. .

Was there anyone with a weapon at Gabrielle Gifford's shooting? There were 13 I think hit when he emptied his 33 round magazine from his pistol.

 

2011 Tucson shooting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Yes there were, which makes those figures even more astounding. The average is slightly over two with eighteen occurring at that one event where someone shot into a crowd. On scene armed personnel simply save lives. There is no way to measure how many shootings they have deterred.

This is completely off topic, but why is there a Trinity High School ad on this page?! Errr.

 

I'm just guessing, but I'd say it is because Trinity is the finest high school on the face of the earth and also because someone paid for it.

Why is it stupid ? Expound on your statement ? Is it stupid to by libility insurance for your car also ?

 

Liability on your car is to protect the person you hit, hopefully by accident. What's the point in requiring it for a gun? In case I accidentally shoot someone?

Why is it stupid ? Expound on your statement ? Is it stupid to by libility insurance for your car also ?

 

 

I'm not sure it's stupid to buy or not buy liability insurance for my car, but it is a legal requirement if I intend to get license plates for my car. However, I'm not required to have liability insurance on my car unless and until I use it on public roads (which requires having a license plate on it). If I buy a jeep, for example, strictly and solely for use on my farm, I'm not required to have license plates on it and I'm not required to have liability insurance on it either. It would be no different than the tractor I own and use on my farm. In other words, liability insurance is only required for vehicles when the vehicles are used on public roads to protect other members of the public having a right to use those public roads.

 

That's a night and day difference with me owning guns and using them on private property where the public is not permitted without my permission.

 

Explain why you think gun owners should be required to have liability insurance on their guns. I need more than: "because I'm required to have it on my car".

 

Here's something to mull over: no liability insurance is required on boats or to get your boat license/sticker renewed; even when those boats are being used on public waterways. From my experiences, I'm much, much, much more likely to be harmed by some drunk boater on a Sunday afternoon on the Ohio than I am by another gun owner.

Well, I didn't used to think people wanted me dead....then BGP gained a political forum, and I got "outted" as a "liberal" in Kentucky.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Forum Runner

 

 

To be fair there are armed officers within a block of your house on a regular basis. Do you ever feel unsafe at the Qdoba because there are usually 1-3 officers there most of the week.

I asked why...besides the questions you pose above, what are the reasons it's stupid. You are often quick to tell me that none of the above are as effective at deterring crime. So, a gun is not the same as any of those. It is, by design, lethal.

 

Sent from my DROID X2 using Forum Runner

 

 

The Ax and Hammer were weapons used to kill people in war long before the gun, much like incendiary devices(propane tank).

The Ax and Hammer were weapons used to kill people in war long before the gun, much like incendiary devices(propane tank).

 

Good point. But hammers, axes and propane tanks are not bought for the purpose of harming. In the case of the hammer and ax as weapons, we can go into the whole cultural dynamic of the time that such were primary weapons of war, but it's really not relative to the current debate. And, we should thank the propane tank inventors for our current abilty to grill conveniently.

 

I have no issue with people owning guns. And I have stated that NUMEROUS times. I have huge, HUGE problems with unchecked gun ownership. Guns have no use other than to kill or maim. You can call target shooting a use, but in the end, you target shoot because you want to destroy...at least you've mentioned that as a source of enjoyment a few times....but I won't bring up the objects you mentioned.

 

Despite everyone's best efforts, most people who support stricter enforcement of the laws, limits on the types of weapons and/or capacity of ammo are NOT anti-gun, nor wanting an all out ban. The legislation proposed isn't perfect, but as a whole is perfectly reasonable.

 

As to KYTM's question, I just want to know reasonable argument against liability insurance against a dangerous device. At the very least, it protects someone who may be wounded, or the family of someone wounded or killed by a gun. It could also protect the owner of the gun from catastrophic finacial circumstances related to a civil suit leveled against them in such an instance.

