Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Back to forum list |
Back to Politics |
Jump to newest |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
Reply privately |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I think this is ingenious , The people who attack schools will think twice before going into a school knowing the teachers are armed and will fight back , " Find don't work the same as in the movies. Even if you you hit your intended target, the bullet does NOT always stop there. In fact, the path of bullets can be VERY difficult to predict. Even for a ballistics expert... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Just take the guns away. How hard can it be? Good to see the students being vocal about this issue. America needs a generational change and these children are the catalyst." Money NRA too powerful. What would happen if Trumps son was killed at school? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Why not have 2or3 ex army who are unemployed guarding schools i know its not ideal but better than arming teachers " That leaves an attacker with one or two targets to prioritize the attacker will be planning , The idea of trumps proposal is no student will know what teachers are armed or how many are armed | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"If trump thinks more armed people are the solution.How come when addressing an NRA conference recently everybody had to check their guns at the door.Surely these conferences are the safest places in America.? " Trump addressed the conference ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"If trump thinks more armed people are the solution.How come when addressing an NRA conference recently everybody had to check their guns at the door.Surely these conferences are the safest places in America.? Trump addressed the conference ?" They part funded his election campaign, there's plenty of footage of him addressing them and in one part he's happily posing with a rifle.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"If trump thinks more armed people are the solution.How come when addressing an NRA conference recently everybody had to check their guns at the door.Surely these conferences are the safest places in America.? Trump addressed the conference ?" Yes sorry i wasn't clear it was the NRA annual convention he addressed last year. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"If trump thinks more armed people are the solution.How come when addressing an NRA conference recently everybody had to check their guns at the door.Surely these conferences are the safest places in America.? " Nice one ?? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"It's what you get when a "businessman" is running the show. It's all about money. By arming the teacher's they are buying more guns - More guns sold NRA is happy - "a win win". Kid's are theoretically safer, big business has made a few more dollars. Cynical I know but couldn't resist it." Cynical maybe , also could well be True ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"It a better option than leaving a school "a soft target" in the case of school shootings its usually a student 15 or 16 years old It ant going to take much to make them think twice If they think that staff are armed they will think before going in to attack , The odds are teachers in these schools have guns at home already but dew to schools being gun free zone they can't carry , " You do know that there was an armed security guard in the school when the massacre took place dont you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"It a better option than leaving a school "a soft target" in the case of school shootings its usually a student 15 or 16 years old It ant going to take much to make them think twice If they think that staff are armed they will think before going in to attack , The odds are teachers in these schools have guns at home already but dew to schools being gun free zone they can't carry , You do know that there was an armed security guard in the school when the massacre took place dont you?" Who was as useful as a chocolate tea pot. Not even an active let alone passive deterrent. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Schools are underfunded they have no money for ink cartridges and stationary but all of a sudden there is money for guns for every teacher. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Just take the guns away. How hard can it be? Good to see the students being vocal about this issue. America needs a generational change and these children are the catalyst. Money NRA too powerful. What would happen if Trumps son was killed at school? " The littlest one? This is going to sound incredibly harsh, but my honest answer would be I don't think he'd notice. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Has anyone thought to ask the teachers if they want to be armed ." Yes, and all the interviews I've seen with them they all say they don't want to be armed. I don't recall a *single* time in which 'good guy with a gun' has managed to stop 'bad guy with a gun' so far in all these incidents. Go look at the #armmewith movement that has started. Fantastic. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Well if a trained policeman was too afraid to take on the assassin then why should a teacher? Coward of the county - get paid to do the job but when it comes to the crunch hides away!" Exactly, it was his job to stop this, and he couldn't, even if he had tried, he may not have succeeded. A teachers job, is to teach, not to gun down their students. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Has anyone thought to ask the teachers if they want to be armed . Yes, and all the interviews I've seen with them they all say they don't want to be armed. I don't recall a *single* time in which 'good guy with a gun' has managed to stop 'bad guy with a gun' so far in all these incidents. Go look at the #armmewith movement that has started. Fantastic. -Matt" Dont blame them. I wouldnt want the responsibility. Usa will never change, i have relatives there with young children and even after sandy hook they still insist it is their right to bear arms. An everyday occurence there and i cant see anything changing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? " They should carry RPGs instead. It'd be like the anime Kill la Kill | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Well if a trained policeman was too afraid to take on the assassin then why should a teacher? Coward of the county - get paid to do the job but when it comes to the crunch hides away!" Hope everyone calling him a coward feels happy when he has a breakdown or kills himself from the guilt!! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Well if a trained policeman was too afraid to take on the assassin then why should a teacher? Coward of the county - get paid to do the job but when it comes to the crunch hides away! Hope everyone calling him a coward feels happy when he has a breakdown or kills himself from the guilt!!" I agree , it's easy to criticise from the outside ! The same thing happened in Hungerford ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Well if a trained policeman was too afraid to take on the assassin then why should a teacher? Coward of the county - get paid to do the job but when it comes to the crunch hides away! Hope everyone calling him a coward feels happy when he has a breakdown or kills himself from the guilt!! I agree , it's easy to criticise from the outside ! The same thing happened in Hungerford ! " If someone signs up for a job which may require you having to take high risks or possibility of injury at some point then don't do the job. They take the pay - a soldier, policeman or a fireman all know the risks before they join up. In this case how many could have lived had he done his job? He might have been killed himself but then again he might not. He could have been a hero -a live one - his conscious - don't know how he can look in the mirror? He was trained for the job! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Apparently 4 armed deputies hid behind cars and didn't enter the school.So good guys with guns couldn't prevent 1 bad guy.More guns Don't help." Less Guns would help tho ! I know let's be Radical no Guns just Cricket Bats as Philip once said ! I doubt we would have 16 Dead kids then ! Guns DO Kill | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Apparently 4 armed deputies hid behind cars and didn't enter the school.So good guys with guns couldn't prevent 1 bad guy.More guns Don't help. Less Guns would help tho ! I know let's be Radical no Guns just Cricket Bats as Philip once said ! I doubt we would have 16 Dead kids then ! Guns DO Kill" Americans are apparently so safety conscious that kinder eggs are considered too dangerous for their children but armed teachers is an acceptable solution to school massacres. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Apparently 4 armed deputies hid behind cars and didn't enter the school.So good guys with guns couldn't prevent 1 bad guy.More guns Don't help. Less Guns would help tho ! I know let's be Radical no Guns just Cricket Bats as Philip once said ! I doubt we would have 16 Dead kids then ! Guns DO Kill Americans are apparently so safety conscious that kinder eggs are considered too dangerous for their children but armed teachers is an acceptable solution to school massacres. " ok arm the Miltary or better still Trumps Bodyguards with Kinda Eggs ! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Apparently four trained police officers were outside the school whilst the shooting was being carried out, but some teachers could have stopped it? " exactly as if Britney a drama teacher in her early thirties is going to pelt down a corridor waving her colt45 is going to save the day and take out a gunman it's a fucking joke the most stupid shit trumps come out with for me anyway | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? " Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns" Like Israel is a good example of anything | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns" Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" " you need to look further than google son | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son" Good come back. So it's because you said so | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son Good come back. So it's because you said so " not at all, was a BBC broadcast actually, and interviews from ex pats who had worked as teachers in Israel, they were also monitored very strictly . you should check Israel's firearm licensing, it may teach a few countries a thing or two, age restrictions for one you are aware most Isreali schools have one way in/out and that is where you will find the guards you read about and quoted above. anyway, try and dig a little deeper son. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son Good come back. So it's because you said so not at all, was a BBC broadcast actually, and interviews from ex pats who had worked as teachers in Israel, they were also monitored very strictly . you should check Israel's firearm licensing, it may teach a few countries a thing or two, age restrictions for one you are aware most Isreali schools have one way in/out and that is where you will find the guards you read about and quoted above. anyway, try and dig a little deeper son." Well from the first bit I found (cba to look deeper) on firearms licensing in Isreal says this: "In Israel, not every person is allowed to carry a firearm. To qualify for a license you have to meet the standards of the Ministry of Public Security. For example; a person who lives in a specific community that the Ministry has defined as a hazardous area to live in or travel to is allowed to apply; in addition, the person must not have a criminal record, and will need to pass a weapons training and qualification course. The license in Israel is for one specific weapon, and you can only buy a hand gun or a weapon for hunting." If that were the case in the US, then they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. -Matt | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son Good come back. So it's because you said so not at all, was a BBC broadcast actually, and interviews from ex pats who had worked as teachers in Israel, they were also monitored very strictly . you should check Israel's firearm licensing, it may teach a few countries a thing or two, age restrictions for one you are aware most Isreali schools have one way in/out and that is where you will find the guards you read about and quoted above. anyway, try and dig a little deeper son." ...there I was listening to my Israeli friends rather than you. There were under the impression that, in general, the only teachers who carry weapons as a matter of course were the ones living in settlements because all adults carry weapons all of the time because they live under constant perceived