Proof that concealed carry permit holders live in a dream world

[noobsrevenge]

Thanks alternate account for OP. I guess I'll put this account on ignore also.

So at the first hint of any opposition to your ignorant viewpoint it seems you prefer to bury your head in the sand rather than form a coherent, worthwhile, or intelligent rebuttal.

Pathetic (and typical of people in your camp I might add). Shoot first ask questions later amIright?

edit: must add I don't care one bit about backing up the OP's viewpoint whatsoever, I only post when I see extreme stupidity, ignorance, or idiocracy that I feel like chiming in on, or in your case, all three! Congrats!

 

[edro]

Right.
But this video was shot not soon after Aurora had occurred, so that was the situation that they simulated.

In this exact scenario, where the gunman walks straight in and immediately shoots the armed citizen, of course the armed citizen doesn't have a chance.
Most armed criminals don't do that.

That's like saying it isn't worth police wearing a bullet proof vest because 1 criminal shot a cop in the face.
Bullet proof vests still give you a much higher survival chance, just like guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.

 

[JMapleton]

On almost all of those situations, they said "this person would have been killed!"

Well if they didn't have a gun in the first place, they would certainly be dead! At least they have a chance to stop the shooter if they have a gun and prevent further damaged to themselves or others. If no one has a gun everyone is dead.

I understand what they're saying, that a lot of people who own guns aren't coordinated enough to actually use them well. But at least we'd have a chance.

 

[Triumph]

Youtube sucks SO BAD, so I can't even watch the video. Just sits there, no buffering, no playing, just sits there. Cause youtube sucks.

But IIRC, this is the 20/20 or some such news video that "exposed" the lies of concealed carry, by setting up a scenario in which the carrying student was absolutely doomed to fail. Guy comes into class, immediately starts shooting the only student in the room who has a hidden gun on him. Riiiiigggghhhttt... A SWAT team member would fail in the same situation. Therefore, SWAT team members do not need to have guns.

 

[desura]

In this exact scenario, where the gunman walks straight in and immediately shoots the armed citizen, of course the armed citizen doesn't have a chance.
Most armed criminals don't do that.

That's like saying it isn't worth police wearing a bullet proof vest because 1 criminal shot a cop in the face.
Bullet proof vests still give you a much higher survival chance, just like guns in the hands of law abiding citizens.

I don't know if the "gunman" knew exactly who had the CCW, but it was a rough simulation of what happened in Aurora. If someone did have a gun in Aurora, they would have been too stunned to realize what was going on until it was over.

 

[SparkyJJO]

I don't know if the "gunman" knew exactly who had the CCW, but it was a rough simulation of what happened in Aurora. If someone did have a gun in Aurora, they would have been too stunned to realize what was going on until it was over.

Any proof to back up that claim, or are you just stating your opinions as fact?

 

[Phoenix86]

Right.

But this video was shot not soon after Aurora had occurred, so that was the situation that they simulated.

Everyone was wearing shirts 3 sizes too large, had gloves and head gear on? The shooter knew who was armed and shot them within seconds of entering the room?

 

[madoka]

If someone did have a gun in Aurora, they would have been too stunned to realize what was going on until it was over.

Even a whacked out nutjob like the Aurora shooter knows better than this:

"Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.

Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater’s entrance.

A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing "The Dark Knight Rises" on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris St, Aurora, Colorado. At 4 miles and an 8-minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn't the closest. Another theater was only 1.2 miles (3 minutes) away.

There was also a theater just slightly further away, 10 minutes. It is the "home of Colorado's largest auditorium," according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters were 18 minutes, two at 19 minutes, and 20 minutes away. But all of those theaters allowed permitted concealed handguns.

So why would a mass shooter pick a place that bans guns? The answer should be obvious, though it apparently is not clear to the media – disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...er-single-out-cinemark-theater/#ixzz2RpMne3wA

 

[styrafoam]

The biggest issue I have with CCW is that majority of the time I spend away from home is either driving to/from work or in the office. That means roughly 50 hours of the 60 I spend out of the home doesn't lend to carrying. Top that off, we are not allowed to carry in bars, sporting events or federal buildings so pretty much the grocery store or mall is the only place to carry.

Sometimes it works out though -
http://www.abc4.com/content/news/to...-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

 

[Agent11]

This video was nothing but propaganda.

 

[highland145]

The test was doomed to fail/liberal propaganda.......so what? What permit holders should do is get a reality check. Are you training, do you have the proper weapon/carry style, are you aware of your surroundings vs "zombie mode" like most people, have you created bad habits unintentionally, are you training.....muscle memory is invaluable.

I carry every day and don't train enough. Should be at least once/mo, imo. I'd bet 90+% of permit holders haven't fired in 6 months. Maybe some police too. I have a pistol on my desk, am I going to defend myself if a robber comes in or wet my pants?

