Wednesday, June 20, 2018 • Morning Edition • "Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."

The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

Comics news, comic book reviews, feature articles about comics, interviews with comic creators, plus the greatest comic book and pop culture discussion in the Outhouse forums!

Advertisement

Gun Ads

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

User avatar

DMM

Rain Partier

Postby DMM » Fri Dec 28, 2012 2:59 pm

Jubilee wrote:Here are the responses from another website what that article was posted on.











I think I'm remarkably tolerant in comparison!

they're being stupid, too.
User avatar

GLX

Outhouse Editor

Postby GLX » Fri Dec 28, 2012 3:45 pm

User avatar

achilles

Rain Partier

Postby achilles » Fri Dec 28, 2012 4:55 pm

Jubilee wrote:
Of course after a ban on handguns offences with firearms went up. It was then illegal to own a firearm and thus there were more arrests. :lol: It's simple.

The Cumbria shootings were absolutely horrible and once again many Brits realised how stupid it is to let people have access to these weapons.

http://www.news.com.au/national/us-gun- ... 543962179#

This article made sick. What horrible people.


Well, I can see you didn't actually read the article. It wasn't talking about people being arrested for having guns, though it did mention the very dangerous people who got arrested for finding guns and turning them promptly in to the police. It was talking about the sort of thing that was a crime BEFORE the ban. Such as using a gun in a crime. I will also point out that even in "gun free" places like Chicago, where they try their best to make sure law-abiding citizens are easy prey for criminals by disarming them--there is no place in America where a mass shooter could wander around for 8 hours picking people off with no response because no one else has a gun.

3MJ

Postby 3MJ » Fri Dec 28, 2012 5:08 pm

achilles wrote:
Well, I can see you didn't actually read the article. It wasn't talking about people being arrested for having guns, though it did mention the very dangerous people who got arrested for finding guns and turning them promptly in to the police. It was talking about the sort of thing that was a crime BEFORE the ban. Such as using a gun in a crime. I will also point out that even in "gun free" places like Chicago, where they try their best to make sure law-abiding citizens are easy prey for criminals by disarming them--there is no place in America where a mass shooter could wander around for 8 hours picking people off with no response because no one else has a gun.


!! How do you possibly know that?
User avatar

muddyglass

dr. strangelove

Postby muddyglass » Fri Dec 28, 2012 10:54 pm

achilles wrote:there is no place in America where a mass shooter could wander around for 8 hours picking people off with no response because no one else has a gun.


alaska?

edit: michael silka was the name of the shooter. i remember watching a show on the military channel about two snipers taking him out from a hovering helicopter, ending his killing spree in alaska. silka was ex-military and he managed to kill one of the snipers before receiving the fatal shot.
User avatar

Windom URL

Rain Partier

Postby Windom URL » Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:31 am

Check this out, Jubilee, there are over 8 million guns in Los Angeles alone.
User avatar

achilles

Rain Partier

Postby achilles » Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:54 am

muddyglass wrote:
alaska?

edit: michael silka was the name of the shooter. i remember watching a show on the military channel about two snipers taking him out from a hovering helicopter, ending his killing spree in alaska. silka was ex-military and he managed to kill one of the snipers before receiving the fatal shot.


Not really what I meant. That was a case of a killer in a small, isolated town killing people without anyone else knowing about it until later. Not some guy who walked down the main drag shooting. I guarantee that the folks there were armed, and if someone knew, they would have responded. Which of course eventually did happen. When the townsfolk did realize what was happening, they lay in wait for him, ready to ambush him should he come back to his car, which he didn't.

As for the only other shooting which comes close to fitting the bill, the UT at Austin belltower shootings, it wasn't that citizens didn't have guns, but that they didn't have the right guns for the situation. There were a bunch of civilians and cops who very quickly were shooting back, but they were doing it with handguns, which didn't have the range or accuracy to hit the shooter, who did have a rifle. It was only when citizens and cops armed with rifles came around that they could hold the guy off enough for a group of citizens and cops armed with handguns to get into the belltower and kill the shooter.

But, hostage situations apart, no other mass shooting has gone on like the one across the pond.
User avatar

Keb

<( ' . ' )>

Postby Keb » Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:15 am

Victorian Squid wrote:Check this out, Jubilee, there are over 8 million guns in Los Angeles alone.

A quarter of those belong to Pirus and Crips...
User avatar

muddyglass

dr. strangelove

Postby muddyglass » Sat Dec 29, 2012 11:59 am

achilles wrote:
Not really what I meant. That was a case of a killer in a small, isolated town killing people without anyone else knowing about it until later. Not some guy who walked down the main drag shooting. I guarantee that the folks there were armed, and if someone knew, they would have responded. Which of course eventually did happen. When the townsfolk did realize what was happening, they lay in wait for him, ready to ambush him should he come back to his car, which he didn't.

