Florida Wants to Kill Kids

[JamesInFlorida]

Gee, I have several lying here next to me. Wanna see?

I personally think a gun should be unloaded whenever it's not in use. No need to have a loaded gun when you're not currently using it.

Do you actually know what you just said?

Oh wait ... don't shoot me 'til I load up .....

Yeah because, being in a confrontation with somebody doesn't count as "using" your gun? If somebody breaks into your house, you should have more than enough time to load your gun. If you can't load your gun that quickly-you probably shouldn't have one in the first place.

edit: or you should change the gun you use for your personal protection at home.

 

[The Rabbi]

There is no such thing as an Unloaded gun...

Gee, I have several lying here next to me. Wanna see?

I personally think a gun should be unloaded whenever it's not in use. No need to have a loaded gun when you're not currently using it.

True. WIth the caveat that a gun for personal protection is always potential in use. Therefore should always be loaded. Mine are.

 

[The Rabbi]

Did you spend a lot of time being this dumb, you fuckwit?

You appear to be the fuckwit here, asshole. Try reading a post or two. Might need someone to explain it all to you.
Geezus, and you run this place?

Oh. So you mean I'm not a racist, antisemitic SOB like you?

God will forgive me.

How about you, hater?

You are a pathetic excuse for a human being. No wonder you don't post more often.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Gee, I have several lying here next to me. Wanna see?

I personally think a gun should be unloaded whenever it's not in use. No need to have a loaded gun when you're not currently using it.

True. WIth the caveat that a gun for personal protection is always potential in use. Therefore should always be loaded. Mine are.

I would tend to agree, I think guns for personal protection are "in use" in the sense that they should be ready to be used at all times-that's really the whole purpose of them. One should still be able to load the gun very quickly, and quick enough before anybody breaking into their house can get into a confrontation with them. 15, MAYBE 20 seconds you should be able to grab your gun, load it, and be prepared to protect yourself (depends on your reaction to waking up if you're sleeping). If you're able to do this-I really don't see the harm in having it already loaded. If somebody can't load their gun in a matter of seconds-they don't have enough control over the weapon.

There's no excuse for not being in total control of your gun if it's in your possession, and no not excuse to have it properly kept away where children, or people who have no clue how to use one can get their hands on it. Obviously you also need to take proper care of it, and do the proper maintence with it whenever you're done using it, but that's another issue.



But I think we both can agree that a responsible gun owner already knows these things. And it's my belief that if you want to exercise your constitutional rights to own a gun (which I have no problem with), you should do so in a responsible way. The accidents that do happen, happen to those who aren't properly prepared, but who think they are.

 

[Anachronism]

Yeah because, being in a confrontation with somebody doesn't count as "using" your gun? If somebody breaks into your house, you should have more than enough time to load your gun. If you can't load your gun that quickly-you probably shouldn't have one in the first place.

edit: or you should change the gun you use for your personal protection at home.

James, I've got a test for you to do.....

Go out to a shooting range. Place a silhouette target out at 7 yards. Stand at the low ready. On the buzzer, bring the gun up and shoot the target 6 times. Now do the same thing, except start with the gun unloaded and see what the time difference is. It's going to be more than you think.

NOW; do 20 pushups, run a quarter mile, and do 50 speed squats. As soon as you're finished with that last squat repeat the shooting part of the test. Then repeat exercises before doing the loading and shooting part of the test. The results will blow your mind.

In the middle of a combative situation there is no time to be trying to load a firearm, find a key for a gun lock or anything like that. BOTH of my home defense firearms sit within easy reach of my bed, and my desk as I type this, ready to go. They both have rounds in the chamber. The handgun doesn't have a manual safety and the safety on the shotgun is already OFF. I won't own a self-defense handgun that has a manual safety.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

Yeah because, being in a confrontation with somebody doesn't count as "using" your gun? If somebody breaks into your house, you should have more than enough time to load your gun. If you can't load your gun that quickly-you probably shouldn't have one in the first place.

edit: or you should change the gun you use for your personal protection at home.

James, I've got a test for you to do.....

Go out to a shooting range. Place a silhouette target out at 7 yards. Stand at the low ready. On the buzzer, bring the gun up and shoot the target 6 times. Now do the same thing, except start with the gun unloaded and see what the time difference is. It's going to be more than you think.

NOW; do 20 pushups, run a quarter mile, and do 50 speed squats. As soon as you're finished with that last squat repeat the shooting part of the test. Then repeat exercises before doing the loading and shooting part of the test. The results will blow your mind.

In the middle of a combative situation there is no time to be trying to load a firearm, find a key for a gun lock or anything like that. BOTH of my home defense firearms sit within easy reach of my bed, and my desk as I type this, ready to go. They both have rounds in the chamber. The handgun doesn't have a manual safety and the safety on the shotgun is already OFF. I won't own a self-defense handgun that has a manual safety.

-well first of all the silhouette wouldn't be seen right away. If somebody breaks into your house they're not magical right in front of you immediately. Also it doesn't take more than 15-20 seconds to find your gun and load it. Now your shooting accuracy of hitting the target six times-that's different, and totally dependent on the person doing the shooting.

When is anybody going to get into a combat situation in their own home? Or in public for that matter? And if you're in public-I'd have my gun already loaded. I get the point of the first part of your post-but not the second.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

When is anybody going to get into a combat situation in their own home?

Meghan Brown, a former Florida pageant queen, shot and killed 42-year-old Albert Franklin Hill during a home invasion March 12 at the 2,732-square-foot house she shares with her fiance in Tierra Verde, Fla.

Armed Beauty Queen Fatally Shoots Intruder in Florida Home Invasion - FoxNews.com

And fortunately Ms. Brown was able to defend herself free from concern about an investigation or litigation from the criminal’s family courtesy of Florida self-defense statutes.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

When is anybody going to get into a combat situation in their own home?

Meghan Brown, a former Florida pageant queen, shot and killed 42-year-old Albert Franklin Hill during a home invasion March 12 at the 2,732-square-foot house she shares with her fiance in Tierra Verde, Fla.

Armed Beauty Queen Fatally Shoots Intruder in Florida Home Invasion - FoxNews.com

And fortunately Ms. Brown was able to defend herself free from concern about an investigation or litigation from the criminal’s family courtesy of Florida self-defense statutes.

I never said somebody shouldn't have the right to own a gun, or to shoot somebody for entering their house. Good for her.

And I probably used the wrong language with "combat situation". What I was trying to get at was the 20 pushups, mile run, etc. that Anarchist talked about in his post. So when would somebody do all that physically straining stuff in their own home to protect against an intruder. If anything you don't want to go out guns blazing running out right away-you don't know how many of them are in your home, if it's more than one and you don't know where the other is-you could be in serious danger.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I never said somebody shouldn't have the right to own a gun, or to shoot somebody for entering their house. Good for her.

Yes but that right exists unmitigated and comprehensively.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

I never said somebody shouldn't have the right to own a gun, or to shoot somebody for entering their house. Good for her.

Yes but that right exists unmitigated and comprehensively.

I wasn't arguing somebody's right to own a gun. My main point (before the tangent in this thread), was that a doctor asking you if you have guns in your house isn't a violation of your 2nd. If you have a problem with it-you have the right not to answer, and the right to seek out a different doctor.

 

[DaGoose]

Yes, maybe we ought to....

.... revisit the issue of parents who have no fucking idea what their kids are doing.

From the article in the OP:

Pediatricians argue it's vital to ask about guns in the home so they can advise parents about risks and make sure the guns are stored properly, all in order to prevent injury and death in children.

"For pediatricians, prevention is the name of the game," St. Petery said.

"We're not out there to rid the state of guns," said St. Petery, who also owns a gun at home and raised three children. "We're out to be sure if parents have guns that they are aware," of how to safely store it, he said. More than one-third of American homes have at least one gun at home, but a 2007 study found 70 percent of guns are not stored safely.

If you want the issue of idiotic parents addressed and you don't want the government involved, what sense does it make to pass legislation preventing a pediatrician from discussing gun safety with a parent (completely free of any government intervention whatsoever)?

And AGAIN...*DUMBFUCK*...what BUSINESS is it of thiers or ANYONE ELSE?

Hmm.....that's what I have said about a woman getting an abortion.

But what I'm reading throughout this entire thread from the wingnuts is:

"I believe in a small government that does not intrude into the private lives of citizens unless it's something that I disagree with. If I disagree with it then I want a big, invasive government exercizing control over the private lives of Americans. In other words, I want it both ways even if it makes me a hypocrite."

.

 

[DaGoose]

I never said somebody shouldn't have the right to own a gun, or to shoot somebody for entering their house. Good for her.

Yes but that right exists unmitigated and comprehensively.

I wasn't arguing somebody's right to own a gun. My main point (before the tangent in this thread), was that a doctor asking you if you have guns in your house isn't a violation of your 2nd. If you have a problem with it-you have the right not to answer, and the right to seek out a different doctor.

Yeah, but they'd rather have a big, invasive government do it for them. So much for self reliance.

.

 

[Contumacious]

From the article in the OP:



If you want the issue of idiotic parents addressed and you don't want the government involved, what sense does it make to pass legislation preventing a pediatrician from discussing gun safety with a parent (completely free of any government intervention whatsoever)?

And AGAIN...*DUMBFUCK*...what BUSINESS is it of thiers or ANYONE ELSE?

Hmm.....that's what I have said about a woman getting an abortion.

But what I'm reading throughout this entire thread from the wingnuts is:

"I believe in a small government that does not intrude into the private lives of citizens unless it's something that I disagree with. If I disagree with it then I want a big, invasive government exercizing control over the private lives of Americans. In other words, I want it both ways even if it makes me a hypocrite."

.

Unfortunately, you assertion is correct.

They believe that they have a right to bear arms. But those radical Muslims, minorities and blacks do not.

.

 

[Againsheila]

Yup. Thousands of innocent children will be slaughtered if this legislation.


What qualifies a doctor to give advice about gun safety??

Critics: New Gun Law Will Kill Kids - Yahoo! News

Ummmm...........probably their MEDICAL degrees, and the fact that because they see so many children in a month, not only do they understand their medical issues, but they also understand the psychology of a child BETTER (generally) than their parents do.

I guess that would depend on the parents...I for one believe most parents know far more about their children than any doctor who maybe spends 15 minutes with them once every 6 months.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yup. Thousands of innocent children will be slaughtered if this legislation.


What qualifies a doctor to give advice about gun safety??

Critics: New Gun Law Will Kill Kids - Yahoo! News

Ummmm...........probably their MEDICAL degrees, and the fact that because they see so many children in a month, not only do they understand their medical issues, but they also understand the psychology of a child BETTER (generally) than their parents do.

I guess that would depend on the parents...I for one believe most parents know far more about their children than any doctor who maybe spends 15 minutes with them once every 6 months.

Maybe he's speaking fro personal experience.

Doctors have no formal training in firearms safety. Ergo they are not qualified to give advice on the subject.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Ummmm...........probably their MEDICAL degrees, and the fact that because they see so many children in a month, not only do they understand their medical issues, but they also understand the psychology of a child BETTER (generally) than their parents do.

I guess that would depend on the parents...I for one believe most parents know far more about their children than any doctor who maybe spends 15 minutes with them once every 6 months.

Maybe he's speaking fro personal experience.

Doctors have no formal training in firearms safety. Ergo they are not qualified to give advice on the subject.

Are you sure about that? Because many take classes.

 

[Anachronism]

-well first of all the silhouette wouldn't be seen right away. If somebody breaks into your house they're not magical right in front of you immediately. Also it doesn't take more than 15-20 seconds to find your gun and load it. Now your shooting accuracy of hitting the target six times-that's different, and totally dependent on the person doing the shooting.

Are you certain of that? You can guarantee that they're never going to break in while you're still awake and away from the firearm, and that they're always going to come through an entry in some other part of the house? Wow, I really wish I had your powers of precognition.

When is anybody going to get into a combat situation in their own home? Or in public for that matter? And if you're in public-I'd have my gun already loaded. I get the point of the first part of your post-but not the second.

Any time you pick up a firearm for self-defense it's a combat situation.

