Gunman at DC Navy Yard shoots at least 7

[eflatminor]

let all me ask all of you anti gun loons here a question. did the gun have know psychological disorders and a history of violence or did the individual?

Based on their illogical arguments, we should ban large capacity spoons because of all the fat people. Afterall, a lot more people die from obesity related illnesses than firearms...

 

[Brain357]

"Almost shot" = "didn't shoot".

Got it.

Proving its not so easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys. You lose.

So basically disarm everyone then?

Except your government overlords, of course.

Didn't say that. Just pointing out your solution isn't very good.

 

[martybegan]

Proving its not so easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys. You lose.

So basically disarm everyone then?

Except your government overlords, of course.

Didn't say that. Just pointing out your solution isn't very good.

In a mass shooting, no solution is going to be good. What you want to do is give people the ability to defend themselves, not just the security people the ability to defend themselves.

 

[eflatminor]

And the right solution is to ignore what every other developed nation has done and keep adding more guns. We've been doing that for a while now. Doesn't seem to be working.

Actually, America doesn't make the list of the top 100 nations based on homicide rates. And if you isolated the few counties/boroughs in which so many of the gang-related murders occur, the rest of the country would have a murder rate akin to Japan...without the monstrously high suicide rate.

The solution is to not prevent law abiding citizens from defending themselves and to keep VIOLENT criminals in prison longer. A third tactic, which does potentially tread on civil liberties, is to loosen the rules that allow for the incarceration of seemingly mentally unstable persons in mental health facilities. Of course, the ACLU would be all over that one.

 

[Brain357]

So basically disarm everyone then?

Except your government overlords, of course.

Didn't say that. Just pointing out your solution isn't very good.

In a mass shooting, no solution is going to be good. What you want to do is give people the ability to defend themselves, not just the security people the ability to defend themselves.

What is it I want to do?

So you would force companies to allow employees and customers to carry guns? And once they are allowed to everyone would carry and we'd be safe? Issue guns to people visiting our country so they can be safe?

 

[koshergrl]

"Almost shot" = "didn't shoot".

Got it.

Proving its not so easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys. You lose.

So did the good guys inadvertently shoot the good guys? No?
The issue wasn't whether it could be difficult...the issue was whether or not armed citizens accidentally kill the wrong people. So far, no, they haven't. You lose. I prefer to have 15 cc citizens debating over which person to shoot, than no cc citizens, and no doubt over who is the person doing the killing (while you're waiting for your turn).

 

[Brain357]

And the right solution is to ignore what every other developed nation has done and keep adding more guns. We've been doing that for a while now. Doesn't seem to be working.

Actually, America doesn't make the list of the top 100 nations based on homicide rates. And if you isolated the few counties/boroughs in which so many of the gang-related murders occur, the rest of the country would have a murder rate akin to Japan...without the monstrously high suicide rate.

The solution is to not prevent law abiding citizens from defending themselves and to keep VIOLENT criminals in prison longer. A third tactic, which does potentially tread on civil liberties, is to loosen the rules that allow for the incarceration of seemingly mentally unstable persons in mental health facilities. Of course, the ACLU would be all over that one.

So rather than strengthen background checks just throw everyone in jail. Ah freedom.

 

[martybegan]

Didn't say that. Just pointing out your solution isn't very good.

In a mass shooting, no solution is going to be good. What you want to do is give people the ability to defend themselves, not just the security people the ability to defend themselves.

What is it I want to do?

So you would force companies to allow employees and customers to carry guns? And once they are allowed to everyone would carry and we'd be safe? Issue guns to people visiting our country so they can be safe?

If you go through the process of becoming a CCW holder, you should be able to carry your weapon unless the owner of the facility does not want you to. In that case the owner has to take responsibility for your safety in the case of an incident.

Here the owner is the government, and it banned CCW holders from being armed. it then took the responsibility for people's safety, and it failed in that responsibility. It should be liable for the damages done.

What shouldnt happen is that gun grabbers use this as excuse to curtail my rights to own a firearm.

 

[koshergrl]

You throw the crazy people who have been arrested multiple times for discharging weapons in jail. Hell yes.

 

[Brain357]

"Almost shot" = "didn't shoot".

Got it.

Proving its not so easy to tell the good guys from the bad guys. You lose.

So did the good guys inadvertently shoot the good guys? No?
The issue wasn't whether it could be difficult...the issue was whether or not armed citizens accidentally kill the wrong people. So far, no, they haven't. You lose. I prefer to have 15 cc citizens debating over which person to shoot, than no cc citizens, and no doubt over who is the person doing the killing (while you're waiting for your turn).

Actually whether it is difficult is exactly the issue. To quote you:
"But people of moderate intelligence are perfectly capable of discerning who is the killer, or otherwise, holding fire. "

You lose again.

 

[Meathead]

And the right solution is to ignore what every other developed nation has done and keep adding more guns. We've been doing that for a while now. Doesn't seem to be working.

