• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

My right to bear arms is under fire right now.

But you apparently have not, by choice. If you are the type who _chooses_ to carry a weapon for self-protection, then you would undoubtedly be the type who acknowledges the responsibility that goes with that, and would keep your skills current.

Bingo.

Keeping your skills current is part of being a responsible gun owner. Reviewing gun laws and legal changes is also part of the responsibility.
 
I'm trying to find cases where a civilian with a CCW, or even a weapon on their person, stopped or prevented a mass murder and I've come up blank. Can you guys point me in the right direction? They must exist, but my google-fu is failing. :(

Here's a recent one:

 
Are you serious. Do you really think the guy today would have killed 26 people with a knife if he couldn't have gotten a gun (or several guns in this case).

Why would he have not gotten a gun? I would bet a million dollars he isn't a CCW carrier.

Take the mall shooter, for example. Stolen gun. Probably not even regular shooter, since he got foiled by a jam...
 
Why would he have not gotten a gun? I would bet a million dollars he isn't a CCW carrier.

Take the mall shooter, for example. Stolen gun. Probably not even regular shooter, since he got foiled by a jam...

From what I gather, he did not have a gun because guns are banned in China.
 
Why would he have not gotten a gun?
People are making the argument that if didn't have a gun, we would have used something else, like a knife or a box cutter or a samarai sword. It's just idiotic. He chose a gun for a reason so he could kill many people as possible without having to look any of them in the face. People don't hunt dear or fight wars with knives because they aren't nearly as effective.
 
I'm not asking for examples of any crime stopped, just mass murders. Of course pulling a gun on a guy holding a knife trying to steal your wallet is going to (probably) work. I'm not saying that. Hell, I'm not even arguing against CCW though I personally think it's dumb.

I was just wondering if CCW actually made a difference in mass murders. And it has in a couple cases. That's all I was asking.

Remember, guys. I only advocate for gun control as a training issue. I do not support the banning of weapons, only their restriction in some of the same ways we restrict the operation of motor vehicles. Let's not bog down the thread with arguments over that.
 
I'm not asking for examples of any crime stopped, just mass murders. Of course pulling a gun on a guy holding a knife trying to steal your wallet is going to (probably) work. I'm not saying that. Hell, I'm not even arguing against CCW though I personally think it's dumb.

I was just wondering if CCW actually made a difference in mass murders. And it has in a couple cases. That's all I was asking.

Remember, guys. I only advocate for gun control as a training issue. I do not support the banning of weapons, only their restriction in some of the same ways we restrict the operation of motor vehicles. Let's not bog down the thread with arguments over that.

That is something really hard to quantify. Most of the people looking to commit mass murders target areas that they know will not have gun carrying individuals there. That's why they go for schools, malls, and places like that where guns are banned.

They go where there are very likely no guns and therefore no resistance.
 
People are making the argument that if didn't have a gun, we would have used something else, like a knife or a box cutter or a samarai sword. It's just idiotic. He chose a gun for a reason so he could kill many people as possible without having to look any of them in the face. People don't hunt dear or fight wars with knives because they aren't nearly as effective.

The man in China used a knife and killed a large number of people. Guns are fully banned in China, so that proves the point, that if someone really wants to kill a large number of people they will use whatever tools they can.

Man wielding knife stabs 22 children at school in Chengping, China
 
Don't forget the guy who shot up the college with a bow...
Yeah, a lot of people are committing crimes with bow and arrows these days. It's an epidemic.

When you mix legitimate arguments with nonsense the legitimate points tend to lose their effectiveness.
 
Yeah, a lot of people are committing crimes with bow and arrows these days. It's an epidemic.

When you mix legitimate arguments with nonsense the legitimate points tend to lose their effectiveness.

But it HAPPENED. It actually HAPPENED. So no, it is not nonsense.
Nonsense is you thinking that someone who carries a firearm on their person would not stop a gunman from killing innocent people. Why the hell do you think they carry in the first place?????
 
Weapon Used Rape Robbery Assault Total
TOTAL CRIMES 1,738,000 12,248,000 51,358,000 65,343,000
Gun 9.5% 20.0% 11.0% 12.7%
Knife 10.7% 16.7% 8.5% 10.1%
Other 4.1% 10.0% 12.9% 12.1%
Unknown Weapon 1.1% 2.4% 1.7% 1.8%
None 63.9% 39.7% 59.3% 55.8%
Don't Know 10.7% 11.2% 6.5% 7.5%

http://www.amfire.com/statistic.asp?page=4
 
Yeah, a lot of people are committing crimes with bow and arrows these days. It's an epidemic.

When you mix legitimate arguments with nonsense the legitimate points tend to lose their effectiveness.

Explain to me how it is not legitimate?

It proves the well known theory that if an individual wants to commit a violent act, they will use what ever means necessary.

I hear the number one cause of internet injuries are from falling off high horses, but that could be simply conjecture.
 
how many people died in 911? didnt the plane get hijacked with a box cutter? so ... a box cutter killed how many people? oh wait... it was the person that killed the people, not the box cutter nor the plane, but i am in favor of banning planes and box cutters.
planes annoy many people in housing developments constructed by airports each year
and many people each year injure themselves with box cutters
 
Back
Top