What happens when you do the exercises that I mentioned? Your heart rate rises, your respiration quickens, and more than likely your body dumps addrenaline into your system. The exact same things that hearing that breaking window glass or kicked in door are going to do to your body. The general affects of those physical changes are a loss of fine motor control, a narrowing of the vision, and a decrease in your ability to think things through quickly and reasonably. All affects that can have a significantly negative effect in a combat situation.

A gun that is not loaded and ready to go at all times is as worthless as a rock, because that's essentially what it is.

 

[Anachronism]

And I probably used the wrong language with "combat situation". What I was trying to get at was the 20 pushups, mile run, etc. that Anarchist talked about in his post. So when would somebody do all that physically straining stuff in their own home to protect against an intruder.

The exercises are to simulate the physical effects of heart-rate, respiration and addrenaline that you body WILL be experiencing if you are ever in that sort of situation. Those affects can make a serious difference in your ability to carry out even very simple tasks like loading a firearm.

If anything you don't want to go out guns blazing running out right away-you don't know how many of them are in your home, if it's more than one and you don't know where the other is-you could be in serious danger.

Sorry, but I'm the "Shoot First, Don't Ask Questions" type. Once I've identified the intruder's form he/she is getting two rounds in the chest, and if necessary one more in the head. Then I'll worry about the next one.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

And I probably used the wrong language with "combat situation". What I was trying to get at was the 20 pushups, mile run, etc. that Anarchist talked about in his post. So when would somebody do all that physically straining stuff in their own home to protect against an intruder.

The exercises are to simulate the physical effects of heart-rate, respiration and addrenaline that you body WILL be experiencing if you are ever in that sort of situation. Those affects can make a serious difference in your ability to carry out even very simple tasks like loading a firearm.

If anything you don't want to go out guns blazing running out right away-you don't know how many of them are in your home, if it's more than one and you don't know where the other is-you could be in serious danger.

Sorry, but I'm the "Shoot First, Don't Ask Questions" type. Once I've identified the intruder's form he/she is getting two rounds in the chest, and if necessary one more in the head. Then I'll worry about the next one.

As you're shooting the first-the other will be shooting you. I'm all for shooting, and killing intruders i your home-they're a potential threat on your life. But if you respond with emotions, without thinking it through-you're only increasing the chances of getting yourself killed. If somebody comes into my house unwanted by breaking in-you're damn right they're going down. I wont hesitate. But to run out recklessly, and only singling out one-you're completely ignoring 1 (or several more), who could be armed, and could pretty easily take you out.

And, if you carry a loaded firearm on you in your own house at all times-I honestly feel bad for you. You're either out of your mind with paranoia, or live in a really bad neighborhood.

Plus if you have little kids around, having a loaded gun that's not properly stored IS a safety concern. No matter how many times you tell children not to touch something, or not to play with it-most kids will if given the opportunity to do so.

 

[Anachronism]

As you're shooting the first-the other will be shooting you. I'm all for shooting, and killing intruders i your home-they're a potential threat on your life. But if you respond with emotions, without thinking it through-you're only increasing the chances of getting yourself killed. If somebody comes into my house unwanted by breaking in-you're damn right they're going down. I wont hesitate. But to run out recklessly, and only singling out one-you're completely ignoring 1 (or several more), who could be armed, and could pretty easily take you out.

Who said anything about running out recklessly? I'm talking about taking the fight to the enemy with good tactics. Clearing rooms as I go. Properly cornering, entering and exiting rooms, making sure my Level IIA vest is on. Making sure to only use my light when necessary. Trust me I do know what I'm doing.

And, if you carry a loaded firearm on you in your own house at all times-I honestly feel bad for you. You're either out of your mind with paranoia, or live in a really bad neighborhood.

Carrying, NO. Generally within about 5' of one, DEFINITELY.

Plus if you have little kids around, having a loaded gun that's not properly stored IS a safety concern. No matter how many times you tell children not to touch something, or not to play with it-most kids will if given the opportunity to do so.

I don't have kids. I don't ever expect to. Given the choice between kids and guns I'll take the guns every time.

As for kids touching things they're not supposed to... I fall back on the words of my father.... "I brought you into this world and I can damn well take you back out of it." Both my brothers and I realized that was no hollow threat. Especially when it came to touching things like his guns, the woodworking machines, etc....