 

I think it's an intersting proposaly that KYTM brings to the table. Heck, I'm for much stronger measures. I want automatic charges to be brought against the owners of guns involved in "accidental shootings". There is absolutely no incentive to be responsible. Your two year old finds your loaded handgun in your night stand drawer and shoots and kills herself? Awwww....a tragedy. Your 13 year old son finds your high powered rifle and unsecured ammo and loads the gun and shoots his friend....again...awww...so sad for the parents...a tragedy. Those are senseless, irresponsible gun owners. And no one will convince me otherwise.

 

I'd really, REALLY love to see the breakdown of gun incidents by legal gun owners, criminal against innocent victim, and criminal against criminal.

To be fair there are armed officers within a block of your house on a regular basis. Do you ever feel unsafe at the Qdoba because there are usually 1-3 officers there most of the week.

 

 

I have never seen officers at Qdoba unless they were eating dinner, lunch or breakfast. Maybe I just don't go at the wrong time. There are police stationed at the firehouse 2 blocks from my house. The only place I regularly see armed police officers is Baxter Theaters, and it doesn't make me feel safer. It's very disquieting.

I have never seen officers at Qdoba unless they were eating dinner, lunch or breakfast. Maybe I just don't go at the wrong time. There are police stationed at the firehouse 2 blocks from my house. The only place I regularly see armed police officers is Baxter Theaters, and it doesn't make me feel safer. It's very disquieting.

 

 

Seeing as I can see Qdoba from my front porch I can assure you they are there regularly and not just to eat. I have never felt uncomfortable near an officer when they are on duty and armed. Whether out and about or when one might stop by to pick up an Rx while still carrying. I have never felt discomfort about weapons though.

Seeing as I can see Qdoba from my front porch I can assure you they are there regularly and not just to eat. I have never felt uncomfortable near an officer when they are on duty and armed. Whether out and about or when one might stop by to pick up an Rx while still carrying. I have never felt discomfort about weapons though.

 

 

Well, are you talking they're there because they're security? Or because they're eating. I don't feel uncomfortable around an officer, per se. I am discomfitted by the scenarion in which an armed guard is deemed necessary. And, I don't feel nearly as uncomfortable around a policeman with a gun as I do random "civillians" with guns in public.

Well, are you talking they're there because they're security? Or because they're eating. I don't feel uncomfortable around an officer, per se. I am discomfitted by the scenarion in which an armed guard is deemed necessary. And, I don't feel nearly as uncomfortable around a policeman with a gun as I do random "civillians" with guns in public.

 

I would say almost half the time they are there it isn't as customers. Not to say they may not grab a bite now and then but they are regularly there not eating.

I would say almost half the time they are there it isn't as customers. Not to say they may not grab a bite now and then but they are regularly there not eating.

 

Interesting. I go in there from time to time, and like I said, I only see them eating. Maybe I just go at the times where security isn't needed....

Interesting. I go in there from time to time, and like I said, I only see them eating. Maybe I just go at the times where security isn't needed....

 

 

The only time I have seen 3 is Thursday-Sunday. Other times when they are there it is usually 1, they could be there for lunch in that case.

I have never seen officers at Qdoba unless they were eating dinner, lunch or breakfast. Maybe I just don't go at the wrong time. There are police stationed at the firehouse 2 blocks from my house. The only place I regularly see armed police officers is Baxter Theaters, and it doesn't make me feel safer. It's very disquieting.

Just seeing police officers working security, brings on anxiety in you? There are police officers at almost all sporting events and many private companies, stores and even hospitals hire off duty officers as security. Would you feel more comfortable going to the same theater if there was no police/security presence?

 

If this is how you feel about just seeing a policeman with a gun, then I fully understand the unmitigated stance you have taken.

Just seeing police officers, brings on anxiety in you? If seeing a trained professional with firearms is that big of an issue with you, I really don't know how you function on a daily basis knowing that you may come in contact with CCDW permit holders with a gun in their pocket and you have no way of knowing.

 

If this is how you feel about just seeing a policeman with a gun, then I fully understand the unmitigated stance you have taken.

 

I guess you didn't read the rest of my posts. It's not the policeman, per se. It's the circumstance in which armed security is necessary. No. It doesn't make me feel better knowing that one or two armed policemen are stationed at the entrance to the movie theater I'm going into are there to protect me. I'd rather stay home and Red Box a movie.