Detroit police chief to citizens: Arm yourselves

[rickjump1 0]

http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/detroit-police-chief-to-citizens-arm-yourselves/
Since leaving L.A., Chief Craig has changed his mind on a couple of issues. Bet he eventually changes his mind on assault rifles too.


.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[quade 4]

The takeaway ought to be, different things work in different places and it's probably smarter to adopt different standards based on different locations. Cities like Los Angeles and New York are vastly different than Detroit or Billing, Montana. Anyone who thinks the same things will work in all locations is just being silly.

Unfortunately, the groups like the NRA want a one-size-fits-all, absolutist interpretation of the Second.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[RonD1120 62]

quade

Anyone who thinks the same things will work in all locations is just being silly.

Unfortunately, the groups like the NRA want a one-size-fits-all, absolutist interpretation of the Second.

Do you mean like progressive liberals? I couldn't resist a set up like that.

And the NRA statement, do you mean that not all Americans should have the right to protect themselves?

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.

[rickjump1 0]

quade

The takeaway ought to be, different things work in different places and it's probably smarter to adopt different standards based on different locations. Cities like Los Angeles and New York are vastly different than Detroit or Billing, Montana. Anyone who thinks the same things will work in all locations is just being silly.

Unfortunately, the groups like the NRA want a one-size-fits-all, absolutist interpretation of the Second.

“Coming from California, where it takes an act of Congress to get a concealed weapon permit, I got to Maine, where they give out lots of [carrying concealed weapon permits, or CCWs], and I had a stack of CCW permits I was denying; that was my orientation,” he said. “I changed my orientation real quick. Maine is one of the safest places in America. Clearly, suspects knew that good Americans were armed.”

Me? I think the good police chief saw the error of his "orientation" with California's gun laws. To be fair, it would have to come directly from him, but this is close enough. For the first time in his career, he acknowledged positive results with armed citizens. Now why wouldn't this work in LA or NY?

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[PiLFy 3]

"Now why wouldn't this work in LA or NY?"

Apparently, cuz Quade told them to throw out The Constitution ...

[rickjump1 0]

PiLFy

"Now why wouldn't this work in LA or NY?"

Apparently, cuz Quade told them to throw out The Constitution ...

You get a cigar for that one and Ron too.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[turtlespeed 226]

PiLFy

"Now why wouldn't this work in LA or NY?"

Apparently, cuz Quade told them to throw out The Constitution ...

Well of course, it so very much, gets in the way of the liberal agenda.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[rickjump1 0]

Iago

A can of bear spray with a 15-20 ft range is probably better tha n a wheel gun in the hands of an untrained shooter.

Past about 7-10 feet an inexperienced shooter that does not practice regularly will be unlikely to hit a man sized target. Particularly when [you factor in stress and adrenaline.

Not saying hes wrong, just better options are available.


Think of all the money to be made selling fashionablr 'accessories' for the 'beautiful people.'

No doubt bear spray is good for two legged critters too; whether it has a pretty ribbon around it or not. Just don't leave it in a hot car. It could go off and season the interior.

Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts.

[regulator 0]

RonD1120

***Anyone who thinks the same things will work in all locations is just being silly.

Unfortunately, the groups like the NRA want a one-size-fits-all, absolutist interpretation of the Second.

Do you mean like progressive liberals? I couldn't resist a set up like that.

And the NRA statement, do you mean that not all Americans should have the right to protect themselves?

dont run and hide now quade.

[regulator 0]

This just happened yesterday. Woman killed by dogs.

Who the hell walks around with bear spray?

http://www.khou.com/news/local/1-dead-another-hospitalized-dog-mauling-in-southeast-Houston-238782371.html


I'll take my .40 as deterrant for 4 legged critters over bear spray any day.

[quade 4]

regulator

******Anyone who thinks the same things will work in all locations is just being silly.

Unfortunately, the groups like the NRA want a one-size-fits-all, absolutist interpretation of the Second.

Do you mean like progressive liberals? I couldn't resist a set up like that.

And the NRA statement, do you mean that not all Americans should have the right to protect themselves?

dont run and hide now quade.

"Run and hide"?

Nope. I was out for my nightly workout if that's okay with you. Do I have your permission to leave the keyboard every once in awhile?

All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

I have ALWAYS said a weapon for home defense is appropriate. The question/argument is how much firepower is appropriate. I'm not a fan of unlimited firepower. I am also less enthusiastic about people universally carrying in public because there are situations/locations it just doesn't work; airplanes and courts for instance, but those are more universal examples.

In another thread you, yourself, said there are situations you simply can't do it and was asking about security for your weapon when you can't carry it on your person. Again, different rules for different situations.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[regulator 0]

Since when does having an AR-15 become 'unlimited firepower'?

[quade 4]

regulator

Since when does having an AR-15 become 'unlimited firepower'?

I didn't say the AR-15 was or wasn't "the" limit, but you just did.

So, this is a start, you admit "a limit" can exist?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Iago

******Since when does having an AR-15 become 'unlimited firepower'?

I didn't say the AR-15 was or wasn't "the" limit, but you just did.
So, this is a start, you admit "a limit" can exist?
You want a 50 cal machine gun? Fine- you can have it. You just need to go to your local BATF office and file the paperwork.

So, this is a start, you admit "a limit" can exist?

I see there being no issue with this same sort of registration for a number of weapons. The NRA and a lot of other people disagree and want limits on .50 cal machine guns removed.

The Second is a right, but not an unlimited one.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Iago

Don't try that bullshit with me.

I know exactly where you're going and I'm not dumb enough to fall into that trap. I picked something arbitrary and big (like a .50 cal) and just used it.

