OT: Yet another reason to carry concealed weapons (2023 Update)

Flyguy loves over-kill.

Unless the victim is prepared to kill the assailants with enthusiasm and without hesitation, with a point blank chest shot, the gun is just something else for them to steal. Most people are afraid to kill another human being and that's why the gun is worthless.

Fred Bloggs wrote: ===============

** Most people like that do not buy guns in the first place. Plus the assailant does not know who he is up against. Might be a mild mannered lad ( or lass ) just like Kyle.

...... Phil

Most places there was no point in the robbery when shooting anyone would have been justified, Texas excluded. Seems in Texas you can shoot people for pretty much anything including wearing a Halloween mask and not go to jail.

Why would you want to shoot someone to protect a diaper bag? I just hope the bag had some dirty diapers in it. Then the robbers could be charged with possession of hazardous material.

Why would anyone think a gun was needed when the only need was to shut the gate behind her?

SNIPPERMAN LOVES to BE killed!

You have two choices in this situation: you can be:

1. The Victim.
2. The Defender. The Victim accepts WHATEVER the perps decide is their fate; the Defender stops the attack. Generally, that once the perps see that the Defender is armed and go on to another victim - FAST! If they don't, they become statistics and there are fewer criminals to prey among law-abiding people. This is THEIR choice.

No country I know of requires its citizens to submit to criminals. The victim has NO IDEA what the perps are going to do to her or her baby - she has EVERY RIGHT to defend herself with WHATEVER MEANS available to her. To think that they were there to steal her DIAPER BAG is downright INSULTING! OF COURSE they are not there to do that, you IDIOT!!

Flyguy wrote: ==========

** Way too simplistic - like all your idiot posts.

The "defender" in your fake scenario has to risk a long jail tern for shooting an unarmed man. In real life scenarios, there are no witnesses you can rely on and no way to show a court you were justified.

....... Phil

Would be pretty good (for me) if I were allowed to carry concealed weapons, but no one else was. That way, I could defend myself when necessary without having to worry about the increased likelihood that an attacker was carrying a gun.

However, I'm pretty sure that legislation along those lines is not going to be enacted anywhere - not even if gun-loving 'merica.

With that option off the table, I'm probably safer if no one is allowed to carry a concealed weapon than if everyone is.

Sylvia.

If you have to keep life as simple as Flyguy seems to need to, that simple binary choice might be only one that you would bother to think about.

Most advanced industrial countries actively discourage their citizens from carrying guns, and still don't feel the need to imprison as high a proportion of their populations as the US does. Discouraging simple minded half-wits like Flyguy from carrying a concealed gun does seem to have the beneficial side effect of making mas shooting less likely, as well as reducing gun suicides and gun murders by about a factor of ten.

So what were they there to do? That *was* what they ended up doing.

I am an idiot to try to discuss anything reasonably with you. The perps at no time did anything to threaten anyone that I could see. If someone wants your bag, give it to them. Of course they didn't intend to steal diapers, but that's what they did. Would it have been ok to kill them as they were leaving with their ill-gotten diapers?

Like I said, in most states you will be the criminal for shooting someone who is unarmed and has made no threats against you... unless you are a cop. That's why cops don't want you to have guns. If a cop shows up and you are holding a gun, you will be killed by the cop. It has happened no small number of times, the good guy with a gun gets killed by the cops. Cops hardly ever get in trouble for shooting someone. In fact, it is best if they are killed, then they can't testify.

I can't believe you don't know all this already.

The gun was put in the diaper bag thinking no one steals a diaper bag! Now there's another gun roaming around in the criminal circuits.

Rick C snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

A cop will kill you because less paperwork is done. And it usually means an administrative leave with pay. Win win for the cop. Once they decide to mete justice upon you, you get a pair, and if you are still moving, more.

Sloman isn't a 'citizen', he's a 'subject' that was trained from childhood to be a victim.

Don't be stupid. Australia takes civil liberties just as seriously as the US. Like most advanced industrial countries they insist that if you want to have a gun at home you have to get license from the police. This may infringe what you see as one of your liberties, but we don't have nearly as many mass shooting incidents as you do, and many fewer gun murders and gun suicides. Public opinion in Australia sees America's approach to gun ownership as dangerous lunacy.

Our reaction to the 1996

was to tighten up the rules on gun ownership quite a bit.

" The government initiated a mandatory "buy-back" scheme with the owners paid according to a table of valuations. Some 643,000 firearms were handed in at a cost of $350 million."

It seems to have worked - we haven't had a mass shooting since then. One Australia lunatic had to move to New Zealand before he could buy the guns he used to kill even more people there.

Tucker Carlson doesn't seem to understand what quarantine is supposed to do, and neither does the woman interviewed - which isn't surprising since Tucker Carlson also features on Fox News.

"Australia has become a “case study for what happens when a country will do anything to keep COVID numbers low.”

It won't actually do "anything" but it does enough to keep case numbers low, which the US couldn't manage.

puts the US Covid-19 death to data at 2,433 per million. Australia is at 80. If we'd done a better job at quarantining incoming travelers ( and US flight crews) we might have done as well as New Zealand, which is at nine.

Freddie Sayers seems to think that doing enough to do better than the US necessarily involves excessive interference in people's liberties - when what's actually involved is doing it competently enough that the restrictions actually work (which is something the US couldn't manage).

Getting stuck in quarantine for 14 days isn't fun, but not quarantining people properly leads to thousands of unnecessary deaths, which isn't much fun for the people who die. or their relatives.

The US has about as many illegals/ undocummentated or what ever you want to call them as the entire population of Australia. We can not or will not keep them out let alone quarenteen or check them for the virus.

That is part of the reason some common things like the bed bugs are comming back into the US.

What exactly did you read in that article which was so bad? I read several times that she felt like she was treated like a criminal simply because she was quarantined. I didn't see where they gave her poor food, or restricted what she read or watched on cable or that she was not allowed to talk to others on the outside. She just didn't want to be in quarantine.

Or maybe you support the quarantine operation and recognize how it prevents covid from spreading around the world or at least in that country?