As for the only other shooting which comes close to fitting the bill, the UT at Austin belltower shootings, it wasn't that citizens didn't have guns, but that they didn't have the right guns for the situation. There were a bunch of civilians and cops who very quickly were shooting back, but they were doing it with handguns, which didn't have the range or accuracy to hit the shooter, who did have a rifle. It was only when citizens and cops armed with rifles came around that they could hold the guy off enough for a group of citizens and cops armed with handguns to get into the belltower and kill the shooter.

But, hostage situations apart, no other mass shooting has gone on like the one across the pond.


the most dangerous shooters are the ones with military training. both silka and whitman were excellent marksmen with military backgrounds. in these situations, if civilians were armed and attempted to try to take these guys out, the body count could become quite high. i know a partial solution is gun education for gun owners so they know how to use their weapons, but charles whitman was a trained u.s. marine after all...

i'm not saying the 8 hours response time in britain was wonderful or anything, but i think a gun battle with armed civilians might not really be the answer in all cases. the british case was mostly a problem with law enforcement not being armed, rather than civilians not being armed.
User avatar

achilles

Rain Partier

Postby achilles » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:03 pm

muddyglass wrote:
the most dangerous shooters are the ones with military training. both silka and whitman were excellent marksmen with military backgrounds. in these situations, if civilians were armed and attempted to try to take these guys out, the body count could become quite high. i know a partial solution is gun education for gun owners so they know how to use their weapons, but charles whitman was a trained u.s. marine after all...

i'm not saying the 8 hours response time in britain was wonderful or anything, but i think a gun battle with armed civilians might not really be the answer in all cases. the british case was mostly a problem with law enforcement not being armed, rather than civilians not being armed.


Well, it's long been known that most of the best military snipers were drawn from guys who hunted extensively as kids. Carlos Hathcock among many others fit that bill. And in the Texas situation, armed citizens did indeed help get the guy. Most of whom were hunters.

So in a sense, I'd agree that it certainly depends on the citizen. Joe Average who just shoots a couple times a year at a gun range probably would have to get lucky, or at least be close to the guy on the rampage. Much better would be an experienced hunter, or even better in most cases would be a CCW holder in those states that require extensive training, or someone who participates in the IDPA, (international Defensive Pistol Association), style shooting matches, which basically mimic Secret Service type training.

Which is a popular shooting sport.
User avatar

muddyglass

dr. strangelove

Postby muddyglass » Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:31 pm

achilles wrote:
Well, it's long been known that most of the best military snipers were drawn from guys who hunted extensively as kids. Carlos Hathcock among many others fit that bill. And in the Texas situation, armed citizens did indeed help get the guy. Most of whom were hunters.

So in a sense, I'd agree that it certainly depends on the citizen. Joe Average who just shoots a couple times a year at a gun range probably would have to get lucky, or at least be close to the guy on the rampage. Much better would be an experienced hunter, or even better in most cases would be a CCW holder in those states that require extensive training, or someone who participates in the IDPA, (international Defensive Pistol Association), style shooting matches, which basically mimic Secret Service type training.

Which is a popular shooting sport.


if hathcock were around to handle things, then the rampage shooter would have no chance! his shot through the enemy sniper's scope has made a permanent impression on me. i'm not a gun lover, but it's hard not to appreciate the amazing skill it took to make that shot. on the other hand, i shudder to think what would happen if someone of hathcock's skill went berserk after calculated planning.
User avatar

achilles

Rain Partier

Postby achilles » Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:40 pm

muddyglass wrote:
if hathcock were around to handle things, then the rampage shooter would have no chance! his shot through the enemy sniper's scope has made a permanent impression on me. i'm not a gun lover, but it's hard not to appreciate the amazing skill it took to make that shot. on the other hand, i shudder to think what would happen if someone of hathcock's skill went berserk after calculated planning.


It made an even more permanent impression on the enemy sniper... :wink:

As for the other, I'd say we'd all better hope that none of our snipers decides to go on a murder spree.

Losty

A Quagmire

Postby Losty » Sun Dec 30, 2012 7:52 am

very fucked up, in Australia we dont have as many guns and Im happ about that

3MJ

Postby 3MJ » Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:00 pm

Total firearms murders, 2011: 8,583
% change, 2010-11: -3
Fire- arms murders as % of all murders: 68
Fire- arms murders rate: 2.75
Fire- arms robberies rate: 39.25
Fire- arms assaults rate: 43.77

Just putting these here

RATES ARE PER 100,000 PEOPLE. SOURCE: FBI UNIFORM CRIME REPORTS
User avatar

habitual

Silly French Man

Postby habitual » Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:53 pm

Natural Selection is far more effective in the U.S. it seems compared to socialist countries :D

Hab

leave a comment with facebook


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FaceBook [Linkcheck], jephd and 23 guests