Quantcast
  1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!

"If I Only Had a Gun"

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by LC450, Apr 7, 2009.

  1. LC450

    LC450 The Peoples Republic of WA State Member

    Messages:
    152
    Likes Received:
    3
  2. JumpWing

    JumpWing NK WA Member

    Messages:
    599
    Likes Received:
    25
    Nobody was able to shoot back at this guy and the media is asking if guns are too easily accessed? Sounds to me like access to guns isn't easy enough.
     
  3. swoop

    swoop Milwaukie, Oregon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,079
    Likes Received:
    281
    All of these nuts will find a way to kill, with or without guns. Car, knife, bomb, club, ect. When will the anti's learn that the nut is the problem, not his choice of weapon. :confused:
     
  4. Doc In UPlace

    Doc In UPlace Tacoma-ish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,644
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Interesting perspective from NYU's Jim Jacobs HERE.

    It's pretty clear that the clone-bot of an interviewer has her agenda, but Jacobs might surprise you.
     
  5. ZombieAssassin

    ZombieAssassin Oregon Member

    Messages:
    227
    Likes Received:
    0
    The experiments in the show were skewed in that:
    1. Shooter walking into classroom was firearms instructor, and thus more likely than average person to be a more accurate shooter.
    2. Shooter knew the situation he was walking into (layout of room, etc) and thus has an unscientific advantage.
    3. Shooter knew where armed student was located, and that there was only 1, thus has an unscientific advantage.
    4. Armed student knows their ammo isn't real, so what is the point in drawing it? It likely changes their thinking.

    Other than those 4 huge faults with the experiment, I would agree that people scrambling to get out of the room, etc. was fairly realistic. Too bad that the 4 huge faults make the experiment worthless to draw conclusions from.

    Instead of shouting NO FIREARMS, the show used faulty experiments and scientific sounding data (such as the diagram of the human body and telling you how the body reacts under stress -- all in a 15 second presentation, therefore it's FACT) to get YOU to convince YOURSELF that firearms are bad, need regulation, etc. That's more effective than yelling NO FIREARMS, so I applaud them for this tactic.

    The portion about gun show purchases was disingenious. So what if someone can walk into a gun show and purchase firearms? Who determines what quantity I'm allowed to purchase, and why should there be a quantity limitation? Who cares about private sales and the inability to track firearms AKA registration. There is no compelling reason for registration that makes sense. Government screws everything up, so why give one more thing to screw up, and give one more thing to be used AGAINST you. Law abiding people don't cause problems, and criminals will always find a way to achieve their goals. Micromanaging firearms won't solve any problems, but it WILL further the agenda of firearms control and elimination from the hands of the citizenry.

    Children were used to push an agenda -- use emotions to override reason to make bad decisions and false conclusions.

    These "cops" that Diane Sawyer interviewed said that ALL training disappears after 1-2 months of not training -- a patently ludicrous statement. Makes me wonder if these "cops" weren't really actors. One of these "cops" also said that people, especially kids, think that video games are the same as reality. This statement is a typical technique (realized or not) of people that value sensationalism over fact and logic -- no data to back up the statement, does not logically follow from assertion to conclusion. The only way this is true is if someone is mentally r3tard3d and/or a validation of the public education system (which most people attend) turning out idiots (by design).

    I do agree that the requirements to carry concealed are ridiculously low, but I don't believe that letting government decide the requirements will render anything useful, consider the track record of government at all levels in making reasonable and prudent decisions to promote the individual and liberty. I'd rather have it the way it is now, rather than government likely to draw up requirements, then ratchet them up every year until no one can achieve them -- or exclude people due to government regulated costs. Government doesn't much right, so only a fool would want to give government one more thing to intentionally screw up and control you with.

    Vehicles are far more dangerous, beer is far more dangerous, yet anyone can get either, and there isn't regular testing to keep your drivers license or beer purchasing license. The logic of these doesn't reconcile with the logic of firearms regulation AKA control AKA elimination.
     
  6. Doc In UPlace

    Doc In UPlace Tacoma-ish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,644
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Right, the "shooters" in the "experiment" came in, and after shooting the instructor, shot the only armed person repeatedly to the exclusion of everyone else.

