• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Multiple People Shot Outside Empire State Building

Dr_Patrick said:
I think it's better to err on the side of safety. Obviously, criminals in general aren't going to abide by gun control laws. However, if there is a fairly thorough screening process, it may prevent even a few unstable people from getting them and doing potentially bad things with them. I think that alone is worth it.
Click to expand...

if you want to err on the side of safety-stop disarming honest people


btw NIGHTLINE JUST Reported that the 9 people wounded were wounded by the POLICE

8 feet away and they couldn't keep their rounds on a guy whose weapon had jammed

THAT IS PATHETIC GUN CONTROL by the NYPD
 
TurtleDude said:
if you want to err on the side of safety-stop disarming honest people


btw NIGHTLINE JUST Reported that the 9 people wounded were wounded by the POLICE

8 feet away and they couldn't keep their rounds on a guy whose weapon had jammed

THAT IS PATHETIC GUN CONTROL by the NYPD
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about disarming people or taking people's guns away. I'm saying that gun control is a necessary evil considering the amount of unstable people that there are out there. I'm in no way an anti-gun person. Hell, I grew up in a household that had a lot of guns in it. I have nothing against guns. The thing that concerns me is that many pro-gun people have gotten so carried away with being pro-gun that they've moved the median to a world of extremism where it's all or nothing and if you disagree with that you are anti-gun. I think someone who openly advocates taking guns away from people and basically ****ting all over the 2nd amendment is anti-gun. There is a gray area there.

As for the cops wounding 9 people, they are trained and they still shot innocent people. That kind of **** does happen. What makes you think that an average citizen carrying a gun wouldn't potentially do more damage? Frankly, it surprises me that this guy got any shots off at all considering how many cops constantly swarm around those areas. Obviously, the NYPD needs to train their officers better for this kind of thing. However, it's not exactly surprising considering that this type of thing doesn't often happen. Manhattan Island is a lot safer than it used to be and is more of a tourist haven than anything else. You can thank gentrification for that.
 
1) having shot competitively at high levels (two world championships, several big pro IPSC shoots etc) I can tell you that people who get CCW permits generally are far better shots than cops.

2) its already illegal to shoot people as the suspect did. He most likely didn't have a carry license-so what other laws do you want.

3) i think he whacked his target then he pulled on the cops and was unable to shoot-they cut him down with 16 shots at a range of 8 feet hitting 9 other people along with the mope

good shots (my level up to IPSC Grand Master) can put 16 rounds in a pie plate at 8 feet in less than 4 seconds) two of us shooting 8 shots each under 2.5

those cops suck as shots
 
Paschendale said:
I'm curious. If preventing shooters from obtaining the weapons they need to kill won't stop them, what will? I hear a lot of "Rawr! Can't ban guns!" in these arguments, but very seldom any actual alternatives. The only idea I heard after the Batman shooting was all kinds of security in movie theatres. That suggestion was, of course, absurd, and it boggles my mind how the same people who lament the coming of a Big Brother future were in favor of constant scrutiny of people anytime they go outside their homes.

So, gun advocates, if disarming the violent won't stop them, what will?
Click to expand...
An armed population.

A gun control law isn't going to jump out of a book and paper-cut the criminal until he stops. A lawfully possessed firearm in the hands of a trained civilian, just you normal guy or gal, will stop the criminal.
 
Jerry said:
An armed population.

A gun control law isn't going to jump out of a book and paper-cut the criminal until he stops. A lawfully possessed firearm in the hands of a trained civilian, just you normal guy or gal, will stop the criminal.
Click to expand...

So the only solution is more death? No, a society where we have to expect to fight for our lives against our neighbors is not one we should aspire to. We're better than that.
 
TurtleDude said:
1) having shot competitively at high levels (two world championships, several big pro IPSC shoots etc) I can tell you that people who get CCW permits generally are far better shots than cops.

2) its already illegal to shoot people as the suspect did. He most likely didn't have a carry license-so what other laws do you want.

3) i think he whacked his target then he pulled on the cops and was unable to shoot-they cut him down with 16 shots at a range of 8 feet hitting 9 other people along with the mope

good shots (my level up to IPSC Grand Master) can put 16 rounds in a pie plate at 8 feet in less than 4 seconds) two of us shooting 8 shots each under 2.5

those cops suck as shots
Click to expand...

There's a world of difference between being a good marksman in a controlled environment and being able to hit a target during a high stress situation where tons of people are around. I also didn't understand this argument when people proposed it about the Colorado shootings. Again, training in a controlled environment is different than being able to hit one target in a dark theater where there is tear gas. As an armed citizen in the theater you would have 1 target. The gunman has several targets. He can hit anywhere he wants and his objective is met. You have to avoid hitting anyone else and just hitting him. Even in a situation where visibility isn't an issue, that would be challenging. Not to mention the stress factor.
 
Jerry said:
What? How dare they politicize anything on a political forum!!
Click to expand...

Well, it would have been nice if there would have even been an ounce of sympathy included in the politicizing. I realize we all have our own political agendas, but I don't think being a human ****ing being is out of the question.

Not that I have room to talk because I haven't mentioned the victims yet either.
 
