Gun Control - Page 3
   

       The Horse Forum > Life Beyond Horses > General Off Topic Discussion

Gun Control

This is a discussion on Gun Control within the General Off Topic Discussion forums, part of the Life Beyond Horses category
  • Grass excellent barfs
  • Funny gun control pictures

Like Tree71Likes

 
LinkBack Thread Tools
    08-24-2012, 03:33 PM
  #21
Green Broke
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernTrailsGA    
.

Chevaux, wounding someone in the real world is impractical and takes a Crack Shot like in the Movies, anyone with firearms training Civilian or Law Enforcement is trained to shoot for Center Mass, this is to stop the Attacker and avoided collateral damage.

A shotgun where there might be several people would be the worse thing in the world, defensive shotgun ammunition uses BB sized projectiles, usually 13 to 15 of them in the shell, the pattern and force of them could easily kill or wound a lot of people.

Rifles are kinda of like Shotguns, too much firepower on a crowded city street


.
I don't know, southern. It depends on what distance one can take a clean shot, IMO. Shotguns are out, obviousely. Rifles, by design, are far more accurate, and can be selected for use at a distance to be no more dangerous than a given hand gun at close range. There was probably "no room" for rifles in this situation...no telling.

How accurately one can hit a given target is only a matter of practice. IMO So, I expect pretty darn good shots in a police department.
     
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
    08-24-2012, 03:48 PM
  #22
Green Broke
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernTrailsGA    
Missy, we normally agree, but in this case I believe that statement is wrong.

How many more might have been hurt or killed by the gunman in this case or any other case if the Police just sat there and watched? Personally I think if I was there (and did not have my gun) I would want the Police to intervene, they probably have better training that I do anyway


.
Didn't see this before, Southern. I probably miscommunicated what I meant, so forgive. I did not mean I would not want and expect the police to intervene. I meant that when valuable information comes to light it is often ignored which means it is highly likely the same "error" will occur again for the same reason.

In the case of police, valuable information can be ignored b/c people respect what they do (including me) and any "observation" that questions their operations are often taken to be disrespectful criticism. Improvement cannot be made w/o analyzing how effective something operates. Do they evaluate internally? I would guess, yes. However, how effectively cannot, in practice, be measured. Compare this to a nuclear power plant.
     
    08-24-2012, 03:50 PM
  #23
Super Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Missy May    
.... But, if I were going to train someone to take someone out w extreme discrimination, and do so effectively...I think I would train them to reach for the appropriate weapon and ensure their marksmanship was excellent.
Missy, here is a question for you.
Lets say you and I are cops (just bear with me here) and we are called out to respond to a juvenile stealing an ice cream cone from the local dairy stand.
“Ugg, bored kids… why can’t they stay home and play video games??“ I quip because I’m cynical.
Ok, we head on over.
We exit our cruiser (which has a shotgun in a locked case on the rack, and a trigger lock as well because all our department cruisers do.)
Once we are out of the cruiser we see it is about 100 yards off the road to get to the stand and we start walking.
As we walk up to the stand the owner and Juvie are yelling at each other and don’t notice us.
All of a sudden the juv pulls a gun and threatens to shoot the owner.
Do you shout, “Ok everybody, no one move while I run back to the cruiser and get the shotgun because it might be more appropriate. Be right back!”
Or do you draw the gun on your side and deal with the situation since it has all unfolded in about 1 1/2 seconds??

I mean you never actually trained this exact situation with an ice cream stand being 100 yards from the cruiser. But as you were trained, you don't pull the shot gun upon arrival for every single call.

Because, remember the time you pulled the big 'un for the mountain lion up the tree call and when you arrived it was a three month old kitten?? Yeah, we are still laughing about that one in the squad room.
Allison Finch and Corporal like this.
     
    08-24-2012, 04:01 PM
  #24
Super Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevaux    
I`m from Canada and we`ve just gone through decommissioning of the long gun registry. I did always think the registry was frightfully expensive and didn`t lower the crime rate. For me, I can take or leave firearms -- I believe them to be just a skill required tool no different than a surgeon`s knife or a carpenter`s band saw. I also believe someone with murderous and criminal intent will find a way to do their deed regardless of gun control legislation.
Sadly, I couldn't agree more.

Quote:
Anyways, I have a question on the police side of things and I guess it`s really directed at Allison Finch (I apologize ahead of time for my cluelessness and inappropriateness on this thread). Ì`m given to understand that a police officer shoots for body mass or center target (I`m sorry I don`t know the correct term) rather than try to wing somebody. I think they do this because shooting a hand gun doesn`t have the same accuracy of sighting as a rifle. So, is it practical for a police officer to use a shot gun instead a hand gun? Wouldn`t a shot gun with its spray pattern enable a police officer to disable a villian without having to kill them by `knocking the legs out from under them`so speak? Also, I do not think that a shot gun shoots as far as a hand gun so may reduce the chance of hitting bystanders who are further away?
There are definitely times when different weapons are better choices. While shotguns are real stoppers, they have a downside when used in a crowd. The pellets in 00 buckshot ate the equivalent of 9 32 caliber bullets all flying at once. The problem is that there is a spread. The further away from the suspect, the wider the spread. So, there is the possibility that one or more pellet may miss. Now, slugs are one projectile that is the equivalent of a 72 caliber bullet. GOOD stopping power. Here, the problem is over penetration. A single projectile may be easier to keep on target.

As for stop vs wound....it has been shown again and again, just because you wound someone, you often don't stop their desire to kill. Even someone shot center mass in the heart will have time to keep shooting. The Calif. Bank robbery had a suspect with fatal wounds, shot in the heart, who kept fighting a good while killing during that time. So, a shot in the arm or leg is truly irresponsible, not only because it risks the cops, but the public as well. "Knocking the legs out from under them" doesn't keep them from pulling a trigger.

It is a terrible sad situation and, when a cop has to take a life, they often suffer their whole lives with the burden.
     
    08-24-2012, 04:16 PM
  #25
Super Moderator
Lockwood, you can be at my side, in an emergency, any time. You couldn't be more correct. Just yesterday we had a jump and run where the guy had a gun. He was running through THICK brush. We were running through it with little visibility, not knowing if he had stopped and was now aiming at us. Yup, you get a bit "hyper". Those 911 calls with a report of lethal force being used, you have all of that response time building up huge amounts of adrenaline. When you get there, it can often affect how you deal with the incident. Yes, this can lead to rash reactions and mistakes. There really is no real life training that will really prepare you for that. Regular training...you always know you are going home to your family.

I have no doubt that some of the wounded was "friendly fire". Luckily none of the people seemed to be seriously wounded. On a crowded street (think the empire state bldg may have been a bit crowded?) there simply is no way to ensure that all the rounds will hit AND stay in the bad guy.
     
    08-24-2012, 04:20 PM
  #26
Started
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allison Finch    
So, it starts again....cop bashing. Why don't you try stepping into the line of fire some day?


And, BTW Wetrain, I am a democrat AND a law enforcement firearms instructor and gun toter. Try not stereotyping that way.....OK?

Allison, I think you're being a bit sensitive. I by NO means meant this as a "cop bashing" thread. It was more of a media bashing thread, if you read my other comments you may have picked up on that instead of jumping to conclusions, but considering your line of work, I can see how that happens.

I get very irritated when the media tries to manipulate stories, like wording the headlines to make it seem like this guy randomly shot 10 people when in fact a few stray bullets from the cops hit bystanders OR how the media insisted on showing a picture of Trevon Martin when he was seven and picturing George Zimmerman as a big bad wolf.

And Im aware that some Democrats carry, but let's face it, if the Democrats could just do away with the 2nd Amendment, they would.
     
    08-24-2012, 04:22 PM
  #27
Green Broke
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allison Finch    
As for stop vs wound....it has been shown again and again, just because you wound someone, you often don't stop their desire to kill. Even someone shot center mass in the heart will have time to keep shooting. The Calif. Bank robbery had a suspect with fatal wounds, shot in the heart, who kept fighting a good while killing during that time. So, a shot in the arm or leg is truly irresponsible, not only because it risks the cops, but the public as well. "Knocking the legs out from under them" doesn't keep them from pulling a trigger.

It is a terrible sad situation and, when a cop has to take a life, they often suffer their whole lives with the burden.
Very true. That's why our son (Marine vet and now big city policeman) carries a .357 Sig P229 instead of the 9mm. Paraphrasing him...if it ever came to that type of unfortuneate situation, you want to make sure he doesn't get back up.
Posted via Mobile Device
Allison Finch and uflrh9y like this.
     
    08-24-2012, 04:29 PM
  #28
Super Moderator
Quote:
Originally Posted by wetrain17    

And Im aware that some Democrats carry, but let's face it, if the Democrats could just do away with the 2nd Amendment, they would.



I'm glad you are comfortable believing that. I know too many dems who would disagree. I even know rebublicans who believe in gun control
     
    08-24-2012, 04:37 PM
  #29
Started
Quote:
Originally Posted by Allison Finch    


I'm glad you are comfortable believing that. I know too many dems who would disagree. I even know rebublicans who believe in gun control

However, those are not the ones in office trying to rewrite the Constitution.
     
    08-24-2012, 04:38 PM
  #30
Started
Quote:
Originally Posted by Missy May    
Well, it will be difficult to ever know w surety who, exactly, owned the rounds that injured these people. .
once they collect the bullets from the victims they will be able to tell if it came from a cops issued gun or the killers.

With the bolistics(sp) they will even be able to tell which gun each bullet came from because of different pressure points put on the bullet even if its the same make of gun.

The police will know who shot where etc etc after all the testing but who knows if that information will be released to the public
Allison Finch likes this.
     

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How do I get this under control?! twh Horse Health 5 12-21-2011 10:13 AM
Bug Control Five Furlongs Horse Health 9 04-12-2011 10:39 PM
Gun Control smrobs General Off Topic Discussion 130 01-28-2011 08:13 PM
HELP! He is out of control!! mjnltnmh Horse Training 125 11-06-2010 08:52 AM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0