Veteran With Concealed Carry Permit Shoots Back At Chicago Gunman

[Nerd Rage]

Going to a party in Chicago on 4th of July weekend is asking for trouble.  I don't leave my home in the evenings for the most part, and I live in a good area of Chicago.

 

That being said, if Chicago wouldn't have caved on concealed carry, this vet and his friends would have been shot up without a way to defend themselves.  Bad guys always find a way to get their weapons, it's nice that the good guys can have theirs now too. 

[BGM]

How do you plan on doing that?

 

The black market doesn't exactly go by the law.

the first step would be to stop selling them to anyone who asked at walmart ;)

 

the next step would be to criminalise carry any firearm unless you are 'official' i.e. police, but imo i don't really like that either..

 

it's a chicken an egg situation, i accept that.. but more control is the answer, not more guns.

 

i know it's an old horse to flog.. but i honestly feel safer knowing that no one around me is carrying a gun and there is no chance some crazy fool is going to pull one out on me

 

if people still want them yes there are ways... but they are 100% illigal ways, and how many times in your lifetime have you actually ever run into someone that is part of 'organised crime' - it's not a big issue tbh

[tmcclelland455]

I'm surprised the vet didn't get screwed over by the law. Seems like it works out a lot like that nowadays.

[theyarecomingforyou]

You have an uncanny knack for accusing entire groups for poor decisions made by individuals.

This isn't about a small number of individuals - it's endemic. It's institutionalised, state sanctioned murder. It's the inevitable consequence of a lack of accountability, with very few killings ever resulting in reprimands (with the majority of those that do being overturned).

 

I won't apologise for caring passionately about such a gross injustice.

[+Warwagon MVC]

I know a lot of people say "Get rid of guns". I agree with them to a point.

 

If this was the early days of guns, and guns were just becoming available, to the point were you could actually get rid of them and stop anyone from getting them, bad guys included. Then, sure lets get rid of guns and just stab each other, punch each other, shoot each other with arrows or throw rocks.

 

But that's not the case, not by a long shot. There are millions upon millions of guns.

 

Its very simple.

 

Government makes laws, bad guys don't care.

 

Government takes guns bad guys don't care and they keep theirs.

 

Like the one guy says "If someone breaks into your house with a gun with the intent to rob and kill, sure you can call 911 and  they will come ... and take a picture of your dead body!"

 

...

 

It's like the honest consumer that buys a $2,000 piece of software and then is forced to have a USB security dongle inserted into  their computer to even use the piece of software they just dropped $2,000 for because OMG they might be a pirate.

 

When the ACTUAL pirate just cracks the software and uses it WITHOUT the dongle not being inconvenienced at all!

[AsherGZ]

Really? Where's the "private gain" for some 18 or 19 yr old kid who is sent (ordered) to some hell hole half way around the world to get shot at or blown up for buttons money?

These kids weren't ordered to join. They did so of their own free will knowing full well what they were in for, which for most of them is to play real life Call of Duty (warning: may be traumatizing for some) with real people and real life guns to the soundtrack of The Roof is on Fire. Getting paid for that is a bonus. It's sure a hell lot more than what they would make at McDonald's per hour. Also they'd get called heroes back home.

[Dinggus]

Once again, members outside the US start arguments.

 

Also, please don't insult the military saying we're mercenaries. if you've never experienced war, you shouldn't talk like you know all about it.

 

Try fighting a ghost.

[Zidane]

While I agree that the US missues its armed forces to get involved with conflicts we have no need to, I won't agree that our armed forces are "just mercernaries". Even if they "signed up" for it, it doesn't make their sacrifice any less sad. The armed forces is a lot more than just "go there, shoot 'em dead", they are a part of our communities and a lot of them join because they geniuely feel they can make a difference. Do some of them join to get paid scholarships and stuff? Sure...but why does that make them "appear bad" when people take internships/etc all the time.

 

What people really need to blame is fat cats in Washington who send our men and women into these conflicts on a dime without seriously taking in the consequences of doing so.

[adrynalyne]

This isn't about a small number of individuals - it's endemic. It's institutionalised, state sanctioned murder. It's the inevitable consequence of a lack of accountability, with very few killings ever resulting in reprimands (with the majority of those that do being overturned).

 

I won't apologise for caring passionately about such a gross injustice.

It isn't a small number?

 

Do you have an amount of how many incidents per year?

[COKid]

What people really need to blame is fat cats in Washington who send our men and women into these conflicts on a dime without seriously taking in the consequences of doing so.

 

Oh, they're very aware of the consequences. That makes their arrogance even more concerning.

[theyarecomingforyou]

I know a lot of people say "Get rid of guns". I agree with them to a point.

 

If this was the early days of guns, and guns were just becoming available, to the point were you could actually get rid of them and stop anyone from getting them, bad guys included. Then, sure lets get rid of guns and just stab each other, punch each other, shoot each other with arrows or throw rocks.

 

But that's not the case, not by a long shot. There are millions upon millions of guns.

What's needed is sensible policies regarding gun ownership. For starters, there is no need for large magazines and they should be criminalised - that would make it more difficult for mass shootings to be carried out. Loopholes regarding weapon sales should be closed. Mental health issues and circumstances should be factors in allowing gun ownership. Gun owners should be required to demonstrate that they have their weapons properly secured in locked cabinets. Certain calibres and weapon types should be restricted altogether. In incidents where guns have not been stored safely and children have been injured or died those individuals should be banned from owning them.

 

Obviously the US cannot move to European style restrictions overnight and never will do but at the moment there isn't even any momentum in the right direction - in fact there are movements to further liberalise gun ownership and use. Instead there should be common sense solutions to improve the current situation, which nobody can consider is acceptable.

 

Once again, members outside the US start arguments.

I don't see any arguments, I see discussions relating to the issues.

 

It isn't a small number?

 

Do you have an amount of how many incidents per year?

Around 600 people per year are shot by police in the US. That compares to zero shot in the UK and six in Germany.

[+Warwagon MVC]

What's needed is sensible policies regarding gun ownership. For starters, there is no need for large magazines and they should be criminalised - that would make it more difficult for mass shootings to be carried out.

[Gone]

What's needed is sensible policies regarding gun ownership. For starters, there is no need for large magazines and they should be criminalised - that would make it more difficult for mass shootings to be carried out. Loopholes regarding weapon sales should be closed. Mental health issues and circumstances should be factors in allowing gun ownership. Gun owners should be required to demonstrate that they have their weapons properly secured in locked cabinets. Certain calibres and weapon types should be restricted altogether. In incidents where guns have not been stored safely and children have been injured or died those individuals should be banned from owning them.

 

Obviously the US cannot move to European style restrictions overnight and never will do but at the moment there isn't even any momentum in the right direction - in fact there are movements to further liberalise gun ownership and use. Instead there should be common sense solutions to improve the current situation, which nobody can consider is acceptable.

 

I don't see any arguments, I see discussions relating to the issues.

 

Around 600 people per year are shot by police in the US. That compares to zero shot in the UK and six in Germany.

What is so criminal about having large magazines? The great great majority who have large magazines do not commit crimes. Therefore, it is not criminal to have a large magazine. How many people are beat by police in the UK compared to the US (lets forget Rodney King).

 

I have apparently disgruntled a mod in this thread, and have received 2 warning points.

[adrynalyne]

What's needed is sensible policies regarding gun ownership. For starters, there is no need for large magazines and they should be criminalised - that would make it more difficult for mass shootings to be carried out. Loopholes regarding weapon sales should be closed. Mental health issues and circumstances should be factors in allowing gun ownership. Gun owners should be required to demonstrate that they have their weapons properly secured in locked cabinets. Certain calibres and weapon types should be restricted altogether. In incidents where guns have not been stored safely and children have been injured or died those individuals should be banned from owning them.

 

Obviously the US cannot move to European style restrictions overnight and never will do but at the moment there isn't even any momentum in the right direction - in fact there are movements to further liberalise gun ownership and use. Instead there should be common sense solutions to improve the current situation, which nobody can consider is acceptable.

 

I don't see any arguments, I see discussions relating to the issues.

 

Around 600 people per year are shot by police in the US. That compares to zero shot in the UK and six in Germany.

I meant unjustified.

 

Care to give it another go?

[DocM]

In the 1990's the Feds had a large magazine and assault weapons ban. It had a sunset provision and so it expired. In the many studies that followed it was found the magazine limits and assault weapons ban had ZERO net effect. None. Zip. Nada. It was not renewed.

[Gone]

In the 1990's the Feds had a large magazine and assault weapons ban. It had a sunset provision and so it expired. In the many studies that followed it was found the magazine limits and assault weapons ban had ZERO net effect. None. Zip. Nada. It was not renewed.

DocM always holds the truth! Now my last year in the Marine Corps, they banned high capacity magazines from the PX. If we needed to replace a damaged weapon magazine, it would come out of our pay at a greater cost than we could buy at the military exchange. They only removed those for sale to please the 'honorable' Mr. Obama (which is why Generals shouldn't be politicians).

[xrobwx71]

there seems a simple solution here... don't allow chumps like this Mickiel access to weapons??!

 

Then no one would need them... oh wait, that's probably too sensible.

How do you dis-allow access? Ban all weapons? Cocaine is illegal. Methamphetamine is illegal. Drinking and Driving above .08 BAL is illegal. etc, etc. What is the answer? 