Paschendale said:
So the only solution is more death? No, a society where we have to expect to fight for our lives against our neighbors is not one we should aspire to. We're better than that.
Click to expand...

well maybe everyone dropping to their knees and singing kum ba yah would have been better than a guy with a CCW whacking the killer rather than 2 cops wounded 9 people
 
Dr_Patrick said:
There's a world of difference between being a good marksman in a controlled environment and being able to hit a target during a high stress situation where tons of people are around. I also didn't understand this argument when people proposed it about the Colorado shootings. Again, training in a controlled environment is different than being able to hit one target in a dark theater where there is tear gas. As an armed citizen in the theater you would have 1 target. The gunman has several targets. He can hit anywhere he wants and his objective is met. You have to avoid hitting anyone else and just hitting him. Even in a situation where visibility isn't an issue, that would be challenging. Not to mention the stress factor.
Click to expand...

well having shot someone in a street mugging I think I understand stress. It wasn't any more than the stress of having been in the lead of the olympic trials until a piece of target came through the side of my glasses and messed up my eye. or shooting for 10K in prizes at the USPSA open nationals.
 
TurtleDude said:
well having shot someone in a street mugging I think I understand stress. It wasn't any more than the stress of having been in the lead of the olympic trials until a piece of target came through the side of my glasses and messed up my eye. or shooting for 10K in prizes at the USPSA open nationals.
Click to expand...

Well, that's you. I'm talking about the average gun toting citizen, though. Everyone handles stress differently.
 
Paschendale said:
So the only solution is more death?
Click to expand...
Crime drops in armed populations. Gun control increases crime.

Paschendale said:
No, a society where we have to expect to fight for our lives against our neighbors is not one we should aspire to. We're better than that.
Click to expand...

Arming the population is how you prevent having to fight for you life, because an armed population is a very strong deterrence.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Well, it would have been nice if there would have even been an ounce of sympathy included in the politicizing. I realize we all have our own political agendas, but I don't think being a human ****ing being is out of the question.

Not that I have room to talk because I haven't mentioned the victims yet either.
Click to expand...

That's what the RIP tag is for. OP didn't use the RIP tag, so we're free to skip the fluff and lip-service and jump right to the meat of the issue.
 
Jerry said:
That's what the RIP tag is for. OP didn't use the RIP tag, so we're free to skip the fluff and lip-service and jump right to the meat of the issue.
Click to expand...

I know what the RIP tag is for. However, one shouldn't have to use a RIP tag to show sympathy to the victims before jumping right into the politicizing.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
Well, that's you. I'm talking about the average gun toting citizen, though. Everyone handles stress differently.
Click to expand...
Turtle was originally speaking about the average gun-toting citizen in the first place before folks started trying to pick his statements apart.

The average gun-toting citizen handles combat-stress a lot better than a cop.

That's what Turtle's original statement was.
 
Dr_Patrick said:
I know what the RIP tag is for. However, one shouldn't have to use a RIP tag to show sympathy to the victims before jumping right into the politicizing.
Click to expand...
Go cry to a mod then, because we don't care.
 
Why is this a gun thread instead a crazy people thread. Thanks to guns it wasn't water? It's fortunate the psycho didn't blame/kill more people.
 
Last edited:
It's not difficult to kill an unsuspecting victim, means is irrelevant.

The cops kept it from potentially getting totally out of hand, and barely injured anyone; I say good work, next story.
 
Jerry said:
Go cry to a mod then, because we don't care.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about forum policy. I don't give a **** about forum policy. I'm talking about being a human being. Obviously, that's a foreign concept to you.
 
Jerry said:
Crime drops in armed populations. Gun control increases crime.
Click to expand...
Which is why the US has a far lower crime rate then Canada or why suburban areas in the US have lower crime rates then the unarmed innner cities
Arming the population is how you prevent having to fight for you life, because an armed population is a very strong deterrence.
Click to expand...
That seems to work in the inner city very effectively, and if I recall correctly the US west durining the late 1800s was crime and violence free
 
Overall

The fact that trained proffessionals shot 9 bystanders, I shudder to think what would happen if a large number of people with that level of training were carrying guns. Would a small gun fight turn out to be an entire block of people turning and shooting at each other as people join in without an undestanding of what initially happened
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Overall

The fact that trained proffessionals shot 9 bystanders, I shudder to think what would happen if a large number of people with that level of training were carrying guns. Would a small gun fight turn out to be an entire block of people turning and shooting at each other as people join in without an undestanding of what initially happened
Click to expand...

the average cop shoots less than 200 rounds a year

the average CCW holder shoots far far more. MOst CCW holders-at least in the classes I taught, were hard core gun enthusiasts who see shooting as their main recreational activity
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Overall

The fact that trained proffessionals shot 9 bystanders, I shudder to think what would happen if a large number of people with that level of training were carrying guns. Would a small gun fight turn out to be an entire block of people turning and shooting at each other as people join in without an undestanding of what initially happened
Click to expand...


I don't think you understand enough of the situation to make such a critique. It's not like they directly hit all 9 bystanders and when you have a maniac swinging a .45 on a busy Friday morning NYC sidewalk you don't have time to wait for everyone to clear zone the shooter.
 
9 of 10 victims were injured by respondents? This sure didn't turn out to support conservative theory quite the way some were trying to use it, did it? Maybe people shouldnt be so quick to jump the gun (so to speak) next time?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom