Recruiting forum off topic thread (merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's too easy to get an AR on the black market. If I could snap my fingers and make all the AR's in the world disappear for the greater good, yeah I'd do it. Unfortunately the reality of an assault rifle ban will just mean law abiding citizens can't get them whereas those willing to go into the black market can.

I get that argument for sure but the left would say it only takes one person that couldn't get that assault rifle in theirs hands to save a number of lives

I know that an attack would still happen but if it's done with a traditional gun the loss of lives is much lower.


Tough tough controversial area that I know very little answers for.

I know that I am getting my carry permit in the next few weeks. That is all I know at this point
 
We need to make it more profitable for mercenaries and allow the public domain to spy and hunt terrorists. The private sector would kick a$$ at finding the bad guys quickly and disposing of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I get that argument for sure but the left would say it only takes one person that couldn't get that assault rifle in theirs hands to save a number of lives

I know that an attack would still happen but if it's done with a traditional gun the loss of lives is much lower.


Tough tough controversial area that I know very little answers for.

I know that I am getting my carry permit in the next few weeks. That is all I know at this point

I just think we need to do a better job of shutting down the black market for guns. A tank is pretty dang lethal too but I guarantee you aren't getting one of those on the black market!
 
It's too easy to get an AR on the black market. If I could snap my fingers and make all the AR's in the world disappear for the greater good, yeah I'd do it. Unfortunately the reality of an assault rifle ban will just mean law abiding citizens can't get them whereas those willing to go into the black market can.

This is exactly where I was going next. We cannot even stop human beings from crossing our borders illegally, much less drugs that fuel the cash for the black market. How in the world are they going handle AR's so the bad guys don't have them?
 
I get that argument for sure but the left would say it only takes one person that couldn't get that assault rifle in theirs hands to save a number of lives

I know that an attack would still happen but if it's done with a traditional gun the loss of lives is much lower.


Tough tough controversial area that I know very little answers for.

I know that I am getting my carry permit in the next few weeks. That is all I know at this point

Glad you are joining in with the ccp.

Serious question. How many people died or were wounded in Paris from the suicide vest bombs versus the AR's? The bombs could have been placed in backpacks or whatever instead of worn as vests. If the Boston brothers had access to what the Paris group did the deaths would have been much worse.
 
Glad you are joining in with the ccp.

Serious question. How many people died or were wounded in Paris from the suicide vest bombs versus the AR's? The bombs could have been placed in backpacks or whatever instead of worn as vests. If the Boston brothers had access to what the Paris group did the deaths would have been much worse.

Suicide bombs could be much worse I agree

I am encouraged by seeing more Muslims condemning these acts in California. Changing the mindset of their extremist is the only cure for that
 
I still get that image in my head of the killer pointing that AR that jammed at that woman's head that was laying on the sidewalk by that restaurant in Paris. What if some citizens had handguns in their hand at that moment? How many more lives would have been saved or been uninjured by taking just one of those maniacs out? How about yesterday in Cali? What if there was security at this off premises sanctioned employee event, or, there was no prohibition against ccp on the premises? What if the couple knew that and chose to wait? What if the woman that saw all of the boxes and activity at their home had not listened to the left and the lies about profiling, and just called law enforcement to investigate? The lack of knowing what is most important to address is mind boggling.
 
I have a Ruger LCR 38 with my cc permit in my wallet.

This is what my wife has. Unfortunately we don't have CC permits yet. It's pretty expensive in Illinois and I have other things on my priority list. Also CC is banned at my work place, so my incentive to get it is a bit reduced.
 
Interested in responses here as it seems we have some serious gun owners here.

I will start by saying I probably own more guns than a large majority of people here and would bet I have killed more animals. I am a hard core right wing republican BUT

I would be willing to support gun control that completely eliminated all assault weapons(I know that is next to impossible). If there was 100% certainty that was the end of all new gun control legislation

I once owned 2 different assault weapons and while I enjoyed shooting them they didn't improve my life in any real way.

Guns aren't the problem here but the assault weapons are making the casualties much more significant

I am willing to give that right up to save some lives but that is where I draw the line.

Does that make me a liberal and need to turn in my man card??

Yes it does. Sad face.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Banning any certain types of guns isn't going to help. Long guns account for far fewer deaths than handguns anyways. Banning them just in case is dumb. Do you really think the Virginia tech shooter had any problems not using a long gun? Also, making something illegal for me doesn't stop a killer from breaking the law. Pipe bombs are illegal. Terrorists don't care.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Banning any certain types of guns isn't going to help. Long guns account for far fewer deaths than handguns anyways. Banning them just in case is dumb. Do you really think the Virginia tech shooter had any problems not using a long gun? Also, making something illegal for me doesn't stop a killer from breaking the law. Pipe bombs are illegal. Terrorists don't care.