2 anecdotal examples:
While taking my conceal class, low stress situation, I forgot to take the safety off twice. Granted, not my normal carry but I'm familiar with the pistol and I was the one that had just put the safety on.

A few thousand times, I've taken my pocket carry+holster out and put it on my desk when I get to the office. My bro asked me if I'd been practicing my draw. I showed him by pulling my pocket carry+holster.....He says, "WTH are you going to do with that?":$

I don't care if Jules has an agenda or not, it's on the permit holders to ensure their abilities.

 

[MisterJackson]

Probably more typical than it should be. But the situation you've presented was designed for failure.

Holy shit, I'm agreeing with Sixone for once.

 

[Nebor]

That video was absolutely ridiculous. They put college students in a contrived scenario with virtually no training.

Rates of CHL issuance is extremely low in every state. No state has more than 5% of their population licensed to carry a handgun. I think the people that go through the trouble (limited though it may be) to get a license take it fairly seriously. Now I know that the majority of licensees don't carry a gun every day, but they're almost certainly part of the "gun culture."

I hadn't fired a weapon since I returned from Afghanistan in December, but I went out to the range yesterday with my normal carry pistol (H&K USP Compact .357 SIG,) drew from concealment and fire 12 rounds into the 10 ring at 20m. Stepped over to the rifle range, and was hitting the 8" steel plates at 100m every time with my PS90 w/ eotech, standing up. So while firearms skills are perishable, there's some degree of "riding a bike" to it. I don't think that the kind of people that get concealed handgun licenses are reckless idiots or that they forget how to use\draw their weapon.

That video was just a hatchet job. I've been an Army officer, reserve Texas peace officer and firearm enthusiast for several years now. Police officers like people with CHLs, it's an indicator that they're good, law abiding people who bring just a little bit more safety and stability to the world.

 

[sixone]

I don't care if Jules has an agenda or not, it's on the permit holders to ensure their abilities.

Absolutely. That kind of training is desperately needed, but not widely available to most Americans.

 

[AstroManLuca]

So basically the gun nuts are all implying that in a real life situation, everything would be perfect and there would be no undue stresses on the gun holder?

"No battle plan survives contact with the enemy"

 

[z1ggy]

Absolutely. That kind of training is desperately needed, but not widely available to most Americans.

Or too expensive. I went to the range with my g/f and we shot around 300 rounds total. The range time + the ammo + targets cost me around $200. That's not something I am going to go do every week because that's just too much money.

I make sure I can place all of my rounds in the 10pt or the very next section from 25ft, and I feel confident. If I were to have to use my firearm in a real life situation though, I probably would not use it over 25-50ft as at 75ft my accuracy went down. In a public setting, missing the person who aims to harm you, might cause harm to an innocent person. In all reality, unless faced with a situation I couldn't escape by running away....Well...I'd probably run away instead of trying to shoot.

 

[highland145]

Absolutely. That kind of training is desperately needed, but not widely available to most Americans.

You can get a day long home defense class for under $200 around here. Taught by off duty police.

 

[sixone]

You can get a day long home defense class for under $200 around here. Taught by off duty police.

I'm enrolled in one coming up here in a couple of weeks.

I'm talking more about personal protection out in public areas, where a class covers lots of different situations and good decision making.

I can draw and shoot fairly quickly, with a good degree of accuracy. Not so sure about doing the same under pressure, when the hormones are flowing.

 

[Nebor]

So basically the gun nuts are all implying that in a real life situation, everything would be perfect and there would be no undue stresses on the gun holder?

"No battle plan survives contact with the enemy"

There's tons of stress. That's why we have high capacity magazines.

I'd go so far as to say that some situations are near hopeless, like the Aurora Colorado shooting. You're sitting in a crowded theater, get hit with tear gas, all hell breaks loose as some guy at the very front starts firing into the crowd. People are running everywhere, you're all fucked up from the tear gas... Oh, and the guy way down there at the front has body armor on. You can't close the distance to him because of the crowd, you can't accurately fire because of the effects of the gas and people jostling you in their attempts to escape... It's just a nightmare situation.

 

[highland145]

I'm enrolled in one coming up here in a couple of weeks.

I'm talking more about personal protection out in public areas, where a class covers lots of different situations and good decision making.

I can draw and shoot fairly quickly, with a good degree of accuracy. Not so sure about doing the same under pressure, when the hormones are flowing.

Thought you may be. I haven't looked locally. Bro has been to one in N.C., 3 days, $1500(? I'd have to ask him). That's not going to happen for most people.

 

[shortylickens]

Even a whacked out nutjob like the Aurora shooter knows better than this:

"Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.

Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater’s entrance.

A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing "The Dark Knight Rises" on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris St, Aurora, Colorado. At 4 miles and an 8-minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn't the closest. Another theater was only 1.2 miles (3 minutes) away.

