Gun owner...first shot kills homem invader...literally, his first shot...

[turtledude]

I have to go...so I will leave you with this...

Not one more bullet, weapon or piece of equipment will be given up to the gun grabbers...they have an irrational fear of guns and simply won't put on their tin foil hats...

sadly, in the future people might have to give them bullets to stop their assault on our rights

 

[turtledude]

We couldn't trust the mass shooters who used them.

but there are about 310 million guns in the United States...millions...millions of actual gun owners...and the mass shooters...less than 20 per year...who might misuse standard magazines...

Millions of gun owners do not misuse standard magazines by using them to commit crimes or kill people...

Brain...could I get you to get a brain scan when you are thinking about an issue like this...it would be very interesting to see...

If only it were just the mass shooters. Don't forget all the strays from the gang bangers emptying their hi cap magazines.

You seem in good spirits this evening, good to see. Last few times you didn't seem yourself. Hope all is good with you.

gangbangers cannot legally have weapons moron

but you don't seem to worry about cops shooting all those extra rounds

typical statist Scumbag

 

[Brain357]

BTW there is no evidence law enforcement agencies actually track how many rounds defensive gun uses involve. SO Brain's braying about "proof" is idiotic

It has been easy finding examples of defenders needing less, should be easy to find them needing more if they existed.

that doesn't prove anything moron

Sorry but real examples of actual events prove a lot more than well your nothing that you have brought so far.

you cannot prove there will never be a time when someone needs more than 10 rounds

that alone destroys your argument

as I said, you are dishonest and beneath contempt

so you should be laughed at for your cowardly evasions

You are worried about the one person who might possibly one day need that hi cap magazine. I am looking to save actual lives in the mass shootings we know happen and the gang shooting we know happen. The real world trumps your fantasy.

 

[turtledude]

BTW there is no evidence law enforcement agencies actually track how many rounds defensive gun uses involve. SO Brain's braying about "proof" is idiotic

It has been easy finding examples of defenders needing less, should be easy to find them needing more if they existed.

that doesn't prove anything moron

Sorry but real examples of actual events prove a lot more than well your nothing that you have brought so far.

you cannot prove there will never be a time when someone needs more than 10 rounds

that alone destroys your argument

as I said, you are dishonest and beneath contempt

so you should be laughed at for your cowardly evasions

You are worried about the one person who might possibly one day need that hi cap magazine. I am looking to save actual lives in the mass shootings we know happen and the gang shooting we know happen. The real world trumps your fantasy.

no you aren't. you are trying to troll and harass gun owners

only a moron thinks murderers will obey a gun control law

and since you cannot prove your proposed restrictions are narrowly tailored to achieve a demonstrable good, your suggestion fails

 

[WinterBorn]

The more you discuss these issues with anti gunners the more it seems to be confirmed that there is something deeply wrong with their ability to reason...they function normally in all other ways...and then...they just miss the most basic, common sense realities of life...I would love to get scans of their brains...

You cant give a single defense where someone needed a hi cap magazine, yet you are certain that they do need it. Now there is something wrong with that. I am giving you lots of examples to support what I am saying. Guns seem to be like a religion for you guys.

No, that is not what is happening.

You are claiming that bad guys use high capacity magazines and that law abiding citizens will never need more than 10 rounds. Then you demand that we justify our refusal to go along with a ban that will accomplish nothing positive.

I do not need to prove I need something. You must prove that my having it is a hazard.

 

[Brain357]

It has been easy finding examples of defenders needing less, should be easy to find them needing more if they existed.

that doesn't prove anything moron

Sorry but real examples of actual events prove a lot more than well your nothing that you have brought so far.

you cannot prove there will never be a time when someone needs more than 10 rounds

that alone destroys your argument

as I said, you are dishonest and beneath contempt

so you should be laughed at for your cowardly evasions

You are worried about the one person who might possibly one day need that hi cap magazine. I am looking to save actual lives in the mass shootings we know happen and the gang shooting we know happen. The real world trumps your fantasy.

no you aren't. you are trying to troll and harass gun owners

only a moron thinks murderers will obey a gun control law

and since you cannot prove your proposed restrictions are narrowly tailored to achieve a demonstrable good, your suggestion fails

Criminals will use whatever guns are easy to get. Now it is hi cap semi autos. Ban hi cap magazines and they will use 10 rd magazines. If you doubt it look at that CA mass shooter who used 10 rd magazines because that is the norm in CA. There is your proof.

