Why A "Good Guy with a Gun" is Bullshit

[MikeK]

No, it is based on the track record of localities where the people in charge do not believe citizens have the right to keep arms, never mind carry concealed. Look at all the red tape places like DC and Chicago put in place once the SC forced their hands in Heller and McDonald, respectively. Now bring on mandated shall issue CCW and the powers that be in those places would double down on the red tape.

They don't want people to have guns, that much is clear.

I understand what you're saying but I don't think you understand what I'm saying.

Tell me the specific red tape elements you're citing and I'll tell you how they can easily be eliminated by properly structured and composed legislation -- which can and will eliminate any further impediments. Many of the problems we have with tampering by petty bureaucrats is the result of incompetently composed laws in which future tampering is not anticipated. One very common example is failure to include a criminal penalty for non-compliance with or attempted circumvention of a mandate. This makes it not worth the risk for a petty bureaucrat to tamper with a new law they happen to dislike.

 

[OldLady]

Aren't Police Officers the "good guys"? What makes a person with three or six months training superior in skill and mental stability to a retired Military Veteran or a person who excels at shooting sports? If the truth be known most Police Officers aren't interested in anything other than basic proficiency with a firearm and there are civilians who are not only interested in shooting sports but are forced to be aware of laws governing shooting situations. I'm not trying to put down Police Officers but they aren't the only "good guys" on the block.

Who is denying anyone their Second Amendment Privilege? If one reads Heller without bias, they will realize even the late Justice Scalia limited the 2nd A. to a privilege and not an absolute right. Some people should never own or possess a gun. Do you not agree?

And it is up to the government to prove that with real evidence that will stand legal muster

But that's not what people are doing are they? no they want to arbitrarily deny the rights of people because some government lackey secretly put their name on a list

You make stuff up to defend you position, that's not only dishonest, it is stupid!

But prove me wrong: Name the Lackey who secretly put the name of someone else (not their own, even your use of syntax is childish) and that person's name on a list. Do it now with sufficient evidence and prove you're not dishonest and stupid.

Some mistakes happen and can be corrected, others are fatal and cannot! That concept seems to be above your level of understanding (common sense).

No one knows who put their name on a no fly list or why. They aren't even notified when their name is put on a no fly list.

That's the fucking point.

Of course they aren't notified! That would be the same as notifying Mafia members that they were the subject of an undercover operation! Most people who "suspect" they're on the list aren't. If they complain, it is investigated, and they are removed if it was a mistake. However, most of the time, they aren't on the FBI's list at all.

2AGuy's article about Air Marshalls' "quota" does not say a Surveillance Report automatically puts anyone on the FBI watch list. There is a list of criteria -- which the Orlando shooter did NOT meet, btw -- for putting someone on the list and keeping them there. If a tourist takes a picture out a plane window and there is nothing suspicious about this person's daily activities or past, they aren't going to end up on anyone's list. It's just a report by an air marshall of their observations on planes. The quota is ridiculous and should be struck down, but it doesn't put anyone on the Terror Watch List or the No Fly List unless a whole lot more is evident.

This is NOTHING but another attempt to stop any gun control. There was no one complaining about this list until it suddenly got tied to buying a firearm. Now. some of the FBI guys actually doing the terrorist surveillance don't like the list tied to buying a gun either, since it would or could tip the individual off that he is on the list if he is denied a gun. I don't know how we would get around that and still prohibit weapons to suspected terrorists.

Yeah...because none of the mass shooters...including Orlando and San Bernadino...muslim terrorists, were not on the no fly list....there is no bearing on that list with mass shootings....yet the anti gunners want to use a list that has no due process to ban normal Americans from owning guns......

That actually made sense. Mark your calendar.

 

[martybegan]

No, it is based on the track record of localities where the people in charge do not believe citizens have the right to keep arms, never mind carry concealed. Look at all the red tape places like DC and Chicago put in place once the SC forced their hands in Heller and McDonald, respectively. Now bring on mandated shall issue CCW and the powers that be in those places would double down on the red tape.

They don't want people to have guns, that much is clear.

I understand what you're saying but I don't think you understand what I'm saying.

Tell me the specific red tape elements you're citing and I'll tell you how they can easily be eliminated by properly structured and composed legislation -- which can and will eliminate any further impediments. Many of the problems we have with tampering by petty bureaucrats is the result of poorly composed laws in which future tampering is not anticipated. One very common example is failure to include a criminal penalty for non-compliance with or attempted circumvention of a mandate. This makes it not worth the risk for a petty bureaucrat to tamper with a new law they happen to dislike.

Well in NYC, if you want a handgun permit to keep a handgun in your own home, you wait an average of 3-6 months and pay $1000 to the City to get the ability to even purchase the handgun.

This isn't tampering by bureaucrats, its a top down decades long attempt at making it as hard as possible to get a legal firearm.

 

[daws101]

There is nothing about killing babies or queers marrying in the BoR's.

False! Captain ignorance!

 

[daws101]

Your premise is wrong at the most basic level. The correct mode of action for a CCW holder is to hold in place, and if the shooter tries to enter the area he controls, take him out.

