Do it for Trayvon, 100 blacks beat two whites

[del]

Two vs dozens. Yep, not good odds. Which is why my preferred carry is a baby Glock 9mm, with the bad-ass extended 30 round 9mm mag. Got two of 'em in the car, with the standard normal sized one in the gun. That gives me....lets say, about 70+ bullets at my disposal.

Yeah, that would do the trick. After the first 2-3 aggressors were taken care of, I doubt the rest would keep coming.

So how long does it take you to change clips. Odds are good someone in that 100 person mob is just waiting for you to have to reload.. Call it 2 seconds if you're really good. An average shooter could double tap you in 2 seconds.

First, it's a magazine, not a 'clip'. Second, TWO seconds?! That's an incredibly sloooooow mag change. Next, no real shooter "double taps" but instead place two rapid, well placed shots. There's a big difference. And by the way, if those two shots took anywhere near 2 seconds, you'd be among the slowest shooters at the range...like molasses slow.

Now here's a quick magazine change:

nobody's shooting back on the range, cowboy, and there's a big difference between facing a mob and playing hard guy in mom's basement.

you did real well on the vid, though

 

[Wry Catcher]

A wee (or more) bit of topic - well, racism is the topic - so allow me to post this link to another form of the same shape (lol): Institutional Racism.

Why Couldn't Marissa Alexander Stand Her Ground in Florida? - Yahoo! News

1. Stand your ground is a stupid law.

2. Racism is lodged in the bowels and brain (note singular, it ain't the in the Cerebral Cortex) of the racist.

3. Who did I Challenge with this form of post?
a. California Girl
b. Political Chic
c. Willow Tree
d. CrusaderFrank

[note, as in all objective tests two are throwaways]

 

[Katzndogz]

Or you can go for the Taurus Judge revolver. Fires a .410 shotgun shell through a pistol!!!! 4 pellets all about the size of a .380 round. That would work also. Of course, you could use "rat shot", and pepper them with tiny pellets that would take out eyes and hurt like a bitch, but probably not kill 'em. That way the cops can still arrest 'em and they can rot in jail while you laugh.

BUT remember, ONLY if your life is immediately being threatened, and the person(s) doing so have the ability and intent to do so, can you defend yourself in this way. Then and ONLY then.

Oy vey... I'm a gun owner and 2nd Amendment supporter, NRA member. But why do whites always fall back into excited discussions about guns whenever the subject of attacks on them comes up? Why don't whites step back and look at the bigger picture: they live in a country where attacks on them are only going to get worse unless and until they organize politically, AS WHITES, and start fighting back politically?

Perhaps because they recognize that crime in the U.S. is at historically low levels not seen since the mid 1970s, in spite of the fact that our population has increased by 45% since '74. So no, things aren't getting worse....in fact, they're considerably better, statistically speaking.

United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2010

Statistically speaking, statistics can say anything you want. Realistically speaking crime is at higher levels than ever with the exception of the 80s during the Blood-Crip war.

Realistically, nothing is going to be done about these mobs who use strenghth of numbers to beat victims to death if they can. Nothing is going to be done to mobs of teenagers. Are you prepared to shoot an unarmed child? Does the fact that it's 50 or 100 unarmed children make a difference?

 

[Oldstyle]

Perhaps you should quit the braggadocio and tune-in to reality. Unless you wish to tell us how you'd have done exactly the same as this reporter if you found yourself in his shoes. Though I'll let dwell on that before you dig yourself into a hole by claiming that you'd act on your "intestinal fortitude" by confronting a hundred or so hostile strangers.

In my younger days I jumped into a six on one fight to protect someone who was taking a savage beating. I got a broken nose and three cracked ribs for my troubles. Would I do it again? Yes, as a matter of fact I would. I don't like bullies or mobs. Sometimes you have to stand up to them no matter what the cost. That isn't "braggadocio" that's just how I was raised.

Big difference between fighting 6 guys and a 100 there buddy.

You're going to get your ass kicked...whether it's 6 or 100...the point is to stand up and fight. Running away all the time simply emboldens bullies.

 

[catzmeow]

Statistically speaking, statistics can say anything you want.

Your inability to read and interpret statistical data is duly noted.

Realistically speaking crime is at higher levels than ever with the exception of the 80s during the Blood-Crip war.

This may be true inside your colon, but it certainly isn't true of crime in the U.S.

