Another Killing

Aunt Marg

Granny Pantie Power!
There are several reasons your logic concerning firearms is flawed:
Rats & Cockroaches sometimes run in packs. A single-shot shotgun is totally inadequate in a defensive situation, unless the victim can guarantee only one adversary. A potential victim would be helpless after one shot. Same issue with bolt-action rifles - limited capacity of 2-5 rounds which is adequate for hunting. Also slow to reload, slow follow-up shots if needed & the excessive power needed for long-range hunting endangers neighbors.
A revolver is fine, but you are limited to 6-8 rounds. Why do you suppose police departments use semi-auto pistols now? 15-18 round capacity & much faster reload.
A law-abiding citizen is entitled to have all the edge he can get; after all, criminals have no limitations on their weapons.
In a combat or war-type situation, I can understand your point, but that's where my understanding begins and ends.

They'll always be criminals in this world, and even in countries where guns don't exist or aren't the norm, there will be gun crimes, but I stand firm on my thoughts as to automatic and semi-auto weaponry, aside from killing, they serve no purpose in a well-adjusted society/country.
 

win231

Well-known Member
Location
CA
In a combat or war-type situation, I can understand your point, but that's where my understanding begins and ends.

They'll always be criminals in this world, and even in countries where guns don't exist or aren't the norm, there will be gun crimes, but I stand firm on my thoughts as to automatic and semi-auto weaponry, aside from killing, they serve no purpose in a well-adjusted society/country.
"Combat or War-type situation?" As far as I'm concerned, a home-invasion robbery is a combat situation. :)
Yes, you are correct; automatic weapons are for killing. And I'm glad they are. If they weren't, they would be useless. Ask any cop.
I'd be happy to get rid of my automatic weapons. As soon as criminals get rid of theirs.
 

Gaer

To affect the quality of the day, ah! the highest
In a combat or war-type situation, I can understand your point, but that's where my understanding begins and ends.

They'll always be criminals in this world, and even in countries where guns don't exist or aren't the norm, there will be gun crimes, but I stand firm on my thoughts as to automatic and semi-auto weaponry, aside from killing, they serve no purpose in a well-adjusted society/country.
I agree about the automatic and semi-automatic weapons, Marg.
BUT,
if they are banned, this is a foot-in -the-door for more and more gun legislation. This is just the beginning!
I know you don't live in America, but I wish i could get across to everyone how important it is to protect the Constitution of the United States!
 

Aunt Marg

Granny Pantie Power!
"Combat or War-type situation?" As far as I'm concerned, a home-invasion robbery is a combat situation. :)
Yes, you are correct; automatic weapons are for killing. And I'm glad they are. If they weren't, they would be useless. Ask any cop.
I'd be happy to get rid of my automatic weapons. As soon as criminals get rid of theirs.
Re: home invasions, absolutely, but that IMO is where guns should remain and where guns should essentially be restricted to, unless of course a gun-owner is looking to transport his or her firearm for use related to sport, which applies in our country, but to allow everyone to carry guns around freely is the most asinine thing I ever heard, regardless of what the 2nd amendment affords.

But hey, three cheers to the nut-job who filed a suit in and around 1975 that the SCOTUS ruled on, stating that the 2nd amendment rights weren't being interpreted properly, otherwise a special permit would still be required (and in effect) for an individual to legitimately carry outside of ones own home, which IMO is the way it should be, regardless of the fact that criminals may or may not have guns.

That would be sane, but of course as we all know, society and this world is anything but sane.
 

tbeltrans

Senior Member
Just out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with Brooklyn Center? Is it poor? Predominantly Black? On TV it looks middle-middle class but that may not be the case.

I used to live in a town where the police had a terrible attitude toward the residents. It was a type of class warfare wherein the working class cops (23 of them patrolling a largely crime-free town of 6000 mostly wealthy people) took it upon themselves to harass, belittle and demean the residents every chance they got.
In the Twin Cities, at least in the first ring suburbs, there is much diversity. So the answer to your question, it is both. There are certainly clusters of low rent and/or subsidized housing. However, the middle class and poorer housing are in close proximity in that area.

