Not wacko at all. I believe the motivation to pack heat is a direct admission that you possess a very, very small penis and are unwilling to defend yourself with the two weapons God gave you. I call my left one Thunder and my right one Lightning
OT: Paris
- Thread starter BoilermakerMid
- Start date
You better beware of a helluva lot of pistol packing women out there! Vbg
By the time they fumble through their purse or glovebox to find it, I'm able to seduce them. Then they want to gift it to me saying they've replaced lost or stolen ones before. I say no thanks baby, my guns are attached to my shoulders. Yours is probably being used by some gang banger right now
Because that is where the highest density is? People seem to enjoy congregating in areas where most aren't packing. Wonder why that is? (We can both use mediocre logic)
You were the one that used mediocre or lower level logic. I just stated what statistics tend to show.
Don't play dumb. There was implied causation in your post. If there wasn't, why even bring it up?
Only brought it up because there is a lot of anti gun(legal carry) sentiment in the thread. Just brought it up to show what 1)statistics point too 2)carrying might have some benefits
Am I pro second amendment person? Yes. Do I carry or even have a gun now? No. Is that going to change soon? Likely. Been thinking about it for awhile. I also tend to think someone trained well in firearms in certain situations can put an end to an incident. Also think that in some incidents it likely does not matter.
Take the Paris incident-In the concert hall, really they need to be stopped at the gate. Nobody will see them while watching a concert, would be hard to get a good shot off in that crowd. In the cafe or out on the street, an armed citizen ends it right after it starts.
I think there's a lot of mis-information out there. With the concert hall, the first officer that showed up on the scene immediately went in on his own and confronted the gunmen. This forced the gunmen into a confined space with hostages. There was a couple hours until the hall was stormed by a full police raid - but the gunmen were not shooting people still. None of the people held hostage were killed prior to or during the police raid. People (not saying you) have been out there saying "people were being killed for a couple hours before police finally came in - if someone had a gun inside it would have been over immediately and lives saved" - well that's not really true (and you basically suggest that). Also, take the stadium bombings. They made a concerted effort to NOT tell people what was going on because they didn't want to cause panic or a mass exodus (and basically the bombers at that point were waiting out there for a mass exodus).
The police are professionals and they handled these situations basically as best they could - especially involving large/mass crowds.
Secondly, a lot of it depends on the situation. The gunmen who stormed the concert hall weren't just some random who bought their first gun a few days before and decided to go around shooting at people. The witnesses flat out said they were basically professionally trained - when one was reloading, the other would cover them in a protective position.
As for the cafes (and still the concert hall), again - there's a difference between militant style attacks and a random shooter with a pistol. Even a highly trained person with a hand gun would have a major challenge taking down multiple gunmen with machine guns. Just the other day in DC, an off-duty Baltimore police officer shot a man who was attacking a woman with a knife in Union Station - and in the process shot a bystander. And that's a trained cop. It's much easier said than done - especially in mass hysteria situations.
I have no problem with people owning hand guns. And really, not a problem with concealed carry. BUT I don't understand why when people say there should be things like mandatory background checks - it is treated as if we are taking away their basic human rights. Again, not saying you're saying that as you seem fairly level headed. And quite frankly, most Americans agree with these things. But obviously there is a very strong lobbying group in this country that doesn't.
Not questioning the accuracy of what you say, but would appreciate a source since I have seen no such information from any news outlet or on the Internet?
I will just start off by saying your post said what i basically attempted to say.
I would add to that that one reason I did not comment to much about the specific Paris incident is that there are many different stories out there. Some say they were all French citizens, some say they had bogus passports, some were refugees etc etc. I figured I would just let it settle.
One of the things that is, or at least was a hallmark of an Al Qaeda styled attack is that there is a 'small attack', largely designed to get people to move to a specific exit, and then when people congregate there or move to there there is a much larger attack to maximize casualties.
What I meant by 'stopping them at a gate', and I was referring to the concert hall at this point, was basically not letting them in the hall in the first place, much like what happened at soccer stadium. I mentioned people are in a small area, crowded in, not paying attention to anything else, just about impossible to get a clean shot off. In other words not sure people carrying in this matter would have helped, and could easily have made it worse. Not sure it would have mattered in this case. So I did say in some situations it could help, in others it would not.
To project or predict if an armed civilian even with training would help in certain situations or not is hard to say. Sometimes it will, sometimes it will not help.
I do think these terrorists that commited the act had some training. This is the first I heard about a police officer going in by himself. Kudos to that man. That said, if one cop stopped several gunmen with automatic weapons i question how professional they were. That just based on military experience.
I hear you. There is just a lot of different stories, a ton of different versions. Pretty standard for these types of events.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...d8-11e5-934c-a369c80822c2-20151119-story.html
The first shots at the Bataclan theater had been fired by the terrorists at 9:45 p.m. When the BRI got there at 10:15 p.m., local police had already killed one of the assailants. The other two had gone upstairs with 20 hostages, but that wasn't immediately known to the police.
......
None of the hostages was hurt or killed, even by the terrorists, during the assault, "which is extraordinary."
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/pa...o-captain-shares-details-france-raids-n466461
"Uniformed police first to respond to the scene had managed to shoot dead one terrorist, but two more remained holed up in a second-floor room — with hostages."
http://www.afr.com/news/world/europ...ded-siege-at-bataclan-theatre-20151118-gl1q9e
The first policeman to arrive on the scene, an officer from the anti-crime branch, bravely made his way into the building where he shot one of the terrorists, who was killed when his suicide vest exploded.
.....
After all the hostages were evacuated – miraculously, no one was injured – the police officers reached the end of the corridor and fired on the killers with HKG36 assault rifles. One attacker went down, and then the other detonated his suicide vest, killing them both.
