I give up...

[Ray Ray 3,566]

You have to remember a few things, there are lots of anti's on this forum and not every gun owner is pro gun.

 

This thread magically found a few who need 2A training

 

Raj and Dr. Jimmy Rustler

[alec.mc 180]

I've heard that argument from the antis as well when it came to the recent Colorado shooting. " oh, it wouldn't of made a difference if somebody had a gun, their chances of actually hitting him would of been slim"

 

So, In absolute worst case scenario you would rather have a 0% chance of survival over a %1 Chance of survival? .......

 

Small chance still sounds better then no chance to me.

[TK421 2]

I've heard that argument from the antis as well when it came to the recent Colorado shooting. " oh, it wouldn't of made a difference if somebody had a gun, their chances of actually hitting him would of been slim"

 

So, In absolute worst case scenario you would rather have a 0% chance of survival over a %1 Chance of survival? .......

 

Small chance still sounds better then no chance to me.

 

I love how they argue that because he had body armor someone shooting back would have been ineffective. Body armor or not, if that ass clown was getting peppered by 9mm or .40 cal bullets he would not have been able to stand his ground and methodically shoot people, he would have attempted to seek cover, that would have bought people time to escape and saved lives!

[woodentoe 14]

I love how they argue that because he had body armor someone shooting back would have been ineffective. Body armor or not, if that ass clown was getting peppered by 9mm or .40 cal bullets he would not have been able to stand his ground and methodically shoot people, he would have attempted to seek cover, that would have bought people time to escape and saved lives!

 

It is called suppressive fire.

 

Oh, and TK421...Why aren't you at your post?

[GRIZ 3,369]

 

 

No offense Paul, but I've seen some "interesting" things watching LEO's and armored car drivers qualify. I'll say that the best shooters are the ones that actually enjoy it.

 

From my perspective having been a LE firearms instructor for nearly 30 years you are 100% correct Ray.

[Holeshot 3]

Raj, are you lost in space or something?

[Babyface Finster 45]

I've heard that argument from the antis as well when it came to the recent Colorado shooting. " oh, it wouldn't of made a difference if somebody had a gun, their chances of actually hitting him would of been slim"

 

So, In absolute worst case scenario you would rather have a 0% chance of survival over a %1 Chance of survival? .......

 

Small chance still sounds better then no chance to me.

 

The whole argument is irrelevant. The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. There is no requiremen that the citizen be trained or even capable with the weapon. Not much different than there being no requirement that a person be educated or even moderately well informed in order to exercise his 1st amendment rights. I would expect and hope that anyone who wants to carry would voluntarily undergo training, but I see no good reason for my/your rights to be denied due to the negligence of others who are irresponsible. When you even entertain this line of thinking you give a certain credibility to the antis' argument.

 

I have no problem with very stiff punishments for those who violate the law while exercising this right, but the right is not to be infringed. Period.

 

I would be just as outraged by some panicky, untrained CCW'er shooting an innocent bystander, but Constiutionally guaranteed rights are just that. Guaranteed. The cost of maintaining these rights can at time be appalling. The price we we pay by surrendering these rights is worse.

[alec.mc 180]

The whole argument is irrelevant. The right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the 2nd amendment. There is no requiremen that the citizen be trained or even capable with the weapon. Not much different than there being no requirement that a person be educated or even moderately well informed in order to exercise his 1st amendment rights. I would expect and hope that anyone who wants to carry would voluntarily undergo training, but I see no good reason for my/your rights to be denied due to the negligence of others who are irresponsible. When you even entertain this line of thinking you give a certain credibility to the antis' argument.

 

I have no problem with very stiff punishments for those who violate the law while exercising this right, but the right is not to be infringed. Period.

 

I would be just as outraged by some panicky, untrained CCW'er shooting an innocent bystander, but Constiutionally guaranteed rights are just that. Guaranteed. The cost of maintaining these rights can at time be appalling. The price we we pay by surrendering these rights is worse.

 

I dont think you understand the point I was trying to make, never once did I imply that people should undergo any sort of training, requirements, or prerequisites.

 

My post was absolutely pro 2a, and I was making argument over the antis ridiculous " CCW wouldn't of made a difference " statements.

[Dr.Jimmy Rustler 23]

Ray did you even read what I posted?

[Babyface Finster 45]

I dont think you understand the point I was trying to make, never once did I imply that people should undergo any sort of training, requirements, or prerequisites.

 

My post was absolutely pro 2a, and I was making argument over the antis ridiculous " CCW wouldn't of made a difference " statements.

 

I think you took me the wrong way, Alec. In fact, my post was not strictly in response to you but also to the sentiment that the average Joe does not have the skills to CCW. I should have quoted more than just you.

 

I know you're pro-2A, the problem is that the antis that matter to us are motivated more by irrational fear than true lack of facts. Any arguments you make, no matter how valid, don't do much to convince them. I choose to avoid getting into a debate about the finer points of self-defense, responsibility, crime statistics or anything else not directly related to the fact that the 2A guarantees me certain rights. Whether they like it or not. To engage on other issues (in my experience ) merely fuels the fire and makes them even more rabid about agruing against gun rights. It allows them to continue grandstanding on issues that are totally irrelevant to the 2A rights guaranteed us all. It doesn't matter if CCW would have done anything in the Colorado tragedy. My right was guaranteed before this crazy bastard and is guaranteed after. If the gun-owning community had been more adamant about these rights in the past we wouldn't have the useless, feel-good laws like OGAM, P2P, mag caps, etc. Once we got into the arguments of "Why does anyone need more than X rounds?" we gave the other side too much power and legitimacy. That's all I'm saying.

[KpdPipes 388]

[ExpendableRaj 1]

So, don't carry a gun because you might not be able to shoot back or you aren't trained enough? Yeah okay

 

Raj, are you lost in space or something?

 

No, I believe that all people aside from those who are deranged/serious criminals should have the choice to be able to CCW or not. And it is the individuals responsibility, to decide if CCW is a good decision for them or not. Personally, I'm in favor of constitutional carry such as AZ has.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

To the OP, here's a popular farewell from another website:

 

"It's been fun, but there is just too much negative energy here and too many new a**holes who post bullsh*t and lots of great people who used to post all the time who have left or gone underground. I'm out. Life is too short. I'll be in kona. Hope to see some of you there. Paolo knows how to find me."

[Smokin .50 1,907]

Interesting thread.

 

I'll add my two cents' worth:

 

The OP needs to understand that there always has been a deliberate attempt to inflame on gun forums, probably from Anti's. It's best to disregard them and keep on doing what works for you. I see no reason for you to quit the forum because some here have a varying opinion. Remember that there isn't any test to be a member of the forum. Hell, you don't even have to prove you've ever picked-up a gun!

 

To make claims that people here go out of their way to bad-mouth others here is wrong. Certain items of discussion are more inflammatory than others, and it's merely a case of different people "coming out of the woodwork" to express their concerns for topics that they feel strongly about. In other words, a lively discussion, such as we're having now on this thread. No need for feeling butt-hurt, unless you're the instigator!

 

As to whether or not a CCW would have been able to halt aggressive action in Colorado, I have NO DOUBT that it would have. A friend of mine with 28 years in on-the-job, who was the guy in charge of training for their SWAT Team, joined a club that I belong to and shoot USPSA at. He confided in me that he THOUGHT he knew how to shoot, until he saw what we do at a practice Match. Recently he opined that any USPSA and/or IDPA Shooter of C-class or better would have been able to take-out the Colorado gunman. And he gave details on how it would have went down (during a jam, reload, etc.) and that some of us would have tried a head shot up close after determining he wasn't bleeding from the torso (the ol' El-Presidente` qualifier in USPSA).

 

I believe in the right of self defense and am a strong 2A proponent. But I'm also a realist. Al Sharpie Sharpton can get a bus load of unemployed city dwellers to go protest at the drop of a hat. They don't even have to know what it is their protesting, most are paid to be there AND the signs are handed to them after they arrive and get off the bus! Not too many 30 year old Dads are looking to spend a vacation day to jump on a protest bus instead of taking their kids to the amusement park or visiting family out of state.

 

So I think everybody ought to take a deep breath and just relax....

[leahcim 680]

To the OP, I am also fairly new to this forum and I am way in favor of CCW and gun-control laws along the lines of AZ, but I recognize that on any forum there is going to be a broad range of opinion, and there are some on this forum who disagree with my POV. But I appreciate the debate, and I try to read everything and remain open to different views. I enjoy the discussion and I do not plan to leave because there are people with different views.

 

"He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that." John Stuart Mill

[bulpup 98]

Personally, I like reading a few takes on the laws, but there is only one forum explicitly marked NJ gunlaws. The rest is where do we go and shoot.

 

All the rants can attempt to point me somewhere but I am not going to be argued with by some J-off that has some whimsical burr up their ass. If you can't make a point or counter point that makes sense then you are just another sheep following a leader or waiting for a leader.

 

The rest of the site has some great info.