I know a lot of people say "Get rid of guns". I agree with them to a point.

 

If this was the early days of guns, and guns were just becoming available, to the point were you could actually get rid of them and stop anyone from getting them, bad guys included. Then, sure lets get rid of guns and just stab each other, punch each other, shoot each other with arrows or throw rocks.

 

But that's not the case, not by a long shot. There are millions upon millions of guns.

 

Its very simple.

 

Government makes laws, bad guys don't care.

 

Government takes guns bad guys don't care and they keep theirs.

 

Like the one guy says "If someone breaks into your house with a gun with the intent to rob and kill, sure you can call 911 and  they will come ... and take a picture of your dead body!"

 

...

 

It's like the honest consumer that buys a $2,000 piece of software and then is forced to have a USB security dongle inserted into  their computer to even use the piece of software they just dropped $2,000 for because OMG they might be a pirate.

 

When the ACTUAL pirate just cracks the software and uses it WITHOUT the dongle not being inconvenienced at all!

++++1, LIKE, A+, atta boy etc....

[xrobwx71]

What's needed is sensible policies regarding gun ownership. For starters, there is no need for large magazines and they should be criminalised - that would make it more difficult for mass shootings to be carried out. Loopholes regarding weapon sales should be closed. 

There ARE numerous policies. felons/criminals ignore them. So, if there was a policy or law that you couldn't have a drum magazine in the 1930's, this would have prevented or made it more difficult for Al Capone, John Dillinger ( replace with any mass murderers name from any era) from ordering the death of so many people? Loopholes? We don't need no stinkin loopholes..... 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_by_state

[Wyn6]

I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.

 

Warwagon, what are you trying to say with this video? I hope it's not that due to the ability to speed load, massive amounts of people can still be killed with magazines that hold a smaller number of rounds.

 

If that's the case, then I guess we can all win Olympic gold in the 200m dash, eh? Or, we can all be flying aces, or world class race car drivers, etc. Most people do not possess the skill set to do the above. These skills belong to an elite few.

 

Now, if you were simply posting a video that you really like, nevermind and that guy is really fast.

[+Warwagon MVC]

I wasn't going to comment in this thread, but just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.

 

Warwagon, what are you trying to say with this video? I hope it's not that due to the ability to speed load, massive amounts of people can still be killed with magazines that hold a smaller number of rounds.

 

Correct. But theyarecomingforyou's argument was that you should get rid of larger magazines. That video just proves that if you took away that guy's large magazine he would just bring more smaller ones with him. Wouldn't slow him down much.

[BGM]

i'm just so glad i don't live in a land where joe public can carry a gun, i literally am thankful that i don't have to be scared to go outside of my home as one poster in this thread mentioned..

 

i just can't fathom what that would be like, it makes me quite sad :(

[Fergdog]

I'd guess the far far majority of American's don't live in areas where they are scared of getting shot just by going outside at night. I feel bad for those that do though in the big cities.

[Lamp0]

So what do we learn from this gun story? Seems to me not all that much, past the pro-gun / anti-gun point scoring.

[theyarecomingforyou]

What is so criminal about having large magazines? The great great majority who have large magazines do not commit crimes. Therefore, it is not criminal to have a large magazine. How many people are beat by police in the UK compared to the US (lets forget Rodney King).

There is no legitimate need to have large magazines, therefore they should be banned to protect the general public. In the UK for instance shotguns are allowed but are limited to three rounds (one in the chamber, two in reserve).

 

There ARE numerous policies. felons/criminals ignore them. So, if there was a policy or law that you couldn't have a drum magazine in the 1930's, this would have prevented or made it more difficult for Al Capone, John Dillinger ( replace with any mass murderers name from any era) from ordering the death of so many people? Loopholes? We don't need no stinkin loopholes..... 

Nobody disputes that criminals will find their way around laws. However, restricting the legal options makes that more difficult and has a direct impact on the availability of illegal firearms. In the UK, Japan and other countries with firearms restrictions there a very few shootings and weapons are hard to come by. If your point was accurate one would expect as many shootings in the UK as the US, as criminals would find a way around the laws - that isn't the case.

 

Correct. But theyarecomingforyou's argument was that you should get rid of larger magazines. That video just proves that if you took away that guy's large magazine he would just bring more smaller ones with him. Wouldn't slow him down much.

Most mass shooters aren't firearms experts able to reload at exceptional speed, nor are the circumstances usually right to do so. Limiting the number of rounds in a magazine is a sensible precaution that has minimal impact upon legitimate users and has the potential to save lives.

[Gone]

Restricting magazine capacity only affects law abiding citizens, not the criminals.