Rstanley0312 1 #1 July 27, 2012 http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspxLife is all about ass....either you're kicking it, kissing it, working it off, or trying to get a piece of it. Muff Brother #4382 Dudeist Skydiver #000 www.fundraiseadventure.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #2 July 27, 2012 Yup, CCW can be great. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #3 July 27, 2012 QuoteYup, CCW can be great. Given other heated debates on this forum, I think this is a gracious response. (Thanks, Skydekker) I would ask that people who advocate CCW not make more of this one incident than is warranted. It is another data point.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #4 July 27, 2012 QuoteQuoteYup, CCW can be great. Given other heated debates on this forum, I think this is a gracious response. (Thanks, Skydekker) I would ask that people who advocate CCW not make more of this one incident than is warranted. It is another data point. Here's another data point issue, which I'm sure will be soundly attacked by some, but what the hell: In the time it took that kook to stab 2 people at hand-to-hand range, I wonder how many pistol rounds he could have fired, and how many people might have been hit, at longer range? Objective military history has shown that modern firearms are more efficient at inflicting multiple casualties, at longer range and in a shorter time, than stabbing/cutting weapons are. Clinically speaking, without any agenda, it simply is what it is. But if someone asserts the same data point vis-a-vis a civilian context, even in a purely clinical manner - at least in the US - they're demonized and attacked in the hopes of silencing or overwhelming them. Hardly conducive to an open discussion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #5 July 27, 2012 You kind of lost me, Andy. I think you are arguing in favor of gun control because the same guy could have done more damage with a firearm. Then, you add the issue of long range in there to change the scenario. That changes things completely. When I was a cop, we reviewed tests and studies on edged weapons. A cop needs at least 21 feet of standoff to be able to recognize an attack by an edged weapon and bring his firearm to bear. Edged weapons are very serious. In this case, maybe more so than a firearm. At 21 feet, you are more likely to miss me with a firearm than you are to miss me with a knife at two feet. In this case, we don't have a man with a firearm creating mayhem. We have a man with an edged weapon. And a man with a firearm stopped him. It is what it is. Twisting the scenario to support an agenda isn't terribly useful. A good man with a gun did a good thing. If the bad guy had a gun, what would have happened? We don't know. He might have expended a magazine without hitting anyone. He might have killed a dozen people. We just don't know. All we know is that on this day, a good man with a gun did good.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #6 July 27, 2012 Quote I think you are arguing in favor of gun control I'm really not, which is half my point. I'm saying clinical discussions of legitimate data point issues are rendered nearly impossible by people who misapprehend discussion for advocacy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #8 July 27, 2012 OK. Good. You had me worried. The problem that I see is we don't have enough data to come to really good conclusions...and we disagree on what the data means anyhow. People wave around isolated incidents to advocate what they 'feel'. This incident indicates CCW was good. The Colorado incident indicates firearms need to be kept from some people. Broad ranging conclusions from individual events are rarely sound reasoning examples. I think we are agreed on that.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #9 July 28, 2012 We can compare that to what happens in canada WINNIPEG -- Just over a month ago a Manitoba judge fretted publicly about the possibility Derrick Sanderson would be set free from jail early and stab someone. That's exactly what Sanderson, 22, stands accused of after being arrested for knifing a young Winnipeg woman to death early last Sunday in an attack on Furby Street. On June 7, Sanderson appeared before Judge Rocky Pollack and pleaded guilty to possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose and breaching a condition of a supervised probation order. "Cases like this one make judges worry," Pollack told him. "No judge wants to be the one who gave what would look like to any member of the public to be a very low sentence and then hear the next day that this person was released early from jail and stabbed somebody."If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #10 July 28, 2012 Seems a guy makes a rolling stop at a stop sign, and gets pulled over by a local policeman. Guy hands the cop his driver's license, insurance verification, plus his concealed carry permit. "Okay, Mr. Smith," the cop says, "I see your CCW permit. Are you carrying today?" "Yes, I am." "Well then, better tell me what you got." Smith says, "Well, I got a .357 revolver in my inside coat pocket. There's a 9mm semi-auto in the glove box. And, I've got a .22 magnum derringer in my right boot." "Okay," the cop says. "Anything else?" "Yeah, back in the trunk, there's an AR15 and a shotgun. That's about it, not counting my guns at home." "Mr.... Smith, are you on your way to or from a gun range...?" "Nope." "Well then, what are you afraid of...?" "Not a damned thing..."I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #11 July 28, 2012 Old joke. Embedded in the joke though is a truth about gun ownership; a lot of people buy them to feel power over their fears. Some fears are founded in reality, some aren't. I think a lot of gun owners own guns due to unfounded fears. What was the gun owner in the joke afraid of? "Not a damned thing." Bullshit. He's as much as admitting he fears for his life if he doesn't have a gun.