone, should be able to own as many powerful guns as they want, social consequences be damned. Thought experiment – how many kids being killed by guns at one sitting might make you think we’ve reached the break even point? Is there any number of young lives that would make you take a second look at the second?
December 17th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
How many inanimate objects will you ban in your quest to find “safety”? According to the FBI baseball bats kill more people, but you just want to ban guns…
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
December 17th, 2012 at 6:51 pm
Ah, here’s the second predictable rhetorical device: a rigged strawman situation – sort of like asking a person if they’ve stopped beating their spouse. People without a good argument are SO predictable!
C’mon, Joey-boy – that one is beneath even your abysmally low standards of argument.
One innocent child is obviously too many in a perfect world. Unfortunately, the world isn’t perfect. And it is not possible to provide perfect security, particularly when a demented attacker is willing to kill themselves also.
The OKC bombing killed 19 children under the age of 6, and 168 persons overall; 600+ others were injured. Why aren’t you arguing for a ban on rental trucks, fertilizer, and diesel fuel?
December 17th, 2012 at 6:52 pm
Ah Joey-boy. You go right on ahead, making up your own facts and dodging the ones that you find to be inconvenient.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:01 pm
Here’s a little thought experiment for you, Joey: in Durango, the average police response time is (if you believe the figures) between 3 and 4 minutes.
Three guys just broke into your house, surprising you and your wife at 2AM. Two have baseball bats; one has a knife. They’re standing in your hallway – about 15 feet away – and looking at you through the open door. They’re nicely backlit by the night light.
The one with the knife says they’re going to castrate you, tie you up, rape your wife while you watch – then kill you both, rob the place, and split. Then they start walking towards you.
Which makes more sense: for you to lie there pissing your pants in fear because you don’t have any way to defend yourselves and know you’re both going to die – or to pick up the pistol on your bedside table and to let 3 low-life bastards begin their eternal dirtnaps?
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:03 pm
82 Joe,
Your premise is garbage and full of fallacy; as such I reject it outright.
Like every other hysterical non-thinker on this issue, you place complete blame on the tool and give no responsibility to the person wielding the tool. The “social consequences”, as you put it, of the guns we own lawfully and responsibly, mean that there are roughly 80 million guns owned by free citizens in this country with a tiny fraction of a percentage point owned or used irresponsibly and/or unlawfully.
There are two big “break even” points reached here. One is the fact that the prison system can’t and shouldn’t be the only means by which ticking mental timebombs can be addressed and dealt with. The second is that a sign declaring “gun free” zones might as well say “HELPLESS VICTIMS HERE” in bright neon to the sort of twisted malignant narcissist who wants to make himself famous via mass murder.
Anyone who insists, in the face of all facts to the contrary, that criminalizing non-involved people who played no part in these atrocities and curtailing their rights of protection against those who will commit them, is not interested in a serious conversation.
Remember this discussion next time you want to call someone else a religious zealot of some kind, and then go look in a mirror.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
@ Hondo: You said, “And as I’ve told you elsewhere, Joe: had one member of the staff been armed that day, there’s a pretty good chance that those 20 children would still be alive.”
I agree that had someone been armed there’s a CHANCE for less of a loss of life, but I disagree with it being a ‘pretty good’ chance. Role-play it out – not knowing what is going on, being an administrator or teacher, and hearing shots fired. Where do you go? How do you sweep through the school? If you find a bunch of kids, do you escort them to safety or press on to find the perpetrator? How do you alert LEOs to your (allied) presence?
A lot of the answers to how likely a difference it would have made depend on the time-line of when the shots were fired. If, and I don’t currently have this information, all the deaths occurred in a 5-minute window, that’s vastly different than a 30-minute window.
Would an armed defender have made a difference? Entirely possible. Is there a ‘pretty good chance’ that it would have saved 20 kids? Damn unlikely, in my opinion. I’m willing to hear counter-arguments, obviously, but my point being that I think the merits of armed defense is lost in the debate when the benefits are exaggerated.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:22 pm
Anonymous: I’m not going to quibble over a choice of words such as “pretty good”, “good”, or “fair”. All denote a reasonably good chance – much higher than the 0% chance we saw.
