Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I remember that.
I am very glad he was acquitted.
As some would say, I would rather face a jury of 12 than be carried by 6.
It's a travesty that he was even arrested to begin with. He only shot 4 bullets into the grass.
You and I probably do NOT agree on most issues (for instance I'm in favor of national healthcare, I see it as a Ninth Amendment Right).
However, I'm glad to say that you and agree on what is most important, The 2nd Amendment, the only barrier between you and tyranny.[/I]
EDIT:
Also where is the OP since I provided this example?
It like posting about the The Battle of Athens, Tennessee, 1946, when the people overthrew the State government. Suddenly all the gun-control kids go home, knowing they've lost the argument completely.
It says he had an AK, but, only fired 4 shots. I asked when has a private citizen fired 20 or more rounds in a pure self defense situation.
Someone said the Civil War and Revolutionary War. Well, thats an example, but they are wars. If you count wars as "self defense", then sure, BUT, in those two wars NO ONE had a 20+ round magazine. I know, I said when has anyone fired 20 shots. In context, meaning used a 20 round magazine. But fair enough, I did say 20 shots. The 1946 Tennessee situation...that is the same deal. It was a mini-war, like a Revolutionary in their little town, and while they surely fired more than 20 shots, they too didnt have 20 round mags.
Im not anti-gun, or pro-gun control. Im just opening a discussion on the topic. That statistically, the NEED for a 30 round magazine for self defense is virtually non-existent. Stats show it is extremely rare for more than 2-3 bad guys to be involved, and that study said appx 80% of the time the bad guys run at first shot. Cops use bigger mags, because they chase bad guys and tend to get into bunkered-down shootouts, whereas the private citizen encounter will last a few seconds and be over.
I really was kinda hoping to be proven wrong, that people would give me multiple examples of a private citizen in a self defense situation fires 20 plus rounds from the same gun/magazine, thus showing a NEED for those high cap magazines.
Well, guess I got my answer. Never, not once, in recent history has a private citizen needed over 20 rounds in a self defense situation.
You're wrong actually. But the truth is decidedly inconvenient and messy, so it is ignored.
What Really Happened at Waco
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-moore/what-really-happened-at-w_b_42326.html
Fourteen years ago today, federal agents descended on a clapboard structure outside of Waco to take into custody a man who called himself David Koresh. I was present throughout every day of the subsequent ordeal. And I still don't think the truth of what transpired has ever been told. What follows here is what I know to be fact, much of it observed first hand. - JM
. . . .
The BATF officers went ahead with their plan of attack even though they had been told by their own undercover agent, Robert Rodriguez, that the Davidians were ready and itching for a fight. David Koresh had been tipped by David Jones, the mailman who had met Peeler on the country road. The Davidians must have been blind if they did not pick up on many other developments in Waco that indicated this was to be an unusual Sunday morning. A parade of agents in their personal cars had stretched out over two miles up Interstate 35 as they drove up from their training grounds at Fort Hood. The team assembled at Bellmead Community Center where highway 84 and Loop 340 intersect. Even on a Sunday, there was passing auto traffic as the agents milled about the parking lot wearing their Kevlar suits and BATF insignia. The raid team on the cattle trailers also passed the Mag Bag where three Davidians had been hanging out and working on cars. In the fifteen minutes it took the BATF raid team to drive between the Mag Bag and Mt. Carmel, one of them could have easily phoned Koresh inside of the compound to offer a warning.
Gunfire stopped and Mulloney and McLemore saw the wounded BATF agents lying in front of the compound. A cease-fire had been negotiated over the telephone and injured were being evacuated. Mulloney changed tapes in his camera and slipped the first one down the front of his pants because he was worried that police or BATF officials might try to confiscate his recording. He walked over to his KWTX-TV news truck, which was one of only two vehicles capable of carrying the wounded. Three seriously injured agents were loaded into the Bronco, holding their open wounds as McLemore drove them back to meet the Lifeflight helicopter for transport to a hospital. BATF officers thanked Mulloney and McLemore and credited them with saving the lives of the agents. The two journalists had also assisted with communications. The BATF had asked them to call for medical help because radios being used by agents, absurdly, were not programmed to communicate with the command and control center.
