Posted by moy23 on 12/19/2012 12:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by The Taint on 12/19/2012 12:06:00 AM (view original):

I was having lunch in this place that was in a pretty seedy part of Vegas today when, for the first time in my life, I looked around and wondered about my safety.  It was a really odd feeling, one I'd never had before.  I know what you are saying. 

Personally, I'm not in that situation very often and even after that feeling today I don't think I could ever carry concealed, but I'm seriously thinking of getting something for the house and having the wife and I take safety classes at the local range. 

I didn't mean to make it sound like chicago has gone to hell in a handbag, it hasn't, but there is more than enough violent activity that would warrant protection... and in this economy the violence seems to only be increasing. 

fwiw -  I just told my wife today I think we might get a gun for the house and some lessons. I keep thinking about how defenseless those kids and teachers were.  Can't get that thought out of my mind.  Ultimately I'll probably still hold off cause I have concerns with having a gun in the house... but the pros to gun ownership are catching up to the cons rather quickly imo.  

Shotgun for the wife/house.   Easy to operate with point and pull accuracy.   Assuming she ever had to use it, it's probably a panic situation.    You don't need pinpoint accuracy with a shotgun.

Posted by tecwrg on 12/19/2012 8:59:00 AM (view original):
I can't say "We shouldn't make it easier for deranged individuals to kill more people faster.  I find it difficult to imagine that any rational person wouldn't agree with that." because it's hysterical?

I'd be fine with trained and armed security in schools, if that what it takes.

My entire outlook on sacrifices that need to be made in favor of better security for my family, and people in general, changed after 9/11.  I don't fly that often, but I've never once complained about all the additional screening at airports that's been in place post 9/11, because I know and agree with why it's there.

If my children, and future generations of children, have to "be exposed" to armed security as part of their everyday life, then so be it.

No.  "Why does Joe Citizen need a HCAW?" is a kneejerk, hysterical question in response to a recent tragedy.

Did Joe Citizen need a HCAW on 12/4/12?   I assume not.   Why weren't you asking then?

Let's get our calendars out.  Why don't you tell me when it's appropriate to ask the question, and I'll schedule it in my calendar.

FWIW, we;ve had other mass shootings in CT in recent years.  Two of them are within 10 miles from where I'm sitting right now.  The most recent one was in 2010.  Maybe I'm just getting around to ask the question from that one.  Is 28 months long enough to wait?

FWIW, I'm all for registering any type of firearm.   I'm all for restrictions on purchasing any type of firearm.   I'm fine with banning clips over 10.   I'm happy to sign your petition banning all AW-type guns.    But how does any of this stop Adam Lanza?    He intended to kill his mother and, for reasons unknown, he intended to kill as many children as possible.   He could have done this with a shotgun designed to hunt quail.  

He could have also done this with an axe, chain saw, knife, lots of gas and matches, home made explosives etc etc. Do you just ban everything?

Of course I was being sarcastic about the Hartford Distributors shootings.

I don't have the answers.  I've already said that I don't know where that line should be drawn.  I'm just asking the questions as a topic of discussion.

I don't think our leaders in Washington are going to specifically be calling on me to provide the answers.  I'm skeptical that they will even be checking in on the WIS General Discussion Forum to get your opinion, or moy's opinion, or bad_luck's opinion either.

You say that you're on board with my objective (which you've misstated above).  So what do you suggest?

Posted by furry_nipps on 12/19/2012 10:00:00 AM (view original):
He could have also done this with an axe, chain saw, knife, lots of gas and matches, home made explosives etc etc. Do you just ban everything?

Most mass killings are done with guns.  Many with high-capacity assault weapons.  Let's start there.

If mass axe murders start to become all the rage, then we can talk about that.

You already have my suggestions. 

But banning HCAW is not solving a problem.   Honestly, until Sandy Hook, I would have never considered any type of .22 caliber weapon to be an AW regardless of the modification.   A .22 would not be my choice of firearm to defend myself against anything bigger than a squirrel or rabbit.   That said, maybe I've looked at AW in the wrong light.    I wouldn't start banning .22s.    I'd start with clip capacity.   10 should be plenty.   Maybe people need to register clips along with guns.   Someone with a hundred 10 capacity clips would catch my attention before a gun owner with 13 weapons and 2 clips for each.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 10:13:00 AM (view original):
You already have my suggestions. 

But banning HCAW is not solving a problem.   Honestly, until Sandy Hook, I would have never considered any type of .22 caliber weapon to be an AW regardless of the modification.   A .22 would not be my choice of firearm to defend myself against anything bigger than a squirrel or rabbit.   That said, maybe I've looked at AW in the wrong light.    I wouldn't start banning .22s.    I'd start with clip capacity.   10 should be plenty.   Maybe people need to register clips along with guns.   Someone with a hundred 10 capacity clips would catch my attention before a gun owner with 13 weapons and 2 clips for each.

Who would this draw attention too? The guy who shot up clackamas town center (oregon mall) used a stolen gun. The gun(s) used in this attack also were not his. When a local convience store got robbed and shot up the person was using a stolen gun as well. Maybe I just didn't read about these before, but it seems like most of these attacks are from another persons gun.

The guys stockpiling clips.   There's really no reason to do it.

Although I do understand the point.  Someone intent on evil will find a way.   If it's stealing a gun, they'll steal a gun.  But they'll have to go door to door to get a bucketful of clips.   And the clips will hold 10 rounds.  Everyone will still get to own their guns but it will be more difficult to stockpile unnecessary clips.

FWIW, I can make an argument for owning a semi-automatic gun with multi-round clips all day long.   I can't make an argument for owning a dozen clips for said gun.

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):
The guys stockpiling clips.   There's really no reason to do it.

Although I do understand the point.  Someone intent on evil will find a way.   If it's stealing a gun, they'll steal a gun.  But they'll have to go door to door to get a bucketful of clips.   And the clips will hold 10 rounds.  Everyone will still get to own their guns but it will be more difficult to stockpile unnecessary clips.

But are these the guys doing this? Like I said at least in these recent attacks minus james holmes they haven't even owned any gun.

Posted by furry_nipps on 12/19/2012 10:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 12/19/2012 10:32:00 AM (view original):
The guys stockpiling clips.   There's really no reason to do it.

Although I do understand the point.  Someone intent on evil will find a way.   If it's stealing a gun, they'll steal a gun.  But they'll have to go door to door to get a bucketful of clips.   And the clips will hold 10 rounds.  Everyone will still get to own their guns but it will be more difficult to stockpile unnecessary clips.

But are these the guys doing this? Like I said at least in these recent attacks minus james holmes they haven't even owned any gun.

The DC sniper 'stole' his gun from an authorized dealer. Note the quotations.