The first shots were fired in the principal’s office. Sounds of them were broadcast over the entire school by the PA system. The children were killed some time afterwards. Anyone armed on-site would have been tipped that there was a shooter and had time to get ready.
If the armed individual had been the teacher in classroom where the first group of students were killed and kept his/her wits about them, very likely zero of the children would have died – the gunman would have bought it as he forced his way in through the door. Ditto had the principal been the one armed and had the option of dropping the shooter vice trying to tackle them barehanded (hands against either a pistol or rifle doesn’t generally work too well).
Other scenarios might have seen some – but less – loss of life.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:23 pm
88,
Nothing is guaranteed or taken for granted in such a horrible scenario. No one can say for absolute certainty what would have happened had circumstances been different and an armed defender were able to try and stop this fucker.
The certainty we do have, and did in this awful case, was that a killer had free reign to commit mass murder unanswered until outside help could be notified and mount a response.
Given those two scenarios, I’d rather go with the odds of someone willing, able and ready (as much as possible under the circumstances) to put a stop to the madness of a twisted psycho.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:28 pm
@88
“I agree that had someone been armed there’s a CHANCE for less of a loss of life, but I disagree with it being a ‘pretty good’ chance”
Even if it was only 50%…even if it was only 25%, that’s a hell of a lot better than 0%.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:36 pm
@89 & 90: I agree in principle that an armed defender would have resulted in a chance that this ended less badly for the kids, I just put it at the ‘low’ chance of it having made a difference. Still better than none, but because I view it as low, and because I feel that arming school staff runs the risk of other problems, I feel it’s not a compelling argument. You do, I don’t – no problem, we simply disagree.
The other part of that argument is what I mention above – I think, and you might not, that arming teachers runs the risk of other problems such as accidental deaths. I’m traveling right now and don’t have the statistics in front of me, but I’ll try to pop on later and give some actual numbers. Chances are we’ll disagree, but again, neither you nor I are politicians to my knowledge, so this is about learning, not policy.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:38 pm
92,
I’m not advocating for blanket and arbitrary arming of anyone that isn’t trained and ready to act accordingly. If the school districts want to have personnel, government or otherwise, specifically for this purpose I’m open to suggestions for what would work.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:38 pm
@82: In the case of Castle Rock vs. Gonzales, the SCOTUS said that the police do NOT have a Constitutional obligation to protect you. So; who are you going to turn to for your protection? Please enlighten us on your plans for my security and the security and protection of my children and grandchild. When it comes to them, I would rather my grandson go to elementary school where the teachers and staff are properly trained and armed, rather than waiting on the police to arrive. Since you are fixated on the 20 kids as your benchmark; would more of them be alive today had the staff and teachers of that school been trained and armed? We know that an armed citizen in the mall in Oregon saved countless lives by closing on the shooter with his weapon drawn and once the shooter saw it, stopped his attack and took himself out. Same thing happened in CT. The shooter took himself out once he saw a LEO pointing his weapon at him. In the mall shooting, the shooter took himself out before police even entered the mall.
I understand that the truth interferes with your utopian narrative, but sometimes you have to stop acting emotionally and start thinking with logic, reason, and common sense. The facts and statistics are against you, so you use the only thing you have; the memory of 20 innocent children to attempt to deflect. That’s makes you lower than snail shit.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:42 pm
@91: In a vacuum, yes, any chance is greater than no chance. The reality is that armed teachers might introduce other issues, though, such as accidental deaths, or even just poor gun safety mechanisms that results in easier access to firearms.
If you think that can’t happen, I’ll tell you some stories about kids hacking computers that are ‘secured’, or entering locked offices that they don’t have access to, etc.
December 17th, 2012 at 7:43 pm
Drunk drivers kill! We’ve been told that for years. But when it comes to guns, the guns kill. You figure it out. I can’t.