If private citizens hadn't had the right to a free press, and the right to bear arms, it is likely this whole fiasco would have went down much differently. The truth to this story is still being unveiled to us. Who knows if we will ever know what really happened. Lies are all we here about in the official version of events.
Once thing is for sure, the government should never be given a monopoly or asymmetric advantage of violence and power. They can't do anything right, and you are in favor of letting them be in control of all the most powerful guns? Nice.
It's a travesty that he was even arrested to begin with. He only shot 4 bullets into the grass.
You and I probably do NOT agree on most issues (for instance I'm in favor of national healthcare, I see it as a Ninth Amendment Right).
However, I'm glad to say that you and agree on what is most important, The 2nd Amendment, the only barrier between you and tyranny.[/I]
EDIT:
Also where is the OP since I provided this example?
It like posting about the The Battle of Athens, Tennessee, 1946, when the people overthrew the State government. Suddenly all the gun-control kids go home, knowing they've lost the argument completely.
It says he had an AK, but, only fired 4 shots. I asked when has a private citizen fired 20 or more rounds in a pure self defense situation.
Someone said the Civil War and Revolutionary War. Well, thats an example, but they are wars. If you count wars as "self defense", then sure, BUT, in those two wars NO ONE had a 20+ round magazine. I know, I said when has anyone fired 20 shots. In context, meaning used a 20 round magazine. But fair enough, I did say 20 shots. The 1946 Tennessee situation...that is the same deal. It was a mini-war, like a Revolutionary in their little town, and while they surely fired more than 20 shots, they too didnt have 20 round mags.
Im not anti-gun, or pro-gun control. Im just opening a discussion on the topic. That statistically, the NEED for a 30 round magazine for self defense is virtually non-existent. Stats show it is extremely rare for more than 2-3 bad guys to be involved, and that study said appx 80% of the time the bad guys run at first shot. Cops use bigger mags, because they chase bad guys and tend to get into bunkered-down shootouts, whereas the private citizen encounter will last a few seconds and be over.
I really was kinda hoping to be proven wrong, that people would give me multiple examples of a private citizen in a self defense situation fires 20 plus rounds from the same gun/magazine, thus showing a NEED for those high cap magazines.
You are wrong you lying sack of shit. Claiming your point on evidence on this forum is ludicrous and you know it. What in the hell is wrong with you? Are you that desperate for some make believe forum cred? ~sheesh~ What a fecking loser.
LOL> I don't need to prove you wrong. Anyone over 12 years old knows that you are completely full of shit trying to call your opinion fact based on information on this forum.
LOL> I don't need to prove you wrong. Anyone over 12 years old knows that you are completely full of shit trying to call your opinion fact based on information on this forum.
Im not basing it on just that.
I tried to research it myself online, and found nothing.
I tried to recall any incident I heard of over the years, and nope, none.
I asked on here for anyone to share any stories they've got. Nope.
Im not basing my opinion off just this forum. Im basing it off not being able to find any sliver of evidence that a private citizen has fired more than 20 rounds from the same gun in a single self-defense incident in this country.
Again, Im not counting wars or criminal resistance to law enforcement. That isn't the context of this question.
I really was kinda hoping to be proven wrong, that people would give me multiple examples of a private citizen in a self defense situation fires 20 plus rounds from the same gun/magazine, thus showing a NEED for those high cap magazines.
LOL> I don't need to prove you wrong. Anyone over 12 years old knows that you are completely full of shit trying to call your opinion fact based on information on this forum.
Im not basing it on just that.
I tried to research it myself online, and found nothing.
I tried to recall any incident I heard of over the years, and nope, none.
I asked on here for anyone to share any stories they've got. Nope.
Im not basing my opinion off just this forum. Im basing it off not being able to find any sliver of evidence that a private citizen has fired more than 20 rounds from the same gun in a single self-defense incident in this country.
Again, Im not counting wars or criminal resistance to law enforcement. That isn't the context of this question.
Wow, you actually have a couple of hours of Internet research to base your fact on!!! I'm so impressed! I bet that's the same way Obama found out that he doesn't have a spending problem.
Im not basing it on just that.
I tried to research it myself online, and found nothing.
I tried to recall any incident I heard of over the years, and nope, none.
