I knew a thread about this would be here, and about what it would look like...
Jook - Thanks for a responsible, well thought out opinion. Not common around here. I haven't looked at the link yet, but will, I already know what it says. I've looked it up at least a dozen times.
I've thought about it too, I see no reason people should sit there and do nothing. A group of 20 people can rush one shooter and if they are within 20 feet, he might be able to take down 2 or 3 before they stop him. They often are within 20 feet. Yes that's a great cost in lives, but when they do nothing he stands there and reloads and kills several more. I'm always amazed when nobody tries to do a thing when they have a shooter outnumbered by a huge margin. Rush the guy while he reloads.
Mike - Yes Obama does want to confiscate guns. "Sensible gun laws" is an obfuscation. He filled out a questionnaire a few years ago with the question - do you support gun confiscation? - His answer he checked was Yes, and signed it. Later he denied even filling it out. A photocopy is easy to find online. When he realized using the term "gun control" would be political suicide, he re phrased it to sound less intimidating.
Just recently Obama and Hillary both said we should look to Australia as an example of how to deal with gun violence. Do you actually know what they did? Passed a strict gun control law that made it mandatory to sell guns back to the government. Anyone who failed to do so they would confiscate their guns,. Over half a million were confiscated. Confiscation is definitely what Obama wants, that is the only reason he would cite Australia as an example. Since then their homicide rate has gone up 300%. In the first year armed robbery went up 44%. Australia didn't ban guns outright, but to own one a person is required to get a license, have it registered, store it in a locked cabinet, and store the ammunition in a separate locked location. That makes home defense almost impossible. In the time it takes to unlock both cabinets, remove the trigger lock ( I think that's also required but not positive) load and get ready, your family is dead.
Police response time averages 20 minutes nationwide. An armed burglar can kill you and your entire family in under 10 seconds. Even armed with a baseball bat he can injure or kill a half dozen people long before police can respond. I don't know about you, but I don't plan to sit around and wait for police to get here, it's more like 30 minutes out here in the boonies. Last time I had to call them, 35 minutes. Came in from Louisiana and found the house had been robbed while nobody was here. I'm glad the burglar was long gone...I would have been dead 30 minutes before the cops got here. Or maybe him, if I knew it was in progress...but I didn't know a thing about it. I went in the back door, because I parked close to it, found the front door was wide open 20 minutes later. I would have walked in unarmed and with no idea...I had no reason to suspect a thing.
It goes back to the same thing I've been saying for a long time. Take away guns and you give criminals exactly what they want, defenseless victims. Every one of the mass shootings in the past few years has had 2 things in common. Gun free zones, or locations where they knew nobody would be able to shoot back, and all but one or two had been very recently taking behavior modification drugs, such as Prozac.
When was the last time you heard of someone walking into a police station, NRA meeting or gun show and shooting people? It don't happen, it's a well known fact someone there will shoot back. Where are the strictest gun laws in the country? New York, Chicago, Detroit, LA, Baltimore, just to name a few. The same places also have the highest crime rates, right now the highest murder rates are Chicago and Baltimore. About 350 this year in Chicago, 300 in Baltimore. Most of these are blacks killing other blacks, usually gang members in Chicago.
WHY? If strict gun laws reduce crime, why do the places with the strictest laws also have the highest crime rates?
1. Criminals get guns on the black market, always have, always will.
2. Stricter gun laws provide them with defenseless victims, exactly what they want.
Read the link Jook posted, I just did. In the bottom section you'll see that only 1% of criminals their guns at gun shows. The claimed "gun show loophole" doesn't exist, all sellers at gun shows are required to be registered firearm dealers and perform on the spot background checks. Criminals get guns on the street, usually stolen ones from other criminals. Black market.
As far as this incident, we don't have enough info to make an informed decision, but the FBI is refusing to say it was not a terrorist attack. The husband went to Saudi Arabia recently, both were devout Muslims, they were wearing body armor, had military style weapons, and had multiple small explosives at their house, including some rigged for remote control. You don't leave a party and come back the same day and put together multiple bombs in the meantime. I just heard they were also shooting at police out the back window of the SUV while the police chase was in progress. That was from a recording of police radio as it happened.
They had a plan of some kind and they intended to leave, it was not a suicide attack. The explosives left at home indicate they had still another plan. Who knows what? This was not the primary target. But it was not exactly spur of the moment either.
We have enough to suspect terrorist activity, but not prove it. The body armor, go pro cameras and multiple weapons show it was definitely planned. I suspect an Islamic terrorist act, but have no proof so far. I know it was planned, that much is obvious.
I'm a member of the BOMB SQUAD.
If you see me running, better catch up!
http://billy-griffis-jr.artistwebsites.com/
