PDA

View Full Version : Doug Giles on CCW


vantec08
07-22-2012, 6:10 AM
http://townhall.com/columnists/douggiles/2012/07/22/the_dark_knight_movie_massacre__why_i_carry_a_gun_ everywhere_i_go


You, my friend, are your first responder … your first line of defense.

Hopalong
07-22-2012, 7:10 AM
Agreed.

adrenaline
07-22-2012, 7:25 AM
You, my friend, are your first responder … your first line of defense.QFT....definitely sigworthy. I wished more of our Cali-Gunners could carry.

vantec08
07-22-2012, 8:45 AM
along these same lines -- http://freenj.blogspot.com/2012/07/preventing-future-mass-killings.html

check the last paragraph

Legasat
07-22-2012, 9:06 AM
I would carry if I could....

Lone_Gunman
07-22-2012, 9:41 AM
Good piece there. It pretty much sums up why I cary everywhere I go.

Tavern Keeper
07-22-2012, 12:05 PM
Amen and Amen

Adeodatus
07-22-2012, 6:43 PM
Doug Giles is awesome!



I would carry if I could....

You may be able to soon. I am currently in the design phase of something big. I will be posting a thread about it in the very near future. I am praying this will be a game changer.

HighLander51
07-22-2012, 7:23 PM
, “One fast-thinking and trained person who was armed/licensed with a concealed weapon could have stopped that SOB right in his tracks before the body count skyrocketed.”

Yea, right, and how much dark house live fire training have you had? Ever been in a real incident?

Tacobandit
07-22-2012, 9:29 PM
This needs to be posted over and over again on the brady facebook page, I would post it myself but they removed my posts for pointing out actual facts and that they use the same fear and propaganda crap they accuse the NRA of doing, so I am banned from posting there. Apparently brady doesnt like the first amendment as much as they dont like the 2nd.

12voltguy
07-22-2012, 10:12 PM
, “One fast-thinking and trained person who was armed/licensed with a concealed weapon could have stopped that SOB right in his tracks before the body count skyrocketed.”

Yea, right, and how much dark house live fire training have you had? Ever been in a real incident?

+ he had full armor, helmet throut cover
A sharp shoot with night vision might get him in the eye:chris:
or shots fired back could have made him run away who knows:confused:

Werewolf1021
07-22-2012, 10:25 PM
+ he had full armor, helmet throut cover
A sharp shoot with night vision might get him in the eye:chris:
or shots fired back could have made him run away who knows:confused:

He was wearing a tac vest, not body armor. http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/22/fox-no-body-armor-for-aurora-theater-shooter/

Its all academic though as Aurora city council ruled no gun signs are law

1000stars
07-22-2012, 10:43 PM
no gun allowed, no defense allowed

Gray Peterson
07-22-2012, 10:56 PM
He was wearing a tac vest, not body armor. http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/22/fox-no-body-armor-for-aurora-theater-shooter/

Its all academic though as Aurora city council ruled no gun signs are law

Wrong. The City of Aurora may have an ordinance, but the ordinance violates state law.

Regents of the University of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/opinions/2010/10SC344.pdf)

Quiet
07-22-2012, 11:23 PM
https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/562899_426616800715344_525619092_n.jpg

VegasNick702
07-23-2012, 12:35 AM
+ he had full armor, helmet throut cover
A sharp shoot with night vision might get him in the eye:chris:
or shots fired back could have made him run away who knows:confused:

Yea, so he has body armor so lets just give up and throw in the towel before trying.... Oooook. How about aiming for the second large mass, the hips?

Mendo223
07-23-2012, 1:13 AM
yea the people who complain and whine that "a CCW holder would have just killed more innocent people" really anger me..

you are basically saying that you would rather them have ZERO defense, zero chance to save lives...

even if a CCW holder accidently shot a few bystanders while shooting holmes, i garuntee the total death and wounded count would have been lower...

its just like how defensive gun use happens over 1 million times a year, yet only 25k people are killed by guns or use htem to commit suicide....even though the numbers favor gun rights, the loony anti gunnies cant seem to rationally comprehend this.

kimber_ss
07-23-2012, 2:07 AM
This is a good reason to carry everyday, regardless of whether it's just an ordinary day or a "fun" day. Going to see a movie.

Couldn't help but notice how many news reports were "AW" this "AW" that. Not a lick of knowledge about the right to own an ar in a legal config. for the average citizen. :willy_nilly:

Gray Peterson
07-23-2012, 2:09 AM
yea the people who complain and whine that "a CCW holder would have just killed more innocent people" really anger me..

you are basically saying that you would rather them have ZERO defense, zero chance to save lives...

even if a CCW holder accidently shot a few bystanders while shooting holmes, i garuntee the total death and wounded count would have been lower...

its just like how defensive gun use happens over 1 million times a year, yet only 25k people are killed by guns or use htem to commit suicide....even though the numbers favor gun rights, the loony anti gunnies cant seem to rationally comprehend this.

