What it's like to live in America where everybody can buy guns?

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
21,799
Reaction score
6,577
Sure. They tried. The attempt failed. The law, and the revised term expired.

And so that is the definitive term which decides whether a person in ignorant or lying. Rather than having their own interpretation on the matter.
 

pgsmith

Master of Arts
Joined
Jun 1, 2005
Messages
1,589
Reaction score
481
Location
Texas
You haven't read the entire thread.
No, I have read the entire thread, but thanks for asking.


This is precisely what I mentioned in a post on a different page of this thread. Just as you have a designated driver, you could have a designated carrier. That would be rather easy to maintain as a policy. For example, a group of folks go out for an evening. One guy or gal decides they're not going to drink and be the ride home for the group. Okay, good and responsible plan. Let's say that guy or gal also has a CCW so they carry. Why not, they're sober. The club, for example, could wave the entrance fee for those 'designated' folks. Give them a wristband or different colored stamp or whatever. They get in free and drink club soda for free (or whatever non-alcoholic beverage) all night with the presentation of the wrist band or stamp (or whatever). So we've accomplished some common sense goals; We've got some sober folks in the club so we can tone down the damn drunk driving. That's a win. We have some sober people that are armed. Real world example in one of my previous links of a night club shooting that was stopped by an armed citizen, so that's a win. They get a free pass all night which really doesn't cost the club jack squat (sodas cost pennies to serve) so the club is now promoting safe driving and safe carry with a small, tangible reward. That's a win.

Can any system be abused? Sure, there is always a dumbass that will try to skirt around the system. But just like a designated driver that gets caught drunk driving there are penalties for shooting while stupid drunk. But again, and this is the important part, we have TENS OF THOUSANDS of examples annually of armed private citizens stopping/preventing violent crime. In the link above, night club shooting where the bad guy was stopped by an armed private citizen. If that person wasn't there.....

So I go back to my simple math:

0 armed private citizens + 1 armed bad guy = 100 people shot

1 armed private citizen + 1 armed bad guy = 4 people shot (including the bad guy who was stopped)

Will it always be that way? Every situation is different. But one things for sure, those 100 shot people in Orlando had only three options: run, hide, wait for help. The other night club folks had a fourth option: return fire. One yielded fewer casualties. The bottom line and take home message is simple; your personal security is up to YOU. Not the police, not the military and definitely not the mercy of the bad guy. It's up to YOU. If you outsource YOUR personal security to someone else then you've limited your options and you're dependent on things beyond your control i.e you're a victim. As the old saying goes, when seconds count the police are minutes away.

That scenario would work just fine for someone like you that is a professional. However, the vast majority of people are not. Heck, the vast majority of people are idiots and wouldn't hesitate to get drunk when they're supposed to be the "designated driver". This has been proven a great many times every day.

You want to talk about simple math, then here's some for you .... according to you, there were 100 people shot that may not have been if we allowed concealed carry in nightclubs. That's all well and good, however there were 9,967 deaths caused by drunk drivers. You know, the ones that are supposed to have penalties if they get caught driving drunk. :)

So you're advocating that we should let the general population carry firearms while they're at the club, even though they are already killing almost 10,000 people each year through their own drunken stupidity? The only way that would possibly be an improvement is if everyone was personally responsible for themselves. Unfortunately, that doesn't even happen in the movies, and is nothing remotely resembling real life.

What a juvenile discussion.

You do realize that only kids use the word "juvenile", and then it is usually to refer to discussions that they don't understand right? :)
 

Kong Soo Do

IKSDA Director
Supporting Member
Joined
May 17, 2011
Messages
2,419
Reaction score
329
That scenario would work just fine for someone like you that is a professional.

I'm just a regular guy with specific skills in certain areas. In regard to people acting responsibly, I think the majority would do the right thing but understand that idiots abound. CCW carriers however are by-and-large responsible people. Of a note of interest, police make a mistake in deadly force shootings 11% of the time whereas the armed private citizen only 3% of the time. And since the armed private citizen shoots bad guys three time more than police it is a significant statistic. What I'm suggesting is that of the % of nightclub goers that carry a firearm, I think the majority would act responsibly. And as I suggested, the club offers the incentive of free cover charge and non-alcoholic beverages for the designated carrier. And again, a stamp or wristband would/could identify such a person so that they aren't served alcohol. Now to be clear, this isn't legislation but just an idea on an internet forum. Not suggesting it is fool proof or couldn't be improved or even a better idea suggested. Just tossing it around.

The genesis was the night club shooting in which a patron did stop an active shooter last week. Don't know if the good guy was drinking, though I suspect not as it happened (IIRC) outside the club. But it is an example (one of tens of thousands annually) where an armed private citizen stops a bad guy.
 

drop bear

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Feb 23, 2014
Messages
21,799
Reaction score
6,577
I'm just a regular guy with specific skills in certain areas. In regard to people acting responsibly, I think the majority would do the right thing but understand that idiots abound. CCW carriers however are by-and-large responsible people. Of a note of interest, police make a mistake in deadly force shootings 11% of the time whereas the armed private citizen only 3% of the time. And since the armed private citizen shoots bad guys three time more than police it is a significant statistic. What I'm suggesting is that of the % of nightclub goers that carry a firearm, I think the majority would act responsibly. And as I suggested, the club offers the incentive of free cover charge and non-alcoholic beverages for the designated carrier. And again, a stamp or wristband would/could identify such a person so that they aren't served alcohol. Now to be clear, this isn't legislation but just an idea on an internet forum. Not suggesting it is fool proof or couldn't be improved or even a better idea suggested. Just tossing it around.

The genesis was the night club shooting in which a patron did stop an active shooter last week. Don't know if the good guy was drinking, though I suspect not as it happened (IIRC) outside the club. But it is an example (one of tens of thousands annually) where an armed private citizen stops a bad guy.

Another option is of course offer free entry and drinks to people ranked in jujitsu.

Bjj Eastern Europe US Hero Serviceman That Stopped Terrorist in France, Trains Jiu-Jitsu

As per this incident where a jujitsu armed person successfully prevented a shooting. And an example of the many times jujitsu is used to stop violence.

The math is simple. And shows how good guys armed with jujitsu can stop bad guys with guns.

1 person armed with jujitsu + 1 gunman= nobody dead.

Jujitsu armed practitioners 60% of the time are successful all of the time. And they are statistics.
 
Last edited:
Top