I asked on here for anyone to share any stories they've got. Nope.
Im not basing my opinion off just this forum. Im basing it off not being able to find any sliver of evidence that a private citizen has fired more than 20 rounds from the same gun in a single self-defense incident in this country.
Again, Im not counting wars or criminal resistance to law enforcement. That isn't the context of this question.
Wow, you actually have a couple of hours of Internet research to base your fact on!!! I'm so impressed! I bet that's the same way Obama found out that he doesn't have a spending problem.
The NRA, not to mention local news, has researched and documented 99% of all self-defense shootings by private citizens. And good for them. The NRA may not be folks I always agree with, but I agree with the 2nd amendment.
But if they have documentation and news links to all the incidents where someone shot 1-4 rounds at a bad guy or two, I guarantee it would be front page news, if not national news, if a private citizen had to empty out an AR15 30 round mag to defend himself. I searched. I read. I asked.
And nothing. It's never happened.
If it's not on the Internet it didn't happen eh? Your pathetic!
I really was kinda hoping to be proven wrong, that people would give me multiple examples of a private citizen in a self defense situation fires 20 plus rounds from the same gun/magazine, thus showing a NEED for those high cap magazines.
You were proven wrong, you CONVENIENTLY IGNORED HALF OF MY POST AND DELETED IT FROM QUOTATION (the most important part)!!!!!! I reposted it below for everyone to read.
"The man was acquitted later. However, the very fact that he had the ABILITY to use 30+ rounds in rapid time, and the hostiles were aware of it, made them NOT proceed with their assault.
Thus, the reason you don't hear about these things too often, is because criminals ARE NOT dumb enough to engage people who have these weapons, they choose a far weaker target instead."
Case in point, people with semi automatics don't use their weapons to defend themselves, because no one is dumb enough to mess with us. They pick on the other 99% of the citizens in your neighborhood that DONT. Criminals are smart, believe it or not.
I want some facts and truthiness. Has ANY private citizen (not a cop, solider, militia, security guard)....EVER needed more than 20 shots for any single incident of self-defense? I tried researching it, and I cant fine a single incident. Ever. I found one website with a lot of good stats from the NRA's own sources: The Thinking Gunfighter: Self Defense Findings
How many self defense situations required a "reload"? : About 1/2 of 1% it says, so, 0.5%.
How many shots are fired by the defender? : In most cases, about 2. Yes, TWO.
The average number of shots fired by the defender? 2. The median? 2.
It says the majority of cases where more than 2 were fired were the defender simply shooting the gun until empty, out of reaction, not necessity.
Out 482 shooting incidents studied (By the NRA), only 3 required a reload. 1 of the 3 was to kill a Lion (like the cat) who escaped, and a large cal revolver was used, needing 13 shots to kill the animal.
The largest number of "attackers" reported, across the country, was 7...where 7 men tried to do a home invasion. The home owner fought them off, killed 2, wounded 1................with a SHOTGUN.
Im trying to find an example. And I cant. I cant find one single example of a private citizen needing a 30 round magazine to fight off intruders or attackers. Not one. Not one single incident. In fact, every single incident seems that a 15 round magazine would be PLENTY to get the job done....yep, even if the attacker is an African Lion.
Im a gun rights supporter, but I also try to see both sides of all issues. Well....Im having trouble justifying the need for 30, 45, 50, or 100 round magazines in the hands of private citizens. Should they be banned? I dont think so. It wouldnt change anything except add more work for the understaffed PD's to enforce yet another law. But, is there a justified NEED for them? Absolutely not.
Dear Bucs: I am not a gun person.
But it was clearly explained to me that the point is more for DETERRENCE, NOT actually having to shoot the weapon much less shooting a person!
For example, during the LA Riots, one of the businesses that was defended safely,
without any incident, was a pawn shop where the owners HAD and DISPLAYED their automatic weapons. Nobody messed with them, no one fired a shot or got hurt.
THAT was the point! They were outnumbered and 1-2 bullets means nothing.
I can tell you from incidents I've read about home invasions and gangs
attacking each other, or if you're trying to police gangs on the border,
clearly the bigger weapons serve as bigger DETERRENCE.