If you believe it's true, prove it. Find some statistics that can "prove anything" and make your case.

 

[eflatminor]

nobody's shooting back on the range, cowboy, and there's a big difference between facing a mob and playing hard guy in mom's basement.

Which is exactly why we practice on the range, simulating as many possible tactical situations as possible. If you practice extensively, when some is actually shooting back, you're prepared. Do you not believe in the concept of training?

Nevertheless, I stand by my critique of Ernie's estimations of "fast" mag changes and shooting. Two seconds is SLOW.

 

[catzmeow]

Which is exactly why we practice on the range, simulating as many possible tactical situations as possible. If you practice extensively, when some is actually shooting back, you're prepared. Do you not believe in the concept of training?

Unless you're a cop or soldier, you aren't experiencing realistic simulations of tactical situations, bucko. And even then, they're not that realistic, in most cases. Which is why so many cops and soldiers miss their intended targets in an exchange of fire scenario.

 

[High_Gravity]

In my younger days I jumped into a six on one fight to protect someone who was taking a savage beating. I got a broken nose and three cracked ribs for my troubles. Would I do it again? Yes, as a matter of fact I would. I don't like bullies or mobs. Sometimes you have to stand up to them no matter what the cost. That isn't "braggadocio" that's just how I was raised.

Big difference between fighting 6 guys and a 100 there buddy.

You're going to get your ass kicked...whether it's 6 or 100...the point is to stand up and fight. Running away all the time simply emboldens bullies.

100 people can kill you, it all depends if its really worth it or not.

 

[eflatminor]

Which is exactly why we practice on the range, simulating as many possible tactical situations as possible. If you practice extensively, when some is actually shooting back, you're prepared. Do you not believe in the concept of training?

Unless you're a cop or soldier, you aren't experiencing realistic simulations of tactical situations, bucko. And even then, they're not that realistic, in most cases. Which is why so many cops and soldiers miss their intended targets in an exchange of fire scenario.

Boy are you ignorant on this topic! First, I've experienced the tactical training that cops and soldiers go through. It PALES in comparison to real competition tactical shooters. It's not uncommon for us to go through 20,000+ rounds per year. A cop? They 'qualify' once a year with less than one box of ammo required. Even the SWAT teams don't train anywhere near the extent we do. And when soldiers come to one of our matches, which is most welcome of course, they are never anywhere near the best shooter on the range despite their training. If they stick around and shoot 2-3 per week like we do, they'll get better of course.

Realistic simulations is exactly what we do. Check out an IDPA match or an IPSC event. Three gun matches offer tactical simulations using various types of firearms. These are examples of tactical training that when embraced by serious competitive shooters, FAR outweighs the experience of your local cop. It's not even close.

All this training has served me well. I have proven that I'm prepared. You are welcome to call 911. Good luck.

 

[catzmeow]

It PALES in comparison to real competition tactical shooters.

There's an oxymoron in your sentence. Let's see if you can identify it on your own.

 

[eflatminor]

It PALES in comparison to real competition tactical shooters.

There's an oxymoron in your sentence. Let's see if you can identify it on your own.

First, way to stick to the topic at hand. Can't respond with logic and reason...so you attack grammar? Wow, that's weak.

Secondly, there is not an oxymoron in my sentence. Oxymoron - a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.”

Tactical shooting is a well recognized category of firearms training. It stands in contrast to non-tactical or target shooting. Competitions that center around tactical shooting and the competitors that compete in those matches are not contradictory to the weak ass training provided to cops...which is akin to target practice.

My point is clear and accurate. You can continue with red herrings if that's your thing.

 

[catzmeow]

It PALES in comparison to real competition tactical shooters.

There's an oxymoron in your sentence. Let's see if you can identify it on your own.

First, way to stick to the topic at hand. Can't respond with logic and reason...so you attack grammar? Wow, that's weak.

Secondly, there is not an oxymoron in my sentence. Oxymoron - a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.”

Tactical shooting is a well recognized category of firearms training. It stands in contrast to non-tactical or target shooting. Competitions that center around tactical shooting and the competitors that compete in those matches are not contradictory to the weak ass training provided to cops...which is akin to target practice.

My point is clear and accurate. You can continue with red herrings if that's your thing.

