Clearly you have failed to identify the difference between joe bob the citizen and joe bob the bottom of the barrel government agent all hopped up on that government mojo thinking he's got the authority and duty to shoot grandmas. They may both be idiots and unworthy of carrying, but one has the power of the government behind him, while one does not.

It's part of the same line of reasoning behind not trusting the police. Lots of joe bobs who shouldn't be an armed government agent...

[Edited on November 5, 2013 at 8:52 AM. Reason : .]

11/5/2013 8:49:58 AM

Quote :

"How is that any different than anyone having a gun?"

because it's compulsory.

it's the same reason that allowing teachers who are licensed CCP holders to carry is a good idea, but "arming teachers" is about the dumbest fucking policy imaginable.

11/5/2013 9:24:12 AM

even if a TSA agent is licensed to carry concealed (and an airport wasn't a place that prohibited it), I still wouldn't want them to be armed. TSA is not law enforcement, they have no police powers and we need to stop the creep that is moving to giving them more power. It started subtly with uniforms and badges, it needs to stop before its too late. It's much harder to dial back security theater than it is to prevent it to begin with.

11/5/2013 9:55:52 AM

I disagree. TSA agents are good guys by virtue of their snappy blue uniforms and latex gloves. Therefore, it stands to reason that they should be armed, so as to prevent the bad guys with guns.

It's bullet-proof logic, chums.

11/5/2013 3:50:04 PM

we just need gun free zone signs at the airport. that will solve the problem so TSA agents wont need guns

11/5/2013 4:05:06 PM

Cities with airports shouldnt allow the sale of firearms and should also try voluntary gun surrender drives with cash rewards.

11/5/2013 4:40:01 PM

An editor for Guns & Ammo, Dick Metcalf, wrote a column that suggested that some gun control is good. The things he suggests are pretty mild. Column is available here:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Lets-Talk-Limits-by-Dick-Metcalf-of-Guns-Ammo-December-2013.pdf

as expected the gun nuts continued to be nuts, and their reaction was exactly what you would expect. Ad Age covered the outrage and backlash here:
http://adage.com/article/media/guns-ammo-editorial-supports-gun-control-angers-readers/245135/

Guns & Ammo responded by issuing an apology and firing Metcalf (to which I responded by cancelling my subscription to Guns & Ammo)

What was Metcalf's crime? Statements like "I don't think that requiring 16 hours of training to qualify for a concealed carry license is infringement in and of itself. But that's just me." are not outrageous.

gun nuts are fucking retarded

11/7/2013 11:11:18 AM

^this.

11/7/2013 11:45:39 AM

^^ "I don't think that making it harder to get something is infringing on getting that thing". Brilliant logic.

11/8/2013 11:28:06 PM

Metcalf's crime is that he didn't know the context of the term "Well Regulated" and completely misinterprets it. That is inexcusable for someone that writes on gun laws for a living. "Well regulated" applies to the status of the militia, meaning that the militia needs to be properly functioning - i.e. armed. He changes that into present day language as somehow meaning that the right to bear arms needs to be regulated. He then justifies this message by making glorified examples of where we've trampled on the first amendment. His message wasn't off base, but his constitutional interpretation was so far off base that he deserved to be fired.

11/8/2013 11:55:20 PM

Quote :

"He changes that into present day language as somehow meaning that the right to bear arms needs to be regulated."

This isn't "present day language". This is centuries of legal precedents.

I know it's hard for some people to digest, but the constitution doesn't stand alone, it has the entire US Code with it.

11/12/2013 6:34:03 PM

Sure, the US code, which defines the militia as all members of the national guards and all able bodied men between the ages of 17 and 45.

11/12/2013 6:55:43 PM

The editor's basic premise isn't wrong; conflating rights must be balanced.

But the way he's using this fact would justify any regulation.


"Hey, rights can be regulated."