Note: also, one other person explained that in some states where there are
thousands of wild hogs that stampede in packs, people can't hunt them
without multiple shots; they would get run over and killed.
I want some facts and truthiness. Has ANY private citizen (not a cop, solider, militia, security guard)....EVER needed more than 20 shots for any single incident of self-defense? I tried researching it, and I cant fine a single incident. Ever. I found one website with a lot of good stats from the NRA's own sources: The Thinking Gunfighter: Self Defense Findings
How many self defense situations required a "reload"? : About 1/2 of 1% it says, so, 0.5%.
How many shots are fired by the defender? : In most cases, about 2. Yes, TWO.
The average number of shots fired by the defender? 2. The median? 2.
It says the majority of cases where more than 2 were fired were the defender simply shooting the gun until empty, out of reaction, not necessity.
Out 482 shooting incidents studied (By the NRA), only 3 required a reload. 1 of the 3 was to kill a Lion (like the cat) who escaped, and a large cal revolver was used, needing 13 shots to kill the animal.
The largest number of "attackers" reported, across the country, was 7...where 7 men tried to do a home invasion. The home owner fought them off, killed 2, wounded 1................with a SHOTGUN.
Im trying to find an example. And I cant. I cant find one single example of a private citizen needing a 30 round magazine to fight off intruders or attackers. Not one. Not one single incident. In fact, every single incident seems that a 15 round magazine would be PLENTY to get the job done....yep, even if the attacker is an African Lion.
Im a gun rights supporter, but I also try to see both sides of all issues. Well....Im having trouble justifying the need for 30, 45, 50, or 100 round magazines in the hands of private citizens. Should they be banned? I dont think so. It wouldnt change anything except add more work for the understaffed PD's to enforce yet another law. But, is there a justified NEED for them? Absolutely not.
I think the main argument is the people who don't trust the
govt or the motivations in trying to regulate this thing.
Same with abortion regulation, people don't trust the politics.
It's not that they want abortions they just don't trust the motives for regulation.
and they are saying NIX to that!
I never go to my mailbox without my 9MM. I want to be prepared in case some bad guy posing as being from Publisher's Clearing House approaches me, with the real intent of gunning me down in order to steal my garden hose.
Thanks, you gave the only rational answer to my question.
A big, scary gun with lots of bullets is quite a deterrent.
Hunting wild game could put one in a herd, and many shots may be needed.
Both logical, realistic explanations. Which is all I was looking for really.
How can a government "govern" a population that outnumbers them and had them outgunned? Thats ridiculous.
The group with the most firepower WILL govern. Whether it is the govt, like here in the US, or it is the cartels...like Mexico...or it is the religous factions, like Afghanistan.
You anti-govt types think there is some freedom utopia where there are no rules or laws (well, at least nothing except the anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-weed laws). But you are wrong. A population with a very weak government WILL be ruled by drug cartels and religious factions.
The whole point of government is to PREVENT a "Survival of the Fittest" scenario.
LOL> I don't need to prove you wrong. Anyone over 12 years old knows that you are completely full of shit trying to call your opinion fact based on information on this forum.
Im not basing it on just that.
I tried to research it myself online, and found nothing.
I tried to recall any incident I heard of over the years, and nope, none.
I asked on here for anyone to share any stories they've got. Nope.
Im not basing my opinion off just this forum. Im basing it off not being able to find any sliver of evidence that a private citizen has fired more than 20 rounds from the same gun in a single self-defense incident in this country.
Again, Im not counting wars or criminal resistance to law enforcement. That isn't the context of this question.
I never go to my mailbox without my 9MM. I want to be prepared in case some bad guy posing as being from Publisher's Clearing House approaches me, with the real intent of gunning me down in order to steal my garden hose.
HAHA! I shower with my AR15 hanging from the towel rack. Just in case somebody comes in "Psycho" style to kill me while Im in the shower. I also always keep my .45 on a wrist-holster while having sex with new girlfriends, just in case they are just plotting a way to get me in a vulnerable position to rob me.
My last girlfriend had a problem with me carrying my pistol with me to the beach and into the surf. She said it was scary to think I had to carry a gun to swim in the ocean. I said "Bitch I saw Jaws, and Im ready". You never know, ya know?
