Homeland Security suggests we all brandish scissors against mass murderers...

It's as stupid as HS unveiling the duct tape and plastic theory when Bush was prez.

Except that a pair of scissors really can kill somebody, but duct tape and plastic won't protect you from a chemical attack.

Sure but not if that other person has a gun and is 20, 30 feet away.

10 yards away? LOL. If they have to pause to reload and I have a pair of scissors I could close that distance pretty quickly. If my other option is being shot to death its a clear choice.

Of course they should not have to pause to reload, government has no right to do that. Mass murderers should be able to fire hundreds of rounds without pause, its their right.
 
More than half of this country doesn't own guns.

I see nothing wrong with DNS's video, it seems to make sense to me. Defend yourself with whatever you have around - how exactly is that bad advice?

It's as stupid as HS unveiling the duct tape and plastic theory when Bush was prez.

That wasn't "stupid" either. Neither was the masking tape "X" on your windows during WWII in England.

They're not perfect solutions - not even good solutions. But they're better than nothing.

I get the feeling that you guys think that DHS should recommend that everyone carry a gun all the time instead. Is that correct?
 
Except that a pair of scissors really can kill somebody, but duct tape and plastic won't protect you from a chemical attack.

Sure but not if that other person has a gun and is 20, 30 feet away.

10 yards away? LOL. If they have to pause to reload and I have a pair of scissors I could close that distance pretty quickly. If my other option is being shot to death its a clear choice.

Of course they should not have to pause to reload, government has no right to do that. Mass murderers should be able to fire hundreds of rounds without pause, its their right.

On the other hand, I would prefer to have more bullets than the criminal. The perp doesn't care about the law. Joe citizen is stuck with his measly 7 rounds, throwing scissors at the criminal, or maybe gouging his eye with a paper clip.
 
Last edited:
More than half of this country doesn't own guns.

I see nothing wrong with DNS's video, it seems to make sense to me. Defend yourself with whatever you have around - how exactly is that bad advice?

Unless one actually knows how to defend one's self in close quarters...... They'll probably be the first one shot. :dunno:
 
More than half of this country doesn't own guns.

I see nothing wrong with DNS's video, it seems to make sense to me. Defend yourself with whatever you have around - how exactly is that bad advice?

It's as stupid as HS unveiling the duct tape and plastic theory when Bush was prez.

That wasn't "stupid" either. Neither was the masking tape "X" on your windows during WWII in England.

They're not perfect solutions - not even good solutions. But they're better than nothing.

I get the feeling that you guys think that DHS should recommend that everyone carry a gun all the time instead. Is that correct?


No, I was against the creation of DHS. But, this is the sub-mediocre thought that we receive from these creations. Surely, we could do better than this half baked scheme.
 
Except that a pair of scissors really can kill somebody, but duct tape and plastic won't protect you from a chemical attack.

Sure but not if that other person has a gun and is 20, 30 feet away.

10 yards away? LOL. If they have to pause to reload and I have a pair of scissors I could close that distance pretty quickly. If my other option is being shot to death its a clear choice.

Of course they should not have to pause to reload, government has no right to do that. Mass murderers should be able to fire hundreds of rounds without pause, its their right.

Spin it baby! Spin it!!!!!!! :thup:
 
Sure but not if that other person has a gun and is 20, 30 feet away.

10 yards away? LOL. If they have to pause to reload and I have a pair of scissors I could close that distance pretty quickly. If my other option is being shot to death its a clear choice.

Of course they should not have to pause to reload, government has no right to do that. Mass murderers should be able to fire hundreds of rounds without pause, its their right.

On the other hand, I would prefer to have more bullets than the criminal.

I'm not sure what good just having bullets would do you.



The perp doesn't care about the law. Joe citizen is stuck with his measly 7 rounds.


The perp doesn't care about the law thus he automatically gets access to a black market that can provide him anything he likes? How does that work? Is there a number you call and you tell the guy "Hey, I don't care about the law" and he says "OK, great, come on over to my place, I'll sell you any illegal thing you desire"

I'm sure lunatics like Adam Lanza could have easily bought anything they liked off the black market, having zero ties to any criminal organizations.
 
It's as stupid as HS unveiling the duct tape and plastic theory when Bush was prez.

That wasn't "stupid" either. Neither was the masking tape "X" on your windows during WWII in England.

They're not perfect solutions - not even good solutions. But they're better than nothing.

I get the feeling that you guys think that DHS should recommend that everyone carry a gun all the time instead. Is that correct?