December 17th, 2012 at 8:53 pm
JOE – here’s a history lesson for you:
Since you’re a scholar on the 2d Amendment and still hung up on the “well regulated militia” thing, clearly you DO need a history lesson. The founding fathers never intended (or even envisioned) that 20 kids would get killed one day. So, here’s a little American history lesson since you asked for it:
First of all, the crime of the day back then was relative to the time. There were no “semi-automatic” weapons back then, but they still had their share of crime – and mass murder, too. Specifically, in an article found in the New Bern North Carolina Gazette, a story from July 7, 1775 reported that “‘a Demoniac’ shot three people and wounded a fourth with a sword, before being shot by others.” Back in those days, organized law enforcement didn’t exist (not as such as we have today), so who was responsible for maintaing good order and discipline? Yes, it was anyone considered part of a militia (able bodied men, ages 17 to 46). They were the law abiding citizens, who had guns handy and killed the lunatic so he wouldn’t rack up a greater body count.
Now go away and let the grown ups have a discussion.
December 17th, 2012 at 9:21 pm
Hey, Joey, deaths in the hospital, or related to a hospital stay have averaged about 170K to 190K since 2000. Where’s the angst and rending of garments for those victims?
There are far more victims that die from drunk driving, stoned driving, and medical malpractice than die from firearms, yet your panties remain unwadded over them.
December 17th, 2012 at 9:34 pm
CDC reports indicate cars are more dangerous than guns. When the left gives up their care, I will consider selling my guns.
http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/child_passenger_safety/cps-factsheet.html
Motor vehicle injuries are the leading cause of death among children in the United States.1 But many of these deaths can be prevented. Placing children in age- and size-appropriate car seats and booster seats reduces serious and fatal injuries by more than half.2
How big is the problem?
In the United States during 2009, 1,314 children ages 14 years and younger died as occupants in motor vehicle crashes, and approximately 179,000 were injured.2
One CDC study found that, in one year, more than 618,000 children ages 0-12 rode in vehicles without the use of a child safety seat or booster seat or a seat belt at least some of the time.3
December 17th, 2012 at 9:38 pm
@98. Jonn said it last evening in his response to that idiot Cole. The murderous rampage at the school makes the libs FEEL SAD AND BAD. They want not to feel sad and bad, so they want to ban guns to make themselves feel better, even though it accomplishes nada. Car accidents caused by drunk drivers just don’t impact the libs’ FEELINGS with the same force.
December 17th, 2012 at 11:19 pm
@100 – The REAL problem is that the liberal end does NOT want to FEEL anything. They want to maintain an even strain. Everything is fine. Everything is just fine. No disturbances in the pool that is their mindset, just stagnant water. They do not want to FEEL anything.
December 18th, 2012 at 4:56 am
#63, Hondo, but when Joe moves here and sees that schools are bombed with propane tanks and students are still killed, like what happened in Brindisi, Italy in May what’s he going to do?
Anders Breivik, as we all know was originally a redneck, 2nd Amendment supporting, gun owning American, right?
Hell, they even like to kill each other over here for sexy time. Just ask Foxy Knoxy.
Yeah, the WORLD is a fucked up place, Joe. If you ever left your basement and stopped eating cheetos, you’d know that.
Murders happen here all the time. Done with carpet knives, kitchen knives, pantyhose, or other implements of a non-warfighting variety. And there’s a large number of children and women that are victims. No mass murders, unless you want to count Eastern Europe, but to hijack your people’s rally cry, isn’t one too many?
It’s stupid here. Giving someone the finger is a ticket-able offense (found that one out myself). It falls under some defamation and insult of character laws. Everyone is supposed to play nice and get along. But people are still killing each other. Move over here for a few years and see what your ‘dream state’ looks like in reality.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Some have suggested teachers need to be armed, that would solve the problem. Here’s what Great Britain’s “The Telegraph” rightly thinks of that notion: “Such is the contagion of madness”. Couldn’t have put it better myself.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:07 pm
And here’s what the Dalai Lama has to say on the subject, “If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.”
We can play dueling quotes all day long.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:13 pm
Here’s another – “I’ve seen the enemy, and he is us”.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:15 pm
Incidentally, the Dalai Lama quote is particularly appropriate given that it was given in response to a girl asking what you should do if someone is pointing a gun at a classmate.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:19 pm
A situation that is only likely to happen in the US.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:22 pm
Joe: I fully agree. You’re definitely a part of the problem.
