TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Evidence?
School shooting Florida
- Thread starter Darat
- Start date
- Status
Evidence?
Obviously not
But what does the civilians being armed have to do with the armed forces.
Do they not bother training your armed forces there and do they have to bring their own guns when they sign up?
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Perhaps in your world. Not mine.
It's not so much that people in the UK are proud of the fact that we don't have the sort of public shootings that are so often in the news in the US ... most people in the UK just never think about guns and public shooting incidents ... it's not something that anyone needs to worry about in the UK.
The only reason that UK members here are comparing UK gun controls with those in the US, is that like almost everyone around the world we are horrified at how this keeps happening in a country with such lax and free gun laws ... and most of us are sad at the thought (the fact, actually) that yet again young kids in a US school have been forced to pay with their lives ... those are (imho) the main reasons why UK posters are so strongly opposed to what's happening with private gun ownership in the US.
Soldier in the US do not come from the jungle, they come from the civilian population.
Get a clue or two. They are cheap and freely offered. Do you have any idea how long it takes to train a person unfamiliar with firearms? You obviously don't. In addition, based on the tone, you're really not interested in being educated. Uh, bye.
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2001
- Messages
- 21,821
Above it was noted that he is a full sheriff's deputy.
You are suggesting that a sheriff's deputy does not have training in using weapons?
Damn right.
That's why it's obscene to allow disturbed teenagers legal access to firearms - especially semiautomatic rifles.
Although you seem to be saying that this is necessary for soldiers.
The Russians have a large army, and they don't have frequent school shootings. Are you really saying that the US is less inherently capable than Russia?
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Last edited:
Many other countries have effective soldiers whose first experience with firearms was when they joined the armed services.
The US can't rely on its recruits being familiar with firearms, so they will have to have training in place for that.
Even if they have experience with pistols or hunting rifles, how much use would that be for controlled firing of a fully-automatic weapon?
I'd like something more than your assertion before I accept that school shootings are a necessary side effect of an effective infantry.
Yes I do.
You seem to be implying that part of having a decent armed forces is having armed civilians, as somehow this means they would need less training with guns in combat situations.
I'm struggling to see this.
The same statutes that make everyone responsible for the damage and injury they cause. The tobacco suits and settlements would be an excellent example. The question of the degree to which arms manufacturers and dealers are responsible in any particular case would be a matter of fact to be resolved at trial, and any conviction would be subject to multiple levels of appeal.
That's how our system works. Judges, juries and appeals courts determine whether a case is legal. Your clergyman tells you what's moral. If you want to claim that making and selling guns is a sacrament, you might actually find some support. That's the core of the problem.
I'm obviously using a different language to you.
If the officer only had a taser, you'd presumably say that until he was shot and killed he wasn't outgunned by the person with the semiautomatic rifle.
I agree that a highly-skilled person with a handgun might be able to outshoot a bad shot with a semiautomatic pistol, even at a fairly long range.
If you want, I will rephrase my comment.
The problem is that it's possible for a civilian with a grudge to perfectly legally acquire firepower so that if they are an average shot they would outgun cops who aren't specially prepared.
Sure, you only have to worry about vehicles, knives, and acid attacks. All occurring with no viable defense.
So, do you think you are the only ones horrified? I get that impression as it has been expressly stated that Americans don't value human life as much as others. That is a horrific and unforgivable insult!
Need I inform you that the US is not the UK, nor is it Europe. There is a very different starting point. Hunting is prevalent all over the US except in the large cities. Yes, I know there is some limited hunting in the UK and elsewhere, but it is minuscule compared to the activity in the US.
Guns have been an integral part of American culture since before we kicked your asses out some 200 + years ago. Attempting to get rid of them or even apply significant restriction might have a worse result than finding other plausible solutions. There are other solutions, however, just like here each side doesn't listen to the other one, therefore nothing ever gets done. That in some respects might not be as bad as doing some of the "feel good" proposals advocated by gun grabbers. % 99 of the gun owning citizenry are not the problem, most firmly believe that giving up their firearm(s) supposedly for the greater good would have no effect. Therefore, most of that % 99 won't support anything related to the elimination, curtailment, or anything ultimately leading to the banning of any type of firearm...
Pterodactyl
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,280
When I was at Parris Island, I thought I was pretty hot ****, because I had done a lot of shooting as a kid/teenager, killed deer and stuff like that. I qualified just fine, but I was nowhere near the elite level shooters in my company.
A couple weeks of intensive training and guys who had never held a weapon before were much more competent than I. FWIW.
A sheriff's deputy is a fully trained law enforcement officer comparable to a police officer. Some places have police departments and sheriff's departments, with different functions; in others, the county sheriff functions as the only police agency. This guy's own department chief says the guy failed to follow his training.
https://sheriff.org/LE/Pages/Home.aspx
I have heard that military firearms instructors prefer newbies; "experienced" shooters have to be untrained from all their fathers' and uncles' bad habits.
Pterodactyl
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2013
- Messages
- 1,280
An officer in his position most definitely would’ve had active shooter training.
No, that would take too long. They graduate from basic training after 10 weeks, fully armed and ready for battle. It's not like becoming a doctor or even an EMT. The U.S. Army gets more applicants than it can take.
https://www.goarmy.com/soldier-life/becoming-a-soldier/basic-combat-training.html
I won't address the first part of your post, only this part...
The mass shooter DID NOT acquire his firearm legally. He had mental health issues and lied on the required form he had to submit... That's part of the problem. Even if people are caught lying on these forms, they are commonly not prosecuted.
Your taser versus a rifle is a bit absurd. Yes, if two people are otherwise equal the pistol will nearly always lose to a rifle, EXCEPT when the person possessing the pistol is well trained versus a teenager with a rifle that he likely does not have much experience with. Marksmanship is only one part of this equation. Tactics are a bigger part. Originally, prior to Columbine first responders waited for SWAT to arrive. However, after Columbine, it was noted that most mass shooters would stop and flee or kill themselves if confronted. This latter point is very, very important. If the Broward Co. Sherriff's department has not been trained on this type of response, then the Sheriff needs to find another job. As a minimum they should discuss and train for tactics in this situation, period.
- Status