There was also a theater just slightly further away, 10 minutes. It is the "home of Colorado's largest auditorium," according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters were 18 minutes, two at 19 minutes, and 20 minutes away. But all of those theaters allowed permitted concealed handguns.

So why would a mass shooter pick a place that bans guns? The answer should be obvious, though it apparently is not clear to the media – disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012...er-single-out-cinemark-theater/#ixzz2RpMne3wA

Yup, putting up a sign just tells killers they wont have any resistance.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I have a few concerns with CCW. One is that CCW holders are well trained, and it doesn't seem like there is much training required to get a CCW license.

Other concern is the type of person who, because they are armed, gets brave and becomes overly aggressive. And this has happened, the guy in FL who shot and killed the teen for playing loud music, and that guy who confronted two teens in a pickup because they cut him off (road rage). Both of these guys are facing charges now but one teen is dead who likely didn't deserve to die and the other two were extremely lucky.

 

[AstroManLuca]

I have a few concerns with CCW. One is that CCW holders are well trained, and it doesn't seem like there is much training required to get a CCW license.

Other concern is the type of person who, because they are armed, gets brave and becomes overly aggressive. And this has happened, the guy in FL who shot and killed the teen for playing loud music, and that guy who confronted two teens in a pickup because they cut him off (road rage). Both of these guys are facing charges now but one teen is dead who likely didn't deserve to die and the other two were extremely lucky.

This is what I don't understand about opponents of gun control. At every turn, they oppose any effort to require more rigorous testing for CCW permits, universal background checks, waiting periods... anything that could potentially prevent some people from getting a gun. Yet they also preach about how important it is that guns are only accessible to "responsible, law-abiding citizens." Well, how the F do you know if the person you're selling the gun to is responsible and law-abiding if you don't do a background check and don't require any serious testing to get a CCW permit?

I suppose it is just the "slippery slope" argument and fighting for what they perceive to be their own best interests. I'm not against guns entirely, I just think that they are dangerous and we need to make sure that only people who are very qualified can get them, and if that slows down the process, that's probably a good thing.

 

[pontifex]

I don't know if the "gunman" knew exactly who had the CCW, but it was a rough simulation of what happened in Aurora. If someone did have a gun in Aurora, they would have been too stunned to realize what was going on until it was over.

pretty sure this video is much older than post-Aurora (unless there's another Aurora shooting I am unaware of).

You also can't take this 1 very unique situation and say CCW doesn't work. Just because it may not work in this seriously flawed scenario, doesn't mean it won't work in others.

There are lots of scenarios where you won't be directly confronted by the shooter where you can have time to deploy your own weapon.

Also, if any of this gun control shit goes through, I demand Blade Control. Knives, axes, chainsaws, scissors, etc. You know once guns are banned the criminals will turn to knives. Might as well take care of them pro-actively now. I'm scared of other people with knives. You never know what they are going to do, crazy people out there. Some of those knives are scary - black handles, tactical knives, large blades...pissing my pants just thinking about it.

ANYONE can go into a grocery store or convenience store and buy a knife! They could buy a huge butcher knife or something like that! No background checks! don't even need ID! WALMART sells knives!!! and you can even by them online without a background check also!!!!!!

The only knives allowed for civilians will be butter knives. Only professional chefs/cooks, butchers, etc can own the larger and more deadly knives. And then they have to have a permit that says they are trained and know what they are doing. They MUST be locked in a safe when not in use.

Axes and chainsaws will only be allowed for professional lumberjacks or people who need them to do a specific job. Again they will need to be licensed for them and must lock them in safes when not in use.

Why does someone even need a chainsaw anyway? It can cut through a 5 foot round tree in seconds! thats crazy! you should only need a handsaw to cut down a tree.

Sharp scissors will be banned! Safety scissors for everyone!

Oh, and don't forget those ceramic/plastic knives that allow you get them through metal detectors and on planes etc! banned entirely!

if you don't agree with this then you don't care about the safety of our children!

 

[sixone]

This is what I don't understand about opponents of gun control. At every turn, they oppose any effort to require more rigorous testing for CCW permits, universal background checks, waiting periods... anything that could potentially prevent some people from getting a gun. Yet they also preach about how important it is that guns are only accessible to "responsible, law-abiding citizens." Well, how the F do you know if the person you're selling the gun to is responsible and law-abiding if you don't do a background check and don't require any serious testing to get a CCW permit?

I suppose it is just the "slippery slope" argument and fighting for what they perceive to be their own best interests. I'm not against guns entirely, I just think that they are dangerous and we need to make sure that only people who are very qualified can get them, and if that slows down the process, that's probably a good thing.

Because the military did much more extensive background checks on Nidal Hasan, than what a gun-buyer would ever have. The FBI was warned about the older marathon bomber.

And they still committed their crimes. Until we have a protocol in place that uses background checks EFFECTIVELY, we're going to have a problem that refusing a sale can't solve.