or actual threat. An ideal environment to encourage I think you'll agree. As ever, you do provide unbiased incites into so many things. Thank you | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns" Teachers in Israeli schools are not armed | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Teachers in Israeli schools are not armed" Some choose not to be armed, others choose to carry | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son Good come back. So it's because you said so not at all, was a BBC broadcast actually, and interviews from ex pats who had worked as teachers in Israel, they were also monitored very strictly . you should check Israel's firearm licensing, it may teach a few countries a thing or two, age restrictions for one you are aware most Isreali schools have one way in/out and that is where you will find the guards you read about and quoted above. anyway, try and dig a little deeper son. Well from the first bit I found (cba to look deeper) on firearms licensing in Isreal says this: "In Israel, not every person is allowed to carry a firearm. To qualify for a license you have to meet the standards of the Ministry of Public Security. For example; a person who lives in a specific community that the Ministry has defined as a hazardous area to live in or travel to is allowed to apply; in addition, the person must not have a criminal record, and will need to pass a weapons training and qualification course. The license in Israel is for one specific weapon, and you can only buy a hand gun or a weapon for hunting." If that were the case in the US, then they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. -Matt " also an age restriction which means you cannot apply until the age of 24, or if you have served in military its lowered to 21 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son Good come back. So it's because you said so not at all, was a BBC broadcast actually, and interviews from ex pats who had worked as teachers in Israel, they were also monitored very strictly . you should check Israel's firearm licensing, it may teach a few countries a thing or two, age restrictions for one you are aware most Isreali schools have one way in/out and that is where you will find the guards you read about and quoted above. anyway, try and dig a little deeper son. Well from the first bit I found (cba to look deeper) on firearms licensing in Isreal says this: "In Israel, not every person is allowed to carry a firearm. To qualify for a license you have to meet the standards of the Ministry of Public Security. For example; a person who lives in a specific community that the Ministry has defined as a hazardous area to live in or travel to is allowed to apply; in addition, the person must not have a criminal record, and will need to pass a weapons training and qualification course. The license in Israel is for one specific weapon, and you can only buy a hand gun or a weapon for hunting." If that were the case in the US, then they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. -Matt also an age restriction which means you cannot apply until the age of 24, or if you have served in military its lowered to 21" The SNP will probably follow suit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Trump suggests arming teachers , to prevent attacks on schools , what you think ??? Works okay for Israeli Teachers, they have no concerns Is that so? It's a matter of policy is it? Schools don't have armed civilian security guards pretty much all of whom will have served in the military under national service? Interesting "fact" you need to look further than google son Good come back. So it's because you said so not at all, was a BBC broadcast actually, and interviews from ex pats who had worked as teachers in Israel, they were also monitored very strictly . you should check Israel's firearm licensing, it may teach a few countries a thing or two, age restrictions for one you are aware most Isreali schools have one way in/out and that is where you will find the guards you read about and quoted above. anyway, try and dig a little deeper son. Well from the first bit I found (cba to look deeper) on firearms licensing in Isreal says this: "In Israel, not every person is allowed to carry a firearm. To qualify for a license you have to meet the standards of the Ministry of Public Security. For example; a person who lives in a specific community that the Ministry has defined as a hazardous area to live in or travel to is allowed to apply; in addition, the person must not have a criminal record, and will need to pass a weapons training and qualification course. The license in Israel is for one specific weapon, and you can only buy a hand gun or a weapon for hunting." If that were the case in the US, then they wouldn't be in this mess in the first place. -Matt also an age restriction which means you cannot apply until the age of 24, or if you have served in military its lowered to 21 The SNP will probably follow suit " how you figure that one? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation?" an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree?" Putting a lightly armed and highly agitated teacher with a handgun up against a madman with a rifle will just end up with the madman gaining access to a hand gun. The very fact that such a proposal is even being discussed shows just how dumbed down the 2nd Amendment argument has become. Putting more firearms into schools will not help one iota and will significantly increase the chances of teachers being shot dead by either the perpetrator or hot-headed Police first responders. You want to gain an advantage over someone - you outgun them; you don't let yourself be outgunned. That mantra has stood the test of time since man first roamed this planet. Arming teachers with handguns will make matters worse and arming them with Assault rifles and/or machine guns may level the playing field, but it will still result in many more innocents being killed through negligence and accidents. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree?" More chance of hitting a child or other innocent bystander maybe. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree? Putting a lightly armed and highly agitated teacher with a handgun up against a madman with a rifle will just end up with the madman gaining access to a hand gun. The very fact that such a proposal is even being discussed shows just how dumbed down the 2nd Amendment argument has become. Putting more firearms into schools will not help one iota and will significantly increase the chances of teachers being shot dead by either the perpetrator or hot-headed Police first responders. You want to gain an advantage over someone - you outgun them; you don't let yourself be outgunned. That mantra has stood the test of time since man first roamed this planet. Arming teachers with handguns will make matters worse and arming them with Assault rifles and/or machine guns may level the playing field, but it will still result in many more innocents being killed through negligence and accidents." You are aware that both semi and full auto rifles are prone to "jams" and even without a jam, one has to reload half a dozen armed teachers with hand gun of their choice against a madman high on what ever taking out kids, put my money on the half dozen teachers, whether a 911 or a glock | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree? Putting a lightly armed and highly agitated teacher with a handgun up against a madman with a rifle will just end up with the madman gaining access to a hand gun. The very fact that such a proposal is even being discussed shows just how dumbed down the 2nd Amendment argument has become. Putting more firearms into schools will not help one iota and will significantly increase the chances of teachers being shot dead by either the perpetrator or hot-headed Police first responders. You want to gain an advantage over someone - you outgun them; you don't let yourself be outgunned. That mantra has stood the test of time since man first roamed this planet. Arming teachers with handguns will make matters worse and arming them with Assault rifles and/or machine guns may level the playing field, but it will still result in many more innocents being killed through negligence and accidents. You are aware that both semi and full auto rifles are prone to "jams" and even without a jam, one has to reload half a dozen armed teachers with hand gun of their choice against a madman high on what ever taking out kids, put my money on the half dozen teachers, whether a 911 or a glock" So you are doubling down on even Trumps suggestion of a “couple” now it is six armed teachers per school or probably ten to account for days of sickness and being rota’d in different parts of the school etc. That would be roughly 2,000,000 new guns in US schools that were not there before. By the law of averages a person is accidentally killed or seriously injured each year per hundred thousand guns. That therefore is 20 people a year accidentally killed or injured whether or not the shooter is dissuaded or not from still attacking a school. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree? Putting a lightly armed and highly agitated teacher with a handgun up against a madman with a rifle will just end up with the madman gaining access to a hand gun. The very fact that such a proposal is even being discussed shows just how dumbed down the 2nd Amendment argument has become. Putting more firearms into schools will not help one iota and will significantly increase the chances of teachers being shot dead by either the perpetrator or hot-headed Police first responders. You want to gain an advantage over someone - you outgun them; you don't let yourself be outgunned. That mantra has stood the test of time since man first roamed this planet. Arming teachers with handguns will make matters worse and arming them with Assault rifles and/or machine guns may level the playing field, but it will still result in many more innocents being killed through negligence and accidents. You are aware that both semi and full auto rifles are prone to "jams" and even without a jam, one has to reload half a dozen armed teachers with hand gun of their choice against a madman high on what ever taking out kids, put my money on the half dozen teachers, whether a 911 or a glock" US police officers hit their targets approximately at a rate of 28% https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html?referer=http://www.google.com/ What rate do you think teacher's will manage and where do the other rounds end up? Do you watch as many snooty films as your hero Trump who would have gone in even if he wasn't armed? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree? Putting a lightly armed and highly agitated teacher with a handgun up against a madman with a rifle will just end up with the madman gaining access to a hand gun. The very fact that such a proposal is even being discussed shows just how dumbed down the 2nd Amendment argument has become. Putting more firearms into schools will not help one iota and will significantly increase the chances of teachers being shot dead by either the perpetrator or hot-headed Police first responders. You want to gain an advantage over someone - you outgun them; you don't let yourself be outgunned. That mantra has stood the test of time since man first roamed this planet. Arming teachers with handguns will make matters worse and arming them with Assault rifles and/or machine guns may level the playing field, but it will still result in many more innocents being killed through negligence and accidents. You are aware that both semi and full auto rifles are prone to "jams" and even without a jam, one has to reload half a dozen armed teachers with hand gun of their choice against a madman high on what ever taking out kids, put my money on the half dozen teachers, whether a 911 or a glock US police officers hit their targets approximately at a rate of 28% https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html?referer=http://www.google.com/ What rate do you think teacher's will manage and where do the other rounds end up? Do you watch as many snooty films as your hero Trump who would have gone in even if he wasn't armed? " I don't really believe that, I prefer to believe from my own experience with both practical pistol and practical shotgun where you are running a course shooting 6 inch steel plates, strange how one can hit a 6 inch steel plate on the move but unable to hit a human body | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree? Putting a lightly armed and highly agitated teacher with a handgun up against a madman with a rifle will just end up with the madman gaining access to a hand gun. The very fact that such a proposal is even being discussed shows just how dumbed down the 2nd Amendment argument has become. Putting more firearms into schools will not help one iota and will significantly increase the chances of teachers