The gun control movement true believers believe that shooting at the guy 15 seconds in, even if there was any sort of crossfire or backstop problem or something similar, is less preferable to a guy continuing to mow people down for over 2 minutes to the tune of 70 people getting shot.

vantec08
07-23-2012, 7:02 AM
This needs to be posted over and over again on the brady facebook page, I would post it myself but they removed my posts for pointing out actual facts and that they use the same fear and propaganda crap they accuse the NRA of doing, so I am banned from posting there. Apparently brady doesnt like the first amendment as much as they dont like the 2nd.

Agree, taco. Brady banned my ip.

vantec08
07-23-2012, 7:40 AM
+ he had full armor, helmet throut cover
A sharp shoot with night vision might get him in the eye:chris:
or shots fired back could have made him run away who knows:confused:

Oh. Well then lets roll over and play dead like good sheep.

advocatusdiaboli
07-23-2012, 8:48 AM
I would carry if I could....

Me too, but it won't happen in my county any time soon.

LHC30
07-23-2012, 8:52 AM
, “One fast-thinking and trained person who was armed/licensed with a concealed weapon could have stopped that SOB right in his tracks before the body count skyrocketed.”

Yea, right, and how much dark house live fire training have you had? Ever been in a real incident?

Exactly! While I believe there may have been at least ONE CCW in the theatre, unless the mindset is there to overcome the chaos this evil man created, an average CCW holder would have been able to make a difference.

However, this should not preclude the existence of CCW holders!

Werewolf1021
07-23-2012, 7:30 PM
Wrong. The City of Aurora may have an ordinance, but the ordinance violates state law.

Regents of the University of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/opinions/2010/10SC344.pdf)

The point still stands. No chest body armor, just a tac vest.

advocatusdiaboli
07-24-2012, 6:48 AM
The point still stands. No chest body armor, just a tac vest.

This. The media use terms regarding firearms they don't fully understand (because they don't understand firearms) and imagine they have magical properties: assault weapon, tac vest, barrel shroud, barrel magazine, etc. Seeing the comments on CNN was revealing: many people are confused between semi-auto and auto modes and what rifles have selectable fire, they assume making a rifle all black imbues it with assault weapon firearm super powers making devastating over any "regular" semi-auto, they hear "tac vest" and assume that means full body armor invincible to mere mortals.

At the time of our revolution, nearly everyone understood firearms and there was no fear of the arm but of men—people understood arms kept them safe and free. Today, with rampant ignorance of firearms technology, capabilities, and limitations (thanks largely to Hollywood and TV) firearms are deemed evil not men and a significant number of people think banning them will make them safe and free.

David Frum, a former moderate conservative, just published an essay on CNN that stated gun control is being stonewalled by fear of crime and ignorance of plummeting crime rates. Nothing could be more wrong. In fact, it is the opposite: gun control is motivated by fear and ignorance of firearms and a belief that the police are obligated to and will save us from any threat.

Lack of education breeds ignorance and ignorance breeds fear. We will not see significant progress on firearms rights in this state or nationally until we stop that cycle of ignorance and fear in a majority of Americans.

12voltguy
07-24-2012, 5:39 PM
He was wearing a tac vest, not body armor. http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/07/22/fox-no-body-armor-for-aurora-theater-shooter/

Its all academic though as Aurora city council ruled no gun signs are law
other reports say different
who to belive,LOL

1 news radio show said 2 people:D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULvsJVn1H9w&feature=em-uploademail\

wheels
07-24-2012, 6:08 PM
Wrong. The City of Aurora may have an ordinance, but the ordinance violates state law.

Regents of the University of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/opinions/2010/10SC344.pdf)

So if you are OK with getting guns pointed at you and defending yourself in court, you will probably walk. Sounds like the "play stupid games" scenario - which is what the city council wanted.

heavybarrel308
07-24-2012, 8:50 PM
The media and even some of the conservative talk show host that I listen to keep saying that it would have been impossible because this guy had body armor. First thing, body armor stops projectiles from penetrating the body, but the dispersed energy from the round impacting hurts like hell. If you or someone you know that has survived an impact while wearing body armor, sometimes even level IV, has some substantial bruising at the impact site. So if someone was able to defend themselves and others and hit him even on parts of his body covered by the body armor, at the very least should have got his attention. A 230gr. .45 may have knocked him on his rear. Or even a missed shot would have broken his train of though when he realized that someone was returning fire. Second issue was the smoke and darkness. Those of us who have had a military or law enforcement background know to look for the muzzle flash when taking fire, and then some of us have been trained to work through a CS / teargas environment. Also with the advance of technology, many weapon lights and personal lights are very compact and portable. So the theory that NOTHING could have been done by a CCW holder disturbs me. I'm not saying that it would be easy. It would have very been difficult, but having someone there that could have responded would have made a difference. More lives could have been spared.