It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Watchful1
Originally posted by infinite
Originally posted by Watchful1
If we ban guns kids will just turn to explosives....
really? i don't follow the logic.
explosives are harder to get hold of, espeically the military type. plus the laws around the sale of certain chemicals are tight in the States now since 9/11.
Anarchist Cookbook...
Molotov Cocktails for lunch anyone?
Didnt someone eariler say that some kid in the eightys who was a physics major shoot professors? Wouldnt it follow that chemistry or even just highly motivated students bent on destrustion be very able to kill with explosives?
Oh yea... AND its soooo tough for thoes Iraq militants to devise SOME sort of IED, be it small or large...
posted by Realtruth
If one person on campus had a gun, was near the perp and knew how to use it, fewer people would have lost their lives.
posted by Watchful1
The funny part about ALL this is that eventually all guns must be taken. No one needs guns anymore . . People with guns will try to keep them and when the government comes to take them . . long story short by violence we stop violence. The government wont care as long as you follow laws preventing death by arms or civil disobedience. [Edited by Don W[
Originally posted by semperfortis
If I, a legal gun carrying citizen, had been within sight of the subject when it started, MANY, MANY that have died would in fact be alive...
Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
No offence Semper but I find your statement disingenuous. You are not a ‘legal gun carrying citizen’ you are a cop.
As a cop Semper you have been trained how to handle your weapon and how to control your emotions in a situation like this one today. Most citizens that carry weapons legally or not do not have your training and would most likely be firing randomly in the general direction of the nut with the gun, due to their lack of training they would not be able to control them selves to aim correctly.
If someone was there with a gun to try and stop the gunman it could vary well have added to the body count.
Originally posted by Mr Mxyztplk
Originally posted by semperfortis
If I, a legal gun carrying citizen, had been within sight of the subject when it started, MANY, MANY that have died would in fact be alive...
No offence Semper but I find your statement disingenuous. You are not a ‘legal gun carrying citizen’ you are a cop.
As a cop Semper you have been trained how to handle your weapon and how to control your emotions in a situation like this one today. Most citizens that carry weapons legally or not do not have your training and would most likely be firing randomly in the general direction of the nut with the gun, due to their lack of training they would not be able to control them selves to aim correctly.
If someone was there with a gun to try and stop the gunman it could vary well have added to the body count.
posted by Realtruth
donwhite, The reason I say this is that I was in law enforcement for a number of years . . police do their best to thwart criminal behavior they can not be there 100% of the time . . wait for their CO and hand it over to the investigators. I don't think many people here and I hope that many people here will never experience the madness, illogical, irrational behavior of a criminal that is unpredictable. I know this is a very insensitive term to be used now, but have you ever heard of "Shooting ducks in a barrel"? This is exactly what transpired today and like I said if one student or maybe, even an off duty officer would have been carrying and knew how to use their weapon, fewer lives would have been lost.
Here is some interesting info. Semper correct me if I am wrong, but most of the altercations I have been in were within 5 to 10 feet. And that is generally the correct distance for most altercations, but I would have to agree with the poster that officers do have much, much more training and muscle memory response when it comes to confrontation. Now as to control our emotions, that is another thing. Officers try to do their best, but they are human beings and a lot is going through your mind in a gun drawn situation. Semper, Are we on the same page here? There are people that are not officers that I know that are not only a good shot, but very level headed people in panic situations. Medics, Doctors, firemen, etc. [Edited by Don W]
Originally posted by Zaphod58
As someone in the original thread pointed out, guns are tools. You can kill someone with a screwdriver, should we take those away too? I grew up playing Doom, and Duke Nukem, and all those other first person shooters, but have NEVER thought about picking up a gun and killing someone. You can't blame games and tv for something like this happening.
From initial reports he was looking for his girlfriend, and probably had a "If I can't have her, then no one can, and I can't live without her" mentality.
Originally posted by Strangerous
Originally posted by eagle32
I was just throwing out a random situation.
I cant have a gun, i can NOT kill an intruder despite what you claim, if i did then i would be locked up.
There was a famous case here where a farmer shot an intruder with a shotgun (licensed) and was sent straight to jail.
I dont know what countries law you are thinking of but in Britain there is no justifying shooting anyone for any situation unless you are licensed to do so as an armed officer. (not including war situations).
This is simple fact.
If the saviour had a licensed gun he would still be at fault.
Unlike the U.S a guy like me cant go just get a gun license and have firearms, otherwise everyone would do it with half a chance.
You can't have a gun? Why what have you done in your past? Must be a bad lad, I know people with previous convictions for ABH who now hold guns. Only those who are unstable or have served 3 years in jail can never have a gun. Everyone else has just to meet the criteria.
The famous case you cite (incorrectly) involved a farmer with an unlicenced shotgun (also a section 5(?) weapon as it was 5 shot). He'd lost his licence for shooting at people's dogs previously. He booby trapped the house, lay in wait, shot twice, executing the burglar when he clearly posed no threat and couldn't prove self-defence - a bad example to choose.
Better example to cite
news.bbc.co.uk... - stabbing someone 7 times and cutting their throat CAN be justified
There was also the pensioner who shot dead a bloke who was banging on his door with an airgun (ie must be over-powered) and walked free, and the guy who shot & killed the guy on his doorstep with a spear gun, again acquitted - both these used and proved self-defence but I can't find those stories online.
Kenneth Noye stabbed and killed an undercover copper in his garden, claimed self-defence and was acquitted.
A friend of mine was sitting in his house with guns locked and loaded as a burglar 'had something long in his arm' while in his garden, phoned plod and only put the guns away when the blue lights showed up - again no issue.
There are loads more examples
The official line:
www.cps.gov.uk...
A legal interpretation:
www.bsdgb.co.uk...
Confirmation of what I said about reasonable force and what I say about Tony Martin:
ttp://www.medical-journals.com/r04_0911.htm
The use of force in self-defence in the UK is based on your perception of the threat at the time, if you can prove you believed at the time he was armed and you had access to a firearm then deadly force is justified as long as it can be considered 'reasonable'(assuming there's no alternative to prevent bodily harm).
If the perp has a knife or gun then an armed response certainly could be considered reasonable.
These rules apply to everyone: the police, the forces (HINT - that's why they say 'stop or you will be shot' it shows shooting was a last resort response to prevent harm) and householders .
The licenced-gun holder would not be 'at fault' unless the self-defence defence was proved to be false.
There is an issue with intent in that you'd need to unlock / load your gun (ie you could have used that time to escape) but that's a technicality and depends on the layout of the property etc
Those are the simple facts, mate.
You're just plain wrong as a short google search / those links will tell you.
Why don't you look into UK firearms law before posting?, this took me 10 minutes to put together.
A little research would help you understand your rights rather than just posting false info and thinking you have none