Actually, America doesn't make the list of the top 100 nations based on homicide rates. And if you isolated the few counties/boroughs in which so many of the gang-related murders occur, the rest of the country would have a murder rate akin to Japan...without the monstrously high suicide rate.

The solution is to not prevent law abiding citizens from defending themselves and to keep VIOLENT criminals in prison longer. A third tactic, which does potentially tread on civil liberties, is to loosen the rules that allow for the incarceration of seemingly mentally unstable persons in mental health facilities. Of course, the ACLU would be all over that one.

That's racist of course, but yeah.

 

[Brain357]

In a mass shooting, no solution is going to be good. What you want to do is give people the ability to defend themselves, not just the security people the ability to defend themselves.

What is it I want to do?

So you would force companies to allow employees and customers to carry guns? And once they are allowed to everyone would carry and we'd be safe? Issue guns to people visiting our country so they can be safe?

If you go through the process of becoming a CCW holder, you should be able to carry your weapon unless the owner of the facility does not want you to. In that case the owner has to take responsibility for your safety in the case of an incident.

Here the owner is the government, and it banned CCW holders from being armed. it then took the responsibility for people's safety, and it failed in that responsibility. It should be liable for the damages done.

What shouldnt happen is that gun grabbers use this as excuse to curtail my rights to own a firearm.

Do you know any company that allows employees to bring guns to work?

 

[Brain357]

You throw the crazy people who have been arrested multiple times for discharging weapons in jail. Hell yes.

So the right protects freedom by throwing more people in jail? And for how long?

 

[Peterf]

You throw the crazy people who have been arrested multiple times for discharging weapons in jail. Hell yes.

Are there many people who discharge weapons in jail? I suppose anything is possible in the US of A but it seems a bit unlikely.

 

[KissMy]

Do you know any company that allows employees to bring guns to work?

Every one I have worked for allowed guns. It was a lot of the darn cities, schools, etc, I went to on service calls that did not allow it that was the problem.

 

[koshergrl]

What is it I want to do?

So you would force companies to allow employees and customers to carry guns? And once they are allowed to everyone would carry and we'd be safe? Issue guns to people visiting our country so they can be safe?

If you go through the process of becoming a CCW holder, you should be able to carry your weapon unless the owner of the facility does not want you to. In that case the owner has to take responsibility for your safety in the case of an incident.

Here the owner is the government, and it banned CCW holders from being armed. it then took the responsibility for people's safety, and it failed in that responsibility. It should be liable for the damages done.

What shouldnt happen is that gun grabbers use this as excuse to curtail my rights to own a firearm.

Do you know any company that allows employees to bring guns to work?

Yeah, the district attorney's office. Many DAs have cc permits, and keep their weapons on them at all times. I know because my sister was one of them.

 

[Brain357]

Do you know any company that allows employees to bring guns to work?

Every one I have worked for allowed guns. It was a lot of the darn cities, schools, etc, I went to on service calls that did not allow it that was the problem.

I've never heard of that. Please name them so I can do some research.

 

[martybegan]

What is it I want to do?

So you would force companies to allow employees and customers to carry guns? And once they are allowed to everyone would carry and we'd be safe? Issue guns to people visiting our country so they can be safe?

If you go through the process of becoming a CCW holder, you should be able to carry your weapon unless the owner of the facility does not want you to. In that case the owner has to take responsibility for your safety in the case of an incident.

Here the owner is the government, and it banned CCW holders from being armed. it then took the responsibility for people's safety, and it failed in that responsibility. It should be liable for the damages done.

What shouldnt happen is that gun grabbers use this as excuse to curtail my rights to own a firearm.

Do you know any company that allows employees to bring guns to work?

Guns in the Workplace | Conceal Carry

I'm sure there are plenty of smaller companies that do, and as you see in the article, some places ban it in thier policies due to insurance requirements, but dont really enforce it.

Also the idea of concealed carry is "concealed" so unless the CCW holder has concealing issues or is forced to use his weapon, there are probably tons of people who carry with the boss none the wiser.

 

[Brain357]

If you go through the process of becoming a CCW holder, you should be able to carry your weapon unless the owner of the facility does not want you to. In that case the owner has to take responsibility for your safety in the case of an incident.

Here the owner is the government, and it banned CCW holders from being armed. it then took the responsibility for people's safety, and it failed in that responsibility. It should be liable for the damages done.

What shouldnt happen is that gun grabbers use this as excuse to curtail my rights to own a firearm.

Do you know any company that allows employees to bring guns to work?

Yeah, the district attorney's office. Many DAs have cc permits, and keep their weapons on them at all times. I know because my sister was one of them.

Well that covers almost none of the population. Thanks.

 

[Spoonman]

You throw the crazy people who have been arrested multiple times for discharging weapons in jail. Hell yes.

So the right protects freedom by throwing more people in jail? And for how long?

you're worried about the rights of a guy who has broken the law multiple times yet you will tread all over a law abiding citizen and restrict their constitutional rights because it is your personal agenda