What's new

Gun Control

I am glad that I live in a town where criminals have to legitimately worry that the house they are entering is the home of a gun owner. I see CCers and open carriers every day. Love walking thru Walmart and seeing a rancher with a handcannon strapped to his belt. They have never given me pause and caused me to worry.

Criminals risk their own lives by entering anothers house uninvited at any time.
 
Read this:

LOGANVILLE, Ga. (AP) - A Georgia mother who shot an intruder at her home has become a small part of the roaring gun control debate, with some firearms enthusiasts touting her as a textbook example of responsible gun ownership.

Melinda Herman grabbed a handgun and hid in a crawl space with her two children when a man broke in last week and approached the family at their home northeast of Atlanta, police said. Herman called her husband on the phone, and with him reminding her of the lessons she recently learned at a shooting range, Herman opened fire, seriously wounding the burglary suspect.

The National Rifle Association tweeted a link to a news story about the shooting, and support poured in from others online, hailing Herman as a hero. The local sheriff said he was proud of the way she handled the situation.

"This lady decided that she wasn't going to be a victim, and I think everyone else looks at this and hopes they have the courage to do what she done," Walton County Sheriff Joe Chapman said Wednesday.

Herman was working from home Friday when she saw a man walk up to the front door. She told police he rang the doorbell twice and then over and over again. He went back to his SUV, got something out and walked back toward the house, a police report said.

Herman took her 9-year-old son and daughter into an upstairs bedroom and locked the door. They went into bathroom and she locked that door, too. She got her handgun from a safe, the report said, and hid with her children. At some point, she called her husband, who kept her on the line and called 911 on another line.

In a 10-minute 911 recording released by the Walton County Sheriff's Office, Donnie Herman calmly explained what was happening to a dispatcher. His part of the conversation with his wife was also recorded.

"Is he in the house, Melinda? Are you sure? How do you know? You can hear him in the house?" Donnie Herman said.

His wife told him the intruder was coming closer.

"He's in the bedroom? Shh, shh, relax. Just remember everything that I showed you, everything that I taught you, all right?" Donnie Herman told his wife, explaining later to the dispatcher that he had recently taken her to a gun range.

It wasn't clear from the recording exactly when they went to range and Donnie Herman told The Associated Press on Wednesday the family didn't want to talk about the shooting.

After Donnie Herman told his wife police were on the way, he started shouting: "She shot him. She's shootin' him. She's shootin' him. She's shootin' him. She's shootin' him."

"OK," the dispatcher responded.

"Shoot him again! Shoot him!" Donnie Herman yelled. He told the dispatcher he heard a lot of screaming, but he seems to get increasingly worried when he doesn't hear anything from his wife.

Melinda Herman told police she started shooting the man when he opened the door to the crawl space. The man pleaded with her to stop, but she kept firing until she had emptied her rounds, she told police. She then fled to a neighbor's house with her children.

The man drove away in his SUV. Police found the SUV on another subdivision street and discovered a man bleeding from his face and body in a nearby wooded area. Police identified the suspect as 32-year-old Paul Slater of Atlanta.

Chapman said the hospital asked him not to comment on Slater's condition, but he said he is not certain Slater will survive. Authorities have a warrant but haven't formally arrested Slater yet. They plan to charge him with burglary, possession of tools for the commission of a crime and aggravated assault, Walton County sheriff's Capt. Greg Hall said.

A phone number for Slater was not listed and it was not clear whether he has an attorney.

Authorities believe Slater targeted a home in another local subdivision but left when confronted by the homeowner, Chapman said.

(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
 
Honestly that story doesn't sound very good to me. It seems like he believed he was entering an empty house. When he opened the door to where her and her kids were she just started shooting and as he begged her to stop she continued shooting. I think a verbal command is in order first. "Stop! Get out of my house of I'll shoot you!" If he doesn't stop or makes any sort of sudden movement go ahead and shoot. If he leaves let him leave. The gun might have been able to save her and her kids' life without her shooting a man in front of her children.
 
I see term limits as a way to protect voters from themselves. Besides, if we ever truly get a great person in office, someone who is perfect for the job I don't want them to have to leave because of term limits. I want the freedom to elect the person I think is the best candidate.

Term limits are contrary to freedom, imo.


I guess I never looked at it that way, but I agree with you partially.

Just think of a JFK or RFK type as a president all for 8 terms.
 
Honestly that story doesn't sound very good to me. It seems like he believed he was entering an empty house. When he opened the door to where her and her kids were she just started shooting and as he begged her to stop she continued shooting. I think a verbal command is in order first. "Stop! Get out of my house of I'll shoot you!" If he doesn't stop or makes any sort of sudden movement go ahead and shoot. If he leaves let him leave. The gun might have been able to save her and her kids' life without her shooting a man in front of her children.

If anyone breaks into my home I am assuming they have a gun.
 
If anyone breaks into my home I am assuming they have a gun.

So you're committed to killing anyone who breaks into your home? I don't get it. Assume they have a gun, fine. Does that mean you start shooting the second you have a clear line of fire? I'm not worried about the fate of the intruder. Personally I don't want to kill anyone and I doubly don't want to kill anyone in front of my son.

Shooting in self defense must always be done to stop the threat. Period. Anything else qualifies as murder in my opinion.
 
So you're committed to killing anyone who breaks into your home? I don't get it. Assume they have a gun, fine. Does that mean you start shooting the second you have a clear line of fire? I'm not worried about the fate of the intruder. Personally I don't want to kill anyone and I doubly don't want to kill anyone in front of my son.

Shooting in self defense must always be done to stop the threat. Period. Anything else qualifies as murder in my opinion.

I am assuming that your self defence covers everyone in the household.

For example I am woken up in the middle of the night to breaking glass. I am grabbing my gun. As I leave my room I see a man entering one of my daughters rooms. He is a goner. There is no way in hell I am letting him go in there. None. Now if I see him in the kitchen instead and he is crawling back out of the house. Well, I call 911 and give them info on the guy as I watch him but I let him go.
 
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/20...ack-on-hill-over-executive-order-gun-control/

Reporting that Biden is looking at two things (amoung others) .
1. Magazine limits - I see this as something that will pass and yet not make a damn bit of difference. OK you can not buy a 30 drum mag. Oh the shooter had 5 loaded magazines that hold 15 rounds each? Well dang it...

2. "Universal" Background checks- includes gun shows and private transacations. Man the police are going to have a field day with private sellers. I see so many people breaking this that it will be very hard to effectively enforce.
 
Honestly that story doesn't sound very good to me. It seems like he believed he was entering an empty house. When he opened the door to where her and her kids were she just started shooting and as he begged her to stop she continued shooting. I think a verbal command is in order first. "Stop! Get out of my house of I'll shoot you!" If he doesn't stop or makes any sort of sudden movement go ahead and shoot. If he leaves let him leave. The gun might have been able to save her and her kids' life without her shooting a man in front of her children.

I think I agree with you here, in the most basic way of "wouldn't it be nicer to solve the problem without shooting if possible" sense.

however, the woman was terrified. . . . and a lot of people are just going to be terrified, particularly women and kids, when someone breaks into their homes.

I think the burden of having "good sense" or "good manners" should be left on the perp who trespasses, breaks and enters, or initiates the offense. . . . as long as he is advancing. When he starts to flee the threat just isn't the same. . .

but this woman was cornered, and the terror was understandable. It would have been better if she had listened and stopped firing, but I'm not sure I want people like her becoming the defendants in court. I'd say when you enter unlawfully into others' property and present a threat to their safety, it's like you have pulled a gun on somebody, and if they shoot back it's all self defense. Boy I hate courts sometimes when they get hung up on trying to make people offenders for their inability to keep a cool head when feeling their lives are on the line.
 
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/20...ack-on-hill-over-executive-order-gun-control/

Reporting that Biden is looking at two things (amoung others) .
1. Magazine limits - I see this as something that will pass and yet not make a damn bit of difference.
Except that it would've made a difference in Tucson; Loughner wasn't apprehended until he had to stop to reload. Loughner obtained his weapon(s) legally; if there had been a ban on high-capacity magazines, lives would have likely been saved.

Some people (including that Republican hack Lindsey Graham) say that they can reload just as fast with a smaller clip. Cool. Then no problem with smaller clips.

Lanza allegedly "jungle-rigged" his gun for maximum effect. At Columbine, they killed in multiple ways, but high-capacity was part of it. In other words, there's a demand by mass killers for high-capacity mags. For hunting or sport or even defending your property, the benefit of a high-capacity clip is negligible.


2. "Universal" Background checks- includes gun shows and private transacations. Man the police are going to have a field day with private sellers. I see so many people breaking this that it will be very hard to effectively enforce.
Probably right, but that doesn't mean you don't close the loophole. At least it will help to monitor the gun shows and help appropriate investigation of backgrounds in the future.
 
Last edited:
I don't think gun control would help do much. Plenty of data to support that. We do live in a violence friendly society that can have a powerful impact on those who aren't mentally well.
Um, there's actually plenty of data to support that it does work.

Such as the fact that there have been more mass murders since the assault weapons ban (albeit very weak) was lifted. There were a (short-term) record number of people killed in mass murders in 2012 (>150).

Case studies include assault weapons bans in the UK and Australia in 2006 that vastly reduced the frequency of (mass) murders.

See extensive peer-reviewed studies/meta-analyses by Harvard School of Public Health and Johns Hopkins school of Public Health, which are more credible than your citationless claim.

I think we need to help address people who are mentally sick rather than start taking people's guns away.
Address people who are mentally sick? Great! You ready to pay more taxes? Do you support an individual mandate on insurance? Excellent. Thanks for joining the cause.

As for taking people's guns away, that's a fearmongering talking point by the NRA and other gun-huggers. At most, there will be universal background checks and/or ban on purchases future assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Nobody's taking anybody's guns away--unless someone brings their illegal weapons out in public.

I think people who have guns need to take extra special care of them especially if they feel they could fall into the wrong hands.
You think?

How did that work out for Lanza and his mom and 20+ of the local schoolchildren?

There was no reason for the Lanza family to have an assault weapon.

Increased investment in mental health might have averted the problem.

Restrictions on assault-like weapons would've saved at least some lives.

Instead, now nearly 30 people are dead.


Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't the Colorado theatre shooter was buying ammo in bulk online?
Yep. Glad you support reasonable regulations on monitoring ammo sales.
 
Ingame if you restrict the size of ammo clips they will simply change the way they prepare. It has been widely acknowledged that it takes mere seconds to change a clip. I still maintain that it wont make much of a difference at all.
 
I think I agree with you here, in the most basic way of "wouldn't it be nicer to solve the problem without shooting if possible" sense.

however, the woman was terrified. . . . and a lot of people are just going to be terrified, particularly women and kids, when someone breaks into their homes.

I think the burden of having "good sense" or "good manners" should be left on the perp who trespasses, breaks and enters, or initiates the offense. . . . as long as he is advancing. When he starts to flee the threat just isn't the same. . .

but this woman was cornered, and the terror was understandable. It would have been better if she had listened and stopped firing, but I'm not sure I want people like her becoming the defendants in court. I'd say when you enter unlawfully into others' property and present a threat to their safety, it's like you have pulled a gun on somebody, and if they shoot back it's all self defense. Boy I hate courts sometimes when they get hung up on trying to make people offenders for their inability to keep a cool head when feeling their lives are on the line.


Oh yeah. I'm completely in favor of giving the victim tons of leeway. I would never advocate prosecuting the woman. To be perfectly clear, my concern is for her and her children. People talk a big game about shooting intruders. The one's who have actually done it are traumatized by it. I'm advocating for people to spare themselves the trauma of killing an intruder. I have basically zero concern for the fate of the intruder.
 
Do we know, are they going to confiscate the millions of "high cap" magazines already out there? Will the ones already out there be able to be sold, traded or passed down as part of an estate?
 
They take longer to reload, though, right?

A little, if you have a speed loader and practice you can reload pretty fast.

You do realize that window of opportunity during the reload cuts both ways, right? If I'm trying to defend myself the attacker can use my reload time. So this ammo capacity restriction will maybe play a small role in mass shootings (again, responsible for fewer deaths than lightening) and may play a small role in people's ability to defend themselves as well.

But let's also look at the ultimate reason, according to the supreme court, that we have a right to arms. To defend against a tyrannical government. This mag capacity limitation has the biggest impact on the ability of the people to defend themselves against tyranny.

One Brow, do you feel like this will have an actual affect on violent gun crime? Do you think it will deter anyone from going on a shooting rampage or make shooting rampages less tragic?

I personally don't think a single life will be saved. But hey, if we can't adequately justify our freedoms then they should be taken away.
 
Reporting that Biden is looking at two things (amoung others) .
1. Magazine limits - I see this as something that will pass and yet not make a damn bit of difference. OK you can not buy a 30 drum mag. Oh the shooter had 5 loaded magazines that hold 15 rounds each? Well dang it...

2. "Universal" Background checks- includes gun shows and private transacations. Man the police are going to have a field day with private sellers. I see so many people breaking this that it will be very hard to effectively enforce.

1. That's still half the bullets of five magazines with 30 guns each. However, I agree that the quicker a magazine can be changed, the less effective this will be.

2. Agreed.
 
A little, if you have a speed loader and practice you can reload pretty fast.

Do you have to reload a speed loader? I genuinely have no idea how they work.

For example, let's say there was a ban on civilian purchase of weapons with magazines (so no current guns get taken away). Instead, civilians would have to buy revolvers, rifles that get loaded one bullet at time, etc.

1) Do you think that would significantly impact the ability of a householder to defend themselves against an intruder?
2) Do you think that would significantly impact the ability of a mass shooter to kill a large number of people?
 
As far as universal background checks, I say it's super tough without national firearms registration.
 
Top