No, I was against the creation of DHS. But, this is the sub-mediocre thought that we receive from these creations. Surely, we could do better than this half baked scheme.

Did you watch the video, or just read the headline?

The training video covers significantly more than "attack with scissors". It's a general training video for civilian response to an active shooter scenario.

What would you have advised, if you had made the video?
 
I think it's hilarious that people think that "everyone having a gun" would prevent an office or school shooting.

All it would do is raise the body count.
 
10 yards away? LOL. If they have to pause to reload and I have a pair of scissors I could close that distance pretty quickly. If my other option is being shot to death its a clear choice.

Of course they should not have to pause to reload, government has no right to do that. Mass murderers should be able to fire hundreds of rounds without pause, its their right.

On the other hand, I would prefer to have more bullets than the criminal.

I'm not sure what good just having bullets would do you.



The perp doesn't care about the law. Joe citizen is stuck with his measly 7 rounds.


The perp doesn't care about the law thus he automatically gets access to a black market that can provide him anything he likes? How does that work? Is there a number you call and you tell the guy "Hey, I don't care about the law" and he says "OK, great, come on over to my place, I'll sell you any illegal thing you desire"

I'm sure lunatics like Adam Lanza could have easily bought anything they liked off the black market, having zero ties to any criminal organizations.

Sure, law abiding citizens abide and would have no recourse but to follow the law. Criminals could care less what laws are written.
 
That wasn't "stupid" either. Neither was the masking tape "X" on your windows during WWII in England.

They're not perfect solutions - not even good solutions. But they're better than nothing.

I get the feeling that you guys think that DHS should recommend that everyone carry a gun all the time instead. Is that correct?


No, I was against the creation of DHS. But, this is the sub-mediocre thought that we receive from these creations. Surely, we could do better than this half baked scheme.

Did you watch the video, or just read the headline?

The training video covers significantly more than "attack with scissors". It's a general training video for civilian response to an active shooter scenario.

What would you have advised, if you had made the video?


If you have a gun, shoot him.

If not, do nothing and pray a brave NRA hero will save you.
 
I think it's hilarious that people think that "everyone having a gun" would prevent an office or school shooting.

All it would do is raise the body count.

Possibly, but would a shooter even entertain the idea of shooting up an office if he knew everyone was armed? Think deterrent.
 
No, I was against the creation of DHS. But, this is the sub-mediocre thought that we receive from these creations. Surely, we could do better than this half baked scheme.

Did you watch the video, or just read the headline?

The training video covers significantly more than "attack with scissors". It's a general training video for civilian response to an active shooter scenario.

What would you have advised, if you had made the video?


If you have a gun, shoot him.

If not, do nothing and pray a brave NRA hero will save you.

So you're saying that we have to call the NRA now? Where are the police?
 
I think it's hilarious that people think that "everyone having a gun" would prevent an office or school shooting.

All it would do is raise the body count.

Possibly, but would a shooter even entertain the idea of shooting up an office if he knew everyone was armed? Think deterrent.

Again, are you suggesting that everyone having a gun is better advice for DHS to give than what they advised in the video?
 
In your case yes.....please.
Me? I'm going to shoot the asshole.

What if you accidentally shot and killed a co-worker by mistake?

Then you deal with the consequences of your actions... Personal responsibility kinda works that way...

I know liberals don't like to hear about personal responsibility.. but, c'est la vie

I know that my original post was not directed towards you, but since you responded...

Are you so confident in your shooting skills and awareness in the midst of panic that you'd take the shot, while accepting the possibility that perhaps that guy running down the hallway isn't the shooter, but a frantic co-worker?
 
What if you accidentally shot and killed a co-worker by mistake?

Then you deal with the consequences of your actions... Personal responsibility kinda works that way...

I know liberals don't like to hear about personal responsibility.. but, c'est la vie

I know that my original post was not directed towards you, but since you responded...

Are you so confident in your shooting skills and awareness in the midst of panic that you'd take the shot, while accepting the possibility that perhaps that guy running down the hallway isn't the shooter, but a frantic co-worker?

I was confident in my skills in my Army days... that I would not kill a friendly.. not much different now.. except my days of 100 pushups in 2 minutes and 10 minute 2-mile runs are well behind me

Maybe I am not the same as others though.. and if there are those who would panic and know it, it is probably wise when they make the decision (that is a personal one) not to carry a firearm
 

Forum List

Back
Top