I live about 10 miles east of Brooklyn Center. Right now, my wife and I are about 90 miles south at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, but will be returning home tomorrow.

We have been getting emergency warnings of overnight curfew in our home neighborhood the past few nights.

Tony
 
Last edited:

JimBob1952

Senior Member
I agree about the automatic and semi-automatic weapons, Marg.
BUT,
if they are banned, this is a foot-in -the-door for more and more gun legislation. This is just the beginning!
I know you don't live in America, but I wish i could get across to everyone how important it is to protect the Constitution of the United States!
Gaer, you are always a favorite of mine, but....

The Second Amendment is as follows: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Now, how we got from "a well-regulated Militia" to ownership of military-style, large capacity, semi-automatic firearms is beyond me. I don't think it what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. I think they were thinking that members of the militia (needed for keeping order, defending against Indian attacks and in case the British ever came back) should be allowed to keep their muskets and Kentucky rifles at home and not locked up in the town armory.
 

win231

Well-known Member
Location
CA
Gaer, you are always a favorite of mine, but....

The Second Amendment is as follows: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Now, how we got from "a well-regulated Militia" to ownership of military-style, large capacity, semi-automatic firearms is beyond me. I don't think it what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. I think they were thinking that members of the militia (needed for keeping order, defending against Indian attacks and in case the British ever came back) should be allowed to keep their muskets and Kentucky rifles at home and not locked up in the town armory.
The "debate" also involves the second part of the sentence: "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
"The people" are not the Militia; they are regular citizens. How you interpret it depends on which part you focus on.
 
15 cases where officers mistaken guns for Tasers and only 3 convicted.

"... prosecutors charged the officer, Johannes Mehserle, with second-degree murder. They reviewed surveillance video that showed him pulling out a firearm and shooting Grant, who was lying face down on a train platform. ... Mehserle was convicted of involuntary manslaughter."

"In 2005, for instance, a Minnesota federal court permitted a suit against Officer Gregory Siem, who was accused of drawing his Glock, not his Taser, and shooting Christofar Atak, a man his partner was trying to handcuff. In a decision denying qualified immunity, the judge ruled there were too many differences between the weapons for Siem’s actions to have in fact been accidental. .... The Glock was not only heavier than the Taser, the judge decided; it also had “a noticeably different feel when held.” The pistol, he noted, had a trigger safety, but the Taser had no “security mechanism.” Finally, the Glock had a conventional trigger, the Taser a rubber button."

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/n...0210414-pvgqpv4wfrhfzhpy2pzwjwbjha-story.html
 

fmdog44

Well-known Member
Location
Houston, Texas
Just another case of what to do and what not do if you carry a gun. Fatal shooting last night and be sure to read the reason one man was killed.

The shooting happened in the 5000 block of I-45 North just before 1 a.m.

Police said they responded to reports of gunfire and found a man down in the parking lot with another man sitting in a vehicle nearby. The man who was shot, who police identified as 36-year-old Michael D. Simmons, was pronounced dead at the scene.

The other man, age 51, was identified as the shooter. He was questioned and detained, according to police.

North officers were on a shooting at 5000 North Fwy. One adult male is deceased due to his injuries. #hounews CC9
— Houston Police (@houstonpolice) April 14, 2021
Investigators were told the two men got into an argument over a parking space at the motel.

Simmons walked to his vehicle and then returned “with his hand in his waistband and again confronted the other male,” police stated in a press release. “Fearing for his life, the male pulled his weapon and shot Simmons.”

“The facts were presented to the Harris County District Attorney's Office, which advised the incident would be referred to a grand jury.”
 

Dana

Senior Member
Very sad situation.

IMO this type of thing will continue in one form or another until people learn to comply with the police.

I know that this will sound like blaming the victim but IMO it's about saving a person's life.

Fight for lasting change/justice in the courtroom, not in the streets.

Well said Aunt Bea...
 

Keesha

🌸
Location
Canada 🇨🇦
I'm conservative on some things, not so much on others. For example, my position on gun control is that all semi-automatic weapons should be banned outright. People with permits would be allowed to own bolt-action rifles, revolvers and pump or single-shot shotguns for sporting and home defense purposes.

