Toledo Talk

Arizona Congresswoman Shot - Condition Unknown

http://www.newyorktimes.com/2011/01/09/us/politics/09giffords.html

Awful.

created by holland on Jan 08, 2011 at 03:59:22 pm     Politics     Comments: 73

source      versions


Comments ... #

Of the six victims killed, one was a 9 year old child.

posted by MrsPhoenix on Jan 08, 2011 at 05:52:39 pm     #  

Doctors are apparently optimistic about her recovery, even though the bullet went in one side of her head and out the other.

posted by Ace_Face on Jan 08, 2011 at 05:54:05 pm     #  

What a tragedy. I hope this isn't the start of a rash of political assassinations, like the 60s. Makes me sick!

posted by bikerdude on Jan 08, 2011 at 06:15:57 pm     #  

A federal judge is dead too...

posted by SensorG on Jan 08, 2011 at 06:19:05 pm     #  

Looks like the congresswoman will make it. Doctors are very optimistic she will recover.

Fox News has excellent coverage, and has included a photo of the judge who was killed and a photo of the assailant. Nothing from CNN regarding photos. I used to love watching CNN, but their quality of coverage has really been awful over the last several years. I am not a conservative, but a moderate/independent who likes to read the liberal Buzzflash as well as the conservative Drudge. Don't like Glenn Beck in particular. Man, that guy is crazy.

posted by bikerdude on Jan 08, 2011 at 08:06:32 pm     #  

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/rep-giffords-socalled-hit-list-dems-targeted-sarah-palin/

"Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ), who was shot Saturday during a public event in Tucson, was among 20 other members of Congress who were on a so-called hit list published by former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin.

Palin, who has never publicly advocated violence against fellow US politicians, has often employed rhetorical attacks that leverage imagery and terminology familiar to gun owners and evocative of firearms. She said in March that her supporters should "reload" and "aim for" Democrats, ostensibly with their votes.

A map of the US, published on Palin's Facebook page, featured targeting crosshairs over individual congressional districts Palin had targeted for intense campaign efforts. While her note called for "pink slips," she added that supporters should fire a "salvo" at those lawmakers. Rep. Giffords was on the list. "

posted by anonymouscoward on Jan 08, 2011 at 09:46:22 pm     #  

My liberal friends are all in a huff about this thing, but we have to wait and see how it plays out. I remember when Oklahoma City bombing happened, my co-workers wanted to bomb the Middle East back to the Stone Age.

posted by Ace_Face on Jan 08, 2011 at 10:09:38 pm     #  

Anon, thank you for the link.

posted by OhioKimono on Jan 08, 2011 at 10:29:30 pm     #  

I doubt that this guy that shot this poor woman was influeneced by Palin as he seems to be crazier than her! The good news is, that her show is not going to be renewed...check Huffington Post. Palin does need to "cool it" with all the gun rhetoric. She is well and truly a scary idiot!

posted by RockChick on Jan 08, 2011 at 10:30:26 pm     #  

I don't think the discussion is whether or not Palin had influenced the shooter directly, but it really brings to light everyone's silence towards these thinly-veiled calls for violence that people like Palin have been urging. As the third-term congresswoman herself said, there are consequences for these actions. Unfortunately, the consequences are that she became a victim and people like Palin SHOULD be held accountable for what exactly they had been implying.

posted by dhr on Jan 09, 2011 at 09:11:55 am     #  

FLASHBACK>>>
OK, how's THIS for some "violence-inciting rhetoric"? “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” “Argue with neighbors, Get in their face!,” “If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry.” “Punish your enemies” “I’m itching for a fight.” “Hand-to-hand combat”. Barack Obama

If holding Palin accountable seems in order, we should be doing the same with BHO.

posted by KraZyKat on Jan 09, 2011 at 08:26:20 pm     #   1 person liked this

Don't forget his penchant for having actual bombers as advisers, too.

posted by Wulf on Jan 09, 2011 at 09:02:15 pm     #  

Please don't pour gasoline on me President Obama! I am just an ordinary citizen!

posted by Ace_Face on Jan 09, 2011 at 10:11:28 pm     #  

KraZyKat posted one "quote" that was relevant and it wasn't in any way given in context, nor properly cited. I am not an Obama supporter, but let's keep this conversation logical.

The fact remains, what happened is EXACTLY what Palin suggested should happen.

posted by dhr on Jan 09, 2011 at 11:18:54 pm     #  

Umm this guy was an unapologetic nutbag liberal, and comiited EXACTLY what DHR suggests to happen to people who don't agree with him when he wishes people on this site would "STFU or fight me", die of cancer, or "disappear". You know this guy personally DHR? You get one of your master's degree's in community college with him? And just think you have stated that you wish people to die & you own a gun, how did you pass the test as you clearly have a "death wish"? So did you vote of McCain - Palin? I sure didn't. Stings a little huh?

To say that one side of the isle is alone in in flaming rhetoric or craziness is a bold face denial of the human condition to begin with. Maybe this guy was mad because Obama told him he could come along for the ride but "had to ride in the back".

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 10, 2011 at 08:22:32 am     #  

This guy was far from a liberal, no matter what you moron Palin-worshipers claim. Hey, whatever helps you sleep better at night!

He was a psychopath who got his ideas from a certain 'David Wynn Miller'—"Miller's been selling his particular (and particularly bizarre) strain of the right-wing anti-tax "sovereign citizen" movement/conspiracy for years now..."

http://gawker.com/5729241/why-was-jared-loughner-obsessed-with-grammar

posted by toledolen_ on Jan 10, 2011 at 10:37:34 am     #  

I don't know why both sides keep trying to pigeonhole this guy into a set of mainstream political beliefs. His beliefs were obviously very complicated and non-main stream. Each side is cherry picking his beliefs to make him look like he is a member of the opposing party.

I don't think the Teabagger rhetoric had any influence on this guy at all. Definitely more lone wolf style. To think someone who considered "Animal Farm" and "Mein Kampf" to be among his favorite books able to be motivated/encouraged by Sarah Palin is just idiotic. I would say Alex Jones is a lot more culpable in this incident, but then again, not everything Alex Jones says is BS and he does not encourage violence.

One thing all sides can agree on: Resorting to violence is never a proper form of political protest.

posted by brainswell on Jan 10, 2011 at 10:39:51 am     #  

Yeah, from what I've read this person has stalked the congresswoman since 2007, before anyone ever heard about Ms. Palin. He was a known troublemaker/lunatic/dope head at that time. Remember-the ones trying to connect her to this massacre, are the ones who have saddled us with a 17 TRILLION dollar debt. No wonder they point their fingers, and try to shut people up.

posted by Wulf on Jan 10, 2011 at 02:00:16 pm     #  

BTW, loughner read the communist manifesto and mein kamph. I've read parts of each-both garbage. But Animal Farm, is a different matter. Orwell, among my favorite authors, has become quite prophetic.

posted by Wulf on Jan 10, 2011 at 02:07:46 pm     #  

17 TRILLION dollar debt? So your saying it's Bush's fault?

OK, Whateverzzzz.

posted by toledolen_ on Jan 10, 2011 at 02:13:51 pm     #  

And want to ADD to that sum as well. Guess what, as of Jan, the new Congress isn't going to pony up the money.

posted by Wulf on Jan 10, 2011 at 02:34:59 pm     #  

Sure they will...

posted by SensorG on Jan 10, 2011 at 03:53:18 pm     #  

Did dbw666 just say that fighting, cancer, and disappearing are all "EXACTLY" the same as murdering people by shooting? Did he just suggest you can earn a master's degree at a community college? A regular genius, folks!

On another related topic...

A lot of gun advocates, especially on this forum, believe shootings on college campuses could have been prevented if everyone could carry guns on campus legally. In Arizona, where just about everyone can carry without much fuss, why did this situation turn out so tragically? What's your answer?

posted by dhr on Jan 10, 2011 at 07:12:43 pm     #  

The DNC had a web page with bulls eyes on state like the one with cross hairs till they scrubbed it, cant scrub the internet cache though. And I heard somewhere he was a registered independent. Its a tragedy a case of a sick individual, but what is more disgusting is using it in the media as a political paintbrush to paint horns on another party. His favorite books on facebook till it was taken down was the communist manifesto and mein kampf, that doesn't sound like a conservative to me, along with his statements about religion. I don't claim hes a liberal just a sick sick person. As far as people talking about the amount of anger in political rheteric, just think back to how the left treated and talked about Bush when he was in office, maybe its just me but it seemed more virilant and hate filled then.

posted by Linecrosser on Jan 10, 2011 at 08:15:50 pm     #  

OH HEY THE DNC (untrue!) HAD A GRAPHIC WITH BULLSEYES ON STATES! THEREFORE BOTH SIDES ARE BAD SO VOTE REPUBLICAN!

LOUGHNER READ MEIN KAMPF AND THE COMMIE MANIFESTO! BOTH SIDES ARE BAD SO VOTE REPUBLICAN!

Um, first off, "targeting states that Bush won by less than X%" is MUCH MUCH different than putting crosshairs on a map and NAMING SPECIFIC NAMES. Bit of a difference there.

Second, with all the Hitler comparisons thrown about by the likes of Glenn Beck (comparing Obama and Hitler amongst other things) I would say reading Mein Kampf might actually stop some of that bullshit....

It's known that the guy had major issues with the US Currency. Guess what we hear out of the Teabaggers? BUY GOLD BUY GOLD BUY GOLD. Dude wants a gold-backed currency. Hmmmmmm. But the right-wing will just point to the fact that he "does not trust in God" and apparently smoked pot and that he read the Commie Manifesto and claim he's an evil commie pinko atheist pot-smoking librul. Never mind he had issues trying to enlist in the military and got pissed off when they started pushing God on him (which is actually happening in our military... only straight Christian men wanted there).

posted by anonymouscoward on Jan 10, 2011 at 10:59:46 pm     #  

I imagine most of the people spewing that nonsense have never read The Communist Manifesto or Mein Kampf.

I don't care if the rhetoric comes from liberals or conservatives. Words have meaning. Palin has now witnessed what her words meant.

posted by dhr on Jan 10, 2011 at 11:15:35 pm     #  

Few of links on the blaze to video of Liberals advocating violence, or calling for it for the likes of rush linbaugh and others.

posted by Linecrosser on Jan 10, 2011 at 11:55:44 pm     #  

Nice collection of leftist pictures.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

posted by Linecrosser on Jan 11, 2011 at 12:24:49 am     #  

Nice collection of leftist pictures.
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

Didn't see any liberal media figures or elected officials in any of these photos. You can't see the difference between a SF crazy person espousing his beliefs to the 50 people within earshot and Glenn Beck preaching to millions? Apples and oranges my friend.

posted by Ace_Face on Jan 11, 2011 at 02:18:55 pm     #  

Ms. Palin is going to be the next President of the United States. And in so doing, will raise the blood pressure of Her detractors by at least 50%.

posted by Wulf on Jan 11, 2011 at 05:07:52 pm     #  

Wulf - I've got a C note that says you're wrong.

posted by SensorG on Jan 11, 2011 at 05:27:49 pm     #  

I'd love it if she would run. But I've got a C note that says not only is she not going to be President, she isn't going to run. Why would she? She makes more money than the President and she wouldn't have to deal with the whole governing thing.

posted by Ace_Face on Jan 11, 2011 at 06:00:00 pm     #  

AC appears to be as loonie as the idiot that went on the rampage shooting. If you know him, watch him, but try to get him some help.

posted by AmericanPie on Jan 11, 2011 at 06:10:02 pm     #  

Wulf - Another C-note here. She's unelectable. But I'd love for her to try.

posted by holland on Jan 11, 2011 at 07:46:36 pm     #  

I'll keep my 2 C notes, and send them to Her campaign. That way you two won't get the chance, however slim, to give them to some nitwit commie politician.

posted by Wulf on Jan 12, 2011 at 01:27:43 pm     #  

Hah! I'm book marking this page Wulf...see you in 2012.

posted by SensorG on Jan 12, 2011 at 01:59:38 pm     #   1 person liked this

If Palin gets elected is pill-popper Rushie moving back from Costa Rica? Oh that's right, he never moved out of his palatial Florida mansion when Obama was elected president, my bad.

Palin is totally unelectable. She has lost ALL credibility for public sector work because she resigned her governorship.

Being president doesn't entail taking the kids camping with a camera crew or attempting to shoot a gauntly caribou! She is more out of touch with the real world than all those academic elitist politicians she rails against! How many cameras are stuck in your face on a daily basis and how does that make you a better leader?

If offered the choice between another Bush and her, I would take a Bush III any day. And that says a lot.

posted by brainswell on Jan 12, 2011 at 04:44:35 pm     #  

If other members of the public had been armed at the meeting perhaps Loughner could have been killed before he hurt so many. Or perhaps the resulting spray of bullets from both sides in a crowd would have resulted in more wounds and death. But at least the right to bear (and use) arms would have been upheld. I can just imagine what might have happened if every person in the crowd had been armed. Perhaps all would have shot straight and true (as the police always do) or perhaps more deaths might have occurred. Maybe next time we will learn that answer.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 12, 2011 at 05:32:31 pm     #  

Arizona has some of the most lenient gun laws in the country, oldsendbrdy. Anyone could have concealed without a permit legally.

Yet, it still happened.

posted by dhr on Jan 13, 2011 at 09:08:46 pm     #  

Yeah because pencils cause miss spelled words, cars create drunk drivers, and airplanes create terrorist.

The problem is always people, to blame inanimate objects with no free will is to deny the nature of humanity, we are not all good and you will never regulate out crazy.

Cyrus the Great didn't use a Mossberg 500 to establish the Persian Empire, Caesar didn't need an AK to force subjugation on the world, and Lizzie Broden didn't give her mother 40 whacks with a 9mm.

We are forced to deal with urban violence everyday and the elite do nothing, but when one of their own gets effected, it's a rush hurry panic mode.

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 14, 2011 at 08:28:42 am     #  

DBW, while I'm not an advocate of strict gun control, in this case, the magazine size limit the Assault Weapons Ban had would have saved lives. He was taken down while changing magazines. It would have been a difference of 21 bullets in this case.

Loughner had no criminal connections to obtain his gun. He bought his gun in the same manner any law abiding citizen would and made sure he got the largest possible magazine he could.

I know you can't stop crazy, but in this case, the assault weapons ban would have limited the damage big time.

And don't jump to the conclusion that he would have tracked down an older magazine to pull this off, like I said, he had no connections and wouldn't have sought them out. He was too busy lucid dreaming and making non-sensical semantic arguments about words. Not the kind of person who gets hooked up with illegal weapons dealers.

Where were all the concealed carry heroes last Saturday? Even if Gifford was a Republican, I don't think the outcome of the lack of response would have been any different. A political rally is a place even many of the staunchest of gun supporters don't feel comfortable carrying, the implications are too strong.

posted by brainswell on Jan 14, 2011 at 10:26:49 am     #  

BSwell great points and I honestly can say I don't know what my stance on 30 rd magazines but the issue is give an inch & they take a mile with regulation. It's never enough with the Brady bunch folks. Their goal is the complete disarmament of society, thats not hyperbole.

I don't carry a gun to be a johnny law want-to be or to be a bounty hunter. My first responsibility is to my family and their safety. People have the ill conceived notion that a CHL (Ohio does not have CCW) gives you the ability to ride on to the Ponderosa on the white horse and take out the bad guy. The truth of the matter is most CHL owners are lucky to put 50 rounds through their weapons all year long, they are the last people I want throwing lead in a already chaotic situation.

I might have drawn my weapon if I was in this sort of situation but it would have only if all other opportunities to get my family to safety have been extinguished. I know it sounds selfish to not think of the general safety of others by not trying to "put the bad guy down" but I'm not a cop and my family comes first.

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 14, 2011 at 10:38:50 am     #  

Ohh and BSwell you are a 100% wrong if you don't think their are people packing at political rallies. Most people are just smart enough to not OC while they are there.

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."
— Rudyard Kipling

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 14, 2011 at 10:41:01 am     #  

As usual, brainswell can't tell shit from Shinola.

the magazine size limit the Assault Weapons Ban had would have saved lives

No it wouldn't. The genie is out of the bottle and will not be put back in. There are plenty of after market high capacity magazines available.

And don't jump to the conclusion...

Look who's talking. You're predicting his behavior with the typical moonbat logic: If we had this law, then the criminal would never have done the crime. Look stupid, Loughner murdered six people. There's a law against murder - but I guess Loughner didn't know that, right? Otherwise he wouldn't have committed the crime.

...he had no connections and wouldn't have sought them out.

Again, you're predicting. You don't know what Loughner would have done, or what he wouldn't have done. You just aren't that good.

Where were all the concealed carry heroes last Saturday?

The third man on the scene has his CCW license and was packing heat.

A political rally is a place even many of the staunchest of gun supporters don't feel comfortable carrying,...

Here's your final lie of the day. You don't know that this is fact. You might believe it, but you have nothing to back it up with.

Your argument is based on ignorance and a lack of personal responsibility. Take it back to moonbat central where the sheeple will congratulate you for being so wise and good and sensitive, and you can practice licking the boot that kicks you.

posted by madjack on Jan 14, 2011 at 10:53:46 am     #  

MJ, once again, I'm not a Democrat and I don't advocate strict gun control. I'll be the first to admit the AWB was far from perfect and illogical in many senses, but that doesn't mean we give up on common sense solutions to try to keep the crazies from having guns.

Give me a straight answer on this: If Loughner was unable to purchase a 30 round magazine at a gun store, could he have fired 31 shots without reloading?

posted by brainswell on Jan 14, 2011 at 11:53:31 am     #  

I remember reading somewhere that there was a guy in the crowd with a CCW permit and was armed. But yet it was a woman who hit him while he was reloading that put an end to the spree. So much for CCW preventing crimes.

posted by Ace_Face on Jan 14, 2011 at 03:46:52 pm     #  

Oh my, what a surprise.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/01/12/5825033-gun-rights-advocate-high-capacity-magazine-restrictions-makes-sense

"Law-enforcement officials have noted that Loughner's high-capacity round magazine substantially increased the lethality of his rampage; he was able to get off at least 31 shots without reloading and was only wrestled to the ground when he tried to reload with another high-capacity magazine."

Better stock up on those big magazines now. It will probably be illegal to buy and sell them within the end of the year.

How ironic is it that the new Republican led house is going to be forced by public pressure into passing a gun rights restriction? I can hear the Teabaggers already, dubbing their darlings RINOs and traitors. The honeymoon is officially over, kids.

posted by brainswell on Jan 14, 2011 at 04:20:32 pm     #  

This incident calls for a couple of competing movies. One where the lone gunman starts shooting in a crowd and gets killed by a "conservative" protector of the public, and another movie where the lone gunman starts shooting in a crowd where most adults are armed but in the panic they kill one another rather than the bad guy. I bet the second movie would sell more tickets, and get better reviews.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 14, 2011 at 05:33:59 pm     #  

Only when everyone has a gun will no one get shot.

posted by bobo on Jan 16, 2011 at 01:12:33 pm     #  

"As usual, brainswell can't tell shit from Shinola. "

Is Shinola in Indiana?

posted by barfly on Jan 16, 2011 at 03:35:35 pm     #  

Bobo, when everyone has a gun everyone will get shot.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 16, 2011 at 07:14:02 pm     #  

Old - Really? I guess America feel into a warzone when every mantle in this country had a rifle hanging above it from 1770 - 1920. By your logic our rural southern areas (which lead the country in gun ownership per capita) would be nothing but a killing field.

Must be pretty easy to re-write history.

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 17, 2011 at 07:14:02 am     #  

From Brainswell: If Loughner was unable to purchase a 30 round magazine at a gun store, could he have fired 31 shots without reloading?

Yes, Loughner could. I suspect what you really want to say is something along the order of: If there was no such thing as a high capacity magazine, could Loughner have fired 31 shots without reloading? And of course Loughner could not. The reality is that the genie is out of the bottle and high capacity magazines are easily available to everyone.

From oldsendbrdy: Bobo, when everyone has a gun everyone will get shot.

That isn't true. Feel free to look up the history of the Old West and continue reading all the way through Florida (CCW passed in 1999, castle doctrine shortly thereafter) and finish up in the State of Vermont. When you're finished, explain to me just why it is that States with concealed carry laws like Vermont are not a Hollywood inspired blood bath with multiple shootings daily.

Loughner is very likely mentally ill. This shooting is the result of a mentally ill man not getting treatment; not high cap mags and not a lack of gun law. If anyone is to blame for this besides Loughner, start with Loughner's mental health treatment team. After that, progress through local law enforcement and whatever bodyguards were supposed to be protecting the politicos that day.

posted by madjack on Jan 17, 2011 at 11:47:05 am     #  

MJ, because everyone does not have a gun. Just because states have CCW does not mean that every adult is armed. When they are, then the bloodbaths will occur. In the "Old West" most citizens did not walk around armed. It kind of gets in your way when farming.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 12:11:15 pm     #  

DBW8906, the guns were over the mantle,not circulating freely concealed in a crowd. In 1776 guns were unwieldy, single-shot weapons that were good for sniping (if rifled) but poor for self-protection in a crowd. Our present day pistols can allow us to wound/kill almost 20 people with a clip (though I suspect the shooter had practiced). Do you assume if 30-40 automatics came out while someone like Laughner emptied his clip that some more people would not be shot by poorly aimed fire? We'll just have to see how the future of these kinds of incidents unfold. Even if another 20-30 people were killed by well-meaning CCW carriers it would not be a crime. No more than it is when police kill an innocent while trying to kill a bad guy.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 12:23:35 pm     #  

I think a lot of this is what we expect. In Toledo (at least according to the Blade) if you go into certain neighborhoods you can expect almost every male engaged in criminal activity to be armed. So it behooves the other male citizens to be armed. That is different than going to a political rally. In that situation you could probably expect the only one to be armed is the nut like Laughner. Now we are considering encouraging all adult citizens who attend such events to be armed. That will make the future at least interesting.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 12:53:34 pm     #  

You still dodged my point about the south which has much lower crime rates than NW Ohio. Please dont bring up the socio-economic argument because there are just as many flat broke people down there.

So you answer to an armed robber is to leave your weapon at home in hopes of he will understand you are trying to live in peace and be moved by your display of valor that he gives up his life of crime.

The framers of the Constitution were under no pressure from the NRA when they wrote “… the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Because they understood you have the responsibility and right to defend yourself.

Suzanna Gratia (now Gratia Hupp) was having a pleasant lunch with her parents in Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, Texas, when she saw a pickup truck come crashing through the wall. A man armed with two guns and plenty of spare magazines emerged from the truck and started shooting everyone in sight, including Gratia’s mother and father. Al Gratia was shot fatally in the chest. Ursula Gratia was shot point-blank in the head. More than 20 other people in the cafeteria were murdered in cold blood before the killer turned one of his guns on himself and blew his own brains out.

Suzanna hid under a table, clutching her purse which normally contained a .38 revolver. In deference to Texas law at that time, which prohibited carrying concealed weapons on one’s person, she had left her gun in her car. Several more dead diners had guns legally and inaccessibly locked in their cars. Suzanna Gratia Hupp has vowed never to make that mistake again, though such pronouncements always come far too late.

“The decision to follow the law cost me the lives of my parents,” she says. “There is not a day that goes by when I do not think about that.”

Suzanna Gratia Hupp decided to fight back. She set out to change the foolish laws. She turned her anger on her legislators who had “legislated me out of the right to protect myself and my family.” She joined the crusade for the right to carry concealed weapons in Texas and she ran for the state legislature. She was successful on both counts, though not in time to save the lives of her parents.

Today, Rep. Hupp has some harsh words for those gun-control fanatics who come out of the woodwork every time there’s a mass slaying like Columbine. “Why is it that mass shootings now seem to always take place in schools and post offices, places where guns are not allowed? They’re always in these so-called gun-free safety zones.” Like Luby’s cafeteria.

But I guess you would not need a weapon because you never go out to eat right?

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 17, 2011 at 01:28:50 pm     #  

Look at this western family. It looks like none of the men are armed. What the hell is wrong with them?
http://theautry.org/explore/exhibits/images/sod/twostory_full.jpg

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 01:29:50 pm     #  

DBW, I do not dispute any of your points. I just believe that being human there will be innocents killed sometime in the future by CCW carriers. You apparently believe that every person on the side of right always shoots straight. Time will tell which of us is right.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 01:34:41 pm     #  

I think what will happen in the future is that if several people are armed in a crowd that encounters a shooter like Laughner: they will have to fall to the floor, or kneel; take deliberate aim so as not to hit bystanders, and shoot to kill him without shooting one another. In the meantime he would have shot several people. The shooting would not be prevented (because he is a nut) but he would have been killed (saving the price of a trial).

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 02:00:53 pm     #  

Old people with valid licenses for driving kill people too are you suggesting we revoke licences and we all ride bikes? 17,941 people died in 2006 in alcohol-related collisions yet you can get multiple DUI's and keep your license!

If we go by Violence Policy Center's an anti-gun group (http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm) number 282 people have been killed by CCW holders since May 2007. A safe guess on the number of CCW holders in America would be about 3 million, so that means .02% of all CCW holders run afoul of the law. You are afraid of the .02% while over 9k people are murdered by gun wielding criminals (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms)!

My whole point is if you actually look at the numbers CCW holders for 99.98% are law abiding citizens but people fall for the fake when CBS screams EVIL GUNS. To stop gun violence we would have to crack down on "the hood" but there would be marches in the street if we actually did that, but gun owners for the 99.98% majority are law abiding citizens so lets slam them.

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 17, 2011 at 02:12:23 pm     #  

I do believe that citizens should be have to pass a practical driving test every 10 years. A lot of the elderly might lose their licenses if that were to occur. The use of a pistol in a crowded restaurant is not a question of law-abiding or not. It is a question of accuracy in the use of the weapon and the luck of the people around it. My point is that (given human nature) innocents will be killed in such a situation (though not every one). Having weapons at hand will not prevent that (it will probably add to the number) but it seems to be worth it to save money trying a murderer.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 02:27:24 pm     #  

I wonder if we could have a "practical" CHL test where the armed citizen faces a device that shoots paintballs or BBs into a simulated crowd (and at him). It might be automated or controled from a booth. He knows it is coming. How soon would he react (his gun is in "concealed" position) to the rampage as members of the "simulated" crowd get "painted" or "BBed". How many members of the crowd would "die" or be wounded before he got off his disabling (or "kill") shot. That seems a much more "practical" test than shooting at paper targets in a basement.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 02:45:45 pm     #  

Instead of paintball play "Laughner ball".

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 02:47:56 pm     #  

I agree with your point that most CCW holders couldn't hit the broad side of a barn and thats a shame. But I'm not relying on YOUR weapon to save me.

When lead is flying bad things happen regardless of who is pulling the trigger, I just wont be left defenseless because so politco has an agenda (even though all their security carries guns).

In his book, More Guns, Less Crime, University of Maryland scholar John Lott's analysis of crime report data claims a statistically significant effect of concealed carry laws on crime, with more permissive concealed carry laws correlated with a decrease in overall crime. Lott studied FBI crime statistics from 1977 to 1993 and found that the passage of concealed carry laws resulted in a murder rate reduction of 8.5%, rape rate reduction of 5%, and aggravated assault reduction of 7%.

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 17, 2011 at 03:07:29 pm     #  

In 1776 guns were unwieldy, single-shot weapons...

Unwieldy by comparison to modern firearms. The vast majority of men were armed, either with the family long gun or, additionally, one or more pistols. People carried the pocket pistol, a small flintlock you could fit in your pocket.

While it's certainly true that repeating firearms were practically non-existent, having a Brown Bess allowed the average man, woman or child to put food on the table or a red coat in the ground. They were easy to shoot, and the alternative was a bow and arrows - or maybe the atlatl. Now that takes some skill!

Following on the heels of DBW8906, the prevention of violent crime begins with armed victims. This has been proven time and again, most recently in Florida. The only crime that has been caused by people who carry their pistol - if you can actually call it a crime - is the unreported attempted robbery. When a criminal attempts to rob or assault someone who displays their firearm, the criminal will most often curse and take to his heels. It is believed that the would-be victim never reports this crime, which I tend to think likely. I wouldn't report it and I don't know anyone who would. Why invite the aggravation?

As far as being able to hit anything, every single police officer on duty should be able to out shoot me without even trying, and most cannot. Now that's a crime.

posted by madjack on Jan 17, 2011 at 05:09:06 pm     #  

But I'm not relying on YOUR weapon to save me.

Which is good, because I don't think he has one. Nor do I think he'd stand in front of you.

By the way, if it's me I suggest you stand to my left. Betsy ejects to the right, and you'll probably shoot better when you're not being showered with red hot empties.

posted by madjack on Jan 17, 2011 at 05:12:43 pm     #  

Nothing says "get away" like the business end of a 1911.

posted by dbw8906 on Jan 17, 2011 at 07:27:03 pm     #   1 person liked this

Yeah, ain't that the truth!

I read one man's account of being stalked in a mall parking lot. He had one or more small children with him and was finishing up Christmas shopping when he noticed two men following him out the doors. The two moved into flanking positions as he was walking across the lot, so he pulled out his pistol and held it where they could see it. Both men stopped following, cursed him and slowly walked away, cursing him as they left. Later on he deduced that what they wanted were the Christmas presents he'd just bought at the toy store. Nice, huh?

Our Hero didn't report this to anyone. I don't much blame him, especially in a city like Toledo.

posted by madjack on Jan 17, 2011 at 08:50:40 pm     #  

Only when everyone has a nuclear weapon will no one get nuked.

posted by bobo on Jan 17, 2011 at 09:46:17 pm     #  

Bobo, I think you are being facetious. I do not trust Iran or North Korea to have nuclear weapons, but that does seem to go against our rational for being armed.

posted by oldsendbrdy on Jan 17, 2011 at 11:27:38 pm     #  

Call me "crazy" but I was just following the logic through today.

posted by bobo on Jan 18, 2011 at 12:12:54 am     #  

Bobo,

The American logic with respect to nuclear weapons is: The country must be predominantly Christian or Jewish and it's economy dominated by cutt-throat, multi-national capitalists.

Then no one will get nuked, mostly because the people calling the shots will be too busy fleecing the taxpayers by maintaining/replacing said nukes every 15 years.

posted by brainswell on Jan 18, 2011 at 05:44:07 pm     #