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #12 July 28, 2012 QuoteOld joke. Embedded in the joke though is a truth about gun ownership; a lot of people buy them to feel power over their fears. Some fears are founded in reality, some aren't. I think a lot of gun owners own guns due to unfounded fears. What was the gun owner in the joke afraid of? "Not a damned thing." Bullshit. He's as much as admitting he fears for his life if he doesn't have a gun. That's what I was getting at here. You said it better.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #13 July 28, 2012 Wow. I was just trying to provide some entertainment. You guys should really try to relax a bit. Just because someone enjoys guns doesn't mean they have deep emotional problems. It's a hobby. Just because they like knowing they can protect their family if two or more people invade the house does not mean they run around in fear. It means they recognize limitations. I no longer tell people that I feel relaxed when I jump out of plane and enter freefall. Too many of them tell me I have control issues. Just like you two, they jump to exrreme conclusions based on a single data point...and prove their opinions aren't worth my time. I'm truly not trying to be insulting. You just bent things around to make a political statement of something that was meant to lighten things up.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #14 July 28, 2012 QuoteJust because someone enjoys guns doesn't mean they have deep emotional problems. I'm a gun owner and have been around guns my entire life. I was even an armorer during a short stint in the Army Reserve, after serving in a combat arms MOS in the regular Army. Quote Just because they like knowing they can protect their family if two or more people invade the house does not mean they run around in fear. I agree that guns can be useful last resort home defense weapons. QuoteIt means they recognize limitations. Judging by other recent threads, this doesn't seem to be the case. Just look at how many hero wannabes think that they could have stopped the Colorado theater mass murders if they had only been there with their 9 mm or their .40 cal. A while back, I was considering a grad school in the city in which my brother lives. I asked him about rent prices near campus, and he starts telling me how I would need to carry a gun to be safe in the areas where rent is affordable. WTF? I've lived in MUCH larger cities with MUCH higher crime rates, and have never had any problems walking around "crack town" after dark, alone and unarmed (at least not with anything which has a primary use as a weapon, such as a gun or knife). It's just not that risky to go through life unarmed, but many people are reluctant to do so because they're scared of extremely unlikely occurrences.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 62 #15 July 29, 2012 QuoteWow. I was just trying to provide some entertainment. You guys should really try to relax a bit. Just because someone enjoys guns doesn't mean they have deep emotional problems. It's a hobby. Just because they like knowing they can protect their family if two or more people invade the house does not mean they run around in fear. It means they recognize limitations. I no longer tell people that I feel relaxed when I jump out of plane and enter freefall. Too many of them tell me I have control issues. Just like you two, they jump to exrreme conclusions based on a single data point...and prove their opinions aren't worth my time. I'm truly not trying to be insulting. You just bent things around to make a political statement of something that was meant to lighten things up. Conceptual thinking is difficult for many folks here. Consequently they love to major on the minors.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve1 5 #16 July 30, 2012 That may be an old joke, but I never heard it till now. I got a good chuckle out of it. My concealed carry permit arrived in the mail recently. I also own about 15 other guns. I guess that makes me a coward in the eyes of most gun-o-phobes. To tell you the truth I don't really give a rip! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #17 July 30, 2012 Quote Quote Just because they like knowing they can protect their family if two or more people invade the house does not mean they run around in fear. I agree that guns can be useful last resort home defense weapons. So what are the first resort weapons? Harsh language and a cell phone? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #18 July 30, 2012 QuoteQuote Quote Just because they like knowing they can protect their family if two or more people invade the house does not mean they run around in fear. I agree that guns can be useful last resort home defense weapons. So what are the first resort weapons? Harsh language and a cell phone? If the gun is your first line of defense, you're doing something wrong. Hell, just a dog in your yard would scare away a lot of the lesser criminal types.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #19 July 30, 2012 QuoteSo what are the first resort weapons? Harsh language and a cell phone? Most normal people would not initially resort to weapons.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #20 July 30, 2012 QuoteQuoteSo what are the first resort weapons? Harsh language and a cell phone? Most normal people would not initially resort to weapons. That's not an answer. You said guns were acceptable "last resort home defense weapons." So what are your first resort weapons? Or if you want to disavow the phrase as a Freudian slip, what are the first resort home defense tools? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #21 July 30, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteSo what are the first resort weapons? Harsh language and a cell phone? Most normal people would not initially resort to weapons. That's not an answer. You said guns were acceptable "last resort home defense weapons." So what are your first resort weapons? Or if you want to disavow the phrase as a Freudian slip, what are the first resort home defense tools? I don't need to disavow the phrase simply because you are trying twist my words to mean something I didn't say.. As a last resort, weapons can be used for protection inside the home. In such cases, guns are often a suitable choice. Other home defense tools and strategies include closing doors, using door locks, security systems, pets, outdoor lighting, telephones, etc.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #22 July 30, 2012 Quote I don't need to disavow the phrase simply because you are trying twist my words to mean something I didn't say.. how did I twist the word "weapon." You wrote it. And then you choose to answer the question for "tools" instead of "weapons," a clear indication that you had to untwist the words. Your tools are only effective in the prevention side, have little value in an actual self defense situation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #23 July 30, 2012 QuoteQuote I don't need to disavow the phrase simply because you are trying twist my words to mean something I didn't say.. how did I twist the word "weapon." You wrote it. What was implied was that weapons are only needed in home defense as a last resort. No untwisting necessary. QuoteYour tools are only effective in the prevention side, have little value in an actual self defense situation. Smart people tend to expend their energy on prevention rather than reaction.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #24 July 30, 2012 Quote Just because they like knowing they can protect their family if two or more people invade the house does not mean they run around in fear. I agree that guns can be useful last resort home defense weapons. So what are the first resort weapons? Harsh language and a cell phone? Real estate - put as much of it as possible between you and trouble. If you are alive to hear someone calling you a coward as you put distance between you and them, you are doing something right. Any time you have to resort to force of arms of any description, you are already in pretty deep kimchee. If there are three of them and you dispatch two before they kill you, do you win? If you put yourself and/or your family at risk in order to duplicate some Hollywood scenario, you have not thought things through. An armed conflict is a crapshoot, and it is ill-advised to bet the ranch on a single pass - regardless of how well you think you have the dice loaded in your favor. Two of the primary rules of combat are: A) Know when to get out of Dodge. And B) Know HOW to get out of Dodge. If you respond to a perceived threat by withdrawing and calling the Cavalry, your odds are about as good as they get. Making split-second life-or-death decisions within seconds of being awakened is an scenario you want to avoid. The cell phone is great for calling in reinforcements once you have reached safety. Whether the problem is an intentional home invasion, a drunk coming "home" to the wrong address or an unexpected family member, you are much better off getting clear and having a trusted LEO sort things out (as a homeowner where I live, one gets the benefit of the doubt - that is hardly universal). If you EVER have to pull the trigger in an armed conflict, trust me, your life will change irrevocably, so I advise doing everything possible to exercise every other available option first. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyrad 0 #25 July 30, 2012 Ban knives!!!When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy. Lucius Annaeus Seneca Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucius Annaeus Seneca
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites