I just read an article on the local news, a san diego woman was texting and driving 85 Mph on the 405 frwy and rear ended a small car killing the driver a young high school girl, she had sent 13 texts in 15 min's just before her phone rang and she answered it right at the point of impact (she was just sentanced to 6 years in prison), so Im wondering how many people are killed everyday due to texting and driving ? I know a kid who totalled his dads excursion when he was on the 5 frwy in lake elsanor he said he looked down to answer a text and that fast he was smashed up on the k-rail in the center devide. yes you get my point right ? how many cell phones kill innocent people daily ?
Godfather.
And that's why the government is taking steps to make cell phones safer by changing the laws...just like some folks want to do with guns.
Nice patience, RG... pointing out this obvious commonality.
Some people can't see that the rules of the road- enforced by police- amount to the same thing as restrictions or guns.
In Canada, we have to have adequate insurance in the event we have an accident driving our tool designed to transport us. You would think, all things being equal, that gun owners would be required to have insurance in the event their tool designed to kill did exactly that.
I just read an article on the local news, a san diego woman was texting and driving 85 Mph on the 405 frwy and rear ended a small car killing the driver a young high school girl, she had sent 13 texts in 15 min's just before her phone rang and she answered it right at the point of impact (she was just sentanced to 6 years in prison), so Im wondering how many people are killed everyday due to texting and driving ? I know a kid who totalled his dads excursion when he was on the 5 frwy in lake elsanor he said he looked down to answer a text and that fast he was smashed up on the k-rail in the center devide. yes you get my point right ? how many cell phones kill innocent people daily ?
Godfather.
And that's why the government is taking steps to make cell phones safer by changing the laws...just like some folks want to do with guns.
Nice patience, RG... pointing out this obvious commonality.
Some people can't see that the rules of the road- enforced by police- amount to the same thing as restrictions or guns.
In Canada, we have to have adequate insurance in the event we have an accident driving our tool designed to transport us. You would think, all things being equal, that gun owners would be required to have insurance in the event their tool designed to kill did exactly that.
It comes and goes lol, especially with da godfadda!
Licensing, insurance, liability... Seems to be common sense to anyone who isn't obsessive with their guns and butthurt at the thought of FORCED responsibility.
2 Las vegas cops are lucky to be alive after a man walked up to their car when they were waiting to turn at a stop light and began firing into the vehicle. Luckily, only one cop was shot in the hand. The other cop was able to chase down the suspect and arrest him.
These attacks on the police are getting out of control. They are being targeted. This can't continue to go on.
2 Las vegas cops are lucky to be alive after a man walked up to their car when they were waiting to turn at a stop light and began firing into the vehicle. Luckily, only one cop was shot in the hand. The other cop was able to chase down the suspect and arrest him.
These attacks on the police are getting out of control. They are being targeted. This can't continue to go on.
Yes, it's bad.... but i don't think there is much that an be done about it unless the people doing it give hints beforehand.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
another one where the good guy ones: Police say a Norfolk pizza delivery driver turned the tables on a teen robbery suspect.
Officers were called to the 900 block of Galt Street around 9:30 p.m. Sunday for the report of a shooting.
The investigation revealed a 15-year-old tried to rob a Chanello’s pizza delivery driver at gunpoint. But, the driver also had a gun and shot the teen.
Investigators charged the 15-year-old with robbery and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. He will remain at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital until he recovers from his injuries.
And if this story doesn't show the rest of the civilized world just how FUCKED UP the USA is.....Then I don't know what does.
The 15 year old has a gun and is out committing armed robbery. The pizza driver is delivering pizza while being armed. And you think it is good guys VS bad guys.
Its just another pathetic story that shows something needs to be done...NOW
Bad guy had gun good guy thankfully had one too and defended himself. Case closed.
Eh not so fast. If only robber had gun pizza guy looses 30 bills. Not sure of exact stat but vast majority of robberies aren't violent. Give crook money and go.
If everyone had a gun or robbers thought they had guns, they would simply shoot and kill then take.
One gun likely nothing happens. Two guns and someone will get hurt.
So in this case we'll pay thousands for ass's medical bills for the 30 bills.
you assume that nothing would have happened but how can one be sure? I'm glad the good guy one this time around.
Odds. Course understand I'm the one that needs to come up with some stats. % of robberies resulting in injuries when victim doesn't resist. Will work on it.
another one where the good guy ones: Police say a Norfolk pizza delivery driver turned the tables on a teen robbery suspect.
Officers were called to the 900 block of Galt Street around 9:30 p.m. Sunday for the report of a shooting.
The investigation revealed a 15-year-old tried to rob a Chanello’s pizza delivery driver at gunpoint. But, the driver also had a gun and shot the teen.
Investigators charged the 15-year-old with robbery and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony. He will remain at Sentara Norfolk General Hospital until he recovers from his injuries.
And if this story doesn't show the rest of the civilized world just how FUCKED UP the USA is.....Then I don't know what does.
The 15 year old has a gun and is out committing armed robbery. The pizza driver is delivering pizza while being armed. And you think it is good guys VS bad guys.
Its just another pathetic story that shows something needs to be done...NOW
Bad guy had gun good guy thankfully had one too and defended himself. Case closed.
Because this guy had a gun for... Wait for it..: PROTECTION! And it worked. Case closed.
bingo!!!!!!
just a girl i posted these numbers in one of the many gun threads on here lol. check them out, especially bullet one and three.
pretty crazy stats I just found: (https://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp) * Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18]
* A 1997 U.S. Justice Department survey of 14,285 state prison inmates found that among those inmates who carried a firearm during the offense for which they were sent to jail, 0.7% obtained the firearm at a gun show, 1% at a flea market, 3.8% from a pawn shop, 8.3% from a retail store, 39.2% through an illegal/street source, and 39.6% through family or friends.[94]
* A 1994 survey conducted by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that Americans use guns to frighten away intruders who are breaking into their homes about 498,000 times per year.[130]
So ~80% purchased with no background check. Goes against argument of further registration.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
the gun on the left is the bb gun. I like how they darken the barrel of that one to make it more confusing . but still....don't carry a bb gun and point it at a cop. dumb dumb dumb
the gun on the left is the bb gun. I like how they darken the barrel of that one to make it more confusing . but still....don't carry a bb gun and point it at a cop. dumb dumb dumb
I think that's the point. People do that intentionally.
the gun on the left is the bb gun. I like how they darken the barrel of that one to make it more confusing . but still....don't carry a bb gun and point it at a cop. dumb dumb dumb
I think that's the point. People do that intentionally.
Maybe that meme belonged in the police abuse thread. Not that those stories aren't clear cut cases of police abuse, but some of them deal directly with issues such as this.
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
Then they could simply use a taser. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. I am unaware of any police departments that train police to shoot to wound. If I was I a life or death scenario, I am not shooting to wound. Honestly, I don't want cops to be trained to just wound. If you have to resort to using your gun on someone, then wounding probably isn't an option.
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
Then they could simply use a taser. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. I am unaware of any police departments that train police to shoot to wound. If I was I a life or death scenario, I am not shooting to wound. Honestly, I don't want cops to be trained to just wound. If you have to resort to using your gun on someone, then wounding probably isn't an option.
Exactly this. And when you're in a high stress situation, accuracy is compromised due to adrenaline and the speed at which events move. So cops (and anyone taking a firearms self-defense course) are trained to fire at the largest part of the target - center mass. Basically the torso. It is the easiest target on the body, and will stop the attacker, It isn't always a fatal shot, but due to the number of organs in the torso from heart and lungs to the digestive system and everything in between, there is definitely potential for that shot to be fatal. Shooting at a kneecap or shooting the hand holding a weapon is typically the stuff of action movies and TV shows.
That being said, I'd like to see more non-lethal force used before resorting to the firearm. More taser, less gun. But that is not always practical or appropriate. I just hate to see escalation to a fatal shooting before other non-lethal methods are exhausted.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
Then they could simply use a taser. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. I am unaware of any police departments that train police to shoot to wound. If I was I a life or death scenario, I am not shooting to wound. Honestly, I don't want cops to be trained to just wound. If you have to resort to using your gun on someone, then wounding probably isn't an option.
Exactly this. And when you're in a high stress situation, accuracy is compromised due to adrenaline and the speed at which events move. So cops (and anyone taking a firearms self-defense course) are trained to fire at the largest part of the target - center mass. Basically the torso. It is the easiest target on the body, and will stop the attacker, It isn't always a fatal shot, but due to the number of organs in the torso from heart and lungs to the digestive system and everything in between, there is definitely potential for that shot to be fatal. Shooting at a kneecap or shooting the hand holding a weapon is typically the stuff of action movies and TV shows.
That being said, I'd like to see more non-lethal force used before resorting to the firearm. More taser, less gun. But that is not always practical or appropriate. I just hate to see escalation to a fatal shooting before other non-lethal methods are exhausted.
I'm Irish, the only time I see a gun is on TV Thanks for the explanation though!
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
Then they could simply use a taser. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. I am unaware of any police departments that train police to shoot to wound. If I was I a life or death scenario, I am not shooting to wound. Honestly, I don't want cops to be trained to just wound. If you have to resort to using your gun on someone, then wounding probably isn't an option.
Exactly this. And when you're in a high stress situation, accuracy is compromised due to adrenaline and the speed at which events move. So cops (and anyone taking a firearms self-defense course) are trained to fire at the largest part of the target - center mass. Basically the torso. It is the easiest target on the body, and will stop the attacker, It isn't always a fatal shot, but due to the number of organs in the torso from heart and lungs to the digestive system and everything in between, there is definitely potential for that shot to be fatal. Shooting at a kneecap or shooting the hand holding a weapon is typically the stuff of action movies and TV shows.
That being said, I'd like to see more non-lethal force used before resorting to the firearm. More taser, less gun. But that is not always practical or appropriate. I just hate to see escalation to a fatal shooting before other non-lethal methods are exhausted.
bingo. plus if you shoot someone's leg they can still shoot back.
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
Then they could simply use a taser. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. I am unaware of any police departments that train police to shoot to wound. If I was I a life or death scenario, I am not shooting to wound. Honestly, I don't want cops to be trained to just wound. If you have to resort to using your gun on someone, then wounding probably isn't an option.
Well you have to be a hell of a lot closer to someone to taser them than you do to shoot them, and tasers don't always incapacitate people (and conversely, sometimes they kill people too). I mean, I would support using rubber bullets most too... the more options the better. I still think that training to shoot people in the leg instead of vital areas would be a GREAT idea. It's not like they HAVE to shoot people in the leg. It's just a good skill to have. I realize that it's not a guarantee that they won't hit something more vital because of aim, but I would like it if they'd at least try it when appropriate (maybe some do, despite not being trained for it, I don't know). It would be very appropriate to do that in a lot of cases. If you shoot someone in the leg you do prevent them from shooting you at least for long enough to see if they're still going to continue the fight, in which case you aim for the head. But you could still give them an opportunity to end the gun fight and no one dies, which I think would happen in most cases. I'm also thinking of the situations where it's not even a gun fight. So many cops have shot to kill when they're dealing with someone with some other weapon. I remember some guy was killed by cops in the Vancouver because he was swinging a bike chain around. He was seriously mentally ill. I wish they'd stopped him with a bullet in the leg, so he'd have been able to get the medical help he needed. His family was devastated, apparently.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ Anyone dumb enough to be waving a realistic-looking BB gun around deserves to be shot by the cops. Of course the cops need to assume that's a real gun. I don't get upset about those stories at all.
What about 12-year-old Tamir Rice?
Hmm. Well, good question - there is certainly an age limit to what I said (nothing is black and white). Though I'm not sure 12 years old is under that limit. I guess that depends on what he knew about the world. Some 12 year olds are a lot more wise than others. A 12 year old could be innocently playing and never even connected a BB gun to a real gun in his own head (maybe he's not too bright). Then again, a 12 year old could also be fully aware that a real-looking BB gun could be used as an intimidation tactic, depending on the kid and what kind of environment he's been in, and would be well aware that cops react to people holding guns. I don't think you need to be very old to know that. Either way, if the cops knew nothing except for the fact that a kid was pointing a gun at them, I wouldn't blame them for shooting him (I do think cops should go for the leg more though... I think they are trained to always use lethal force in those cases, but I'm not convinced that's always the greatest idea).
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
I never ever understand why they don't shoot people in the knee or the shoulder. Why kill when you can incapacitate just as easily?? I expect them to be trained well enough to be able to miss vital organs
Then they could simply use a taser. There is no such thing as shoot to wound. I am unaware of any police departments that train police to shoot to wound. If I was I a life or death scenario, I am not shooting to wound. Honestly, I don't want cops to be trained to just wound. If you have to resort to using your gun on someone, then wounding probably isn't an option.
Well you have to be a hell of a lot closer to someone to taser them than you do to shoot them, and tasers don't always incapacitate people (and conversely, sometimes they kill people too). I mean, I would support using rubber bullets most too... the more options the better. I still think that training to shoot people in the leg instead of vital areas would be a GREAT idea. It's not like they HAVE to shoot people in the leg. It's just a good skill to have. I realize that it's not a guarantee that they won't hit something more vital because of aim, but I would like it if they'd at least try it when appropriate (maybe some do, despite not being trained for it, I don't know). It would be very appropriate to do that in a lot of cases. If you shoot someone in the leg you do prevent them from shooting you at least for long enough to see if they're still going to continue the fight, in which case you aim for the head. But you could still give them an opportunity to end the gun fight and no one dies, which I think would happen in most cases. I'm also thinking of the situations where it's not even a gun fight. So many cops have shot to kill when they're dealing with someone with some other weapon. I remember some guy was killed by cops in the Vancouver because he was swinging a bike chain around. He was seriously mentally ill. I wish they'd stopped him with a bullet in the leg, so he'd have been able to get the medical help he needed. His family was devastated, apparently.
If you shoot someone in the leg, you prevent them from shooting at you long enough to see if he's still a threat? Well, I'm not going to take that chance. Just be sure the first time and aim for the chest.
More people are likely to die in shootings unless firearms rules are overhauled, a watchdog has warned. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabularies said it was easier to own a gun than become a bus driver because of flaws in medical checks. The HMIC said the licensing system for England and Wales has fundamental gaps and previous recommendations for reforms had not been acted on. Only four of 11 forces it inspected were effectively monitoring licences. As of March last year, 734,336 people were entitled to possess and use shotguns or rifles under the legal system for licensing and certificating firearms in England and Wales. In total, these people owned more than 1.8m guns. Gun crime is very low in the UK - and murders and manslaughters involving shootings are relatively rare. There were 29 in the year to March 2014 - and three of those involved a legally held firearm. Stephen Otter, the inspector behind the report, said that while evidence showed that licensed gun holders were very unlikely to be involved in crime, cases where individuals did shoot themselves or others, such as in domestic disputes, often had medical conditions at their root. "It is highly likely that if these processes are not tightened up satisfactorily, there will be another tragedy, particularly if you look at mental health and growing issues around dementia," he said. "Too often, forces are not following the Home Office guidance that is in place, sometimes inexcusably compromising public safety. Lessons from past tragedies have not always been learnt and this fails the victims of those events, including their families, unacceptably." Each police force oversees licensing in its area - but the HMIC said the national guidelines were being inconsistently and inadequately applied and lessons from past tragedies had not always been learnt. Applicants must disclose any relevant medical condition and give the police permission to speak to their GP. However, doctors don't have to respond to the police request - and in practice many licences are issued without policing having completed full medical checks or speaking to referees. The HMIC said that these gaps in the rules meant someone applying to become a bus driver faced more rigorous medical checks than someone who wanted a gun. It called on all applicants to be subjected to a mandatory medical examination as part of their application - and said doctors should be under a duty to record gun ownership and, critically, alert the police to any relevant deterioration in health. Policing minister Mike Penning said: "The Government keeps the firearms licensing system under review to safeguard against abuse by criminals and to preserve public safety. "Discussions are already under way with the police and the medical profession to ensure appropriate arrangements for information sharing between GPs and police."
Gun ownership in England and Wales 151, 413 firearms certificates on issue as of March 2014 - typically meaning sports rifles 582,923 shotgun certificates on issue 1,837,243 shotguns and firearms licensed 72% increase in licensed firearms between 1998 and 2014 (I think 1998 is when new rules came in) 260 certificates revoked as a result of a review and 949 applications refused
So are we strangers now? Like rock and roll and the radio?
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 36,448
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Comments
Some people can't see that the rules of the road- enforced by police- amount to the same thing as restrictions or guns.
In Canada, we have to have adequate insurance in the event we have an accident driving our tool designed to transport us. You would think, all things being equal, that gun owners would be required to have insurance in the event their tool designed to kill did exactly that.
Licensing, insurance, liability... Seems to be common sense to anyone who isn't obsessive with their guns and butthurt at the thought of FORCED responsibility.
These attacks on the police are getting out of control. They are being targeted. This can't continue to go on.
Though understand you are for registration.
http://www.vox.com/2015/8/11/9126891/gun-suicide-rate?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=voxdotcom&utm_content=thursday
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
http://www.americas1stfreedom.org/articles/2015/9/11/the-gun-that-survived-911/
http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/man-shoots-dead-an-intruder-then-realises-its-his-own-father/ar-AAed9nf?li=AA59G3&ocid=mailsignoutmd
That said, from what I can tell in that particular case, the cops were irresponsible with their use of firearms and how they responded to the 911 call anyway, failing to assess the situation properly. That kid wasn't waving that gun around or pointing it at anyone when they pulled up and killed him, AND the person who called 911 specifically said that it could be a fake gun and that it seemed to be a kid, which the cops definitely should have taken into account.
That being said, I'd like to see more non-lethal force used before resorting to the firearm. More taser, less gun. But that is not always practical or appropriate. I just hate to see escalation to a fatal shooting before other non-lethal methods are exhausted.
I still think that training to shoot people in the leg instead of vital areas would be a GREAT idea. It's not like they HAVE to shoot people in the leg. It's just a good skill to have. I realize that it's not a guarantee that they won't hit something more vital because of aim, but I would like it if they'd at least try it when appropriate (maybe some do, despite not being trained for it, I don't know). It would be very appropriate to do that in a lot of cases. If you shoot someone in the leg you do prevent them from shooting you at least for long enough to see if they're still going to continue the fight, in which case you aim for the head. But you could still give them an opportunity to end the gun fight and no one dies, which I think would happen in most cases. I'm also thinking of the situations where it's not even a gun fight. So many cops have shot to kill when they're dealing with someone with some other weapon. I remember some guy was killed by cops in the Vancouver because he was swinging a bike chain around. He was seriously mentally ill. I wish they'd stopped him with a bullet in the leg, so he'd have been able to get the medical help he needed. His family was devastated, apparently.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34248179
More people are likely to die in shootings unless firearms rules are overhauled, a watchdog has warned.
Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabularies said it was easier to own a gun than become a bus driver because of flaws in medical checks.
The HMIC said the licensing system for England and Wales has fundamental gaps and previous recommendations for reforms had not been acted on.
Only four of 11 forces it inspected were effectively monitoring licences.
As of March last year, 734,336 people were entitled to possess and use shotguns or rifles under the legal system for licensing and certificating firearms in England and Wales. In total, these people owned more than 1.8m guns.
Gun crime is very low in the UK - and murders and manslaughters involving shootings are relatively rare. There were 29 in the year to March 2014 - and three of those involved a legally held firearm.
Stephen Otter, the inspector behind the report, said that while evidence showed that licensed gun holders were very unlikely to be involved in crime, cases where individuals did shoot themselves or others, such as in domestic disputes, often had medical conditions at their root.
"It is highly likely that if these processes are not tightened up satisfactorily, there will be another tragedy, particularly if you look at mental health and growing issues around dementia," he said.
"Too often, forces are not following the Home Office guidance that is in place, sometimes inexcusably compromising public safety. Lessons from past tragedies have not always been learnt and this fails the victims of those events, including their families, unacceptably."
Each police force oversees licensing in its area - but the HMIC said the national guidelines were being inconsistently and inadequately applied and lessons from past tragedies had not always been learnt.
Applicants must disclose any relevant medical condition and give the police permission to speak to their GP.
However, doctors don't have to respond to the police request - and in practice many licences are issued without policing having completed full medical checks or speaking to referees.
The HMIC said that these gaps in the rules meant someone applying to become a bus driver faced more rigorous medical checks than someone who wanted a gun.
It called on all applicants to be subjected to a mandatory medical examination as part of their application - and said doctors should be under a duty to record gun ownership and, critically, alert the police to any relevant deterioration in health.
Policing minister Mike Penning said: "The Government keeps the firearms licensing system under review to safeguard against abuse by criminals and to preserve public safety.
"Discussions are already under way with the police and the medical profession to ensure appropriate arrangements for information sharing between GPs and police."
Gun ownership in England and Wales
151, 413 firearms certificates on issue as of March 2014 - typically meaning sports rifles
582,923 shotgun certificates on issue
1,837,243 shotguns and firearms licensed
72% increase in licensed firearms between 1998 and 2014 (I think 1998 is when new rules came in)
260 certificates revoked as a result of a review and 949 applications refused
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/road-raging-mercedes-driver-shoots-himself-in-the-leg-while-waving-rifle-and-handgun-at-florida-family/
A man accidentally shot himself in the leg while waving two guns at a woman and her children during a Florida road rage incident.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14