 

[Brain357]

The more you discuss these issues with anti gunners the more it seems to be confirmed that there is something deeply wrong with their ability to reason...they function normally in all other ways...and then...they just miss the most basic, common sense realities of life...I would love to get scans of their brains...

You cant give a single defense where someone needed a hi cap magazine, yet you are certain that they do need it. Now there is something wrong with that. I am giving you lots of examples to support what I am saying. Guns seem to be like a religion for you guys.

No, that is not what is happening.

You are claiming that bad guys use high capacity magazines and that law abiding citizens will never need more than 10 rounds. Then you demand that we justify our refusal to go along with a ban that will accomplish nothing positive.

I do not need to prove I need something. You must prove that my having it is a hazard.

You don't have any hi cap magazines so we are fine.

 

[WinterBorn]

The more you discuss these issues with anti gunners the more it seems to be confirmed that there is something deeply wrong with their ability to reason...they function normally in all other ways...and then...they just miss the most basic, common sense realities of life...I would love to get scans of their brains...

You cant give a single defense where someone needed a hi cap magazine, yet you are certain that they do need it. Now there is something wrong with that. I am giving you lots of examples to support what I am saying. Guns seem to be like a religion for you guys.

No, that is not what is happening.

You are claiming that bad guys use high capacity magazines and that law abiding citizens will never need more than 10 rounds. Then you demand that we justify our refusal to go along with a ban that will accomplish nothing positive.

I do not need to prove I need something. You must prove that my having it is a hazard.

You don't have any hi cap magazines so we are fine.

Indeed. But that does not mean I will not argue against laws banning high capacity magazines.

 

[Brain357]

The more you discuss these issues with anti gunners the more it seems to be confirmed that there is something deeply wrong with their ability to reason...they function normally in all other ways...and then...they just miss the most basic, common sense realities of life...I would love to get scans of their brains...

You cant give a single defense where someone needed a hi cap magazine, yet you are certain that they do need it. Now there is something wrong with that. I am giving you lots of examples to support what I am saying. Guns seem to be like a religion for you guys.

No, that is not what is happening.

You are claiming that bad guys use high capacity magazines and that law abiding citizens will never need more than 10 rounds. Then you demand that we justify our refusal to go along with a ban that will accomplish nothing positive.

I do not need to prove I need something. You must prove that my having it is a hazard.

You don't have any hi cap magazines so we are fine.

Indeed. But that does not mean I will not argue against laws banning high capacity magazines.

I know. I view you as a good one on here. Wish you would start some threads on thing I agree with you on like mental health and gun safes. Would be interesting to argue with you rather than against constantly.

I'm using common sense on this one. Lots of innocent people being shot with hi cap magazines. Very few if any needing one for defense. I've put together a lot of examples where the shooter not having a hi cap magazine would have saved lives so this is easy for me. Heck if a woman with a .38 revolver can defend against 3 armed criminals anyone should be able to defend with 10 rds. If they can't it's their own fault.

 

[2aguy]

I am looking to save actual lives in the mass shootings we know happen and the gang shooting we know happen.

No, if you were interested in stopping mass shootings you would support concealed carry...since the statistics show...and we know how interested you are in statistics, that mass shooters who are confronted by armed resistance at the earliest possible point in the attack kill less people...run the numbers...

The research shows that as soon as the shooter is confronted by armed resistance...they surrender, or kill themsleves...saving the lives you claim to be worried about...

So join me in hoping more people get the training and start carrying concealed guns....since that saves lives...right?

But that isn't something you will support...right? Because that goes against your beliefs on gun ownership...

