Three kids killed by shooter at Christian school

Killers come in all types... including trans/goo. And what percentage of the population are these goo entities compared to hetero people?

 

sadly, your professional approach to the situation represents a very small minority of current gun owners.

 

With all due respect, you are wrong, and assuming emotions that are flat out not there. You are imputing an emotion (fear) that is quite palpably not there. Fact is, law enforcement is almost never going to be there in time should you actually have need in a life or death scenario, nor do they have a duty to protect you. In that regard, almost everyone is in a somewhat remote area unless you live across the street from a police station.

But no, I am not afraid. I am, however, a proactive individual who does things like put life preservers in my boat, fire extinguishers and smoke alarms in my home, wear a seat belt in my car, and purchase insurance where my risk profile and ability to absorb a loss dictates that it is prudent to do so. I am no more afraid of having someone take the life of myself of my family than I am of any of those other situations. That said, mine (and my family’s) risk profile is a bit higher than most due to some people/events in the past that I am not going to get into.

 

I think they accidentally switched the Cruz and Paddock pictures. Not that it changes your point. Right-wing Twitter was quite rowdy yesterday on the trans issue. I would be willing to bet a lot of those guys are the ones usually saying it's too soon to be getting into policy issues and that it's unfair to stereotype groups with whom they identify.

 

I wonder if you can appreciate how ironic this post is???

 

Add bullet proof glass to the list of security improvements at every school in America. Video of the shooter gaining entry:

 

I have 3 kids in my home. My oldest knows how to be safe around firearms, my two youngest are not old enough yet. None of them have access to my safe. My risk of one of my guns being used in an unintended fashion against anyone in my house is near zero. Use common sense, secure your guns to prevent unauthorized access if you have the need to do so, but I don’t believe we should mandate it regardless of circumstance. At the end of the day, without violating people’s 4th amendment rights, it isn’t really enforceable anyways.

in public, there is actually a good amount of data on defensive gun uses. Suffice it to say that on an annual basis, defensive gun uses generally significantly outweight violent crimes committed with a gun.

 

I can't speak for Helix but as for myself I have a fairly large collection of firearms made up of mostly rifles, shotguns, and pistols that were my Grandfather's and my Father's they are more sentimental to me than anything. I also have a few modern firearms to and truly enjoy going to the range with my adult Sons and shoot varying firearms of different calibers some pistols some AR style weapons some long guns for distance shooting and sporting clays with shotguns, as for carrying daily I do I am in the construction business so I go to some interesting areas sometimes. I have had my CWP for over 20 years and thankfully have never even reached for it

 

This I understand, especially for your work life.

 

I imagine that you are responsible and not saying this applies to you. But the key difference I see with wearing a seat belt and buying insurance is that those things don't require any skills or training. If anything, states seem to be going the other direction with guns to make it even easier for people to drive or carry them around with zero training.

I was talking to a friend recently who's as big of a gun rights guy as anybody, and even he is worried that we're going to see more road rage shootings and escalated disputes with looser regulations. I think it's somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy; more people carrying guns are going to increase anxiety levels, making even more people think they need guns, too. The more guns people are driving around with or walking around with are going to result in more escalations, shootings and deaths. That's particularly true when someone like Zimmerman can claim they had to kill another person because they are getting beaten up and can't let the other person take their gun. Not to mention that even trained police accidentally shoot innocent bystanders. Friendly fire in military battles is not uncommon either.

I really hope I'm wrong though.

 

I don’t doubt defensive uses exceed violent gun crimes. If people have a gun, they will often go to it as a first defense. Just like cops often do.

I am glad you use extensive precautions at home, I’m going to guess that most gun owners don’t.

 

Congrats on the "dumbest post of the day" award. You earned this one.

 

That’s the whole point. Many people are not good responsible people 100% of the time.

 

Name one.

 

Whether you are afraid or not yourself, isn't the point of guns in the arguments of gunowners carrying guns around to make other people afraid? If fear wasn't a factor, the 'bad guy' deterrence argument holds no water. And if you are responding to other people who might harm you carrying guns, that would imply some "fear" on your part, would it not?

 

Regarding public use, my question would center around outcomes. I.e., are you more or less likely to be harmed as the victim of a crime when in possession of a fire arm?

I'm pretty sure a gun at home statistically increases one's chances of harm by firearm.

 

Recently had a neighborhood wannabe cop follow me to my house and instigate an argument. I was on my motorcycle and didn't pull onto my driveway because I only realized he followed me as I was about to pull in. He was arguing across his teenage son who was in the passenger seat so I walked over to his window. He wouldn't roll it down and I got on my bike and took off with him continuing to follow me. Left my neighborhood to lose him before returning home. Found out who he was later on as he lives in the same neighborhood. He told several people if his son wasn't there he would have pulled out his gun because I was the agressor....

He even filed a police report which had falsified statements. Cops agreed my take made more sense but the point is the instigator felt empowered and justified to shoot me over his own aggressive act.....

 

Considering how highly armed our population is, people with guns make little impact on crime stats including on their person. Good guys with guns stopping stuff is akin to sighting a unicorn. If you MUST own a gun it SHOULD be highly regulated. Jump through hoops get licensed and insured. Tax ammo heavily and ban assault weapons are my reasonable suggestions

 

If statistical certainties meant anything to people, no one would play the lottery

 

I would opine that is because most suicides are by gun. I would wonder what are the odds of suicide by gun vs. having your own gun turned on you by a criminal vs successfully fending off a crime with the gun?

I’m not opposed to guns for home protection, but even there I doubt the statistical argument is strong. Out of those “rarely occurring” options mentioned above, I’d expect suicide by gun might even be the most likely event to eventually occur. More commonly the gun might be stolen by a 3rd party to use in another crime, or the “legal” gun owner would eventually use the weapon in a crime themselves. This is not the majority of gun owners, but not exactly “rare”, every gun starts out as “legal”… until it’s used in a crime.