Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Something I always point out to people on this subject.

Columbine:

Happened 6 years into the last AWB: didn’t stop it, didn’t have any effect on it.

The shooters used handguns and shotguns…still piled the bodies up, didn’t need an “assault weapon”

So given past history, what makes anyone think our schools will be safer with a new AWB?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
Cho, the shooter at Virginia Tech, used two handguns, a Glock and a Walther P-22. He reportedly had a good collection of magazines and reportedly reloaded his weapons eighteen times during his assault.
IIRC he murdered 32 people; no "assault rifle" involved.

For some odd reason our local radio station has put Geraldo Rivera on from 9-11AM. Geraldo has been "going off" about guns on a pretty near daily basis, aided & abetted by libtards like Governors Rendell and Spitzer. These people wail about the need to ban "assault rifles" and "high-cap" magazines. Even the ostensibly republican Rudy Guiliani (who's on now) is praising Cuomo for the recent NY gun bans!!
If you argue with Geraldo and these rock-headed governors that you don't need to use assault rifles to kill a lot of people (evidencing the Cho/Virginia Tech event) they'll reply that they know they can't stop every event, just some. But that very statement undercuts their argument -- and they don't even know it!!!!! The nutcakes who commit these spree killings prepare for the event (recall Cho buying LOTS of magazines?????) and so will simply buy or obtain what they need in advance.
Inability to buy a Bushmaster AR-15 with a bagful of 30 round magazines will change nothing. Cho murdered more people than Adam Lanza. Tell me that can't happen again.
People are hell-bent on "feel-good" do nothing regulations. Politicians sell it and the populace laps it up like kittens after milk.

"What luck for rulers that men do not think." ~~ Adolph Hitler.​

Scary, huh? Both that it is true....as well as who stated it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
It's not the point, a full court press is. The North Hollywood Bank Robbery also happened while the ban was in effect.

I am convinced part of it is trying to be anti-gun, of course they seemed to ignore the issue for a number of years, but I also think it is because the economy is still horrid and the Administration is insisting on spending us further off the cliff and the media would rather participate in this as a bit of a distraction to that than report on economic reality. Failed financial yard sale states' governments always search for someone or something to gin hatred against, usually from their list of political foes.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
7,758 Posts
As I say: "Show me your new firearms restriction, then explain to me how it will prevent another mass shooting."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Well, Logic matters in those things, but I see it like this. For 20 years, maybe closer to 30, the Pro-2nd people in the USA have come back from being down, built their case with more people, and increased the numbers of people who shoot as well as the numbers and percentages of those who believe in the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

They also built majorities in Congress, culminating with the 1994 Congress which directly followed the 1994 "Crime Bill" (As you'll recall, the last Federal "Assault Weapon/Potato/Shibboleth" Bill expired rather quietly, and crime as dropped since then) and built a solid record of Court Decisions, most notably Heller. Also victories were won in the states, like Florida, and showed that carry permits becoming available to the law abiding cut crime.

These were all done under the American system and in good faith. What we are seeing now is the Antis at the top levels of Media and Government rejecting that system. The new way of gun "control" attempts will probably be by Executive Orders. The new Media takes cues from Piers Morgan rather than the average "Man/Woman on the Street" American. If this is allowed to stand it will redefine, or more properly put, remove the separations of powers under the Constitution in regards to the recognition of the Bill o Rights. It may have started some time back in other ways, but none so blatant, unilateral and bold as this. To make thngs worse much of the Beltway Baghdad Bob media seems not to be asking "Can they?" Or "Should they?" but "How soon can they do it?"

The intent, it seems, is to do it tomorrow. Hot on the heels of a Budget conference where President Obama shrieked for a raise in the debt ceiling, saying Republicans were "Holding a Gun to the Head" of Americans by not going along with that idea, he intends to take the stage, surrounded by children, to announce his new executive orders relating to guns. Here are some articles on what is developing now, and so fast, after four years of relative quiet. I admit, I actually thought this couldn't happen because of Congress and the Courts, but our President now aims to ignore both, and the Media is cheering him along.

Obama to unveil broad gun plans Wednesday - The Washington Post

Obama plans to surround himself with children during gun control announcement | WashingtonExaminer.com

Texas Proposal: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions in the State - NewsRadio 1200 WOAI, San Antonio
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
And, so we don't appear to be a "Party of NO", I'd like to suggest an alternative package based on a number of other articles and position papers I've read, that I think would be FAR more effective than punishing the law-abiding...