That will never happen, so I usually just keep my thoughts to myself.
I like your position on gun control.
 

ohioboy

Member
Location
Ohio
Re: home invasions, absolutely, but that IMO is where guns should remain and where guns should essentially be restricted to, unless of course a gun-owner is looking to transport his or her firearm for use related to sport, which applies in our country, but to allow everyone to carry guns around freely is the most asinine thing I ever heard, regardless of what the 2nd amendment affords.

But hey, three cheers to the nut-job who filed a suit in and around 1975 that the SCOTUS ruled on, stating that the 2nd amendment rights weren't being interpreted properly, otherwise a special permit would still be required (and in effect) for an individual to legitimately carry outside of ones own home, which IMO is the way it should be, regardless of the fact that criminals may or may not have guns.

That would be sane, but of course as we all know, society and this world is anything but sane.

Try to remember the case and specific year, there is nothing in the Annotations here about it. I went through SC decisions of 1975, could not find any 2nd AM cases.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-2
 

Rosemarie

Well-known Member
Location
England
The British police manage to do their job efficiently without the need for guns. They are only issued with firearms when there is a definite threat to life.
There is enough copying the Americans already, to the detriment of our society. I hope to God we don't follow suit on the issue of armed cops. It seems to be a case of...if a person is in possession of a gun, they will use it, whether or not the situation deems it necessary.
 

Aunt Marg

Granny Pantie Power!

win231

Well-known Member
Location
CA
The British police manage to do their job efficiently without the need for guns. They are only issued with firearms when there is a definite threat to life.
There is enough copying the Americans already, to the detriment of our society. I hope to God we don't follow suit on the issue of armed cops. It seems to be a case of...if a person is in possession of a gun, they will use it, whether or not the situation deems it necessary.
Uh......yeah. These must be toy guns.

Image: Counterterrorism officers

Counterterrorism officers with London's Metropolitan Police.Kirsty Wigglesworth / AP
 
Last edited:

Chet

Member
Location
PA, USA
The British police manage to do their job efficiently without the need for guns. They are only issued with firearms when there is a definite threat to life.
There is enough copying the Americans already, to the detriment of our society. I hope to God we don't follow suit on the issue of armed cops. It seems to be a case of...if a person is in possession of a gun, they will use it, whether or not the situation deems it necessary.
Your history and societal makeup allow your police to do their job without guns. I imagine there is an unspoken rule between themselves and the bad guys to keep it that way.

Here though, we can't put the genie back in the bottle. Looking at it optimistically though, you can go to any small town in America and it will be nothing like what goes on in the bigger cities. It's two different worlds.
 

911

Well-known Member
Location
USA
Your history and societal makeup allow your police to do their job without guns. I imagine there is an unspoken rule between themselves and the bad guys to keep it that way.

Here though, we can't put the genie back in the bottle. Looking at it optimistically though, you can go to any small town in America and it will be nothing like what goes on in the bigger cities. It's two different worlds.
Why do you think that is?
 

Chet

Member
Location
PA, USA
Why do you think that is?
In the small towns around here like anywhere, everyone knows each other and their families and grew up together. We are all of the same race mostly, ethnic group and religeon. We have physical space between eachother and not jammed in large aapartments like sardines. There are multiple outdoor opportunities with fresh air. Societal stress levels are low.

I remember driving through Philadelphia once. Phew! Never again.

As for guns, I have several sitting in a drawer and they are not bothering anyone and never will.
 

OneEyedDiva

Well-known Member
Location
New Jersey
Very sad situation.

IMO this type of thing will continue in one form or another until people learn to comply with the police.

I know that this will sound like blaming the victim but IMO it's about saving a person's life.

Fight for lasting change/justice in the courtroom, not in the streets.
Aunt be "this type of thing" shouldn't happen regardless. How the HELL do you mistake a gun for a taser? That's just not a reasonable excuse. You mean to tell me a 26 year veteran of the force can't tell the difference? And she was teaching another officer??!! She shouldn't have been on the force if she can't tell the difference! This is not to say I don't disagree with you about complying with the police. But as I noted in a couple of other threads, even Black people who have complied have been injured or killed at the hands of the police.
 


Top