Active Shooter at High School in Parkland, FL

#226
#226
Hoosier_Vol said:
I've been in armed security/law enforcement for almost 15 years. I can say I GUARANTEE you that any of the men or women on my dept would have went in ALONE in a heartbeat. Like I said either in this thread or the other one 99% of the time these cowards kill their self or surrender as soon as they meet resistance. That's why these happen in GUN FREE ZONES. I don't care if I'm only armed with with my 2 9mm that I carry on me or what the "shooter" is armed with....I'd rather try to stop the attack and die trying than to have to live with the fact I stayed outside like a coward while kids or anyone was being murdered.
Click to expand...

Exactly..I worked as armed security for a few years. I know without a doubt what I would do, I've already done it. Thank God in my situations nobody got hurt badly but me. I got stabbed and beat up pretty good by a psych patient once at a hospital that contracted us, and the other time we knew who we were looking for. A small health care company contracted us to guard a couple of facilities against a disgruntled employee who had made specific threats. I cut him off one day coming up the drive to the facility. He surrendered pretty quickly, and the cops in the small town were there in a minute or two to arrest him.
 
#230
#230
DY6LMBWKBBESZNPGUE2DNPBLJE.jpg
 
#232
#232
hog88 said:
I can't make heads nor tails out of this. The bold really confuses me.
Click to expand...

Ulysees E. McGill said:
Well I agree with most of what you said, except for the defending yourself against fellow citizens. I think that was thought of as a given. The main reason I own guns is to protect my family from criminals who would do them harm. I am not a avid shooter or hunter anymore. I go squirrel or rabbit hunting every once in a while. I would usually rather take pictures of animals myself, but I will adamantly defend hunting and the right to bear arms.
Click to expand...

Amendments 1-6 are all about ensuring that, should a tyrannical ruler try to take over the newly-created United States, items are put in place to make sure he can't rise to power. You (1) can't be arrested for your religion, beliefs, words; you (2) can be armed in protection of your rights; you (3) cannot have your house stationed by military; you (4) cannot have your items unlawfully taken by law enforcement; you (5) can defer incriminating yourself and cannot be tried for the same crime twice; you (6) can have a speedy trial.

None of them are person-to-person protections. They're all about stopping what they hated in Britain from happening here.
 
#233
#233
crusse10 said:
None of them are person-to-person protections. They're all about stopping what they hated in Britain from happening here.
Click to expand...

Heller broke all of this down. The point of Heller was, in fact, entirely about the right for arms to be available for self-defense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#234
#234
hndog609 said:
Heller broke all of this down. The point of Heller was, in fact, entirely about the right for arms to be available for self-defense.
Click to expand...

Doesn't change the intent of it. If it was intended, it wouldn't be referencing a militia being armed.
 
#237
#237
crusse10 said:
Amendments 1-6 are all about ensuring that, should a tyrannical ruler try to take over the newly-created United States, items are put in place to make sure he can't rise to power. You (1) can't be arrested for your religion, beliefs, words; you (2) can be armed in protection of your rights; you (3) cannot have your house stationed by military; you (4) cannot have your items unlawfully taken by law enforcement; you (5) can defer incriminating yourself and cannot be tried for the same crime twice; you (6) can have a speedy trial.

None of them are person-to-person protections. They're all about stopping what they hated in Britain from happening here.
Click to expand...

They've already done away with #4.
 
#238
#238
crusse10 said:
Amendments 1-6 are all about ensuring that, should a tyrannical ruler try to take over the newly-created United States, items are put in place to make sure he can't rise to power. You (1) can't be arrested for your religion, beliefs, words; you (2) can be armed in protection of your rights; you (3) cannot have your house stationed by military; you (4) cannot have your items unlawfully taken by law enforcement; you (5) can defer incriminating yourself and cannot be tried for the same crime twice; you (6) can have a speedy trial.

None of them are person-to-person protections. They're all about stopping what they hated in Britain from happening here.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the right to defend yourself wasn't spelled out because it was understood. No need to put in something so obvious?
 
#239
#239
hog88 said:
So you're saying the right to defend yourself wasn't spelled out because it was understood. No need to put in something so obvious?
Click to expand...

Like not mentioning hunting. Hunting was a primary means of obtaining table fare at that time. OF COURSE that consideration was included.
 
#240
#240
Grand Vol said:
Behold, the lowly comma that separates those distinct phrases.

Right of the PEOPLE to bear arms.
Click to expand...

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If the items in this were meant to be separate items, there would have been a conjunction or it would have used a semicolon. Neither of those happened, so it is to be read as one cohesive item.

I don't see those as a list of things as you are implying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#241
#241
crusse10 said:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If the items in this were meant to be separate items, there would have been a conjunction or it would have used a semicolon. Neither of those happened, so it is to be read as one cohesive item.

I don't see those as a list of things as you are implying.
Click to expand...

The well regulated militia is necessary to the security of a free state. They were not referring to the federal govt, they were referencing the individual states. THEN they mentioned the right of the people to bear arms. Each are separate rights 1 a state's right to keep a militia and the 2nd the individual to keep arms.
 
#242
#242
Somebody take Crusse to the gun range with them. He needs to experience how a group of people shooting guns in the same room together can actually be fun and civil and nobody dies.
 
#243
#243
Coug said:
Somebody take Crusse to the gun range with them. He needs to experience how a group of people shooting guns in the same room together can actually be fun and civil and nobody dies.
Click to expand...

Went once. Hit my first target skeet shooting and turned around and asked if I could stop there to have a 100% average. Kept going and ended up 5 for 25 with a double barrel shotgun. It was fun. Haven't ever had the inclination to go back. Definitely don't think guns belong in schools.
 
#245
#245
#247
#247
Kinda convenient, goes "crazy" clears room of all kids, locks door, waits till principal gets there, fires a single shot out an exterior window (purposely furthest angle from any people), and then surrenders to cops. Kinda convenient just as the teacher debate is really heating up.
 
#248
#248
chatsworth_vol said:
Kinda convenient, goes "crazy" clears room of all kids, locks door, waits till principal gets there, fires a single shot out an exterior window (purposely furthest angle from any people), and then surrenders to cops. Kinda convenient just as the teacher debate is really heating up.
Click to expand...

What's even more convenient is that I think in Georgia, even if he discharged his firearm while under the influence of something it's still only be a misdemeanor.
 
#249
#249
crusse10 said:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

If the items in this were meant to be separate items, there would have been a conjunction or it would have used a semicolon. Neither of those happened, so it is to be read as one cohesive item.

I don't see those as a list of things as you are implying.
Click to expand...
The SCOTUS says otherwise.

Here, educate yourself.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
 
#250
#250
chatsworth_vol said:
Kinda convenient, goes "crazy" clears room of all kids, locks door, waits till principal gets there, fires a single shot out an exterior window (purposely furthest angle from any people), and then surrenders to cops. Kinda convenient just as the teacher debate is really heating up.
Click to expand...

Yep..
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top