Private CCW holders can be compared to a minefield, what you are hoping for is the active shooter doesn't expect armed resistance and the CCW holder can get some shots in before the active shooter realizes he is being confronted.

If you hold in place and you hear someone coming down a blind hallway, do you shout out and ask if they are the police, the shooter or another good guy? If it's the shooter, you're shit out of luck, aren't you? If it's the police they may not believe you are a good guy. They may think you're the shooter trying to save his sorry ass.

And if you hold in place but can hear the shooter actively killing people in another part of the building, what do you do? Your gun becomes a joke to the people who are dying.

So you should check YOUR premise for reality.

Food for thought, sadly the NRA crowd is on a life long fast from critical thinking.

LOL, bitch tits enters the conversation backing up one of the biggest trolls on the board.

You are judged by the company you keep.

You are number the number 1 troll on this or any board.

 

[miketx]

False! Captain ignorance!

Where in the BoR's does it say queers can marry. Or that you can kill babies? i've looked and I don't see it anywhere.

Why do want to murder babies?

 

[daws101]

Typical liberal. always think they know what someone thinks.

Since you don't think , you have nothing to worry about.

 

[miketx]

Typical liberal. always think they know what someone thinks.

Since you don't think , you have nothing to worry about.

Typical of liberals who talk out of both sides of their mouth.

 

[daws101]

False! Captain ignorance!

Where in the BoR's does it say queers can marry. Or that you can kill babies? i've looked and I don't see it anywhere.

Why do want to murder babies?

Bullshit
It's the 14th Amendment for both .
Also
Unenumerated Rights
Rights that are not expressly mentioned in the written text of a constitution but instead are inferred from the language, history, and structure of the constitution, or cases interpreting it.

Fail.

 

[daws101]

Typical liberal. always think they know what someone thinks.

Since you don't think , you have nothing to worry about.

Typical of liberals who talk out of both sides of their mouth.

False! Just stating fact.
Fail.

 

[miketx]

False! Captain ignorance!

Where in the BoR's does it say queers can marry. Or that you can kill babies? i've looked and I don't see it anywhere.

Why do want to murder babies?

Bullshit
It's the 14th Amendment for both .
Also
Unenumerated Rights
Rights that are not expressly mentioned in the written text of a constitution but instead are inferred from the language, history, and structure of the constitution, or cases interpreting it.

Fail.

So we can own military style weapons and it's perfectly legal? Yup...thanks.

 

[MikeK]

Well in NYC, if you want a handgun permit to keep a handgun in your own home, you wait an average of 3-6 months and pay $1000 to the City to get the ability to even purchase the handgun.

This isn't tampering by bureaucrats, its a top down decades long attempt at making it as hard as possible to get a legal firearm.

I agree! I'm from Brooklyn (and Queens). I'm quite familiar with the Firearms Control Bureau of the NYPD and the context of my last reply to you refers specifically to the kind of tampering and deliberate foot-dragging you're talking about.

I can tell you for an absolute fact that in NYC it is possible to obtain a carry permit, not just an in-residence permit, in less than 24 hours after the photo, fingerprint and paperwork. All it takes is a phone call from the right official. And if the official is high enough in city government the permit will be delivered by a uniformed cop!

If the list of issued carry permits in NYC were published alongside a list of rejected applications it would cause a front-page scandal.

 

[miketx]

How much do you have to pay that official?

 

[daws101]

False! Captain ignorance!

Where in the BoR's does it say queers can marry. Or that you can kill babies? i've looked and I don't see it anywhere.

Why do want to murder babies?

Bullshit
It's the 14th Amendment for both .
Also
Unenumerated Rights
Rights that are not expressly mentioned in the written text of a constitution but instead are inferred from the language, history, and structure of the constitution, or cases interpreting it.

Fail.

So we can own military style weapons and it's perfectly legal? Yup...thanks.

don't thank me just yet.
A military "style"weapon is not the same as a fully functional military weapon .
You fail again.

 

[daws101]

How much do you have to pay that official?

Why would that concern you?
You already have more guns than you can use.

 

[miketx]

Smoke spin troll lie again and again and again....

 

[miketx]

How much do you have to pay that official?

Why would that concern you?
You already have more guns than you can use.

You have no say on what I have do or want. You're nothing but a traitor.

 

[daws101]

Smoke spin troll lie again and again and again....

In denial much?

 

[miketx]

smoke and mirrors all day long...

 

[MaryL]

Your premise is wrong at the most basic level. The correct mode of action for a CCW holder is to hold in place, and if the shooter tries to enter the area he controls, take him out.

Private CCW holders can be compared to a minefield, what you are hoping for is the active shooter doesn't expect armed resistance and the CCW holder can get some shots in before the active shooter realizes he is being confronted.

No, you are being stupid here. The OP nailed the situation, and in very few active shooter situations did a civilian with a conceal carry permit ever stop the shooter. 99% of the time it's law enforcement AFTER the fact. Guns don't help. They are the problem.