 

[2aguy]

New School Tactics Active shooter - The Firing Line Forums

• [*]Most mass murders perform their killings in "gun free" zones.
  [*]A fast, armed response is the best way to deal with mass murderers.
  [*]The first officer on the scene should use speed, surprise and violence of action to end the incident quickly.
  [*]Most mass killers, when confronted with armed resistance turn their guns on themselves.
  [*]The majority of active shooters are actually poor shots, averaging less than a 50% hit rate.

and Brain...since you are interested in saving lives, then you too would agree that more areas need to be open to either concealed or open carry...right? since almost all of these attacks happen in gun free zones....Right? and statistics show that immediate armed resistance save lives...right?

 

[Brain357]

I am looking to save actual lives in the mass shootings we know happen and the gang shooting we know happen.

No, if you were interested in stopping mass shootings you would support concealed carry...since the statistics show...and we know how interested you are in statistics, that mass shooters who are confronted by armed resistance at the earliest possible point in the attack kill less people...run the numbers...

The research shows that as soon as the shooter is confronted by armed resistance...they surrender, or kill themsleves...saving the lives you claim to be worried about...

So join me in hoping more people get the training and start carrying concealed guns....since that saves lives...right?

But that isn't something you will support...right? Because that goes against your beliefs on gun ownership...

If you really think concealed carry is the answer then you would support a limit on magazine capacity. Most concealed carry guns hold less than 10 rds.

 

[2aguy]

Only because they have to because the anti gunners make it a crime to reveal your pistol on your hip...they play games with open and concealed carry...for example...in Illinois, the pistol must be,concealed....and since it by law has to be concealed it has to be small...in most cases limiting the number of rounds....open carry and concealed carry should be the owners,choice...not the gun grabbers....


If open and concealed carry weren't a game for the gun grabbers, you could carry full size pistols....concealed, without having to worry about "printing" concerns that could get you arrested...

See...this is another point that you miss due to lack of knowledge....full size pistols are easier to shoot than small concealable pistols...the extra weight helps improve control....which means the shooter is more likely to hit what they are aiming for....and not miss and hit innocent people....and people who like revolvers...your magic low bullet weapons, could be carried...

Now, smaller, snub nose revolvers which are harder to shoot have to be carried because they are easier to conceal...while the easier, and safer to shoot, full size revolvers are left at home...

 

[2aguy]

So, to save lives Brain, you think that schools should allow law abiding citizens to carry guns onto their campuses...since the statistics you love show that armed resistance at the beginning of an active shooting saves lives...while gun free zones allow the killing to go on for at least 4 minutes before the police can arrive and enter the building...with guns...which causes the gunman to kill himself...

Right? End Gun free zones now...right? To save lives...right? Or don't you care about saving lives...?

 

[2aguy]

Some more research into saving lives against mass shooters...

