Annotated: World’s Worst Anti-Gun Letter to the Editor

 

Normally, I’d send a link to this pathetic anti-pistol polemic to TTAG’s resident gungrabberdeconstructinator. Sculptor Tuck Langland‘s missive misses the mark on so many levels I reckon I’d unleash a Krafftian War and Peace. So here’s the annotated version of the Granger gun grabber’s letter to the editor. Remember: people think like this. “It seems that every week or two we read of another mass shooting. Many of the pro-gun people say that had an armed citizen been there that he or she could have stopped the carnage. But how many stories have appeared in the papers reporting just such a scenario? Be honest now . . .

how many have you read where the maniac shooter was stopped in his tracks because a concerned citizen — not a police officer — had a gun and dropped him? Compare that number to the number of stories about shooters killing many people before being stopped by police . . .

“Remember, the New York City police have an accuracy rating of 34 percent with the target only zero to six feet away, and they are well trained. What would be the accuracy rating of a self-appointed savior in a very rapid and panic filled situation, where no one really knew what was going on, and who was the one to shoot? Can we imagine the carnage, all done in good faith? . . .

“We have so many guns that there is no way to reduce that number short of police going house to house to search for grandpa’s shotgun in the back of the closet, and that is, quite simply, not the American way. I don’t believe anyone is suggesting that . . .

“One place to start is simple. Limit the sales of huge ammunition magazines. Outlaw military weapons, which are designed for one purpose only and that is to kill people as quickly and efficiently as possible. Why does anyone, other than a soldier or homicidal maniac, need one of those? Let the pro-gun folks explain why they need it.

“And handguns, which also have no purpose but to kill people, have to begin to be reined in . . .

“Is our freedom of gun ownership a good thing or a bad thing? Remember, we kill 20 times as many people per capita as they do in England, which has strict gun laws, and my English friends do not miss private ownership of guns one little bit . . .

“How many have to die before we come to our senses and realize that adding more guns to reduce killing is like adding more mosquitoes to reduce malaria. When will we learn?

“Someday this age of unlimited gun accessibility will appear in our history books as an age of madness. In the meantime, that single misinterpreted sentence in the Bill of Rights will continue to cause more heartbreak and suffering that any other sentence in our entire Constitution.”

 

comments

  1. avatar Sammy says:

    As the great American philosopher Bugs Bunny would retort ” What a Maroon”.

    1. avatar Charles says:

      I was reminded of another great thinker, Winnie the Pooh:

      “When you are a Bear of Very Little Brain, and you Think of Things, you find sometimes that a Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it.”

    2. avatar Ralph says:

      What a Maroon

      What an imbezzle.

  2. avatar Nate says:

    “Remember, the New York City police have an accuracy rating of 34 percent with the target only zero to six feet away, and they are well trained. ”

    He hasn’t done any research. Lost credibility

  3. avatar Average_Casey says:

    I doubt the New York a police are very well trained with firearms considering how many innocent people they shot outside the Empire State Building. Well trained officers would not have hit so many bystanders.

    1. avatar Erik says:

      They didn’t shoot 9 bystanders, some people were hit with bullet fragments from a wall and weren’t even that badly injured.

      A close quarters gun battle to the death isn’t an easy situation to be in, I doubt many people police, military, or civilian can achieve a 100% accuracy rate in that situation

      1. avatar Doug says:

        Actually later reports showed they were all hit by Police bullets, not terrorist pots or terrorist wall debris.

      2. avatar Robert Farago says:

        The cops had no busy engaging Mr. Johnson on that busy street. He didn’t pose an imminent threat to anyone. They should have followed him and apprehended him when it was safe to do so. And it was determined that ALL of the nine people were hit by stray rounds, despite the early FUD blaming injuries on concrete planters.

      3. avatar Innercityswede says:

        Hardly a “gun battle to the death” when the perp doesn’t get off a shot. The cops screwed up, again.

        1. avatar Mike CI says:

          NYC police are in fact, NOT well trained except for maybe ESU(SWAT). My friend is a cop here and other than a day or two of training at the academy they qualify once a year by shooting targets just a few yards away. They can practice on their time at police ranges given 100 Speer Gold Dots per month, but rarely does anyone take advantage of this.
          There are 30000+ cops, and not enough funding or time at the ranges to train them to any real extent, especially since the odds of any individual officer needing to fire is extremely small. 90% of NYPD retire without ever drawing their weapon.
          My buddy wasn’t taught trigger reset, sight picture, sight alignment nor trigger control. I was at a range with him and shot better than him my first time out. And he even dropped his gun and tried to catch it before it hit the ground.

  4. avatar Ross says:

    What a dipshit

  5. avatar Milsurp Collector says:

    It’s funny because I guarantee you the average concealed carrier puts hundreds more rounds down range than the average cop annually, especially when compared to those of Chicago and NYC. Line up six four-year NYPD officers and one passionate CC’er at the range, who for all intensive purposes is on a budget and trains with 50 rounds once a week for a year. I’d bet my money on the CC’er having better groups from more time spent firing his weapon alone.

    This guy is a moron for recognizing police incompetence when it shows itself clear as day, and still he blames armed citizens who train more than the average cop. Go fucking figure.

  6. avatar JoshinGA says:

    So, did I miss something, or have you not yet posted your counter-points?

  7. avatar 07duallydog says:

    Obviously he does not see what the main stream media hides of the number of occurances where a gun was used to stop crimes . He says none of “his” friends in England miss private use of guns . Really? I’m not a soldier ,although I used to be one . Does that make me a homicidal maniac because I have a military style weapon . This guy is off . I’m amazed how people think like this . What’s sad and worrisome to me is when I think of future generations coming up . My oldest son is 20 and my youngest is 10 . How many in my younger sons ‘generation are being taught such BS .

    1. avatar JoshinGA says:

      Im nearly 24, probably very young vs the average visitor to this site, and I worry about my generation and those younger than it. It seems no one questions what they are taught anymore, and very few people take the time to think for themselves. Its quite frightening to me, since I will have to share the majority of my adult life with people who are products of these generations.

      That being said, the author of this piece did a very poor job of supporting his outrageous claims. Even Mikey# is more convincing than this; at least he tries a little bit.

      1. avatar ST says:

        The previous generation grew up during the anti-establishment 70’s. Ours witnessed 9/11, Khobar Towers, Iraq and Afghanistan, and the creation of the DHS, TSA plus the passing of the PATRIOT act. Our generation is a group of bred sheeple who run to “The Establishment” to keep them safe.

        What effect this has on gun rights in the far future remains to be seen.

        1. avatar JoshinGA says:

          I try not to think about it to be honest. Personal responsibility is dying.

        2. avatar Milsurp Collector says:

          Hell I’m 20, but I don’t buy into any of the sheeple BS because I was raised by sane, hard-working, independent parents. I was shocked when I had to verbally smack some sense into my supposedly smarter friends as to why I wanted to and now own firearms for home defense as well as a hobby. Few of them hadn’t even heard about SCOTUS’ ruling that the police are not your personal protection squad and assumed that their job was to “prevent crime”

          People of past geenrations became obsessed with tv, but add into that facebook, unlimited texting, twitter, video games, high def porn, and youtube just to start. Kids today are slaves to electronics and ridiculously lazy. I’m glad I got out of that world years ago. Goodbye Facebook and video games, hello books and a steady workout regime. And don’t even get me started on the public indoctrination centers of schools we have.

      2. avatar Innercityswede says:

        I am a firearms instructor, I see more people everyday who have an interest in learning how to effectively use firearms and not just the demographic one might expect. Lots of women, minorities and even die hard liberals.

    2. avatar Evan says:

      I’m 18, I live in NJ, and my mom is scared of guns. Only my dad exposed me when I was young and honestly they probably scared me a bit more then.( a marlin 336 is not a good first gun to shoot when you are 5 and weigh probably 50 pounds.) But I still don’t buy any of this bs. I listen to actual common sense not the anti gunners common sense.

    3. avatar Evan says:

      I’m 18, I live in NJ, and my mom is scared of guns. Only my dad exposed me when I was young and honestly they probably scared me a bit more then.( a marlin 336 is not a good first gun to shoot when you are 5 and weigh probably 50 pounds.) But I still don’t buy any of this bs. I listen to actual common sense not the anti gunners common sense. It’s the constitution not just some old document.

  8. avatar Tim says:

    Police, well trained? Really? Has this man ever been present at a police qualification?

    I have.

    Having seen the sideshow act known as a qualification shoot several times, I’ve come to the conclusion most police are novices with their firearms.

    I’m not hating on police, it’s not their fault many departments are under funded and thus their ranks are poorly trained. It’s not their fault many police have only a cursory interest in firearms and as such don’t practice outside of required training.

    The second to last person I want busting into my home with a loaded gun in their hands is a police officer. The first would be a criminal.

    I’ll take care of myself, thankyouverymuch.

    1. avatar Danny McBee says:

      I’ll second that, MAC. My sister used to routinely shoot at the range with our local LE practicing for qualification. The general consensus was that they could barely hit the broad side of a barn, but if they could at all they’d qualify. It’s been so long that I forgot the actual stat they had to achieve, but I remember it being something ridiculously low.
      Most police officers are not well trained, and the ones that are probably are because they decided to take a class they weren’t required to take in the first place. That refutes the idea that a CCer would probably cause more carnage.
      That he believes there are more mass shootings than carrier’s defensive shootings shows that he doesn’t really jack crap at all, and his reasoning is that it’s not reported on the news?
      About that whole magazine capacity limitation………Statistically there’s never been any successful dent in violent crime based on limitation of “assault” features, so that wouldn’t solve a darn thing.
      Lastly I must address the “Let the pro-gun folks explain why they need it.” comment. I don’t recall the Bill of Rights being written to simply address needs, do we only get free speech insofar as we need to say something? What about the fourth amendment? We don’t really NEED privacy, so why not just allow government searches at Law Enforcement’s discretion? See how little sense “Need” argument makes, if our rights are simply defined by needs then we’re all screwed already.

      1. avatar Michael C. says:

        I find it strange that they want to ban something that jammed in mass shooting.

    2. avatar matt says:

      I’m not hating on police, it’s not their fault many departments are under funded and thus their ranks are poorly trained

      I doubt they’re poorly funded. Do you know how much a police cruiser, with all the equipment costs? If they would have skiped on the fancy decals they could have bought ammo. Or how about having the cops who sit around the station all day waiting for walk ups man a progressive press?

      It’s not their fault many police have only a cursory interest in firearms and as such don’t practice outside of required training.

      Its like that across industries, you’d be surprised at the number of people who work in IT who don’t know how to type, let alone do their job.

  9. avatar Jarhead says:

    Here is what I responded to Mr. Tuck

    “Be honest now, how many have you read where the maniac shooter was stopped in his tracks because a concerned citizen — not a police officer — had a gun and dropped him?”

    Ok, Tuck (wow your parents named you that?) This is a loaded and dishonest question because most active shooter shootings are done in places that are “gun free zones” so the only want for the average joe is disarmed and doesn’t even get a chance to stop the shooter.

    You obviously didn’t bother to do any research before you wrote this article so I will educate you of the facts. And the facts are that 75% of Active Shooters stopped are stopped by Civilians. This information was gathered by former SWAT team officer, and current police training school owner, Ron Borsch of the S.E.A.L. Academy. It is now considered valid by the L.E.O. trainers and many departments.

    All this is DESPITE the fact that most active shootings take place in gun free zones. Just off the top of my head I can think of several lets start with the Appalachian law school shooting in VA where students stopped the crazed gunmen. Compare that with Virginia tech where students were disarmed and cops were nowhere,
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,43254,00.html

    Then there is a civilian Jeanne Assam, who stopped a crazed gunman at a mega church in Colorado. The pastor of the church himself said in this press conference that she may have saved dozens of lives.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCeqa65pxos

    Then there is a case in In Pearl, Mississippi, assistant principal Joel Myrick stopped triple murderer Luke Woodham using a handgun retrieved from his car
    http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm

    There are also many cases of spree shooters who were stopped in Israel, this one comes to mind.
    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3516039,00.html

    So run tell that Mr. Tuck. Why not do some research next time or be honest and don’t just write to fit your gun control far left liberal narrative. Heck, you may even want to write an article to include these factual cases and to include that they may be even more civilians who take out active shooters if not for strict gun control laws and gun free zones which makes most people at most mass shootings nothing more than sitting ducks.

    1. avatar watzadon says:

      Any chance we can a link for the SWAT/LEO stats on citizens stopping violent escapades?

  10. avatar Lemming says:

    Regarding the “military weapons solely designed to kill people” thing. . . If I may date myself back in the day I’d have answered “all my guns have killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy’s car.”

    1. avatar Matt says:

      Nice. +1

  11. avatar Hazzard Bagg says:

    Two things that drive me crazy:

    1.) The notion that police officers and military service members are better at handling guns than private gun owners: “Remember, the New York City police have an accuracy rating of 34 percent with the target only zero to six feet away, and they are well trained…” As already noted above, the recent result at the Empire State Building reveals the embarrassingly low level of preparedness of New York’s finest. I’ve already delivered a disquisition on this topic elsewhere today.

    2.) Only soldiers should have a right to military-pattern firearms. “Outlaw military weapons, which are designed for one purpose only and that is to kill people as quickly and efficiently as possible…” The Second Amendment protects civilian ownership of weapons which would be appropriate for service in a militia. The Second Amendment does not address hunting and sport shooting in any way.

    Ivory tower twit mouthing off so he can be a hero at the next wine tasting.

  12. avatar CarlosT says:

    190 rounds a year. That’s the extent of official NYPD firearms training. Twice a year, they get 45 rounds of practice, and 50 rounds of qualifying. That’s not highly trained.

    I’m going to head to the range today and I’m probably going to shoot at least the NYPD yearly total, which is pretty much normal for me. I’ll probably shoot more. I’d go every week, but I try to get out at least once a month. I’m not bring this up to claim I’m some Rob Leatham or something, I’m just saying this because I think my numbers are rather unremarkable. I bet a lot of people shoot way more than me. I just think the NYPD numbers are remarkably low.

    1. avatar JoshinGA says:

      I shoot more rounds in a standard week than most police departments do in a year. Im at a round count of 650 of 9mm rounds this month so far. Much more in .22LR. But yet the gun haters seem to think the cops are to be trusted with their guns, while I am to be hated and feared. Maybe I should invest in some sort of uniform that looks official?

    2. avatar LiveFreeAndShoot says:

      My son and I train at least twice a month. He goes through at least 450 rounds of 9mm and I do 550 to 600 rounds of 5.7×28. I may switch to 40 S&W until I can get 5.7 again. But, this means in just this summer alone I have trained more than NYPD will in the next 10 years.. That is sad….

  13. avatar Matt says:

    I must quote “Real Genius” in reply:

    “Do you mind if name my first child after you? ‘Dipshit Knight’ has a nice ring to it.”

  14. avatar Charles says:

    Over at the South Bend Tribune the comments aren’t sympathetic. In fact, you could say he got his head handed to him.

  15. avatar RIGHT! says:

    That photo in the background could be Frank Marshal Davis

  16. avatar Dean Weingarten says:

    There are several documented cases where armed citizens have stopped mass attacks by gunmen. Let me list a few: The Pearl, Mississippi school shooting was stopped by the vice principal Joel Myrick with a Colt .45, The Appalachian School shooting was stopped by two students with handguns. Both of the above incidents were stopped by the armed citizens threatening the shooter without firing.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_High_School_shooting
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting

    The mass church shooting in Colorado Springs was stopped by the shooter being shot by church member Jeanne Assam with a CCW permit.

    http://blutube.policeone.com/police-training-videos/935831023001-jeanne-assam-and-the-new-life-church-shooting/

    The Santa Clara gunshop shooting in 1999 was stopped by an armed citizen after the shooter declared that he was going to kill everyone. Police found a list of intended victims in his car. Only the perpetrator, Richard Gable Stevens was shot.
    http://gunsafe.org/The%20Armed%20Citizen/Gun-shop%20employee.htm

    Just recently, in Early Texas, armed citizen Vic Stacy shot and stopped a deranged man who had just murdered two neighbors and was firing at police with a rifle. Stacy made a very long shot with his revolver, three times as far as the perpetrator was from the police officer, who had an AR-15 type rifle.

    http://www.ktxs.com/news/RV-PARK-KILLINGS-Witness-shooter-recounts-shootout-with-gunman-who-killed-two-in-Early/-/14769632/15933066/-/30wo2o/-/index.html

    That sounds like a very good story… but it never made the national news. I wonder who made the decision to spike that story.

    Of course, when a mass shooting is stopped by an armed citizen, there are not as many victims. That could account for a little of the bias.
    AS OF 28 August 2012

  17. avatar jwm says:

    We never hear of an armed civilian stopping these mass shootings. Because for the most part these mass shootings occur in places where civilians are restricted from carrying their guns. The person who takes the time to get a permit is a law abiding individual that plays by the rules. Gun free zones unfairly hamper such an individual and create helpless victems.
    This guy isn’t part of the solution, so he must be part of the problem.

    1. avatar Joe says:

      In Illinois, that place would be the entire state. Hence the one sided reports of mass shootings, or any shootings, armed robberies, etc.

    2. By default, a mass shooting isn’t “mass”, if the shooter is stopped after one or two victims. Here’s a case of a potential high body-count being neutered by a conceal carry holder.

  18. avatar Chris says:

    It could be that the reason there have been no mass shootings where an armed citizen stopped the shooter is because the armed citizen stops the shooting before it escalates into a mass shooting…

    Can we please start teaching the fundamentals of logic in public school… pretty please?

    1. avatar Bob says:

      +1 Completely.

      And shootings where there are only one or two (or zero) victims do not get the same degree of media coverage as the mass shootings. In other words, when a mass shooting is stopped by an armed civilian, you don’t hear about it BECAUSE it never escalated to a mass shooting.

      Mr. Tuck may know art (looks like he is a sculptor), but otherwise he is a complete moron. He should stick to the artistic stuff, because he could never make a living from thinking.

  19. avatar Chad says:

    2 points: Newspapers and media don’t report when an armed citizen stops the bad person with a gun. Want proof: Just before the Colorado Killings in the movie theater, a 71 year old man in an internet cafe in Florida, shot 2 robbers, who barged in with gun drawn. The local Fox station carried the story, you can find it on the internet. The 71 year old, shot and hit both robbers, who fled the shop and were later arrested seeking medical treatment for being shot. No bystanders were collateral damage and this is a regular senior citizen, who defended himself and his wife.

    When a managing Editor at CNN was asked about why they were not running the story, the editor was unaware of it. Upon learning about it, he replied. Well, we don’t want to encourage “COPYCATS”.

    They don’t want to encourage responsible citizens, defending themselves.

    2nd Point: Ties to the First:

    Encourage Copycats? for 108 hours after the Colorado theater mass killings, that’s all we heard and the news media even gave this killer a name, “THE JOKER”. They did what he wanted, which was make him famous.

    It’s not that regular citizens don’t defend themselves, it’s that YOU DONT hear about it because the MEDIA decides what you should know and the SPIN you hear it in.

  20. avatar Brad says:

    Firearms training is only a small part of what a cop has to do to remain certified. Cops have to train in non-leathal weapons, hand holds and restraints, hours of legal refreshers, hours of proceedure updates, policy lectures, professional development courses, maybe work to get a degree or specialized certification, driver training, certification on chemical weapons, HazMat training, medical and CPR recerts, on and on, etc, etc. Then they have to work their shifts, go to court, cover more shifts for sick or injured officers, oh yeah, they have families too. All of it is important, and most departments would rater send you to a search and siezure legal update than send you to the range for the day. Most police officer go their entire career without shooting their gun. If you were a Department manager, what would you want you officers to be more proficient with? Choose wrong and city council fires you.

    And saying the average CCW permit holder is far better trained is a bit far fetched. I have several close friends who make their living in the FA industry. CCW classes and the like put food on their table, more so even than gun sales, which depending on the weapon can have only a small profit margin. According to them, the “average” CCW holder goes through their class, shoots a few boxes and then only occasionally, if even that often, do they practice more than that. Many CCW holders, got spooked by something, got themselves a gun and certification, only to realize the thing is heavy and not so easy to carry. Eventually they give up trying to keep up and the thing never comes out again, unless it’s to put it on gunbroker.com.

    1. avatar Accur81 says:

      That sounds like you have some experience on that. Yes, the 6,000-24,000 rounds plus per year shooter has more shooting training than the average police officer who is shooting on the local or state payroll. There are TTAG readers who shoot massive amounts, but your average CCW holder does not exactly clear the ammo shelves. Plus, many LEOs cannot shoot reloads or practice ammo through their guns due to departmental policy, liability, and governmental inflexibility. I’ve made some pretty emphatic requests for more training, and haven’t been selected for range school despite shooting higher scores than those who were.

      Personally, my budget is pretty tight, so I’ll be upping my dry fire and .177 BB gun rapid fire. But heh, it’s something.

      1. avatar Michael C says:

        I think I’ve figured out why you can’t get sent to range school. You shoot too well.

  21. avatar StevenD says:

    First of all, Mr. McBee’s need argument above is beautiful.

    Mr. Langland doesn’t really make a point. Typical of his ilk. Guns are bad, too many bullets, the Police will save you…. blah, blah.

    I am all ears for a method to prevent a lunatic from using a weapon of any sort to hurt innocent people. Until then I will be prepared to stop one by any means available to protect my family if need be. With my glock, training and mindset I like my chances.

    1. avatar Vermin says:

      Your post reminds me of the end of the Wizard of Oz when all the characters realize they’ve each had what they were seeking the entire time. Your piece, training, and mindset are the methods by which you, as a civilized person prevent the barbarians from killing innocent people.

  22. avatar StevenD says:

    @ Brad- You list over 10 things that the average cop needs to do to meet minimum requirements of their job. All of which are scheduled and completed in the standard 40 hr work week. You imply that they are added onto a regular work week to be completed on personal time. Calling BS on that. If you are a cop learn how to handle your weapon. If you need an hour of personal time and $20 worth of ammo per week then so be it. Your life and more importantly mine depend on it.

    1. avatar Brad says:

      I wish I worked 40 hours a week. Fact is Steve, I wish it worked out like you think it should. I wish I had an hour to practice every week. I wish I had a range I could go to that was less than 45 mins away to take that hour. I wish I worked for a department that was not cutting training costs every year. I wish my kid did not need braces and I had $20 to spare ($80 a month, $960 a year) to spend on ammo to make up for that.

    2. avatar Ron says:

      None of the things Brad listed are done and completed in a 40 hour work week. It’s usually all done outside of normal duty hours and usually on off days because the shifts are short staffed. My department shoots three qualification courses and one “combat” course yearly and there is talk of quarterly qualification next year. The departmental standard is 80%, and with a few exceptions (usually female officers) the average score is mid 80’s/ low 90’s. The officers that cant shoot arent generally held in high regard by the rest of us. The special operations team qualifies quarterly with all assigned weapons. I am required to shoot no less than 90 with my pistol (although only shooting a 90 will invite ridicule from the rest of the team), 100 with the MP5, and 100 with my M4. Once again many broad generalizations of poor training and low standards. It’s not universal. I wish I only worked 40 hours a week. I can’t remember the last time I did. And no Matt, I won’t tell you where I work. My department’s social networking / Internet policy prohibits it, and I’d also like to be able to refer to my boss as an assclown if i want without having to worry about getting called in the office.

  23. avatar tdiinva says:

    He said we kill 20 times more people the the UK per capita? I believe the figure is 4 times as high and if you exlude gangbangers shooting gangbangers it’s about the same.

    1. avatar Vermin says:

      Yeah, he’s just lying.

      1. avatar tdiinva says:

        No, I think he believes it.

  24. avatar Bob says:

    All of this guy’s arguments are ridiculous, and all of his facts/statistics are incorrect. His analogy about mosquitoes is amazing in its stupidity! I had to read it three times to be sure of what I was seeing. Obviously, he is just another product of our failed education system.

    Stick to your sculpting, because you know nothing about guns or logical thinking.

    I think Robert Farago intended to write a rebuttal to this editorial, but he quickly realized that the editorial was so incorrect in so many ways, that a small book would be required to address all the fallacies of logical argumentation, incorrect facts/statistics, and just plain ‘stupidity’. Robert didn’t know where to start!

    “Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.”

    And this one is very appropriate also –
    “Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.” — Napolean Bonaparte

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Bingo.

  25. avatar Vermin says:

    “Why does anyone, other than a soldier or homicidal maniac, need one of those? Let the pro-gun folks explain why they need it.”

    Aside from shooting homicidal maniacs you mean? (Of course, history is bereft of a single instance of justified armed resistance by mere peasants against his majesty’s soldiers, so I won’t suggest shooting them as a reason for firearms ownership.)

    “Remember, we kill 20 times as many people per capita as they do in England.”

    No we don’t, you fucking liar.

  26. avatar Ralph says:

    I’m going to publish an equally insipid article in Sculpture Magazine. I’m going to recommend molded thermoplastics from a factory in China as a far superior medium to marble. Less environmental damage and all that, and way cheaper, too.

    1. avatar Bob says:

      An article like this requires such a huge amount of stupidity that it just can not be faked. Ralph, you are just too smart to ever write anything this insipid. No matter how hard you try, it is just impossible for you to do.

    2. avatar Vermin says:

      Dude, they’re 28 percent better. 86 percent of people know that.

  27. avatar Stephen says:

    Move To England !!!

    1. avatar JuanCudz says:

      Please don’t! I have to put up with enough idiots already!

  28. avatar Joe says:

    Gun control reminds me of all the “improvement” programs at work. These always entail more work, and affect, sometimes negatively, the 95% that do their jobs and are already self-motivated. The 5% slackers keep on slacking. Nothing changes their behavior short of firing them. Somehow this math works for the people in charge.

  29. avatar Silver says:

    *rubs temples*

    Oh lord…the stupidity in that letter is physically hurting me. The pathetic, low-life slave mentality, the utter ignorance of the purpose of American rights, the complete failure to live up to the mental expectations of a human being…

    I feel like finding a 2 dollar bill just so I can look at Thomas Jefferson and apologize for the people that call themselves Americans today.

    My night’s ruined. I’m now depressed by the reminder that sub-human trash like this inhabits not only the same planet, but the same country…and is allowed to vote.

    1. avatar philthegardner says:

      “…allowed to vote.”
      THAT is the most chilling aspect of this.

      1. avatar Rambeast says:

        “I feel like finding a 2 dollar bill just so I can look at Thomas Jefferson and apologize for the people that call themselves Americans today.”

        Amen.

  30. avatar Brewski says:

    What’s wholly ironic is if you apply the same “Anti-gun” logic that these people use to anything other than a gun, it makes their illogical way of thinking even more ridiculous.

    As reasonable people and the gun community at large already knows, “anti-gun” people blame the tool instead of the crazy person using the tool to commit crimes.

    Case in point: Pillows. Fluffy. Harmless. Used by billions of people to get a good night’s rest. Surely a fluffy soft pillow isn’t evil, right? I mean, c’mon, this one even has My Little Pony printed on it.

    Oh, but on occasion, pillows smother people to death in fits of passion or rage! OMG! Ban all pillows because they’re dangerous! Murderous even!

    Oh wait. The pillow didn’t kill anyone. That’s just silly. The nutjob that wielded it is to blame. After all, what idiot would blame the pillow for the crime.

    Oh.

    Well that makes more sense.

    1. avatar Brewski says:

      Gah, posted that previous reply in the wrong topic…

      Anyway, regarding the topic at hand, it’s all conjecture and “what if” games regarding the CHL user. What if they’re a terrible shot? What if they shoot the innocent people instead of the bad guy by accident? Please. “What if” isn’t an argument against anything.

      But oddly enough he does have one valid point: not all CHL owners have equivalent experience or shooting training or background with firearms as their police or military equivalents. This is true. But, that said, a fair portion of CCers are ex-police, ex-military, and many are just gun enthusiasts and sportsman that have been around guns all their lives and are just as proficient (or even more-so). So whether or not you’re military or police doesn’t really mean anything when it comes to gun experience or proficiency in the DGU setting. And that’s because all CHL holders are pretty much restricted to concealable gun formats, so that kind of levels the playing field to just handgun proficiency.

      I think the OP’s main argument is focused on the CCers that are still relatively new to guns and just got their CHL.

      What’s a bit disconcerting (and this may be the only point the guy could have) is that you can get a CHL license with a minimal amount of range time and still pass. This is assuming you can hit the broad side of a relatively large target at close-ish range. And you can get a CHL without never having been trained to handle your firearm proficiently in a stressful situation or a simulated DGU scenario.

      That’s the only real argument the “anti-pistol” guy could make. And it’s kind of valid.

      To illustrate, getting a CHL is relatively easy, at least in TX. All you need is the ability to listen to a person for 10 hours and regurgitate what he said. In some states, all you need is an online class. Kind of scary.