Not a "trap." It's just that it's virtually impossible to have a conversation with absolutists on any topic; guns, abortion, gays, xenophobia, healthcare reform, socialism. You name the topic and once a person takes an absolutist position, there's no further discussion possible.

You freely admitted there are limits and even gave an example of one location where things are different than another.

No. The bullshit is taking the absolutist position and shutting down the conversation.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Stumpy 284]

Iago

The 'limit,' as everyone wants to call it, only exists in the minds of people around you. In most places you can't put a shooting range in your backyard. That's not a second amendment 'limit' it's just damn common sense. You miss a target it goes flying off into the neighborhood ends up in someone's house.

Unfortunately common sense is not necessarily common (in any population - not specifically gun owners.) Witness people leaving guns lying around where young kids pick them up and shoot them etc.
There are limits on the 2nd whether you choose to believe in them or not. The argument is where that line is drawn.

Never try to eat more than you can lift

[turtlespeed 226]

quade

All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

Why shouldn't the mentally ill protect themselves?

Or are you only saying that they shouldn't be able to protect themselves with weapons.

Or maybe just not with firearms.

Who decides "sane"?

When do they decide it, so that it satisfies you.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 4]

turtlespeed

***All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

Why shouldn't the mentally ill protect themselves?

For the same reason they shouldn't have access to the controls of passenger airliners.

Or would you be okay with that too?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[turtlespeed 226]

quade

******All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

Why shouldn't the mentally ill protect themselves?

For the same reason they shouldn't have access to the controls of passenger airliners.

Or would you be okay with that too?

Are you really trying to equate individual self defense with being directly in control of the lives of a couple hundred people and a proven weapon that can kill thousands?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[quade 4]

turtlespeed

*********All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

Why shouldn't the mentally ill protect themselves?
For the same reason they shouldn't have access to the controls of passenger airliners.
Or would you be okay with that too?
Are you really trying to equate individual self defense with being directly in control of the lives of a couple hundred people and a proven weapon that can kill thousands?

I'm sorry.

What number of people killed by a looney with a gun is acceptable to you? How high does the number have to be before it becomes unacceptable to you?

In your mind, is three children acceptable or does it have to be 20 before it crosses that threshold?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[davjohns 1]

Responses to multiple comments:

I draw the line at WMD for everyone...including governments. Let's face it, government has detonated thousands of nuclear devices just to prove they can. Not terribly responsible in my book. Chem and bio? Stupid. (My first job in the Army was a Nuclear, Biological, Chemical Warfare Specialist)

As to everything else...if you can afford it, store it, and use it responsibly...knock yourself out. I've had a .50BMG rifle. Costs a bunch to feed that monster. On full auto with anyting (let alone a .50), you are squirting money out of the tube at a horrific rate.

I had a range in my basement once. Nobody complained. Use silencers with an effective backstop and all is good.

Bear spray? You're shittin' me, right?

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.

[rushmc 23]

quade

*********Anyone who thinks the same things will work in all locations is just being silly.

Unfortunately, the groups like the NRA want a one-size-fits-all, absolutist interpretation of the Second.

Do you mean like progressive liberals? I couldn't resist a set up like that.

And the NRA statement, do you mean that not all Americans should have the right to protect themselves?

dont run and hide now quade.

"Run and hide"?

Nope. I was out for my nightly workout if that's okay with you. Do I have your permission to leave the keyboard every once in awhile?

All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

I have ALWAYS said a weapon for home defense is appropriate. The question/argument is how much firepower is appropriate. I'm not a fan of unlimited firepower. I am also less enthusiastic about people universally carrying in public because there are situations/locations it just doesn't work; airplanes and courts for instance, but those are more universal examples.

In another thread you, yourself, said there are situations you simply can't do it and was asking about security for your weapon when you can't carry it on your person. Again, different rules for different situations.

the problem is Paul, there are people like you who know they can decide what is enough

I dont think you can
I dont think I should

So, we get back to people bastardizing the Constitution to push their views

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

quade

No. The bullshit is taking the absolutist position and shutting down the conversation.

Nope
Your position here is the bull shit

It is the PC approach to shut down the conversation

You are projecting here

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[turtlespeed 226]

quade

************All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

Why shouldn't the mentally ill protect themselves?
For the same reason they shouldn't have access to the controls of passenger airliners.
Or would you be okay with that too?
Are you really trying to equate individual self defense with being directly in control of the lives of a couple hundred people and a proven weapon that can kill thousands?

I'm sorry.

What number of people killed by a looney with a gun is acceptable to you? How high does the number have to be before it becomes unacceptable to you?

In your mind, is three children acceptable or does it have to be 20 before it crosses that threshold?

You implied that only sane people (emphasis above) should have the ability to protect themselves.

So by your logic, they (Mentally ill) should be unprotected, and more likely to be harmed. Which leads one to the conclusion that "Sane" people are more important and worth more that the mentally ill.

Nice.

I wonder when you would have the lawmakers pass a law making it illegal for a mentally ill person to defend themselves at all.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[regulator 0]

quade

************All (sane) people, not just Americans, should have the right to protect themselves. However, that's not an unlimited right to every weapon on the planet.

Why shouldn't the mentally ill protect themselves?
For the same reason they shouldn't have access to the controls of passenger airliners.
Or would you be okay with that too?
Are you really trying to equate individual self defense with being directly in control of the lives of a couple hundred people and a proven weapon that can kill thousands?

I'm sorry.

What number of people killed by a looney with a gun is acceptable to you? How high does the number have to be before it becomes unacceptable to you?

In your mind, is three children acceptable or does it have to be 20 before it crosses that threshold?


For the children? When will that line ever stop being used in gun control ploys.