New School Tactics Active shooter - The Firing Line Forums

Now some tacticians believe the signs themselves may be an invitation to the active killers. WCPO received many questions about the killings taking place in gun-free zones, so they did their own analysis of mass murders in the U.S. What were their findings about these mass killings? The vast majority occurred in schools or on college campuses where firearms are banned as a matter of state statutes. Others took place in post offices where firearms are banned as a matter of federal law. Most of the rest took place in shopping malls or other businesses where the owners posted signs prohibiting firearm possession by anyone including those with CCW permits. Based on data from the SEALE study, an analysis by TDI, and WCPO's own research, WCPO said "we are able to say definitively that most 'active killer' shootings have occurred in so-called 'gun free' zones." “Officers need to understand valid military principles that apply to these calls, such as speed, surprise and violence of action,” SEALE Academy's Borsch insists. “They need to learn how to close in and finish the fight with aggression, having and keeping the ‘momentum of battle’ on their side. The idea is to keep the adversary off-balance by forcing him always to react to your actions, rather than, after contact, reacting to him.” For example, once an active killer is spotted, Borsch favors the swift application of deadly force over seeking defensive cover in most instances. “An unintentional consequence of going to cover may be to lose sight of the offender, allowing him to gain the momentum of battle and shoot more defenseless innocents until he says it’s over.” Borsch, is a 17 year police veteran and a part-time SWAT team member before retiring from street work, analyzed more than 90 active-shooter incidents on the basis of data largely ferreted out from Internet reports. Most involved schools and colleges, but workplaces, shopping malls, churches and other public places are also represented. Among his findings that have helped shape his tactical thinking: 98% of active killers act alone. 80% have long guns, 75% have multiple weapons (about 3 per incident), and they sometimes bring hundreds of extra rounds of ammunition to the shooting site. Despite such heavy armaments and an obsession with murder at close range, they have an average hit rate of less than 50%. They strike “stunned, defenseless innocents via surprise ambush. On a level playing field, the typical active killer would be a no-contest against anyone reasonably capable of defending themselves.” “They absolutely control life and death until they stop at their leisure or are stopped.” They do not take hostages, do not negotiate. They generally try to avoid police, do not hide or lie in wait for officers and “typically fold quickly upon armed confrontation.” 90% commit suicide on-site. “Surrender or escape attempts are unlikely.” “They choose unarmed, defenseless innocents for a reason: They have no wish to encounter someone who can hurt them. They are personally risk- and pain-avoidant. The tracking history of these murderers has proved them to be unlikely to be aggressive with police. If pressed, they are more likely to kill themselves.” Borsh says.

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Brain357]

Some more research into saving lives against mass shooters...

New School Tactics Active shooter - The Firing Line Forums

“Officers need to understand valid military principles that apply to these calls, such as speed, surprise and violence of action,” SEALE Academy's Borsch insists. “They need to learn how to close in and finish the fight with aggression, having and keeping the ‘momentum of battle’ on their side. The idea is to keep the adversary off-balance by forcing him always to react to your actions, rather than, after contact, reacting to him.”

So far teachers have shot themselves but no bad guys.

 

[2aguy]

Since, according to statistics...immediate, armed resistance save lives...you are opposed to gun free zones...right Brain...

• The vast majority occurred in schools or on college campuses where firearms are banned as a matter of state statutes.

• Others took place in post offices where firearms are banned as a matter of federal law.

• Most of the rest took place in shopping malls or other businesses where the owners posted signs prohibiting firearm possession by anyone including those with CCW permits.

 

[2aguy]

So far teachers have shot themselves but no bad guys.

Sorry, Brain...you haven't done the research...Pearl Mississippi...the shooter was captured by a school administrator...who had to run to his car to get his gun...because he wasn't allowed to carry it...how many lives could have been saved if he had had the weapon on his belt...?

 

[Brain357]

Since, according to statistics...immediate, armed resistance save lives...you are opposed to gun free zones...right Brain...

• The vast majority occurred in schools or on college campuses where firearms are banned as a matter of state statutes.

• Others took place in post offices where firearms are banned as a matter of federal law.

• Most of the rest took place in shopping malls or other businesses where the owners posted signs prohibiting firearm possession by anyone including those with CCW permits.

Gun free zones is a completely different discussion. With teachers having more accidental shootings than bad guy shootings it is an interesting question though.

 

[Brain357]

Only because they have to because the anti gunners make it a crime to reveal your pistol on your hip...they play games with open and concealed carry...for example...in Illinois, the pistol must be,concealed....and since it by law has to be concealed it has to be small...in most cases limiting the number of rounds....open carry and concealed carry should be the owners,choice...not the gun grabbers....


If open and concealed carry weren't a game for the gun grabbers, you could carry full size pistols....concealed, without having to worry about "printing" concerns that could get you arrested...

See...this is another point that you miss due to lack of knowledge....full size pistols are easier to shoot than small concealable pistols...the extra weight helps improve control....which means the shooter is more likely to hit what they are aiming for....and not miss and hit innocent people....and people who like revolvers...your magic low bullet weapons, could be carried...

Now, smaller, snub nose revolvers which are harder to shoot have to be carried because they are easier to conceal...while the easier, and safer to shoot, full size revolvers are left at home...

It is still the case right now. So if a concealed carry guy has less than 10 rds, why do you want the criminal to have more?