Size of clip in a pistol doesn't matter either. You can have multiple clips and change them out in a couple of seconds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Banning any certain types of guns isn't going to help. Long guns account for far fewer deaths than handguns anyways. Banning them just in case is dumb. Do you really think the Virginia tech shooter had any problems not using a long gun? Also, making something illegal for me doesn't stop a killer from breaking the law. Pipe bombs are illegal. Terrorists don't care.

I understand that for sure but my guess is without the ARs use in this latest shooting instead if 14 dealth there would be have casulties in the single digits

I understand that my thinking expressed isn't consistent with conservative thinking so I get your response very much so
 
Glock 10mm and Glock 380 backup gun, but I serve warrants for a living so I need all I can get.

We were doing training with homeland security two years ago and the instructor suggested there would be an attack in east TN within the next five years. Weve already had Chattanooga and I think there will be more. Attacks are moving away from places like New York and Boston where all of the resources are being used to find them. They are going to move to more and more soft targets.

Forget the liberals saying take our guns. Get yourself a firearm and become familiar with it. Don't just take the ccc and think you know what you need to know. Anyone can go and pass the course and get your permit. You need to practice with your weapon and know how to use it and how to use it safely.

There are many things you need to know before you pull the trigger. If you don't know what you should do or how to do it correctly you can be just as big of a danger to the victims as the people your trying to stop.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I understand that for sure but my guess is without the ARs use in this latest shooting instead if 14 dealth there would be have casulties in the single digits

I understand that my thinking expressed isn't consistent with conservative thinking so I get your response very much so

I'm not sure why you would assume less casualties without ARs. There's very little difference in effectiveness in killing between ARs or any other semi auto firearm. The only significant advantage of an AR would be in a gun fight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
On Tuesday, President Obama stunned Americans and French alike with his false claims about gun violence in America. "I say this every time we’ve got one of these mass shootings. This just doesn’t happen in other countries,” claimed Obama. It is a claim that he has continually repeated over the years.

Talk about being self-absorbed.

The French have witnessed three mass public shootings this year. January saw two attacks, one on the Charlie Hebdo magazine and another on a Paris supermarket.

In the November attacks, 129 people were killed and 352 were injured. In just 2015, France suffered more casualties – killings and injuries – from mass public shootings than the U.S. has suffered during Obama’s entire presidency (508 to 424). This number includes the San Bernandino massacre on Wednesday.


In just 2015, France suffered more casualties – killings and injuries – from mass public shootings than the U.S. has suffered during Obama’s entire presidency (508 to 424). This number includes the San Bernandino massacre on Wednesday.

Obama also overlooks Norway, where Anders Behring Breivik used a gun to kill 67 people and wound 110 others. Still others were killed by bombs that Breivik detonated. Of the four worst K-12 school shootings, three have occurred in Europe. Germany had two of these — one in 2002 at Erfut and another in 2009 at Winnenden, with a total death toll of 34.

Obama isn’t correct even if he meant the frequency of fatalities or attacks. Many European countries actually have higher rates of death from public shootings that resulted in four or more murders. It’s simply a matter of adjusting for America’s much larger population.

Let’s look at mass public shootings from 2009 to the middle of June this year. To compare fairly with American shootings, I excluded attacks that might be better classified as struggles over sovereignty. For instance, I did not count the 22 people killed in the Macedonian town of Kumanovo last month.

Norway had the highest annual death rate, with 2 mass public shooting fatalities per million people. Macedonia had a rate of 0.38, Serbia 0.28, Slovakia 0.20, Finland 0.14, Belgium 0.14, and the Czech Republic 0.13. The US comes in No. 8 with 0.095 mass public shooting fatalities per million people. Austria and Switzerland are close behind.

In terms of the frequency of attacks, the United States ranks ninth, with 0.09 attacks per million people. Macedonia, Serbia, Switzerland, Norway, Slovakia, Finland, Belgium, and the Czech Republic all had higher rates.

There are two other studies on these questions that have gotten a fair amount of attention.

One, by State University of New York-Oswego public justice professor Jaclyn Schildkraut and Texas State University researcher H. Jaymi Elsass, who look at shootings across countries, has left out a large number of shootings in other countries.

Yet, despite the extensive news coverage their study has received, they miss a lot of cases. For example, in France, they miss three mass public shootings:

— Tours, France, October 29, 2001: four people were killed and 10 wounded when a French railway worker started killing people at a busy intersection in the city.

— Nanterre, France, March 27, 2002: a man kills eight city councilors after a city council meeting.

— Toulouse, France, March 19, 2012, Mohammed Merah killed four people (the killer also killed people in Montauban, France).

Other cases are missed in such countries as Austria, Belgium, Finland, Netherlands, Italy, Macedonia, Spain, Switzerland and Slovakia.

It takes a lot of time and effort to find all the cases, but if you get all the attacks in the U.S. and miss those in other countries, it makes the U.S. look a lot worse.

Another by Lankford reportedly goes back to 1966, but while he shares his study with reporters, he requires that they don’t share it with researchers in the area and, despite the wide publicity given his findings, he has repeatedly turned down requests by myself to see his research.

The president’s statement was also limited in another sense. He was referring only to shootings in his statement, but bombs are frequently used elsewhere in the world.

The Boston Marathon bombing was a rare exception these days in the United States. But countries such as Russia have frequently suffered bombings. Indeed, since 2009, the nation has seen 1.31 deaths per million from bombings that caused four or more fatalities.

Between 2007 and 2011, there was an average of 6,282 terrorist attacks per year outside of Iraq, Afghanistan and the U.S. On average, more than 27,000 people were killed, injured or kidnapped each year.

Obama keeps using these attacks to advocate requiring background checks on private transfers of guns. Such a requirement, however, already exists in France and almost all of Europe.

The background checks failed. So, too, did France and Belgium’s complete bans on the weapons used in those attacks. The terrorists who attacked those countries still got the weapons that they wanted.

Of the people stopped by background checks, nearly all are people who should have been allowed to buy guns. These delays may be mere inconveniences for most people, but they can endanger the lives of people who are being stalked and need immediate protection.

There is another common factor between mass public shootings. Virtually all of the attacks in America and Europe are taking place where general citizens can’t carry guns for protection. At some point, it has to become apparent to gun control advocates that gun-free zones only protect the killers.

Can Obama actually believe his claim that these attacks “just doesn’t happen in other countries”? More likely, Obama is willing to go to any extreme as he pushes for European-type gun control. The last thing he wants to admit is that countries with such strict gun-control laws can have so many deadly attacks.



John R. Lott, Jr. is a columnist for FoxNews.com. He is an economist and was formerly chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission. Lott is also a leading expert on guns and op-eds on that issue are done in conjunction with the Crime Prevention Research Center. He is the author of eight books including "More Guns, Less Crime." His latest book is "Dumbing Down the Courts: How Politics Keeps the Smartest Judges Off the Bench" Bascom Hill Publishing Group (September 17, 2013). Follow him on Twitter@johnrlottjr.
 
This is what my wife has. Unfortunately we don't have CC permits yet. It's pretty expensive in Illinois and I have other things on my priority list. Also CC is banned at my work place, so my incentive to get it is a bit reduced.

Our county sheriff''s department offers classes that meet CC requirements at no charge. I got mine in 2013 - signed up for class in January for the next open class - four months later! The Sheriff's Office website now says: "**Due to the high volume of applicants for this class, we will no longer be able to accept applications from individuals who have already taken a Florida Firearms Safety Course, those who already hold a Florida concealed weapons license, or those who have current or prior military service. If you are a current or prior military member, you are not required to take a safety course to obtain your concealed weapon license." --- because of the high volume of applicants.

My class was about 50-50 men to women. The class consists of both classroom and range portions and is taught by deputies.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure why you would assume less casualties without ARs. There's very little difference in effectiveness in killing between ARs or any other semi auto firearm. The only significant advantage of an AR would be in a gun fight.

The AR is just do much faster and easier to spray a room full of people than other semi auto guns. More shots in a shorter time=more casualties
 
Our county sheriff''s department offers classes that meet CC requirements at no charge. I got mine in 2013 - signed up for class in January for the next open class - four months later! The Sheriff's Office website now says: "**Due to the high volume of applicants for this class, we will no longer be able to accept applications from individuals who have already taken a Florida Firearms Safety Course, those who already hold a Florida concealed weapons license, or those who have current or prior military service. If you are a current or prior military member, you are not required to take a safety course to obtain your concealed weapon license." --- because of the high volume of applicants.

My class was about 50-50 men to women. The class consists of both classroom and range portions and is taught by deputies.

Similar in content to the one my daughter, a friend of hers, and I took at a local community college here in east TN. It was led by a decorated wildlife resources officer that's busted numerous meth labs and a captain on a police force. They charged, but it was very reasonable. The content was much more than some pretend deal and it was really extensive at the range. About 33% of the class were women.
 
Last edited:
I never understood the whole concealed carry thing . SO , anyway what is the whole I can carry a weapon and no-one else will know . Honest question here . It's a little hard to conceal mine . I know I lived in North Carolina for 12 years . If you owned it you could strap it on .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top