1. Harden classroom doors, more along the lines of an airliner cockpit door--door is more resistant to fire (at minimum I would advocate stop a .44 Magnum slug, ideally a .223, pipedream a .30-06 or .308), door is locked at all times and for entry you have to be buzzed in by the teacher, much like how in some apartments or hotels you have to be let into the building by a remote-unlock from the front desk.

2. At minimum, authorizing staff who desire to carry and have Concealed Weapons Permits to do so, subject to the restriction that they use a minimum caliber of .380 auto (or maybe 9x19mm Parabellum), they must keep it ON-BODY (no purse-carry) and CONCEALED so nobody knows who the armed staff are except maybe the principal. Alternate for the squeamish: establish an educational-institution variant of the Federal Flight Deck Officer armed-pilot program, with training and firearms run through the Marshal's Service.

3. We DO need to overhaul the mental-health system... both to make it easier to identify and manage the violently insane, but also to de-stigmatize clinical diagnoses and reassure the Good Guys that not only will voluntarily seeking help NOT cost them any rights, but shows them to be better people for recognizing what needs to be done and doing it. (I speak from personal experience on this, living with Asperger's; when I first started serious training I had serious worries about how it would affect my eligibility for a carry permit, and in reply one of the cops who trained me gave what I consider some of the highest praise I've ever received, telling me that after completing standard police training he would be quite comfortable swearing me in as a member of his department. Though I know there ARE people who are like "Autistic? With a gun? *empties bladder and bowels*") I do not know HOW to fix it, but the first stage of remedying a problem is recognizing that it exists, and I think any sane person is at that point. Perhaps penalties for obstruction of diagnosis and treatment, since Peter Lanza spent a great deal of money trying to cover up that he had a not-quite-right son, and even now that $1-million-plus annual salary is being used to great effect in creating a "wall of silence" between his homicidal son's head and those trying to get inside it to figure out what triggers lit him off and what could have been done to recognize early-warning signs and save his mother's life and the lives of those people at Sandy Hook. (It appears that his mother trying to take steps to get him diagnosed and into care may be one possible flashpoint--he liked his gravy train of having Mommy take care of him with Daddy's unlimited money and didn't wanna grow up, she wanted to have a chance at a life of her own rather than being chained down with a trial-size Frank Breitkopf*, and he took lethal exception when she wanted out of what he saw as his quite comfortable arrangement.)
*UNSUB in Criminal Minds episode "No Way Out": a brilliant but sociopathic kid whose mother tries to isolate him from the world to contain the damage he can do, but the downside is that after she dies he's set loose on the world living on her money and what he lifts off those he kills.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Diamondback,

I don't worry about "being the party of NO" -FREQUENTLY, the CORRECT answer is "NO".

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Diamondback, from my experience teaching I agree with all you said, especially the hardening aspect, hardened windows and doors to buy time. Plus the CCW and the mental stuff. You hit all the right points, and those ar hte best ideas.

Daresay, a lot of would be school shooters would go elsewhere knowing the chance of an armed response or that it would be harder to get in. Especially number one though because they are worthless p-----s as a rule.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,200 Posts
Thisis what I recently posted to my Facebook page, basically in line wiht Diamondback because he hit the bases so well.

I intend to send versions of these suggestions to my elected officials as well.

(Get ready for core dump, hm...)

Well, shortly after the Sandy Hook shootings, I had meant to post something. I decided to gather my thoughts, because I had quite a few. Then time intervened, and I figured, well I’ll get around to posting something, eventually. However events seem to be going fast now, so I had better post now. It is best to do so at the time, and I guess we’re going to find out how much text I can post on this thing at one go, so here we go.

When I saw the news of the Newtown killings, and heard there were injuries, then deaths, I couldn’t help thinking of the situation, trying to put myself in the shoes of those people teaching there that day, thinking of the kids, very close to the age I have been working with lately, and thinking of a girl who had been missing who I had taught at a young age, who had just been found in Texas after an apparent cross-country joyride that I still have no idea why she did. I just sat there and thought about it, and then as details came out I tried to think of how a person physically could do such a thing. Mentally I couldn’t know how anyone could be so evil, so basically failed at being a human being. I tried to think of the way to prevent this stuff, using my experience in schools and how they are secured as well as my experience in another area, that of guns.

Most of you people who visit here, especially people who know me going back a ways know I have a hobby and an interest in firearms. Love them as a historian, the technology, the developments, and studying them for the reflection they are as artifacts of man. Enjoy shooting them, safely, at a proper range, at paper targets. Basically, that’s been it for some time. A long time, folks, as many of you know.
There’s a saying, “Never the twain shall meet.” Unfortunately I had to sit down and process things, my feelings, what I was thinking about that situation from the perspective of a teacher or educator at the average day at work with kids that young. Then I had to think of school safety, security, how to make it harder for someone intent on that evil to get in, and how to stop them if they tried. I also had to think about guns, and the US, and the realities we look at in this nation.

Making a school safer, in passive means, can be done in several ways, first the locked door “buzz in” technique many use these days. Second, reinforcing doors and other points of entry was something I thought of. The evil misguided Newtown scumbag had apparently broken a window to get inside the building. I indent to put suggestions together in these areas, to send to elected officials and others, using my experience in School safety procedures and my other instincts.

However, this is not the only thing that can be done. Currently there is a push to regulate guns. I had thought it would be a lengthy debate, but the idea of Executive Orders to circumvent the usual procedures and Separations of Powers we have in our Constitution looks to be popular with the current Administration and the media. My thoughts on that in a moment, but first I will address abject reality.

There are guns out there. There are a lot of guns out there. In place after place where they have been banned or heavily restricted, crime continues. During the period of time when we last had an “Assault Weapons Ban” in effect, the Columbine Shootings and the North Hollywood Bank Robbery both happened. Those laws did not stop evil people from getting guns. I doubt any new one would either. Since that Assault Weapon Ban” sunsetted a couple years ago and it no longer the law of the land, violent crime including crimes committed with guns, have gone down. There’s another thing to consider too.

Since fall of 2008, when the economic distress started, I have seen people buying guns in numbers I have never seen before in my life. That is worth considering. I remember in the 1990s when people were worried about that first law, and other proposed laws, hard core shooters were buying guns left and right. In the 1980s there were also people making runs on guns. This has been different than either of those times. The people worried about the economy have covered every demographic and every background you can imagine. I have seen gun stores swamped for the last four years plus by such buyers.

It isn’t just the economy. In the past ten years I have seen the shooting community expand. More people got into it even before the economy started to slide. The economic worries kicked it into overdrive. Since then, with the politics now involved, stores are almost bare. The point is, there are tons of guns and shells out there, mostly in the hands of people who won’t bother anyone with them.

Any law restricting guns would first face the reality of a huge supply out there already and the second factor that if criminals want something they will gladly smuggle it. In my opinion banning guns will stop criminals from getting them as much as banning marijuana stops them from getting that. Saying that a law against guns will only hurt the people who follow the law may sound like a silly bumper sticker, but in my experience it is also true. I am not saying this joyously or to make some political statement. In my experience it is simply reality, and one I consider in looking at this school situation. That is my first concern here. The person who attacked the school had murdered their own mother and stolen her firearms. She worked in the school and could pass any background check, and she herself, it is safe to say, would never have done anything like her son did. There is no restriction, sadly, that would have stopped her from having arms legally.

What must be done is to deal with the reality of the world that we live in. As I mentioned, there are ways to make it harder for an evil person to break into a school. There are ways to help bar the castle gates. However, in my experience, and as I look at what happened at Newtown, and what has sadly happened in some other places as well, that in itself is not enough. I think of the kids I have taught, and the ones my friends have, and the ones I may one day have too. I look at it from two worlds. What I do to teach and what I have as experience with guns.

Never the twain shall meet.

Until they have to.

This was not my choice.

I must then say it. The “Disaster Response” and “Active Threat Response” drills I have seen in various districts and schools aren’t good enough in themselves. Even locking a door, which as I said could be reinforced, is not perfect, and some districts do not give keys to substitutes. Kind of hard to lock the door then, of course either way the drill is often to keep the kids bunched together, not moving. Against the kind of attack the Newtown school faced this is not enough, and anyone who looks at it on the face knows it.

I have done drills in many schools and the thought crosses you mind, in this room, laid out this way, with this age group of kids, what do you do? What things at hand could be used? How would you know? How do they get out that one point of entry or exit that many classrooms have? How much time could you give them to do that? You can’t just stand there and do that.

The principal and teachers at Newtown rushed the waste of air who was in there to kill kids. They bought all the time they could that way. They probably did save some lives at the expense of their own. They will always stand as examples of the best of what we are as people.

There comes a time in reality when we have to face the question of how people in the future can be better equipped to deal with an attack. When one has not seen such a thing, it is understandable one cannot imagine it. It is not in the nature of a normal human being to do so. When we have already seen such a thing, it becomes sadly necessary, gravely so. Not to do so ignores the lesson. Not to do so risks putting others into that same boat, with those same options, when it does not need to be so.

Some people have suggested teachers and school staff be allowed to carry concealed firearms. The people suggesting this have been called every name in the book. They are also right.

Teachers and those who work in schools are already subject to the most serious of background checks, whether teachers, aides, or other staff. Allowing those who pass a rigorous course of training to carry personal handguns in a safe and approved manner of holster carry is not something I had considered until now. A gun is the last thing I would have considered having near a school. Now, after this, if this is what must be done to deter those who look for an easy place to kill, because they are total coward scumbags, so be it. Either holster carry or lock boxes for handguns. Hidden as best as one can so hopefully the kids never have to see them. Kept from them, quiet, but there to protect, having one armed person at or near the front door “buzz in” area and others scattered through the school. No one forced to do it, only volunteers. For additional firing power long guns may be kept locked and hidden away in fast access metal cases, quick to unlock and solid when locked, in the Office or other areas out of sight, for certain people. However, between hardening the school as far as anyone breaking in and allowing carrying of concealed pistols that should cover most of it. I never thought I’d have to consider something like this, but if the reality demands it I volunteer and I know many others in the teaching profession will. As a rule we hope we would act as the Newtown teachers and staff did, buying all the time they could. Having arms would allow us a chance to have an even better chance to protect life, with the prayer that the need to use force to stop an attacker never becomes necessary.

There it is. I wish I had better ideas. I wish I could guarantee better. I wish there was something better. Most of all I wish the discussion never became necessary and there weren’t total scumbags would go after the best and most innocent, held off from doing worse only by the sacrifice of the best and most brave.

David
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,499 Posts
New York and CT both have laws where the slaves have to beg politicians and pay fees and more bribes to get a taste of their own natural rights. Now New York has added yet more restrictions and fees.

Fact: Even the glorious perfection of the Federal Government loses guns, including machine guns every year.

Fact: Criminals do not obey the law.

Fact: Four women needed a gun, just once in their lives.

Fact: They were FORBIDDEN by law.

Fact: They are DEAD and so are 20 children they should have protected.

Geoff
Who is highly upset but not surprised by the Neo-Nazi Parties power grab.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Well, Logic matters in those things, but I see it like this. For 20 years, maybe closer to 30, the Pro-2nd people in the USA have come back from being down, built their case with more people, and increased the numbers of people who shoot as well as the numbers and percentages of those who believe in the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

They also built majorities in Congress, culminating with the 1994 Congress which directly followed the 1994 "Crime Bill" (As you'll recall, the last Federal "Assault Weapon/Potato/Shibboleth" Bill expired rather quietly, and crime as dropped since then) and built a solid record of Court Decisions, most notably Heller. Also victories were won in the states, like Florida, and showed that carry permits becoming available to the law abiding cut crime.

These were all done under the American system and in good faith. What we are seeing now is the Antis at the top levels of Media and Government rejecting that system. The new way of gun "control" attempts will probably be by Executive Orders. The new Media takes cues from Piers Morgan rather than the average "Man/Woman on the Street" American. If this is allowed to stand it will redefine, or more properly put, remove the separations of powers under the Constitution in regards to the recognition of the Bill o Rights. It may have started some time back in other ways, but none so blatant, unilateral and bold as this. To make thngs worse much of the Beltway Baghdad Bob media seems not to be asking "Can they?" Or "Should they?" but "How soon can they do it?"

The intent, it seems, is to do it tomorrow. Hot on the heels of a Budget conference where President Obama shrieked for a raise in the debt ceiling, saying Republicans were "Holding a Gun to the Head" of Americans by not going along with that idea, he intends to take the stage, surrounded by children, to announce his new executive orders relating to guns. Here are some articles on what is developing now, and so fast, after four years of relative quiet. I admit, I actually thought this couldn't happen because of Congress and the Courts, but our President now aims to ignore both, and the Media is cheering him along.