being shot dead by either the perpetrator or hot-headed Police first responders. You want to gain an advantage over someone - you outgun them; you don't let yourself be outgunned. That mantra has stood the test of time since man first roamed this planet. Arming teachers with handguns will make matters worse and arming them with Assault rifles and/or machine guns may level the playing field, but it will still result in many more innocents being killed through negligence and accidents. You are aware that both semi and full auto rifles are prone to "jams" and even without a jam, one has to reload half a dozen armed teachers with hand gun of their choice against a madman high on what ever taking out kids, put my money on the half dozen teachers, whether a 911 or a glock US police officers hit their targets approximately at a rate of 28% https://mobile.nytimes.com/2007/12/09/weekinreview/09baker.html?referer=http://www.google.com/ What rate do you think teacher's will manage and where do the other rounds end up? Do you watch as many snooty films as your hero Trump who would have gone in even if he wasn't armed? I don't really believe that, I prefer to believe from my own experience with both practical pistol and practical shotgun where you are running a course shooting 6 inch steel plates, strange how one can hit a 6 inch steel plate on the move but unable to hit a human body" Once again, completely unable to comprehend anything outside your own, limited, personal experience | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There was some interesting stats online the other day indicating why arming teachers wouldn't necessarily stop an active Shooter. NYPD cops (i.e. trained marksmen) tested for accuracy at the shooting range and again in simulated gunfight conditions. Unsurprisingly the accuracy rate dropped dramatically despite their training and experience. Now, If a trained and experienced professional can't hit a moving and firing target with a good degree of accuracy what chance does a teacher have in that situation? an armed teacher has more chance than an unarmed teacher would you not agree?" More chance of being shot, yes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"It is good, cos it is a gun crazed society, they need to protect themselves too." If guns protect, then you would expect more guns, to equal less death and crime, right? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Having a gun around does not appear to make people safer. This is from the Gifford Law Centre which does take an anti-gun stance, but they do quote the research. "Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder. Though guns may be successfully used in self-defense even when they are not fired, the evidence shows that their presence in the home makes a person more vulnerable, not less. Instead of keeping owners safer from harm, objective studies confirm that firearms in the home place owners and their families at greater risk. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%.2 Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology similarly found that “persons with guns in the home were at greater risk of dying from a homicide in the home than those without guns in the home.” This study determined that the presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3 Claims that guns are used defensively millions times every year have been widely discredited. Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.4 At least one study has found that carrying a firearm significantly increases a person’s risk of being shot in an assault; research published in the American Journal of Public Health reported that, even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.5 The gun lobby has often cited to a thoroughly debunked statistic that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times per year in the United States. That discredited estimate came from a 1995 study that suffered from several fatal methodological flaws, including its reliance on only 66 responses in a telephone survey of 5,000 people, multiplied out to purportedly represent over 200 million American adults.6 The authors of that discredited study themselves stated that in up to 64% of their reported defensive gun use cases, the guns were carried or used illegally, including cases where the victim was actually the aggressor.7 A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice found that defensive gun use occurs at a dramatically lower rate, about 98.5% lower than the gun lobby has claimed.8 The V.P.C. also found that for every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.9 This ratio does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives lost in gun suicides or accidental shootings every year."" your first paragraph says it all; Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder absolute bullshit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Having a gun around does not appear to make people safer. This is from the Gifford Law Centre which does take an anti-gun stance, but they do quote the research. "Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder. Though guns may be successfully used in self-defense even when they are not fired, the evidence shows that their presence in the home makes a person more vulnerable, not less. Instead of keeping owners safer from harm, objective studies confirm that firearms in the home place owners and their families at greater risk. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%.2 Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology similarly found that “persons with guns in the home were at greater risk of dying from a homicide in the home than those without guns in the home.” This study determined that the presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3 Claims that guns are used defensively millions times every year have been widely discredited. Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.4 At least one study has found that carrying a firearm significantly increases a person’s risk of being shot in an assault; research published in the American Journal of Public Health reported that, even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.5 The gun lobby has often cited to a thoroughly debunked statistic that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times per year in the United States. That discredited estimate came from a 1995 study that suffered from several fatal methodological flaws, including its reliance on only 66 responses in a telephone survey of 5,000 people, multiplied out to purportedly represent over 200 million American adults.6 The authors of that discredited study themselves stated that in up to 64% of their reported defensive gun use cases, the guns were carried or used illegally, including cases where the victim was actually the aggressor.7 A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice found that defensive gun use occurs at a dramatically lower rate, about 98.5% lower than the gun lobby has claimed.8 The V.P.C. also found that for every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.9 This ratio does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives lost in gun suicides or accidental shootings every year." your first paragraph says it all; Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder absolute bullshit" Why is it absolute bullshit? What experience do you have on any firearms death or injury let alone of thousands of them over a number of years? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Having a gun around does not appear to make people safer. This is from the Gifford Law Centre which does take an anti-gun stance, but they do quote the research. "Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder. Though guns may be successfully used in self-defense even when they are not fired, the evidence shows that their presence in the home makes a person more vulnerable, not less. Instead of keeping owners safer from harm, objective studies confirm that firearms in the home place owners and their families at greater risk. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%.2 Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology similarly found that “persons with guns in the home were at greater risk of dying from a homicide in the home than those without guns in the home.” This study determined that the presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3 Claims that guns are used defensively millions times every year have been widely discredited. Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.4 At least one study has found that carrying a firearm significantly increases a person’s risk of being shot in an assault; research published in the American Journal of Public Health reported that, even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.5 The gun lobby has often cited to a thoroughly debunked statistic that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times per year in the United States. That discredited estimate came from a 1995 study that suffered from several fatal methodological flaws, including its reliance on only 66 responses in a telephone survey of 5,000 people, multiplied out to purportedly represent over 200 million American adults.6 The authors of that discredited study themselves stated that in up to 64% of their reported defensive gun use cases, the guns were carried or used illegally, including cases where the victim was actually the aggressor.7 A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice found that defensive gun use occurs at a dramatically lower rate, about 98.5% lower than the gun lobby has claimed.8 The V.P.C. also found that for every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.9 This ratio does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives lost in gun suicides or accidental shootings every year." your first paragraph says it all; Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder absolute bullshit Why is it absolute bullshit? What experience do you have on any firearms death or injury let alone of thousands of them over a number of years?" I do not know anyone that I shoot with, whether in syndicates or shooting clubs who have had any threat such as you say in paragraph one, infact if that was the case it would be highly publicised through out the shooting community again bullshit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Having a gun around does not appear to make people safer. This is from the Gifford Law Centre which does take an anti-gun stance, but they do quote the research. "Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder. Though guns may be successfully used in self-defense even when they are not fired, the evidence shows that their presence in the home makes a person more vulnerable, not less. Instead of keeping owners safer from harm, objective studies confirm that firearms in the home place owners and their families at greater risk. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%.2 Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology similarly found that “persons with guns in the home were at greater risk of dying from a homicide in the home than those without guns in the home.” This study determined that the presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3 Claims that guns are used defensively millions times every year have been widely discredited. Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.4 At least one study has found that carrying a firearm significantly increases a person’s risk of being shot in an assault; research published in the American Journal of Public Health reported that, even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.5 The gun lobby has often cited to a thoroughly debunked statistic that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times per year in the United States. That discredited estimate came from a 1995 study that suffered from several fatal methodological flaws, including its reliance on only 66 responses in a telephone survey of 5,000 people, multiplied out to purportedly represent over 200 million American adults.6 The authors of that discredited study themselves stated that in up to 64% of their reported defensive gun use cases, the guns were carried or used illegally, including cases where the victim was actually the aggressor.7 A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice found that defensive gun use occurs at a dramatically lower rate, about 98.5% lower than the gun lobby has claimed.8 The V.P.C. also found that for every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.9 This ratio does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives lost in gun suicides or accidental shootings every year." your first paragraph says it all; Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder absolute bullshit Why is it absolute bullshit? What experience do you have on any firearms death or injury let alone of thousands of them over a number of years? I do not know anyone that I shoot with, whether in syndicates or shooting clubs who have had any threat such as you say in paragraph one, infact if that was the case it would be highly publicised through out the shooting community again bullshit" Simpleton. The gun control laws are very strict here. They are not at all strict in the USA. That is the country under discussion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Having a gun around does not appear to make people safer. This is from the Gifford Law Centre which does take an anti-gun stance, but they do quote the research. "Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder. Though guns may be successfully used in self-defense even when they are not fired, the evidence shows that their presence in the home makes a person more vulnerable, not less. Instead of keeping owners safer from harm, objective studies confirm that firearms in the home place owners and their families at greater risk. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%.2 Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology similarly found that “persons with guns in the home were at greater risk of dying from a homicide in the home than those without guns in the home.” This study determined that the presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3 Claims that guns are used defensively millions times every year have been widely discredited. Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.4 At least one study has found that carrying a firearm significantly increases a person’s risk of being shot in an assault; research published in the American Journal of Public Health reported that, even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.5 The gun lobby has often cited to a thoroughly debunked statistic that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times per year in the United States. That discredited estimate came from a 1995 study that suffered from several fatal methodological flaws, including its reliance on only 66 responses in a telephone survey of 5,000 people, multiplied out to purportedly represent over 200 million American adults.6 The authors of that discredited study themselves stated that in up to 64% of their reported defensive gun use cases, the guns were carried or used illegally, including cases where the victim was actually the aggressor.7 A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice found that defensive gun use occurs at a dramatically lower rate, about 98.5% lower than the gun lobby has claimed.8 The V.P.C. also found that for every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.9 This ratio does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives lost in gun suicides or accidental shootings every year." your first paragraph says it all; Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder absolute bullshit Why is it absolute bullshit? What experience do you have on any firearms death or injury let alone of thousands of them over a number of years? I do not know anyone that I shoot with, whether in syndicates or shooting clubs who have had any threat such as you say in paragraph one, infact if that was the case it would be highly publicised through out the shooting community again bullshit Simpleton. The gun control laws are very strict here. They are not at all strict in the USA. That is the country under discussion. " then you will be aware, different laws, different states, be precise so why is there no threat in UK under your first paragraph, again full of shit | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Having a gun around does not appear to make people safer. This is from the Gifford Law Centre which does take an anti-gun stance, but they do quote the research. "Statistics on the Dangers of Gun Use for Self-Defense Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder. Though guns may be successfully used in self-defense even when they are not fired, the evidence shows that their presence in the home makes a person more vulnerable, not less. Instead of keeping owners safer from harm, objective studies confirm that firearms in the home place owners and their families at greater risk. Research published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that living in a home where guns are kept increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by between 40 and 170%.2 Another study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology similarly found that “persons with guns in the home were at greater risk of dying from a homicide in the home than those without guns in the home.” This study determined that the presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3 Claims that guns are used defensively millions times every year have been widely discredited. Using a gun in self-defense is no more likely to reduce the chance of being injured during a crime than various other forms of protective action.4 At least one study has found that carrying a firearm significantly increases a person’s risk of being shot in an assault; research published in the American Journal of Public Health reported that, even after adjusting for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.5 The gun lobby has often cited to a thoroughly debunked statistic that guns are used defensively 2.5 million times per year in the United States. That discredited estimate came from a 1995 study that suffered from several fatal methodological flaws, including its reliance on only 66 responses in a telephone survey of 5,000 people, multiplied out to purportedly represent over 200 million American adults.6 The authors of that discredited study themselves stated that in up to 64% of their reported defensive gun use cases, the guns were carried or used illegally, including cases where the victim was actually the aggressor.7 A study published in 2013 by the Violence Policy Center, using five years of nationwide statistics (2007-2011) compiled by the federal Bureau of Justice found that defensive gun use occurs at a dramatically lower rate, about 98.5% lower than the gun lobby has claimed.8 The V.P.C. also found that for every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.9 This ratio does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives lost in gun suicides or accidental shootings every year." your first paragraph says it all; Guns kept in the home are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal unintentional shooting, criminal assault or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.1 That is, a gun is more likely to be used to kill or injure an innocent person in the home than a threatening intruder absolute bullshit Why is it absolute bullshit? What experience do you have on any firearms death or injury let alone of thousands of them over a number of years? I do not know anyone that I shoot with, whether in syndicates or shooting clubs who have had any threat such as you say in paragraph one, infact if that was the case it would be highly publicised through out the shooting community again bullshit Simpleton. The gun control laws are very strict here. They are not at all strict in the USA. That is the country under discussion. then you will be aware, different laws, different states, be precise so why is there no threat in UK under your first paragraph, again full of shit" This was national research and Trump wants to arm teachers everywhere in the country. I don't need to be specific. I also said nothing about threats in the UK. Everything is always about you isn't it? Simpleton. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"It is good, cos it is a gun crazed society, they need to protect themselves too. If guns protect, then you would expect more guns, to equal less death and crime, right? " That is right it would, but it dont work that way. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Early in the story... so details still to emerge, but this isn't looking good for the 'Arm all Teachers, It'll be Fine!' argument: "Georgia police take teacher into custody after shots fired at school" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school -Matt" yep, must be a mental health issue, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Early in the story... so details still to emerge, but this isn't looking good for the 'Arm all Teachers, It'll be Fine!' argument: "Georgia police take teacher into custody after shots fired at school" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school -Matt yep, must be a mental health issue, " So an armed teacher could suffer from a mental health issue and cause harm to people without wing threatened? What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy? Could the same thing happen to private individuals in the home if they had a weapon available? Just unbelievable buckshot maybe? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Early in the story... so details still to emerge, but this isn't looking good for the 'Arm all Teachers, It'll be Fine!' argument: "Georgia police take teacher into custody after shots fired at school" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school -Matt yep, must be a mental health issue, So an armed teacher could suffer from a mental health issue and cause harm to people without wing threatened? What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy? Could the same thing happen to private individuals in the home if they had a weapon available? Just unbelievable buckshot maybe? " . "What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy" . you mean like a female school teacher who's scum of the earth husband is cheating on her and having affairs time after time perhaps she would still be level headed and simply leave the scum bag, her whole World wouldn't fall apart simply because she made one bad move and married a cheating scum bag who enjoys sneaking around behind her back like a coward. . now? who does that remind me off | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Early in the story... so details still to emerge, but this isn't looking good for the 'Arm all Teachers, It'll be Fine!' argument: "Georgia police take teacher into custody after shots fired at school" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school -Matt yep, must be a mental health issue, So an armed teacher could suffer from a mental health issue and cause harm to people without wing threatened? What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy? Could the same thing happen to private individuals in the home if they had a weapon available? Just unbelievable buckshot maybe? . "What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy" . you mean like a female school teacher who's scum of the earth husband is cheating on her and having affairs time after time perhaps she would still be level headed and simply leave the scum bag, her whole World wouldn't fall apart simply because she made one bad move and married a cheating scum bag who enjoys sneaking around behind her back like a coward. . now? who does that remind me off " ...or perhaps she wouldn't? Perhaps she'd shoot him? Perhaps if her husband was a bully that never listened to her and lived his life selfishly she'd one day snap and shoot him? The point is that making a weapon designed to kill living things readily available to people with all if their mental frailties is not a sensible thing to do. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Early in the story... so details still to emerge, but this isn't looking good for the 'Arm all Teachers, It'll be Fine!' argument: "Georgia police take teacher into custody after shots fired at school" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school -Matt yep, must be a mental health issue, So an armed teacher could suffer from a mental health issue and cause harm to people without wing threatened? What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy? Could the same thing happen to private individuals in the home if they had a weapon available? Just unbelievable buckshot maybe? . "What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy" . you mean like a female school teacher who's scum of the earth husband is cheating on her and having affairs time after time perhaps she would still be level headed and simply leave the scum bag, her whole World wouldn't fall apart simply because she made one bad move and married a cheating scum bag who enjoys sneaking around behind her back like a coward. . now? who does that remind me off ...or perhaps she wouldn't? Perhaps she'd shoot him? Perhaps if her husband was a bully that never listened to her and lived his life selfishly she'd one day snap and shoot him? The point is that making a weapon designed to kill living things readily available to people with all if their mental frailties is not a sensible thing to do." best you hide all the knives in your home then, just worry about the food that has been cooked up | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Early in the story... so details still to emerge, but this isn't looking good for the 'Arm all Teachers, It'll be Fine!' argument: "Georgia police take teacher into custody after shots fired at school" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/feb/28/georgia-police-take-teacher-into-custody-after-shots-fired-at-school -Matt yep, must be a mental health issue, So an armed teacher could suffer from a mental health issue and cause harm to people without wing threatened? What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy? Could the same thing happen to private individuals in the home if they had a weapon available? Just unbelievable buckshot maybe? . "What about if their life was just getting out of control? Jealousy? Bankruptcy" . you mean like a female school teacher who's scum of the earth husband is cheating on her and having affairs time after time perhaps she would still be level headed and simply leave the scum bag, her whole World wouldn't fall apart simply because she made one bad move and married a cheating scum bag who enjoys sneaking around behind her back like a coward. . now? who does that remind me off ...or perhaps she wouldn't? Perhaps she'd shoot him? Perhaps if her husband was a bully that never listened to her and lived his life selfishly she'd one day snap and shoot him? The point is that making a weapon designed to kill living things readily available to people with all if their mental frailties is not a sensible thing to do. best you hide all the knives in your home then, just worry about the food that has been cooked up" Blah, blah. This on the other hand is actually pertinent. From the LA Times. No doubt this story Will develop and may turn out to be all wrong . Still, until that point in time... Armed teacher fires a gun in Georgia high school. [After teacher fires gun at school, Ga. students us...] http://va.newsrepublic.net/article/i6527813231371616778?user_id=6518159305170272266&language=en®ion=gb&app_id=1239&impr_id=6528164308818348297&gid=6527813231371616778&c=sys&language=en | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"On Friday, Donald Trump repeated his preferred responses to Parkland: new emphasis on background checks and arming teachers to create “offensive capability” in schools" Despite 2 NDs resulting in a student being shot in neck in a single day. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. " Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Anyone marching tomorrow (protesting)" is that a genuine question... or just a shot at being arsey and condescending to a bunch of kids who went thru the horror of being in the middle of a mass shooting incident and have decided to try and do something proactive can never tell with you........ | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I think it's time the yanks looked in the mirror and asked themselves why they like guns so much ! Ban them All ! It's not difficult ! Anyone apart from the police or military get an automatic life sentence for carrying one !" the "2nd amendment" belief is so strong that the "ban them all" idea flew the nest years ago..... and then the hunting element is so strong its not something that would be entertained... but there are stuff that can be done... and a lot of it is common sense, but as soon as you mention common sense gun control... the likes of the "they are coming for all your guns" scarmongering just goes into overdrive.... so for example.... here are what the kids propose... none of it is extremely radical... 1) Ban semi-automatic weapons that fire high-velocity rounds 2) Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons 3) Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks 4) Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement 5) Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes 6) Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform 7) Raise the firearm purchase age to 21 now none of that is radical..... and none of that says "we are going to take away all your guns!!!".... but that is the Narrative the NRA want people to believe..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can " So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I think it's time the yanks looked in the mirror and asked themselves why they like guns so much ! Ban them All ! It's not difficult ! Anyone apart from the police or military get an automatic life sentence for carrying one ! the "2nd amendment" belief is so strong that the "ban them all" idea flew the nest years ago..... and then the hunting element is so strong its not something that would be entertained... but there are stuff that can be done... and a lot of it is common sense, but as soon as you mention common sense gun control... the likes of the "they are coming for all your guns" scarmongering just goes into overdrive.... so for example.... here are what the kids propose... none of it is extremely radical... 1) Ban semi-automatic weapons that fire high-velocity rounds 2) Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons 3) Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks 4) Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement 5) Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes 6) Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform 7) Raise the firearm purchase age to 21 now none of that is radical..... and none of that says "we are going to take away all your guns!!!".... but that is the Narrative the NRA want people to believe..... " An interesting feature of American gun culture is the "tax stamp". Guns can be a very, very expensive hobby, buying the gun, buying optics, accessories (lights, lasers, grips, trigger jobs, etc.), and of course running the gun results in ammunition costs. Many gun enthusiasts are happy to pay these costs, however there is one thing that they are very reluctant to pay, and that is a tax stamp. In the US (in most states), it's perfectly fine and legal to purchase a suppressor (aka "silencer") for your gun, BUT you have to pay a $200 federal tax to have one, on top of the cost of the suppressor itself. This is also the case for short barrelled rifles and short barrelled shotguns, you can have them, but you've got to have the $200 tax stamp. This makes such guns and accessories relatively rare in the US. They are happy to pay a fortune for a gun, but not for a tax. I would therefore suggest that expanding taxation should be a potential lever the government could use to influence behaviour. I would say of _abio's list, perhaps number 1 would be the hardest to get, so if they can't get them banned, try adding a tax stamp. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" As for a total ban, 80% of US gun homicides are drug related so as this large group of people who keep shooting each other already have connections to those smuggling drugs into the country, smuggling guns in as well probably won't be that difficult. " As regards the 80% statistic, I would advise taking it with a pinch of salt. Drug related can mean an awful lot of things. The UK's total gun homicide rate in 2011 (quickest one I could find) was 0.06 per 100k people. If you say 80% of US shooting deaths would probably happen regardless then just do some quick calculations: Take the population of the USA at 325.7M Of the 15,549 murders or mabslaughters commuted with a firearm in the USA in 2017, by the 80% figure you have given then 12,439.2 of these deaths are "drug related" That gives you a "drug related" homicide rate of 3.82 per 100k people. Still think these shootings would still happen if the US had tighter gun regulations? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter?" These accidents don't happen every day , | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" As for a total ban, 80% of US gun homicides are drug related so as this large group of people who keep shooting each other already have connections to those smuggling drugs into the country, smuggling guns in as well probably won't be that difficult. As regards the 80% statistic, I would advise taking it with a pinch of salt. Drug related can mean an awful lot of things. The UK's total gun homicide rate in 2011 (quickest one I could find) was 0.06 per 100k people. If you say 80% of US shooting deaths would probably happen regardless then just do some quick calculations: Take the population of the USA at 325.7M Of the 15,549 murders or mabslaughters commuted with a firearm in the USA in 2017, by the 80% figure you have given then 12,439.2 of these deaths are "drug related" That gives you a "drug related" homicide rate of 3.82 per 100k people. Still think these shootings would still happen if the US had tighter gun regulations? " Depends what you think about similar statistics - supposedly the vast majority of these murders are committed with guns obtained illegally so a confiscation like the Australians had would be unlikely to get them out of circulation. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I didn't say all drug dealer's guns were smuggled into the US, just that if you remove all the guns, this group already has a network in place to smuggle more in for their own ends. The argument for using an AR 15 for home defence usually comes from smaller build women due to it's capacity, stopping power and light recoil. " Unfortunately the first argument is a challenge that faces any civilized country... as a law abiding citizen you just have to put your faith in the emergency services who are properly trained and sufficiently armed to protect the public! I would know where to pick up an illegal weapon in certain cities but i can't think of any circumstance where I would have to for the simple reason that I am not a criminal and I am not in fear for my safety. In the gun loving USA it's not a big deal to carry an unlicensed handgun. In most states you won't even get jail time when caught if you have a clean record! In countries with less guns, particularly Ireland or the U.K, if you get caught with an illegal handgun and don't get at least a year inside, you're either mother Theresa or you're snitching! In a lot of states, carrying an unlicensed handgun is seen as a similar scale offense as having €500-700 of drugs on you would be viewed in our justice systems... In european countries, for most people it's a big decision to be in possession of an illegal firearm and involves having the trust of people you should generally avoid in life so there is very rarely any legitimate grounds to hold a weapon for self defense in these countries unless you're up to no good! Given your average recreational drug user/ low level dealer/mugger is (conservatively) 50-60x more likely to shoot you in America than in Europe, I would think any criminal that isn't armed has a very short career expectancy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I didn't say all drug dealer's guns were smuggled into the US, just that if you remove all the guns, this group already has a network in place to smuggle more in for their own ends. The argument for using an AR 15 for home defence usually comes from smaller build women due to it's capacity, stopping power and light recoil. " You are aware AR 15's are legal here in the UK, arnt you? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Anyone marching tomorrow (protesting) is that a genuine question... or just a shot at being arsey and condescending to a bunch of kids who went thru the horror of being in the middle of a mass shooting incident and have decided to try and do something proactive can never tell with you........" Are you not aware there are marches here in the UK today, thought you would be at the front of the queue to protest considering how strong you feel, or are your panties too tight for marching today | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day ," No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? " I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge " Yup | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge Yup" Yup, more than once in my limited experience. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge " Yes, more than once.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Anyone marching tomorrow (protesting) is that a genuine question... or just a shot at being arsey and condescending to a bunch of kids who went thru the horror of being in the middle of a mass shooting incident and have decided to try and do something proactive can never tell with you........ Are you not aware there are marches here in the UK today, thought you would be at the front of the queue to protest considering how strong you feel, or are your panties too tight for marching today " and you answer is why i asked if it was a genuine question... or were you just being as condescending as you usually are to get a rise out of people..... i see it is the latter....... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge " Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users. Are you able to accept that your experiences, however important they are to you, are an extremely limited proportion of human experience? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users. Are you able to accept that your experiences, however important they are to you, are an extremely limited proportion of human experience?" I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? " Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . " No one has said that there is an excuse, they have just said that this happens. This is why guns shouldn't be introduced in schools and carried by teachers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"so three more people were shot? and you try to make that sound like a good thing? that's just wrong " No, that's not what I'm saying. The debate was about the pro's and cons of arming teachers. People were making points about the dangers of having guns in schools, but I didn't see a mention of the one example of where a gun in a school saved lives. Any death in a school is to be mourned, and ideally the Yanks should control their guns much better, but if we are having this debate lets at least admit that, on occasion, guns do save lives. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"so three more people were shot? and you try to make that sound like a good thing? that's just wrong No, that's not what I'm saying. The debate was about the pro's and cons of arming teachers. People were making points about the dangers of having guns in schools, but I didn't see a mention of the one example of where a gun in a school saved lives. Any death in a school is to be mourned, and ideally the Yanks should control their guns much better, but if we are having this debate lets at least admit that, on occasion, guns do save lives." bollocks ... the alleged incident you mentioned, and i say alleged, just means three more people were shot with firearms ... three people were not saved ... it's ludicrous bollocks to say otherwise .. if indeed this incident did actually occur | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"so three more people were shot? and you try to make that sound like a good thing? that's just wrong No, that's not what I'm saying. The debate was about the pro's and cons of arming teachers. People were making points about the dangers of having guns in schools, but I didn't see a mention of the one example of where a gun in a school saved lives. Any death in a school is to be mourned, and ideally the Yanks should control their guns much better, but if we are having this debate lets at least admit that, on occasion, guns do save lives. bollocks ... the alleged incident you mentioned, and i say alleged, just means three more people were shot with firearms ... three people were not saved ... it's ludicrous bollocks to say otherwise .. if indeed this incident did actually occur " It occurred. Yes, two other students were injured, and the shooter died, but there may have been many more injuries and deaths if the shooter had been able to carry on. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"so three more people were shot? and you try to make that sound like a good thing? that's just wrong No, that's not what I'm saying. The debate was about the pro's and cons of arming teachers. People were making points about the dangers of having guns in schools, but I didn't see a mention of the one example of where a gun in a school saved lives. Any death in a school is to be mourned, and ideally the Yanks should control their guns much better, but if we are having this debate lets at least admit that, on occasion, guns do save lives. bollocks ... the alleged incident you mentioned, and i say alleged, just means three more people were shot with firearms ... three people were not saved ... it's ludicrous bollocks to say otherwise .. if indeed this incident did actually occur It occurred. Yes, two other students were injured, and the shooter died, but there may have been many more injuries and deaths if the shooter had been able to carry on." Do you have a link? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"three less people would've been shot had there been no guns " Very true, but unfortunately we deal in the here and now, and the reality is that, in this case, lives were probably saved as a result of this adult being armed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Police said Rollins, the shooter, had a "prior relationship which recently ended" with Willey and that the shooting was not a random act of violence. The handgun used in the shooting was legally owned by Rollins' father, police said. https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/22/us/maryland-school-shooting-jaelynn-willey/index.html Rollins was killed in the attack. It remains unclear whether he committed suicide or was shot by a school resource officer who responded to the attack. http://abc7.com/maryland-school-shooting-victim-16-dies-after-life-support-removed/3250626/ . . . So 2 assumptions were made, firstly that this was an active shooter intent on killing multiple people, instead of one person wanting to kill one person. The other assumption was that the shooter was killed by an adult with a gun, when in fact he may have killed himself. " No-one will know now whether or not he would have carried on shooting others. Although we don't yet know if the bullet that ended his life was fired by him or the adult, the point is that he was confronted by an armed individual, and stopped. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Police said Rollins, the shooter, had a "prior relationship which recently ended" with Willey and that the shooting was not a random act of violence. The handgun used in the shooting was legally owned by Rollins' father, police said. https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/22/us/maryland-school-shooting-jaelynn-willey/index.html Rollins was killed in the attack. It remains unclear whether he committed suicide or was shot by a school resource officer who responded to the attack. http://abc7.com/maryland-school-shooting-victim-16-dies-after-life-support-removed/3250626/ . . . So 2 assumptions were made, firstly that this was an active shooter intent on killing multiple people, instead of one person wanting to kill one person. The other assumption was that the shooter was killed by an adult with a gun, when in fact he may have killed himself. No-one will know now whether or not he would have carried on shooting others. Although we don't yet know if the bullet that ended his life was fired by him or the adult, the point is that he was confronted by an armed individual, and stopped. " In the article you quoted he had his own fun pointed at his head. That suggests murder/suicide, not spree killer. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users. Are you able to accept that your experiences, however important they are to you, are an extremely limited proportion of human experience? I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this." no one is saying there are 'excuses' for an ND, there are reasons yes and the main reason is human error.. training which the military are pretty well versed in both dry and live is like no other aspect, the emphasis and the getting the drill's and IA's right is paramount and yet incidents still and will occur at many levels.. Had a lad in my basic intake turn outside a 30 to 40 degree arc with a live round chambered in his SLR and he had taken the safety off.. our troop Sgt was ex 9 Para and clued up, spotted it called 'still' very loudly and stepped in put the safety on and asked our Troopie (2nd Lieutenant) to give him a minute.. when he had offed it out of sight and we had been told to face the range and not turn, we heard what sounded like the lad gasping for breath and some words of advice were given.. so whilst technically it wasn't an ND it highlighted to us the possible consequences of safety.. was running part of a range on annual testing as part of pre NI deployment where the discipline was an advance to contact using the SMG 9mm, twice on the first day we had ND's when with rounds chambered, safety on the 2 blokes as they advanced to cover to engage had knocked the safeties off.. One later admitted he had done so as the target came up to save time in engaging, the other was accidental as he went to cover.. one fired one round as he went to ground and the other had knocked it onto auto and fired a short burst.. both incidents were dealt with internally within the Sqn.. i would say that all environments are different when using live but as i said even an experienced handler can and does make mistakes.. as for your mate and the having to account for spent cases etc then yes that's often the way but have had many times where we had plenty which was surplus to play with .. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this " A friend of mine (police officer) recently had his daily carry discharge on him by engaging the safety after chambering a round before starting a shift... granted this is a rare occurrence but like any other piece of engineering, guns can become faulty and malfunction. The few I personally witnessed were just down to idiots being idiots. Even perfect drivers sometimes have minor accidents, with firearms you need to be educated on proper safety, always take precautions and be responsible! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this A friend of mine (police officer) recently had his daily carry discharge on him by engaging the safety after chambering a round before starting a shift... granted this is a rare occurrence but like any other piece of engineering, guns can become faulty and malfunction. The few I personally witnessed were just down to idiots being idiots. Even perfect drivers sometimes have minor accidents, with firearms you need to be educated on proper safety, always take precautions and be responsible!" I'm not sure it is standard procedure to carry a weapon "made ready" (with a round in the chamber), certainly wasn't when I carried a weapon unless you were actually engaged in combat. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this A friend of mine (police officer) recently had his daily carry discharge on him by engaging the safety after chambering a round before starting a shift... granted this is a rare occurrence but like any other piece of engineering, guns can become faulty and malfunction. The few I personally witnessed were just down to idiots being idiots. Even perfect drivers sometimes have minor accidents, with firearms you need to be educated on proper safety, always take precautions and be responsible! I'm not sure it is standard procedure to carry a weapon "made ready" (with a round in the chamber), certainly wasn't when I carried a weapon unless you were actually engaged in combat. " That's how many Americans, if not most, chose to concealed carry. Not a smart idea in my book. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this A friend of mine (police officer) recently had his daily carry discharge on him by engaging the safety after chambering a round before starting a shift... granted this is a rare occurrence but like any other piece of engineering, guns can become faulty and malfunction. The few I personally witnessed were just down to idiots being idiots. Even perfect drivers sometimes have minor accidents, with firearms you need to be educated on proper safety, always take precautions and be responsible! I'm not sure it is standard procedure to carry a weapon "made ready" (with a round in the chamber), certainly wasn't when I carried a weapon unless you were actually engaged in combat. That's how many Americans, if not most, chose to concealed carry. Not a smart idea in my book." Probably the reason for a lot of negligent discharges, some folk need protecting from themselves. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this A friend of mine (police officer) recently had his daily carry discharge on him by engaging the safety after chambering a round before starting a shift... granted this is a rare occurrence but like any other piece of engineering, guns can become faulty and malfunction. The few I personally witnessed were just down to idiots being idiots. Even perfect drivers sometimes have minor accidents, with firearms you need to be educated on proper safety, always take precautions and be responsible! I'm not sure it is standard procedure to carry a weapon "made ready" (with a round in the chamber), certainly wasn't when I carried a weapon unless you were actually engaged in combat. That's how many Americans, if not most, chose to concealed carry. Not a smart idea in my book. Probably the reason for a lot of negligent discharges, some folk need protecting from themselves. " Yeah, it's just asking for trouble in my book. It's a hell of a lot harder to have a ND without a round in the chamber. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this A friend of mine (police officer) recently had his daily carry discharge on him by engaging the safety after chambering a round before starting a shift... granted this is a rare occurrence but like any other piece of engineering, guns can become faulty and malfunction. The few I personally witnessed were just down to idiots being idiots. Even perfect drivers sometimes have minor accidents, with firearms you need to be educated on proper safety, always take precautions and be responsible! I'm not sure it is standard procedure to carry a weapon "made ready" (with a round in the chamber), certainly wasn't when I carried a weapon unless you were actually engaged in combat. That's how many Americans, if not most, chose to concealed carry. Not a smart idea in my book. Probably the reason for a lot of negligent discharges, some folk need protecting from themselves. Yeah, it's just asking for trouble in my book. It's a hell of a lot harder to have a ND without a round in the chamber. " Yeah, practically impossible, although some doofus would probably manage it just to prove me wrong lol! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"three less people would've been shot had there been no guns Very true, but unfortunately we deal in the here and now, and the reality is that, in this case, lives were probably saved as a result of this adult being armed." wrong ... it's an irrefutable fact that nobody would've been shot if there were no fire arms involved ... to imply otherwise is absolute idiotic nonsense | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this " The point is that you are, once again, extrapolating your terms of reference to others. You may well be highly skilled and conscientious when handling a weapon or delivering or any manner of other tasks. Many, many people are not. The course of action that You are advocating is that a large number of people with a little training and the occasional refresher course should have access to a weapon which many Will use irregularly. Does this seem like a good idea? You simply do not believe any of the research about increased risk of injury or death to people who keep weapons in their homes or the shooting accuracy of police officers in the USA or the reduction in shooting incidents when the NRA has their convention. You only believe your own experience, but you are not representative of almost anybody else. A population is made up of lots of people not representative of everyone else but their behaviour as a group is. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day ," Accidents do happen more frequently than every day. As do suicides. 60% of gun deaths in the USA are suicides. 505 deaths (1.5%) were accidental in 2013. We won't have the figures to debate so on because the Trump administration has barred the Centre for Disease Control from gathering or analysing the statistics. You cannot debate what you have no information for, right? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this The point is that you are, once again, extrapolating your terms of reference to others. You may well be highly skilled and conscientious when handling a weapon or delivering or any manner of other tasks. Many, many people are not. The course of action that You are advocating is that a large number of people with a little training and the occasional refresher course should have access to a weapon which many Will use irregularly. Does this seem like a good idea? You simply do not believe any of the research about increased risk of injury or death to people who keep weapons in their homes or the shooting accuracy of police officers in the USA or the reduction in shooting incidents when the NRA has their convention. You only believe your own experience, but you are not representative of almost anybody else. A population is made up of lots of people not representative of everyone else but their behaviour as a group is." still awaiting your explanation on this; and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND the simple thing that some on here need is a plastic flag, part goes into the chamber with the triangle flag sticking out to show its impossible for any round to be in the chamber not that there should be anyway. or indeed if bolt action the bolt should be removed prior to exiting the firing point and ofcourse when moving with live round chambered "Safety" "Safety" "Safety" again there is no excuse for accidental discharge. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Cask, you responding to the past experiences of others by talking about plastic safety devices is a bit bizarre.. No one has said that they personally have had nd's recently so mentioning plastic flags? Such things would not be applicable or sensible for military or police weapons in the situations they are required.. If they even were appropriate to the weapon.. Are you also suggesting that such things could be fitted to openly carried or concealed firearms in relation to teachers in the USA? Not familiar with them to be honest so explain if you will if that is your suggested extra safety aspect for teachers etc.. " I know what he is talking about, and they can be useful for on ranges, or when a gun is being stored, but as you say, not for open or concealed carry. As lots of Americans carry with one in the chamber, it wouldn't work anyway. He is just ignorant of the fact that NDs DO happen. It doesn't matter if it's police, military, civilians, it happens. In fact I gave him evidence above of 2 NDs happening on the same day, both in schools, involving one kid getting shot in the neck and he is still trying to deny it! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this The point is that you are, once again, extrapolating your terms of reference to others. You may well be highly skilled and conscientious when handling a weapon or delivering or any manner of other tasks. Many, many people are not. The course of action that You are advocating is that a large number of people with a little training and the occasional refresher course should have access to a weapon which many Will use irregularly. Does this seem like a good idea? You simply do not believe any of the research about increased risk of injury or death to people who keep weapons in their homes or the shooting accuracy of police officers in the USA or the reduction in shooting incidents when the NRA has their convention. You only believe your own experience, but you are not representative of almost anybody else. A population is made up of lots of people not representative of everyone else but their behaviour as a group is. still awaiting your explanation on this; and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND the simple thing that some on here need is a plastic flag, part goes into the chamber with the triangle flag sticking out to show its impossible for any round to be in the chamber not that there should be anyway. or indeed if bolt action the bolt should be removed prior to exiting the firing point and ofcourse when moving with live round chambered "Safety" "Safety" "Safety" again there is no excuse for accidental discharge." I don't know what the reprimand was. I'm sure that it was severe. That isn't the point is it? The point is that it happened. The point is that casual users are more likely to have accidents because they do not drill. Can you not get your head around the fact that other people are not you? I've given you the statistics on accidental deaths, suicides and the accuracy of police hand gun accuracy. You choose not to believe based on your experience of yourself and a handful of other people. You choose not to believe data on all manner of things because they do not align with your opinions, so there is nothing to discuss really because you "know" that you are right regardless of any information to the contrary. In fact, the more contrary data provided the more entrenched you become. Futile really | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"My most recent witnessed ND was an IPSC INSTRUCTOR, and the end of his shoot, he "unloaded", "showed clear", dropped the slide, dropped the hammer, and it went BANG. Luckily the gun was pointed in a safe direction, and no one got hurt, but it shows how even when safety procedures are followed, and a 2nd person checks a gun, accidents can and do happen. I know you refuse to look at links, so I won't post one, but type "negligent discharge" into YouTube and you will find hours of footage. Maybe you will believe it if you see it with your own eyes? Again, there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for an accidental discharge, for a discharge there has to be a round in the chamber - agree you can youtube all you like but fact is, if anyone gets an accidental discharge it can mean "Death" and there is simply no excuse. . so again I will repost this; I cannot believe 4 people on this forum have witnessed accidental discharge of firearm, that is truly shocking, actually disgraceful, I would really like to here more on each of these circumstances as there is simply no excuse for the accidental discharge of a firearm. I truly believe if this happens, the person in question should have their firearm certificate revoked. . It can be more understandable within military as many individuals have limited range experience (believe it or not) and I know this for fact as my mate is an army RO, the amount of training they get is limited and every spent case must be accounted for. Fact is, experienced stalkers & keepers have much more firearm experience than military, military do not use firearms every day unless in conflict and even then its not 24/7 all year. . and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND? . A firearm simply does not go off on its own, a service member who has a negligent discharge can face punishment for their action and indeed the should. . If a soldier accidentally fires a firearm, he could be charged with negligence. Experts say that most of these incidents involve soldiers who are inexperienced in handling weapons. It can either happen because the safety lock on the firearm was not in position; the magazine has not been unloaded or if the soldier was playing around with the weapon or showing off. A mishandled weapon can lead to deadly consequences. Several soldiers have lost their lives and many more have been injured through negligent discharge of a firearm. . so if the four people on this forum who have witnessed or indeed have experienced accidental discharge of a firearm, would they care to expand more on this, as there is simply no excuse for this The point is that you are, once again, extrapolating your terms of reference to others. You may well be highly skilled and conscientious when handling a weapon or delivering or any manner of other tasks. Many, many people are not. The course of action that You are advocating is that a large number of people with a little training and the occasional refresher course should have access to a weapon which many Will use irregularly. Does this seem like a good idea? You simply do not believe any of the research about increased risk of injury or death to people who keep weapons in their homes or the shooting accuracy of police officers in the USA or the reduction in shooting incidents when the NRA has their convention. You only believe your own experience, but you are not representative of almost anybody else. A population is made up of lots of people not representative of everyone else but their behaviour as a group is. still awaiting your explanation on this; and as for this comment here; "Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users" WHAT WAS THE REPROMAND the simple thing that some on here need is a plastic flag, part goes into the chamber with the triangle flag sticking out to show its impossible for any round to be in the chamber not that there should be anyway. or indeed if bolt action the bolt should be removed prior to exiting the firing point and ofcourse when moving with live round chambered "Safety" "Safety" "Safety" again there is no excuse for accidental discharge." I don't know what the reprimand was. I'm sure that it was severe. That isn't the point is it? The point is that it happened. The point is that casual users are more likely to have accidents because they do not drill. Can you not get your head around the fact that other people are not you? I've given you the statistics on accidental deaths, suicides and the accuracy of police hand gun accuracy. You choose not to believe based on your experience of yourself and a handful of other people. You choose not to believe data on all manner of things because they do not align with your opinions, so there is nothing to discuss really because you "know" that you are right regardless of any information to the contrary. In fact, the more contrary data provided the more entrenched you become. Futile really | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"three less people would've been shot had there been no guns Very true, but unfortunately we deal in the here and now, and the reality is that, in this case, lives were probably saved as a result of this adult being armed. wrong ... it's an irrefutable fact that nobody would've been shot if there were no fire arms involved ... to imply otherwise is absolute idiotic nonsense " Oh my god! By that logic, if the moon really was made of cheese then Aardman may have actually made a documentary about a day trip to it! In cloud cuckoo land, where the lamb can lie down with the lion, and everyone loves and respects everyone, and guns were never invented, then yes, no-one would get shot, but try living in the reality... guns exist, this kid took one to school and started shooting, and was then stopped. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" You simply do not believe any of the research about increased risk of injury or death to people who keep weapons in their homes or the shooting accuracy of police officers in the USA or the reduction in shooting incidents when the NRA has their convention. You only believe your own experience, but you are not representative of almost anybody else. A population is made up of lots of people not representative of everyone else but their behaviour as a group is." interesting that you mention research, because up until friday a republican/NRA inspired bill long ago had stopped the CDC for being able to do any research into guns and their influence in violence... that finally went as part of the budget bill..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I notice many here are talking about negligent discharges. I spent years in the armed forces and in all my time I only witnessed 1 negligent discharge and that was very early in basic training on a 25mtr range when a loaded browning 9mm was given to a left handed trainee who did not understand (or was told) that he needed to use 2 hands to control the weapon and it twisted out of his grip. The Range Officer and his Weapons Training Sgt were both charged with negligence and were out. Negligent discharges are either an excuse to cover up more sinister actions or the result of poor, inadequate or insufficient firearms training. " Thanks for this, maybe a story of someone being reprimanded for an ND will cheer him up! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I notice many here are talking about negligent discharges. I spent years in the armed forces and in all my time I only witnessed 1 negligent discharge and that was very early in basic training on a 25mtr range when a loaded browning 9mm was given to a left handed trainee who did not understand (or was told) that he needed to use 2 hands to control the weapon and it twisted out of his grip. The Range Officer and his Weapons Training Sgt were both charged with negligence and were out. Negligent discharges are either an excuse to cover up more sinister actions or the result of poor, inadequate or insufficient firearms training. " excuse the language; but im fucking glad someone recognises this | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Teacher accidentally fires gun, injures student https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2018/03/15/teacher-fires-gun-injures-student-marquez-newday-pkg.cnn 1 day, 2 negligent discharges in schools by trained police officers. This highlights how stupid it would be to arm teachers. Accidental discharge will never turn into a massacre , I know that's not much good to the poor student that got it in the neck , But teachers carrying guns would be a deterrent to a homicidal lunatic , intent on causing as much destruction as he can So how many NDs are you willing to accept to prevent an active shooter? These accidents don't happen every day , No one said they did, but more armed teachers will lead to more accidents. How many accidental deaths are you willing to accept to stop an intentional killing? I have never seen an accidental discharge of a weapon in 30 years of shooting, which includes attending various shooting clubs, stalking & clay shoots has anyone here with firearm experience witnessed an accidental discharge Yes. Twice. Both in highly controlled military settings with trained individuals used to regularly handling weapons, not amateurs or casual users. Are you able to accept that your experiences, however important they are to you, are an extremely limited proportion of human experience?" care to share both your experiences, or are they secret? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Cask, you responding to the past experiences of others by talking about plastic safety devices is a bit bizarre.. No one has said that they personally have had nd's recently so mentioning plastic flags? Such things would not be applicable or sensible for military or police weapons in the situations they are required.. If they even were appropriate to the weapon.. Are you also suggesting that such things could be fitted to openly carried or concealed firearms in relation to teachers in the USA? Not familiar with them to be honest so explain if you will if that is your suggested extra safety aspect for teachers etc.. I know what he is talking about, and they can be useful for on ranges, or when a gun is being stored, but as you say, not for open or concealed carry. As lots of Americans carry with one in the chamber, it wouldn't work anyway. He is just ignorant of the fact that NDs DO happen. It doesn't matter if it's police, military, civilians, it happens. In fact I gave him evidence above of 2 NDs happening on the same day, both in schools, involving one kid getting shot in the neck and he is still trying to deny it! " I am in no way denying that here are accidental discharges, but what I am saying is that if such a discharge ever happened then the person who had the accidental discharge should have his firearms certificate withdrawn until fully retrained and tested. . If this happened to police or military, the person should be fully reprimanded and demoted. As for handguns the understanding of the safety is essential tell me how an accidental discharge of a hand gun would happen when the majority of handguns require a double pull to fire, first pull to cock, 2nd to fire Normally with a revolver you use your thumb to cock the hammer back so that you can accurately fire using one pull, but of course you can do this using trigger alone, but in no way would that be an accidental discharge. . Similar method with the semi auto 1911, and no way are you going to tell me that people walk around with a 1911, a round in chamber and semi cocked, even with a trigger job, which ive had on my gold cup, you still require around 4lb of pull. . Again anyone who has an accidental discharge should have firearms removed | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Cask, you responding to the past experiences of others by talking about plastic safety devices is a bit bizarre.. No one has said that they personally have had nd's recently so mentioning plastic flags? Such things would not be applicable or sensible for military or police weapons in the situations they are required.. If they even were appropriate to the weapon.. Are you also suggesting that such things could be fitted to openly carried or concealed firearms in relation to teachers in the USA? Not familiar with them to be honest so explain if you will if that is your suggested extra safety aspect for teachers etc.. I know what he is talking about, and they can be useful for on ranges, or when a gun is being stored, but as you say, not for open or concealed carry. As lots of Americans carry with one in the chamber, it wouldn't work anyway. He is just ignorant of the fact that NDs DO happen. It doesn't matter if it's police, military, civilians, it happens. In fact I gave him evidence above of 2 NDs happening on the same day, both in schools, involving one kid getting shot in the neck and he is still trying to deny it! I am in no way denying that here are accidental discharges, but what I am saying is that if such a discharge ever happened then the person who had the accidental discharge should have his firearms certificate withdrawn until fully retrained and tested. . If this happened to police or military, the person should be fully reprimanded and demoted. As for handguns the understanding of the safety is essential tell me how an accidental discharge of a hand gun would happen when the majority of handguns require a double pull to fire, first pull to cock, 2nd to fire Normally with a revolver you use your thumb to cock the hammer back so that you can accurately fire using one pull, but of course you can do this using trigger alone, but in no way would that be an accidental discharge. . Similar method with the semi auto 1911, and no way are you going to tell me that people walk around with a 1911, a round in chamber and semi cocked, even with a trigger job, which ive had on my gold cup, you still require around 4lb of pull. . Again anyone who has an accidental discharge should have firearms removed " https://youtu.be/VFXp1R1lxe8 Here is a YouTube video of a firearms academy telling people to carry their 1911 with a round in the chamber, and the hammer cocked back. Watch it, and look at the other videos suggested by YouTube on the same topic, this is a very very common way to carry in the US. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Cask, you responding to the past experiences of others by talking about plastic safety devices is a bit bizarre.. No one has said that they personally have had nd's recently so mentioning plastic flags? Such things would not be applicable or sensible for military or police weapons in the situations they are required.. If they even were appropriate to the weapon.. Are you also suggesting that such things could be fitted to openly carried or concealed firearms in relation to teachers in the USA? Not familiar with them to be honest so explain if you will if that is your suggested extra safety aspect for teachers etc.. I know what he is talking about, and they can be useful for on ranges, or when a gun is being stored, but as you say, not for open or concealed carry. As lots of Americans carry with one in the chamber, it wouldn't work anyway. He is just ignorant of the fact that NDs DO happen. It doesn't matter if it's police, military, civilians, it happens. In fact I gave him evidence above of 2 NDs happening on the same day, both in schools, involving one kid getting shot in the neck and he is still trying to deny it! I am in no way denying that here are accidental discharges, but what I am saying is that if such a discharge ever happened then the person who had the accidental discharge should have his firearms certificate withdrawn until fully retrained and tested. . If this happened to police or military, the person should be fully reprimanded and demoted. As for handguns the understanding of the safety is essential tell me how an accidental discharge of a hand gun would happen when the majority of handguns require a double pull to fire, first pull to cock, 2nd to fire Normally with a revolver you use your thumb to cock the hammer back so that you can accurately fire using one pull, but of course you can do this using trigger alone, but in no way would that be an accidental discharge. . Similar method with the semi auto 1911, and no way are you going to tell me that people walk around with a 1911, a round in chamber and semi cocked, even with a trigger job, which ive had on my gold cup, you still require around 4lb of pull. . Again anyone who has an accidental discharge should have firearms removed https://youtu.be/VFXp1R1lxe8 Here is a YouTube video of a firearms academy telling people to carry their 1911 with a round in the chamber, and the hammer cocked back. Watch it, and look at the other videos suggested by YouTube on the same topic, this is a very very common way to carry in the US. " Not just in the US... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I notice many here are talking about negligent discharges. I spent years in the armed forces and in all my time I only witnessed 1 negligent discharge and that was very early in basic training on a 25mtr range when a loaded browning 9mm was given to a left handed trainee who did not understand (or was told) that he needed to use 2 hands to control the weapon and it twisted out of his grip. The Range Officer and his Weapons Training Sgt were both charged with negligence and were out. Negligent discharges are either an excuse to cover up more sinister actions or the result of poor, inadequate or insufficient firearms training. excuse the language; but im fucking glad someone recognises this " Everyone recognises this. I would add to that list poor procedures, and, in some cases, poor firearm design. For example the US Army are retiring the venerable Beretta M9 and have replaced it with Sig Sauer P320. Unfortunately poor design of the P320 means that it is NOT drop safe, and will fire if dropped or dumped with a round in the chamber, with the safety on. This is a fundamental flaw for any firearm, but doubly so for a military firearm who although hopefully don't drop their firearms very often, are often bumped around, inside vehicles, jumping out of helicopters and planes etc. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
back to top |