My offer stands. Move to somewhere in Europe (if you can find somewhere that will have you) and provide proof you’ve renounced your US citizenship, and I’ll provide some $$$ to help offset your travel there. It will be money well spent.
Now, do you have anything to add to the discussion – or are you just hanging out to demonstrate your ignorance?
December 18th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
No, you probably need it more than I do.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
Only in the US? Really?
Ask the folks in Norway about that, Joe. Then get back to us.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:26 pm
Joe: I can assure you I can spare some $$$, and won’t send any more than I can reasonably afford.
C’mon – take me up on my offer.
December 18th, 2012 at 3:30 pm
Wait…what are the gun control laws in Norway like?
December 18th, 2012 at 4:49 pm
Best I can tell they’re like most of Europe, Nik – much stricter than ours.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Norway
And the worst massacre of “children” using guns that I know of happened there in 2011, when Anders Breivik went off his nut and shot up a summer camp. 55 of the 69 killed were between the ages of 14 and 19. 110 other individuals were injured, 55 seriously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway_massacre
That was why I was telling Joe to check with folks in Norway and get back to us. He was saying such things only happen here. They don’t; they’ve also happened in Norway (above) and in the UK (twice, each killing 17). Copycat attacks were also foiled in the Czech republic and Poland earlier this year.
December 18th, 2012 at 4:57 pm
Wait..a school got shot up by some madman in a country with stricter laws than ours? Really? Naw….Must be nonsense made up by the Conservative Mainstream Media…
December 18th, 2012 at 5:58 pm
What Joe is saying is “get rid of everything that scares you”.
If you’re afraid of the dark, get rid of the dark. If you’re afraid of eggs, get rid of eggs. If you’re afraid of sofas, get rid of sofas. If you’re afraid of goosefeathers, then get rid of goosefeathers. I’m sure the geese would be happy to get rid of you, too.
You cannot just get rid of things that frighten you. You have to be a grownup and face them, whether you like it or not. There IS NO enemy. If you’re that afraid of the real world, then get some professional help with your problem, Joe, and grow the hell up. I’m tired of whining. You don’t have a solution to any problem. You just like to whine and contradict everyone — the mark of a completely immature personality.
You’re the problem, Joe. It’s not the guns. It’s not the people who have them. It’s you. You’re afraid of your own damned shadow and you’re so afraid of so many things, you’re never going to outlive your own fears because it’s easier to sit in a corner and complain and whine than it is to face them.
December 18th, 2012 at 5:59 pm
Joe. Here’s the deal…
Since you’re so fixated on England and Europe, you really should consider moving there.
Those of us who actually BELIEVE what is written in the Constitution and Bill of Rights do so like those who preceded us 237+ years ago, which is precisely why we fought and won indepence from the country you’d clearly be in.
December 18th, 2012 at 6:03 pm
I posted this earlier today on “Idiots on gun control”.
Here’s a statistic that one and all should find interesting, from the local news station noontime survey:
Should schoolteachers be trained to use and allowed to carry guns?
75% — Yes
25% — No
December 18th, 2012 at 6:29 pm
This is a program that is being implemented in some school districts:
http://www.schoolsecurity.org/trends/students_fight_gunmen.html
December 18th, 2012 at 6:35 pm
I have an idea. Let us look at this country that Joe seems to want. A country where the population cannot own weapons by rule of law. A country where mentally ill people must be registered with the government for the safety of the state. A country where the government takes care of the people from all threats against them, no matter where those threats come from.
Guess what, I didn’t just describe Joe’s perfect America (at least, I hope not). I just described Germany pre-WWII. That’s right, old Chancellor Hitler made Germany just like Joe wants America to be. Didn’t really end well for the Jews, Mentally Ill, or the Homosexuals, did it?
December 18th, 2012 at 6:41 pm
PH – #117
As I said before, such is the contagion of madness. You guys are fucking mad.
December 18th, 2012 at 6:43 pm
Flagwaver, you just described any one of the countries confiscated by Stalin at the end of WWII, under the heading of Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Isn’t it just a pity that the USSR went bankrupt in 1989 and was dissolved? If it still existed, we could ship Joe over there.
December 18th, 2012 at 6:47 pm
@103: Why haven’t you acknowledged the facts that armed citizens have stopped massacres from occurring in this country? I have provided 3 examples right off the top of my head and one of them was at a school. So; you and the British fishwrapper are wrong. Many can be stopped, you just don’t want to admit the obvious, because it doesn’t fit the narrative that you and the other utopians have built up for yourself.
December 18th, 2012 at 7:00 pm
@#46, jumping to conclusions is the only exercise Joey gets. His mind is made up, never, ever try to confuse him with facts.
Joey, if we’re mad, “fucking mad”, please, take Hondo up on his offer. You’re far too good to live with us madmen, and women.
On another note, it will be little noted and not remembered that you have nothing when someone lays a fact or two on you, except to go LaLaLa with your hands over your eyes.
December 18th, 2012 at 7:17 pm
Hey, Joe, if you don’t like it here, then leave. No one is stopping from moving to another country. Or to another planet. Just go.
I’ll repeat what I’ve already said: You’re the problem, Joe. It’s not the guns. It’s not the people who have them. It’s you. You’re afraid of your own damned shadow and you’re so afraid of so many things, you’re never going to outlive your own fears because it’s easier to sit in a corner and complain and whine than it is to face them.
Now one is going to keep you from moving some place else. Just go. What are you waiting for? Your birthday?
December 18th, 2012 at 7:49 pm
WE’RE fucking mad, Joe? That’s YOUR utopia, not ours.
December 18th, 2012 at 7:58 pm
We’re mad? How are we mad?
Because we aren’t afraid to stand up for ourselves?
Because we aren’t willing to just rollover and die?
Because we believe in defending ourselves?
Because we aren’t afraid of our own shadows, like you are?
How is that madness?
You can pull the covers up over your useless head and pull the pillow over your ears all you want to. It isn’t going to make the ‘bad’ stuff go away.
And no matter what you do, some day, you’re still going to die. And there’s nothing you can do about it.
That’s the real secret. We ALL know about it. And we aren’t afraid of it.
December 18th, 2012 at 8:04 pm
Not too far from where I live in Oregon, a gunman opened fire in a mall and shot three people. Do you know what stopped him from shooting more? Not his sense of decency, but the fact he saw a private citizen with a pistol. That caused the shooter to turn the gun on himself.
Guess what, the private citizen was going to shoot the guy, but refrained because the area behind the gunman was not clear. The guy, to my knowledge, was not a veteran or a cop. He was just a private citizen with a CCW.
Tell me, would you rather have left the gunman with his 900 rounds of ammunition and three weapons THAT HE STOLE remain in the building waiting for cops to arrive on scene?
The shooter took about two minutes from the time he walked into the food court until he shot himself. The police took seven minutes to respond from the first 911 call (after the shots began). Then, another ten minutes to actually effect entry into the mall. Tell me, would you want to wait seventeen minutes for the police to stop the shooter, or two minutes for a citizen to stop the shooter?
You decide.
December 18th, 2012 at 8:10 pm
Flagwaver, Joey would want to go reason with the citizen, because he was carrying one of those evil guns, and the mall should have been a gun-free zone.
And, how dare the citizen take into account his backdrop before he fired. It would have been so much better for the meme if he’d touched off a round or two and hit an innocent.
December 18th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
Really? Nobody went there?
*ahem*
Madness? THIS IS SPARTA!!!!
December 19th, 2012 at 7:25 am
Joe doesn’t have the guts to act on his apparent convictions by moving to another country and renouncing his US citizenship. I’ve called his bluff by offering to send him some cash to help pay for one-way plane fare after he does that and provides proof. He’s declined. See comments 108, 109, and 111 above.
December 19th, 2012 at 8:17 pm
@ 36: Joe, would there be more or fewer dead kids if a teacher had been armed?
Straight answer, please.