Since the bad guys can get guns easily, and the good guys carry in case there’s a bad guy, and the NRA advocates EVERYONE should carry, why are cops being vilified when someone’s killed?
See, if we presume everyone is armed, and someone resists arrest, it should be in a cops interest of safety to shoot them? I mean what’s all the fuss about? We want everyone armed, so clearly when someone is resisting arrest they should be taken down. Why should they tread easy and risk their life? Someone is resisting arrest, running away, or even acting unpredictable, it’s the safest measure for a cop.
Yeah, if you live in Guntopia, you should expect to get shot. That’s how it works. People don’t wave their guns. They shoot. You aren’t going to die of old age in Guntopia.
That’s being pedantic. What number do you dial for the police? In my area, we’re instructed to use 911. If we call the police, it goes without saying we called 911.
One can call the police without calling 911. I have the local non-emergency police number on my speed-dial, for lesser problems, such as malfunctioning traffic signals.
If “you’re instructed to use 911,” then it’s wrong to complain when people use 911.
Altering what someone said, and then calling them out on it, is a fallacy, and not a nice one.
You’re still splitting hairs. It’s entirely possible he dialed 911 to summon the police. It’s a reasonable assumption for people to make. Not everyone has the non-emergency number on speed dial. And it’s not misrepresenting the other person’s words in any way.
Indirectly. Which is why I wanted to get the response out there while I was online. I will disagree with you that “Who are you to decide” is much of an argument; I feel it is. But I will agree with you that “freedom” is a poor response.
Without going back and reading all your posts and without getting into your debate, your mileage varies from mine. I’ll disagree with the first part and agree with the second.
Know that in Pittsburgh its almost impossible to get a local number for the police. The standard here is “if you want to talk to a cop or fireman, call 911”. As a result a lot of silly non-emergency calls go through 911. The chances of being prosecuted for one is very slim and can only happen if you have made a habit out of making the same basic call over and over through a course of time and being warned in advance “not to call about this matter again”.
A national 911 and set standards for that 911 would be nice. A list of local and state 911 laws would be nice as well. But to the best of my knowledge neither exists right now.
I’m legitimately curious about this. In what circumstances would having a hidden (and, presumably, more difficult to access) weapon be superior to having an openly carried and visible weapon? Specifically, in what legal circumstances; obviously, someone engaging in criminal or immoral activity would prefer concealment.
This can’t be addressed objectively. Each person has their own set of “rules” based on personal comfort level.
When I am out-n-about (shopping, eating at a restaurant, etc.) my default is to open carry, for a number of reasons:
I find it to be the most comfortable style of carrying.
It educates the public. People ask questions on the legalities on carrying a weapon, and I am happy to answer them.
If I need to stop a bad guy, it offers the quickest draw.
But there are times when I choose to conceal carry. When I go to a “nice” restaurant I usually conceal it, because in that type of environment I don’t feel like explaining the law to others. (Most people here erroneously believe you can’t carry a weapon in a restaurant that serves alcohol.)
And of course there’s the circumstance of wearing a coat in the winter. If I am open carrying, but I have a coat on, then I am technically carrying concealed. So when I was walking around Walmart yesterday, I was carrying concealed. But when I went to the diner afterwards for lunch, I took off my coat and was thus open carrying.
Fastening a seatbelt. Getting in and out of a car. Carrying a purse. Wearing an outfit that doesn’t work with a holstered gun, as described above (for some reason, women’s clothing isn’t necessarily engineered to support a handgun; go figure).
Sad story all around. I have been trying to get past my own dislike for CCW and open-carry as concepts and move on to the other issue I have, which I hope is less contentious, but I fear it is not- the question over whether carrying in a purse should be considered viable under either regime.
It seems that the detachable nature of the purse means you do not exercise the kind of constant, direct control over the firearm that would have if it were holstered on your person. I could be wrong, I am happy to be corrected. But if that is the case, the argument about women’s fashion not lending itself to proper carry…well, pardon me, but I don’t care. At all. And I wonder if that is somehow sexist on my part? Trying to get over my biases, but if restricting carry to on-person holsters means fewer women carry because they don’t like the way it looks with their cocktail dress, I am not going to lose any sleep over it.
Holy cow, I wondered if that exact scenario could happen. If you don’t release the slide on many guns but slowly move it forward it will usually jam a round in the gun. Pulling it back to clear it will not eject the cartridge because the extractor is not engaged. That puts the next round into the first one as you described.
Death trumps bleeding in the media, ‘If it bleeds, it leads’ notwithstanding.
I still want to know what kind of weapon it is.
Revolver, what kind & caliber?
Single shot derringer? What Caliber?
Semi-auto, make, model, caliber?
I had an older HK 9mm semi-auto looking weapon once and I hated it. It was strictly double action, every shot & if you could find an 8 year old who could pull the trigger, I would have been terrified of that kid. I almost had to use two hands to pull it and then the accuracy… Bawahahaha, if I was inside the barn…:eek:
It seems to me that we might ought to explore that “therapy” option.
Well, in all honesty, you’re not exactly presenting reasons for us to trust her, either. I mean, she was dumb enough to leave a loaded gun where a toddler could access and discharge it. And there lies the rub–you don’t trust me not to be a violent criminal, I don’t trust you not to be a total numbnuts about your gun, and no amount of sputtering “But the bad ones are a minority” on either of our parts is going to make us trust each other.
And to be honest, the more “I gotta have a gun with me all the time” folks I meet in real life, the more I favor gun control because I see more stupid shit it never occurred to me that someone would do. Stuff like the friend who was ranting on FB about someone stealing the gun she keeps under the passenger seat out of her unlocked car. Stuff like the guy across the street thinking some searchlights across town were UFO’s and trying to bring them down with his handgun. People who think the world is so dangerous they have to have a gun in the car to protect themselves and their stuff but their yard is so safe they can leave the car unlocked at home, or who think firing a gun into the air in a crowded neighborhood is a good idea, or think it’s fine to leave a loaded gun in a purse next to a toddler…they have fucked up judgement about the world in general and their guns in particular. And that fucked up judgement scares the loving shit out of me, because I have no way of knowing what form it will take next and whether that form will have a tragic outcome. Those real people who I personally know frighten me in a far more visceral way than some theoretical violent criminals I’ve never encountered.
Here’s a local one that I remembered from back in August. He’s listed as “under five” which could put him as old as four, but from what I remember he was no more than three, so toddler works. It was himself that he shot, so it may not qualify. That weapon was also in his mother’s purse.