I know, I didn’t mean to aim that post at you but at the gun control crowd that somehow thinks a gun-free zone will deter someone who’s about to commit multiple murders.
“Gadzooks,” they surely think “I would certainly enjoy gunning down 30 people in cold blood and then taking my own life, but they are in a gun-free zone so what can I do?”
Surround the campus with a ring of rapidly varying magnetic fields, such that any guns, bullets or small change brought on campus is quickly crushed to unusability?
That only works if he ditches the weapon, and even then, I’d be surprised if forensics wasn’t able to trace the weapon.
Maybe he was planning on selling them on the black market.
bolding mine
Why not? It’s worked for drugs. Schools are designated as drug-free zones and we all know that that’s eliminated any substance abuse problems in our educational facilities.
Or possibly there were coupons printed on the back of the receipt like the ones from the supermarket.
Buy 10 at full price and get a free sandwich!
Touché! A palpable touch indeed sir.
“Brady Center to Control Violence - As effective as the war on drugs!”
I know forensics wouldn’t have much trouble with it. I was just pointing out that if you want an example of a rational mind, maybe we shouldn’t look to a murderer.
Huh? Wha? Shirley you are not suggesting that he could have reloaded and resumed carnaging in the same amount of time?
With practice, yes.
A semi-trained person could do it in little more time, and don’t call me Shirley!
All reports indicate that the shooter was methodical, and wasn’t just spraying bullets around. That means that he could have done the same damage with a revolver. He just would have had to reload a little more often is all.
He could have unseated the cylinder, dumped the spent rounds, and refilled each individual hole, one at a time! in the roughly the same amount of time it takes to drop a magazine and put another in its place?
That’s patently ridiculous.
We were talking about using a speedloader, like this
Maybe its time to be more clear, a “come to Jeebus” moment…
I hate handguns, with every fiber of my being. They are as inherently evil as a manufactured item can be, they are manufactured with the intent of injury or threat of injury. Evil, in my book.
Self-defense from crime? My ass, that’s why we have cops. We decide, as a community, to empower certain people that way. If everybody is so empowered, why have cops, except to sort things out after the fact? Would you have everyone drive fire trucks in case one breaks out?
Some people love the goddam things, Lord alone knows why. Fear, is my guess. The handgun is an amulet against fear, but it exacts the price of fear, it reminds you of itself every time you look at it, oil it, fondle it. You pay the price of fear in trying to ward it off. The only thing worse, more corrupt, is the desire to have others afraid of you.
I was born and raised in Texas, where this sort of perversion is common. Can’t tell you how many times I heard about how Bubba shot Junior because Peggy Sue…well, you know. A stupid human interchange that ought not to have proceeded beyond a broken jaw gets somebody plugged! God DAMN, but that’s stupid!
I don’t crusade for gun laws because of the sheer impossibility of it all. Not just from gun pervs, but the simple fact that there are millions of the goddam things, and they don’t rot, the millions we have now, we will have twenty years from now, even if we outlawed them tomorrow.
I admire firearms, to some degree. I think the engineering and science that goes into making an accurate long-range weapon is interesting. Been many a year since I plinked beer cans with a .22, but I’d do it again in a heartbeat. Not as good as fishing, but still fun.
Handguns are about fear. If you succumb to fear, you accomodate fear, you’ve already lost.
Emphasis mine.
Yes, when I purchased my Smith & Wesson 1911, the primary selling point was that it had been personally crafted by Mephistopheles…
You are arguing that some rifles can be “fun”, while handguns are “inherently evil”? That borders on the idiotic. Wait, it crosses the border.
Sure as hell got my faults, goober, but “idiot” ain’t on the list.
You forgot to emphasize the operative word there. In any case, Someone COULD do the same thing ALMOST as fast, even without a speedloader A speedloader would just ensure that they could easily do it as fast as with an double-action glock.
Sure…without a speedloader it would have taken a bit longer to reload. So what? I can dump and fill my S&W Model 28 in less than 6 seconds without a speedloader. The guy wasn’t going for volume of shots. He was serious and methodical. Speed didn’t matter to him. He also was carrying a second weapon as a backup.
’luci, you and I are never going to be on the same side on this issue. But I found your previous post to be very well articulated. Wrong, but well-stated.
Cops aren’t around to defend you from criminals, are they? Sure, they’ll stop a crime in progress if they see one, but they aren’t charged to guard us all and prevent every crime from happening. Nor are they able to do so even if it were explicitly their job.
I don’t think you’re a coward, elucidator, and I fully believe there are many crimes and emergencies you will act to prevent or stop without waiting for the police. Those of us who have guns and are properly trained in their use have another tool to do so.
The only time I have grabbed my loaded gun is when my neighbor was being attacked by a dog. The dog broke off its attack and ran off before I could get there, and she was okay, but it could have been a lot worse. I wasn’t going to go out there without a gun, and we all know dog attacks can be fatal or disfiguring, so waiting for the cops wasn’t an option I was going to take. The dog was destroyed later.
What would you have done?