11/12/2013 7:31:02 PM

I'm pretty staunch in my support of gun rights, and even I think that CCP training should be more demanding , even if CCP holders are statistically a non-issue.

11/12/2013 7:35:26 PM

Quote :

"all able bodied men between the ages of 17 and 45"

so you'll gladly turn in your guns if you're ever injured and when you turn 46?

11/12/2013 9:54:09 PM

does that mean women aren't allowed to own guns either? I'm torn on whether or not to support this newfound evidence.

11/13/2013 12:16:41 AM

^^ Not me, but then I don't buy the argument that the 2nd amendment is talking about a right of the militia's any more than I think the first is talking about a right of only news corporations. The problem with the "militia" only interpretation of the 2nd amendment is that it rests entirely on the idea that in the 2nd amendment (and only the 2nd amendment) the phrase "the people" has a different and far more restricted and limited meaning than in the entire rest of the constitution and it's amendments, and that a document which makes a distinction between the federal government, the states and the people in other places fails to do so in this amendment.

11/13/2013 9:55:16 AM

I wonder why this latest school shooting hasn't really turned up the gun control crowd thus far. It's been 2 days and I'm not really hearing anything in the news.

Is it because he used a shotgun and not an AR-15?

IBT OMG lets ban shotguns and machetes.

But really, if you knew what you were doing, you could do a lot more damage with a shotgun and some buckshot than a fully loaded AR-15.

12/15/2013 9:49:51 AM

body count was low

[Edited on December 15, 2013 at 10:06 AM. Reason : duh]

12/15/2013 10:06:42 AM

Also he was 18, so it's entirely possible that he bought the gun himself legally.

12/15/2013 10:09:20 AM

^^^the last time they tried to get gun control through congress all they did was cause a big increase in the sales of guns and ammo.

getting illegal aliens registered to vote is the flavor of the week



[Edited on December 15, 2013 at 10:12 AM. Reason : g]

12/15/2013 10:09:23 AM

He bought the pump shotgun legally

12/15/2013 10:48:22 AM

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/14/2-shot-man-in-custody-after-florida-theater-shooting/?intcmp=latestnews

So a 43 year old dude was texting in the theatre, a 71 year old retired police captain asks him to stop, an argument ensues, and 71 year old retired police captain pulls out his gun and shoots and kills the texter. Could this texter's death been avoided if the captain hadn't brought a gun to the theatre? Or would he just have strangled him instead? Or maybe it could have been avoided if the texter also had a gun? Sounds like they're considering using using the "stand your ground" defense for the captain.

1/14/2014 9:46:56 AM

i think we need cell phone jammers in movie theaters

1/14/2014 9:54:27 AM

Quote :

"Sounds like they're considering using using the "stand your ground" defense for the captain."

I don't see how. Stand your ground isn't a license to shoot anyone for any reason, it simply removes the requirement that you retreat from an assault before you're allowed to fight back. For SYG to apply, the captain would have to be able to show that he was justified in using deadly force in all other respects except for that he didn't retreat.

1/14/2014 10:21:09 AM

Quote :

"Could this texter's death been avoided if the captain dude hadn't brought a gun cell phone to the theatre?"

[Edited on January 14, 2014 at 10:41 AM. Reason : g]

1/14/2014 10:41:13 AM

So you're under the impression that it's cell phones that kill people, not guns?

1/14/2014 10:44:37 AM

as long as we are blaming things and not people we should blame both right

1/14/2014 10:47:25 AM

sure man. the phone was just as much to blame for the death as the gun.

1/14/2014 10:48:59 AM

71yo probably has PTSD

/argument

1/14/2014 11:02:14 AM

this is the kind of gun crime that will always happen as long as there are guns out there, reducing the number of guns is the only way to reduce this kind of gun crime.

1/14/2014 11:02:15 AM

have fun trying to take them from the type of person that shoots someone over text messaging

1/14/2014 11:03:24 AM

its not a matter of taking guns, its a matter of raising the requirements and tracking guns and letting the numbers come down over time

1/14/2014 12:41:40 PM

^the requirements are high enough already

1/14/2014 12:55:18 PM

you can't track guns without requiring registration which would never pass Congress.

1/14/2014 12:59:12 PM

^^i think they're pretty lax. why do you feel they're too high? is any regulations too much regulation?

[Edited on January 14, 2014 at 1:00 PM. Reason : ]

1/14/2014 12:59:38 PM

The type of person that would concealed carry to a movie theater would jump through any and all hoops to get that gun.

1/14/2014 1:09:49 PM

^^i didnt say they were too high

felons and known mentally ill people cant own guns now.

[Edited on January 14, 2014 at 1:10 PM. Reason : s]

1/14/2014 1:10:17 PM

Quote :

"this is the kind of gun crime that will always happen as long as there are guns out there, reducing the number of guns is the only way to reduce this kind of gun crime."

Or we could work to build a society where someone texting in a theater (or for that matter being asked to stop texting) isn't worth getting into an argument over. I mean seriously, this issue was apparently so important to these guys that they got into a shouting match with each other in the middle of a damn movie theater. And then so important to one that apparently he was willing to kill over it. WTF?

[Edited on January 14, 2014 at 1:18 PM. Reason : WTF]

1/14/2014 1:17:10 PM

Quote :

"Or we could work to build a society where someone texting in a theater (or for that matter being asked to stop texting) isn't worth getting into an argument over."

How exactly should we go about that? Sounds kinda idealistic. Ban violent movies? Video games? Require etiquette and anger-management classes in elementary school?

[Edited on January 14, 2014 at 1:23 PM. Reason : ]

1/14/2014 1:18:44 PM

Quote :

" Sounds kinda idealistic"

kinda like passing more laws to stop actions that are already illegal

1/14/2014 1:24:25 PM

no, not really the same thing.

1/14/2014 1:25:34 PM

not the same

Quote :

"^the requirements are high enough already"

no, not even close. we can start by requiring background checks for every gun purchase.

1/14/2014 1:52:11 PM

Quote :

"The type of person that would concealed carry to a movie theater would jump through any and all hoops to get that gun."

This guy is a retired cop. He can conceal carry pretty much any and everywhere, no questions asked.

1/14/2014 2:03:08 PM

Quote :

"no, not even close. we can start by requiring background checks for every gun purchase."

Which would have solved what in this case?

1/14/2014 2:22:12 PM

Nobody's claiming it would prevent all cases of gun violence, or this specific case.

Again, how could work to build a society where people wouldn't resort to killing over texting in a theatre? Because I'm all for it.

1/14/2014 2:32:44 PM

if he'd stabbed the guy in the throat with a pen from his wife's purse it most likely wouldn't even be mentioned on this site. it's all about what fits your narrative.

1/14/2014 3:25:11 PM

Here's the thing: I grew-up around guns, my family owns guns. I'm not anti-gun. I just realize we have a gun-violence problem in America. I cannot understand how some people can argue "you can just as easily kill somebody with a pen as you can a gun." No you can't, that's simply not true. This dude got mad (and apparently had anger management issues), pulled his gun out and simply pulled the trigger. Much easier and less messy than a 71 year old trying to drive a pen into someone's juggler. Plus, it'd be much easier for the 41 year old to fend off a pen attack of a 71 yr old than a bullet. When I see people making that type of argument, it's apparent that they're letting their emotions drive their arguments, rather than rationale.

1/14/2014 3:43:24 PM

except i didn't say anything about it being easier. you're just making things up. again, to fit the narrative.

[Edited on January 14, 2014 at 4:00 PM. Reason : ]

1/14/2014 3:59:34 PM

haha, you're the one making up the hypothetical situations of a pen-stabbing. to fit your narrative.

1/14/2014 4:04:16 PM