Competitions aren't real, numbnuts. They're controlled environments. Real life isn't. In fact, what you do is significantly less real than the average paintball tournament.

You have zero idea how you'd handle an actual bad guy shooting at you, though I can see that you've sucked up the pap that your instructors have fed you like it was your mama's milk.

Now, type a couple more paragraphs about what a gun-toting badass you are.

 

[eflatminor]

There's an oxymoron in your sentence. Let's see if you can identify it on your own.

First, way to stick to the topic at hand. Can't respond with logic and reason...so you attack grammar? Wow, that's weak.

Secondly, there is not an oxymoron in my sentence. Oxymoron - a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.”

Tactical shooting is a well recognized category of firearms training. It stands in contrast to non-tactical or target shooting. Competitions that center around tactical shooting and the competitors that compete in those matches are not contradictory to the weak ass training provided to cops...which is akin to target practice.

My point is clear and accurate. You can continue with red herrings if that's your thing.

Competitions aren't real, numbnuts. They're controlled environments. Real life isn't. In fact, what you do is significantly less real than the average paintball tournament.

You have zero idea how you'd handle an actual bad guy shooting at you.

Now, type a couple more paragraphs about what a gun-toting badass you are.

And an ad hominem to boot. You're quite the debater there.

No, competitions are not actual live situations, which is why we call it "training". Wow, do I really have to explain that to you? Competitions are however 'real'...unless you think those aren't real bullets coming out of the muzzle? Sorry, but your claim of an oxymoron is false.

Regarding someone shooting at me, it has happened. The bad guy lost. You're simply wrong.

I never claimed to be a bad-ass. Perhaps you're projecting there? Good luck with that too.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You just accused the OP of tweeting the line mentioned in the newspaper editorial? What do you base that on? Your personal opinion that anyone who brings up the fact that blacks assault whites in this country far more than the other way around is a "race baiting asswipe"?

Why should anyone treat your opinion with respect when it's so obviously biased?

Who ever treated Rati's opinion with respect?

She's a mindless hack, everyone knows that.

 

[del]

nobody's shooting back on the range, cowboy, and there's a big difference between facing a mob and playing hard guy in mom's basement.

Which is exactly why we practice on the range, simulating as many possible tactical situations as possible. If you practice extensively, when some is actually shooting back, you're prepared. Do you not believe in the concept of training?

Nevertheless, I stand by my critique of Ernie's estimations of "fast" mag changes and shooting. Two seconds is SLOW.

you're delusional.

have a nice day

 

[eflatminor]

nobody's shooting back on the range, cowboy, and there's a big difference between facing a mob and playing hard guy in mom's basement.

Which is exactly why we practice on the range, simulating as many possible tactical situations as possible. If you practice extensively, when some is actually shooting back, you're prepared. Do you not believe in the concept of training?

Nevertheless, I stand by my critique of Ernie's estimations of "fast" mag changes and shooting. Two seconds is SLOW.

you're delusional.

have a nice day

Well, with that well reasoned and articulate retort, I suppose you win. I bet you were the captain of your high school debating team. Am I right?

You have a nice day too...

 

[del]

Which is exactly why we practice on the range, simulating as many possible tactical situations as possible. If you practice extensively, when some is actually shooting back, you're prepared. Do you not believe in the concept of training?

Nevertheless, I stand by my critique of Ernie's estimations of "fast" mag changes and shooting. Two seconds is SLOW.

you're delusional.

have a nice day

Well, with that well reasoned and articulate retort, I suppose you win. I bet you were the captain of your high school debating team. Am I right?

You have a nice day too...

no, you continue to be wrong

you're good at it

 

[Uncensored2008]

you're delusional.

have a nice day

Well, with that well reasoned and articulate retort, I suppose you win. I bet you were the captain of your high school debating team. Am I right?

You have a nice day too...

no, you continue to be wrong

you're good at it

 

[eflatminor]

Well, with that well reasoned and articulate retort, I suppose you win. I bet you were the captain of your high school debating team. Am I right?

You have a nice day too...

no, you continue to be wrong

you're good at it

Sorry I can't accommodate what would surely be a spectacle of childish name calling. But I get your interest...it would be like watching a train wreck. Who could look away?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What makes anyone think there would be a police report?

I would like to see one person, just one, pull out a handgun and teach the ones who live a lesson. Then reload.

I would not have a problem with it, I would sleep soundly afterwards.