    The thing that I disliked the most was Diane Sawyer's smug assertion at the end that "we could find no study" that examined the successful use of guns in a defense role, therefore (she implied) there was no proof that they were of any use whatsoever.

    Funny I seem to recall about 50,000 cases of successful defensive use.
     
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2009
  7. ZombieAssassin

    ZombieAssassin Oregon Member

    Messages:
    227
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, that was also blatant "agendism" and far from truthful. There are cases of guns in self defense every day, but if you "research" only the mainstream media sources, you'll rarely find them because that's part of their agenda. I read plenty of articles in magazines and online sites that address firearms for self defense.

    Also Diane and her "virtual partner" training, and how even when she knew what would happen, the 2nd time through it she was still slow to draw. This shows that we will all behave this way. Couldn't be her being an old hag, couldn't be her lack of experience, couldn't be her WANTING to behave this way but play it off as normal in order to drive an agenda.
     
  8. Mutoman

    Mutoman North Bend Active Member

    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    137
    I missed this program, if anyone finds an online link to the show, please post it.

    Thanks.
     
  9. Doc In UPlace

    Doc In UPlace Tacoma-ish Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,644
    Likes Received:
    2,032
    Go here: http://abcnews.go.com/2020
    and click on "shooting under fire" for the rigged "experiment" segment if you must get as aggravated as we are. :eek:
     
  10. Mutoman

    Mutoman North Bend Active Member

    Messages:
    741
    Likes Received:
    137
    Yeah, I watched that segment yesterday, which made me more curious to see the rest of the broadcast. I'll just have to wait until it's picked up by HULU.
     
  11. wakejoe

    wakejoe Beaverton, OR Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,024
    Likes Received:
    135
    Forget them. I know what the constitution says, and that's all that matters. Even if they do pass an "AWB" based completely on this one program.

    No compromise this time around. I think the biggest problem with the Clinton-era is that people just followed suite and said "Well, it's the law now." But the law isn't always right, and you don't have to be a "law abiding citizen" all the time.
     
  12. dr drae

    dr drae Seattle Member

    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    3
    I agree that it was terribly unscientific. But I don't think it was an impossible scenario. I viewed it as worst case scenario. A gunman w/fiream skills (not impossible) walks into a room that he's scoped out before (a grudge shooting against a teacher, the shooter could have been in that class MANY times before as a student) and shoots the instructor then turns towards the center of the room. The CC student was sitting front row center, it's not impossible that he'd be the first next target.
    Is it the most likely scenario? Probably not. But I didn't think it was impossible, more like worst case scenario. They should redo the scenario altering the variables (gunman doesn't know the room first, gunman doesn't know where the CC is sitting, etc).

    There's no way to do that scenario scientifically unless you give the gunman the paintball gun (make sure he's a democrat) and the CC a real firearm. :D


    I think the underlying message they hinted at that needed to be more emphasized is that you have to train train train. Safety is key, learn that first. Then practice your skills. Tactical reloads, quick draws, transition drills, etc. Build that muscle memory. The final step being stress inoculation training scenarios, they will keep you level headed and alive.
     
  13. ZombieAssassin

    ZombieAssassin Oregon Member

    Messages:
    227
    Likes Received:
    0
    It makes no sense to consider the worst case scenario, label it scientific, and broadcast it on national TV ... unless you have an agenda.

    It makes no sense to use the logic of "well X Y and Z could happen" which is focusing your mind and actions on the most obscure possibilities. If you do this with life, then you will jump at your own shadow because:
    o You could start your car up this morning, and someone could t-bone you, and you could die.
    o You could go to bed and have a heart attack in the middle of the night and die.
    o You could be eating chicken from KFC and choke on a bone and no one around can assist you and you die.
    Technically all of these things are possible. Likely? Not even close, so they aren't even worthy of consideration.
     
  14. dr drae

    dr drae Seattle Member

    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    3
    Hey look, we agree on something! :D
     
  15. gjohnson

    gjohnson Lake Oswego Member

    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    2
    it would have been nice to see one of the kids pass the gun off to another to trip up the shooter.