      And that’s a perception that I wish wasn’t based on some truth. Personally, I would rather people be required to take and pass at least one 2-3 hour intermediate gun-fighting-related class that places the shooter in a stressful situation to test their mental readiness and physical proficiency in handling their weapon in a simulated self-defense incident prior to getting a CHL permit. It only makes sense. It’s the same concept as taking drivers education and actually driving on the roads and highways instead on only relying on a closed course with safety cones to be considered proficient in the real thing.

      Why would you wait until you’re in a critical defensive situation to find out if you can handle yourself under stress? That’s a huge tactical disadvantage and I wish CHL classes would address it directly instead of it being separate and voluntary.

      How do we bridge the training gap? Well, most ranges (at least in my area of TX) don’t allow you to rapid fire, draw from your holster, double tap, or do anything that would otherwise be conducive to training for a real self-defense situation. Why is that? Playing devil’s advocate, I have to ask: Why are we (CHL permit holders) allowed to carry a weapon that they may or may not be actually ready to use proficiently when the time comes? Why isn’t there more intermediate or advanced mandatory training involved prior to getting a CHL (in TX anyway)?

      The obvious answer is it’s largely unnecessary and mostly likely not very feasible for most gun owners. The crowded theater scenario is just one of a million other scenarios that can be thought up to be challenging for any shooter to navigate safely and effectively and used as an example to make CHLers look inept or out of their depth if they don’t have training necessary to deal with it effectively.

      So here’s where I land on this issue:
      All egos and bs aside, I think every responsible gun owner that is a current CHL holder or is planning on getting their CHL that doesn’t have extensive training, experience in the field, or doesn’t have experience shooting and operating their weapon under stress, really needs to make a mental note and be honest about their personal training up to this point.

      I certainly don’t agree with anything the OP has said as far as taking handguns (or guns in whatever form they’re in) away from law-abiding citizens. For obvious reasons.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Brewski,

        If no data is available, then “thought experiments” (hypothetical situations) are a sensible way of trying to determine a sensible course of action.

        However we have lots of data. Armed citizens without the extensive training that you describe use firearms thousands of times every year to defend themselves and others. I cannot find a single documented instance of an armed citizen shooting an innocent bystander when using their firearm to defend themselves during a stressful event.

        I imagine an armed citizen must have shot an innocent bystander at least once somewhere. But it happens so rarely that we never hear about it. And believe me, the liberal media would be all over it if an armed citizen shot a bystander. And imagine all the injuries or deaths that would have happened if we didn’t allow citizens to use firearms until they passed extensive training? There, see how easy it is to use thought experiments?

        1. avatar Brewski says:

          Well, that’s just it. I’m agreeing with you.

          And I was hoping someone could shed some light on some DGU stats regarding the average shooting proficiency of CCers.

          As far as you not being able to find a case of an armed citizen ever having shot an innocent bystander in a DGU, I’ll guess I’ll take your word for it. I certainly hope that’s the case.

  31. avatar Chaz says:

    Someday this age of unlimited gun accessibility will appear in our history books as an age of madness.

    The view from the ivory tower seems always to be that good people never need to play defense. The nanny state will always be there to save you. But what if they are not? This is not Star Trek where help can instantly materialize from thin air. Would you take comfort in being a martyr for political correctness?

    Arguably better is taking responsibility for your personal safety.

  32. avatar watzadon says:

    “How many have to die before we come to our senses and realize that adding more guns to reduce killing is like adding more mosquitoes to reduce malaria. When will we learn”

    Hey that actually is a great idea, adding more mosquitos to the population would like reduce the overall likehood of Malaria, i think we should apply this to guns as well.

    Hes obviously never heard of biological carrying capacity and competition.

    Tucks a genius, he just doesnt know it yet

  33. avatar Totenglocke says:

    See, idiots like this are exactly why I encourage people who are blowing off steam to never say “I want to shoot stupid people” or some variation of that. I tell them to say “I want to stab stupid people”. Why? Because morons like this think violence is just fine and dandy as long as it’s not committed using a gun

    1. avatar Brewski says:

      I bet people say the latter phrase all the time in the UK.

    2. avatar RIGHT! says:

      This man has no problem with violence as long as he’s the one directing it against Americans.
      How does a hardened Leftist remain relevant in a world ruled by Marxists and Maoists? Become an even wilder anti-American Leftist.
      I bet he’s at the Occupy riots, “Keeping It Real”, as we discuss his idiotcy.

  34. avatar Moonshine7102 says:

    That letter gave me cancer.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email