I really was kinda hoping to be proven wrong, that people would give me multiple examples of a private citizen in a self defense situation fires 20 plus rounds from the same gun/magazine, thus showing a NEED for those high cap magazines.
You were proven wrong, you CONVENIENTLY IGNORED HALF OF MY POST AND DELETED IT FROM QUOTATION (the most important part)!!!!!! I reposted it below for everyone to read.
"The man was acquitted later. However, the very fact that he had the ABILITY to use 30+ rounds in rapid time, and the hostiles were aware of it, made them NOT proceed with their assault.
Thus, the reason you don't hear about these things too often, is because criminals ARE NOT dumb enough to engage people who have these weapons, they choose a far weaker target instead."
Case in point, people with semi automatics don't use their weapons to defend themselves, because no one is dumb enough to mess with us. They pick on the other 99% of the citizens in your neighborhood that DONT. Criminals are smart, believe it or not.
I was not proven wrong. I asked for an example where 20+ shots were fired. He fired 4, into the grass.
Criminals are not smart. They are cowards and most are scared before even committing the crime. Thats why most of them run at the sound of a shotgun being racked, and almost every single one run at the sound of one gunshot.
Criminals dont run because they fear a guy with a gun can shoot them 30 times. They run because they fear a guy with a gun can shoot them.......period, because they might get shot even once.
Dear Bucs: I am not a gun person.
But it was clearly explained to me that the point is more for DETERRENCE, NOT actually having to shoot the weapon much less shooting a person!
For example, during the LA Riots, one of the businesses that was defended safely,
without any incident, was a pawn shop where the owners HAD and DISPLAYED their automatic weapons. Nobody messed with them, no one fired a shot or got hurt.
THAT was the point! They were outnumbered and 1-2 bullets means nothing.
I can tell you from incidents I've read about home invasions and gangs
attacking each other, or if you're trying to police gangs on the border,
clearly the bigger weapons serve as bigger DETERRENCE.
Note: also, one other person explained that in some states where there are
thousands of wild hogs that stampede in packs, people can't hunt them
without multiple shots; they would get run over and killed.
I want some facts and truthiness. Has ANY private citizen (not a cop, solider, militia, security guard)....EVER needed more than 20 shots for any single incident of self-defense? I tried researching it, and I cant fine a single incident. Ever. I found one website with a lot of good stats from the NRA's own sources: The Thinking Gunfighter: Self Defense Findings
How many self defense situations required a "reload"? : About 1/2 of 1% it says, so, 0.5%.
How many shots are fired by the defender? : In most cases, about 2. Yes, TWO.
The average number of shots fired by the defender? 2. The median? 2.
It says the majority of cases where more than 2 were fired were the defender simply shooting the gun until empty, out of reaction, not necessity.
Out 482 shooting incidents studied (By the NRA), only 3 required a reload. 1 of the 3 was to kill a Lion (like the cat) who escaped, and a large cal revolver was used, needing 13 shots to kill the animal.
The largest number of "attackers" reported, across the country, was 7...where 7 men tried to do a home invasion. The home owner fought them off, killed 2, wounded 1................with a SHOTGUN.
Im trying to find an example. And I cant. I cant find one single example of a private citizen needing a 30 round magazine to fight off intruders or attackers. Not one. Not one single incident. In fact, every single incident seems that a 15 round magazine would be PLENTY to get the job done....yep, even if the attacker is an African Lion.
Im a gun rights supporter, but I also try to see both sides of all issues. Well....Im having trouble justifying the need for 30, 45, 50, or 100 round magazines in the hands of private citizens. Should they be banned? I dont think so. It wouldnt change anything except add more work for the understaffed PD's to enforce yet another law. But, is there a justified NEED for them? Absolutely not.
I think the main argument is the people who don't trust the
govt or the motivations in trying to regulate this thing.
Same with abortion regulation, people don't trust the politics.
It's not that they want abortions they just don't trust the motives for regulation.
and they are saying NIX to that!
Thanks, you gave the only rational answer to my question.
A big, scary gun with lots of bullets is quite a deterrent.
Hunting wild game could put one in a herd, and many shots may be needed.
Both logical, realistic explanations. Which is all I was looking for really.