Obama to unveil broad gun plans Wednesday - The Washington Post

Obama plans to surround himself with children during gun control announcement | WashingtonExaminer.com

Texas Proposal: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions in the State - NewsRadio 1200 WOAI, San Antonio
David,

Very well said…it really is a CULTURAL thing, and for so long we were clearly winning that cultural war. I'm not convinced that we're not still winning.

Just some additional thoughts.

Since announcing the Executive Orders (which I immediately took as them testing the waters), The President has clarified that there are only some very minor things that can legally be done through Executive Order, such as crime data collection, and new guidelines to various government agencies; nothing of significant substance (relatively speaking of course). So, I don't think that's what we need to fear…yet.

My recollection of the Heller Decision was that Scalia wrote somewhere in there that any "infringement" on the 2nd Amendment should be met with the highest levels of scrutiny. I take that to mean that SCOTUS should examine the constitutionality of any such infringements.

Most of the discussions I've been seeing have been in relation to the Heller Decision, and certainly any discussion of ammunition restrictions would be weighed against Heller. But semi-auto rifles, and magazine bans to my way of thinking would be weighed against the Miller decision; and it would be hard to justify either as NOT being suitable for a militia.

Lastly, I see a Republican clean sweep in 2014 for Congress. I'm not big on Republicans these days, but I doubt you'd ever catch me singing the praises of Democrats. For me, I really don't have any representation, so I guess Republicans will have to do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,549 Posts
:D Law enforcement fighting back

Mueller said politicians are "attempting to exploit the deaths of innocent victims" by supporting laws that would harm law-abiding Americans. The sheriff said he took an oath to support the Constitution, and laws preventing citizens from owning certain semi-automatic firearms and ammunition magazines would violate their rights

:lol: then this......

"We're restricted and prohibited from enforcing all types of federal laws, including immigration laws," he said Tuesday. "It would be unreasonable for anyone to think that I would enforce a federal firearms law

Read more: Oregon, Texas officials warn White House against enforcing new gun regulations | Fox News
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
Some of my adoption of those suggestions from advocacy also comes from a highly unusual perspective: back in college, the Chancellor of my alma mater was a consultant to Homeland Security on education issues, and knowing that I had done a fair degree of study at the "armchair student" level of CT and related subjects and was spending a lot of time "paper wargaming" scenarios out with friends of mine in Campus Security, he asked me to be one of HIS advisors in turn.

Big kicker: The summer after Virginia Tech, on a Friday when the rest of the campus was shut down, they, a few friends among the faculty who could spare the time that I asked to assist and I did a Full Scale Exercise using airsoft, with the Chancellor and the Director of Security umpiring and me playing the role of the "Red Team". In a nutshell, in several run-throughs we found that other things can slow things down and buy time, but the only way to STOP a truly determined SpK (Spree Killer, as opposed to the SK of "Serial Killer") is swiftly applied overwhelming force, with equal or preferably superior firepower. Campus policy was that Security had to go with no more than Mace, and even though we made a persuasive case to the Chancellor for better equipment in our demonstration, his Executive Assistant (an anti, who liked neither the fact that there was an off-duty cop in Security NOR the fact that CCW permitholder students weren't preemptively expelled just for having that cred) somehow had some bureaucratic dirty tricks up her sleeve and killed any chance of implementation... (Though the policy at my alma mater, at least when I mustered out several Chancellorships ago, was that if you have a carry permit, as long as you keep it concealed so nobody finds out about it, or nobody raises a stink about it, you're golden, if somebody finds it AND complains then it goes or you go.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
It also helps that that was a little local community college with less than two thousand enrolled students per quarter at that time, and that I had been there much longer than the typical 2-year in-and-out for an AA/AS. (Had been a double-major, completed one and after continuing a while on the other, decided to ditch it and change to a History major... right about the time that our Legislature decided term limits were silly for them but a GREAT idea for college students, never mind that I always paid full-boat tuition, no grants, scholarships or any breaks other than resident rate.)

That, and, the guys and gal in Security were range-buddies, who one of the big things they looked forward to in a month was my dropping off fresh gun-porn for 'em after I'd read the latest various G&A and FMG (Guns/American Handgunner) pubs...
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top