Sunday, August 17, 2014

Guns And The Future In Ferguson

“There’s no police,” he said. “We trusted the police to keep it peaceful; they didn’t do their job.”

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just wanted to alert everyone on this since the subject is guns! that progressive socialist andy Cuomo went to isreal to have a look around! think he is getting set up for a 2016 run! LETS not forget he slamed the "SAFE" act on the people of New York and on a radio show said that confiscation of guns was on the table!! We need to start now to derail his ambitions!!

Anonymous said...

"We trusted the police" that was your first mistake. "They didn't do their job" - no, you didn't do yours. Protecting yourself, your family and your property is YOUR job. As soon as your abandoned that responsibility and hand it over to strangers, you are screwed. Man up - accept your responsibility to protect yourself. As soon as this country understands that, the better off we will all be.

TRex said...

"I think the first message is to remind all law enforcement that they are hired to serve and protect"

Ummm, no they are not hired to serve and protect us. They serve and protect the government.

Supreme Court has ruled (more than once) they have no responsibility to protect you.

Anonymous said...

What a whiny bitch. Sounds just like the anti-gunners. Oh, you need "training" to own a gun and be responsible.

Ya, maybe. Or maybe just owning it and brandishing it will be enough....or the basic point/click interface of many weapons is enough to stop an attacker.

Regardless, the basic right of self defense applies.

I agree...training and practice is a damn good idea, but in a pinch, the 80 year old woman that defends herself with the small revolver her deceased husband left her is good enough even though she hasn't had "training".

I just want to be sure we're not espousing some sort of standard that should be attained before exercising one's right to defend themselves and their families.

No such standard exists or should.

TRex said...

quoting above comment:
" Anonymous said...
What a whiny bitch. Sounds just like the anti-gunners. Oh, you need "training" to own a gun and be responsible.

Ya, maybe. Or maybe just owning it and brandishing it will be enough....or the basic point/click interface of many weapons is enough to stop an attacker."

The idea of brandishing being sufficient might have been ok in Mayberry in 1962, but today, you might want to get the front sight filed down, because if you draw a gun and don't intend to use it, it will be a lot less irritating to your anal entryway without that front sight.

I don't think you got the right take away from the article. They weren't advocating some standard before you can buy or own a gun, they were advocating two things that are a mirror image of that.

First, owning a gun, like owning a dog, creates a need for some responsibility. Get responsible. Learn safety. Train to use it.

The second is the timing of all this. The main thrust at the beginning of the article was that these people should have made this decision to defend themselves years ago, already have guns, and already understand training and already know how to use them.

There was no intent towards limiting who should be able to defend themselves.

T. Paine said...

Anonymous....what does 'ya' mean?

Anyway, I just want to observe that expecting police to intervene in robbery, looting or much of anything during a riot to save your butt or your property is lunacy. That's OUR individual responsibility as grown men. Not women, men!

Ya? What language is that? Ya?

Anonymous said...

Hmmmmmmmm.........

You must do this for government BEFORE they will give you PERMISSION to enjoy your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.....

Something's wrong with that thought process wouldn't you say?

Paul X said...

"It’s too late for them to learn how to use a firearm competently, quickly, and under stress."

Nonsense. How can Owens write such claptrap?

It's well known that the majority of attacks are halted by simply pulling a gun out. The bad guy does not hang around to inquire if the intended victim has trained at Front Sight!

The whole point of the utility of firearms is that you DON'T have to be an expert to harvest most of its utility. This makes it far superior to any other defense technology, all of which do require expertise. Nope, you don't need a "black belt" in gun use.

Is it better to practice or take courses? Certainly. That does not change the fact.

"These weapons will largely be neglected, until…… a curious child finds them."

Here, Owens is sounding just like a gun prohibitionist. He is indeed a "whiny bitch". Why does anyone pay attention to him?