monkeyfrog:

goestoeleven:

tacticalhoneybadger:

goestoeleven:

Really getting tired of this one.
There are logical points you can make to advance your argument. This one couldn’t be less logical if you tried.

Hi, I’m your average CCW Holder.
I own firearms, I even carry a few of them. Guess what? I’m a very capable shot, well beyond the level of local law enforcement as I’ve taken several of those guys to school at the range. Of course, Southern Local Law Enforcement tend to be better shots as a lot of those boys are gun enthusiasts too but I digress. I can probably shoot on par with the secret service when it comes to pistols. [I really should join competitions but hey, lack of money kinda stunts that idea.] 
It’s not a stupid argument, it’s a comparison that many people are missing. Why is he allowed to protect his family with armed men when he’s hinted numerous times he doesn’t want us to be armed to protect our own. It’s done in a lot of very poor thought out ways, but at its simplest form, the argument is there. It’s even more ironic when you think about the fact that his unchecked usage of drones have killed over 600 civilians to 3,000 “terrorists” in Yemen and Pakistan, a lot of those civilians being children, including an American Civilian who was just sixteen years of age.
I’m sorry, who needs what regulated again? What were you saying that seemed stupid?

Your argument falls apart as soon as you say you can probably shoot on the level of the Secret Service. Please note - I’m not calling you a liar. If you can, that’s great. I’m always happy to hear that someone has taken the time to receive proper training on how to use a firearm and takes pride in their training and skill.
But if you are trained on that level, you’re not the average CCW holder, and to pretend you are is ridiculous. I know plenty of CCW holders. I know what it takes to get and maintain a CCW. I’ve had this conversation with CCW holders and most of them admit the “training” required is woefully inadequate. It is not Secret Service level training. Please don’t pretend that it is. Please don’t pretend most CCW holders have anywhere near the same kind of training or ability to respond to a threat as the Secret Service do. It’s absolutely false and it is insulting.
What I said may have seemed stupid to you, but it wasn’t. I made a statement. One backed by reality. And I pointed out how completely illogical the argument being made was. I didn’t judge or insult anyone. There’s no need to insult me.

Here’s what I see missing from this conversation:
A gun “enthusiast” who is a good shot can kill both of them before any of the weapons encircling make them “safe” with return fire. So no, guns don’t make us safe. More guns don’t make us safer, and dead people cannot return fire.
If guns don’t kill people, people do, then guns don’t make people safe, either. People do.

Jesus Christ. No one, anywhere, is saying that people can’t protect their families.
Some people, though, are saying that first going through a background check and then doing all this brave protecting with something less than a 30-round magazine might be in order. 

monkeyfrog:

goestoeleven:

tacticalhoneybadger:

goestoeleven:

Really getting tired of this one.

There are logical points you can make to advance your argument. This one couldn’t be less logical if you tried.

Hi, I’m your average CCW Holder.

I own firearms, I even carry a few of them. Guess what? I’m a very capable shot, well beyond the level of local law enforcement as I’ve taken several of those guys to school at the range. Of course, Southern Local Law Enforcement tend to be better shots as a lot of those boys are gun enthusiasts too but I digress. I can probably shoot on par with the secret service when it comes to pistols. [I really should join competitions but hey, lack of money kinda stunts that idea.] 

It’s not a stupid argument, it’s a comparison that many people are missing. Why is he allowed to protect his family with armed men when he’s hinted numerous times he doesn’t want us to be armed to protect our own. It’s done in a lot of very poor thought out ways, but at its simplest form, the argument is there. It’s even more ironic when you think about the fact that his unchecked usage of drones have killed over 600 civilians to 3,000 “terrorists” in Yemen and Pakistan, a lot of those civilians being children, including an American Civilian who was just sixteen years of age.

I’m sorry, who needs what regulated again? What were you saying that seemed stupid?

Your argument falls apart as soon as you say you can probably shoot on the level of the Secret Service. Please note - I’m not calling you a liar. If you can, that’s great. I’m always happy to hear that someone has taken the time to receive proper training on how to use a firearm and takes pride in their training and skill.

But if you are trained on that level, you’re not the average CCW holder, and to pretend you are is ridiculous. I know plenty of CCW holders. I know what it takes to get and maintain a CCW. I’ve had this conversation with CCW holders and most of them admit the “training” required is woefully inadequate. It is not Secret Service level training. Please don’t pretend that it is. Please don’t pretend most CCW holders have anywhere near the same kind of training or ability to respond to a threat as the Secret Service do. It’s absolutely false and it is insulting.

What I said may have seemed stupid to you, but it wasn’t. I made a statement. One backed by reality. And I pointed out how completely illogical the argument being made was. I didn’t judge or insult anyone. There’s no need to insult me.

Here’s what I see missing from this conversation:

A gun “enthusiast” who is a good shot can kill both of them before any of the weapons encircling make them “safe” with return fire. So no, guns don’t make us safe. More guns don’t make us safer, and dead people cannot return fire.

If guns don’t kill people, people do, then guns don’t make people safe, either. People do.

Jesus Christ. No one, anywhere, is saying that people can’t protect their families.

Some people, though, are saying that first going through a background check and then doing all this brave protecting with something less than a 30-round magazine might be in order. 

blog comments powered by Disqus
  1. aarbear98 reblogged this from goestoeleven
  2. kansasxinxblood reblogged this from rifleisfine
  3. thunderdolt reblogged this from goestoeleven and added:
    One thing the CCW person is missing is that marksmanship is not a factor when hiring officers of the law. Discharging a...
  4. simonavalle reblogged this from rifleisfine
  5. lafix reblogged this from goestoeleven and added:
    No kidding. Like the Secret Service didn’t have to have their backgrounds checked. Like he could waive Secret Service...
  6. elizabite said: Oh my god, so am I.
  7. kristynibbles said: ughhhhhhhh