Road rage and guns

[telcoman]

A deadly combination.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/ne...story

So now lets hear the NRA supporters tell us again why guns should be carried around?

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/ne...story

Jacko,Tampa & others in Florida be careful

Telcoman

[rn79870]

I wish there was a psychological test for CCP. Someway they could weed out the ones who, in the heat of the moment, lose sight of the enormous responsibility carrying a gun requires.

[Marenta]

Listen, guns and cars are just as lethal. If you're mad and driving, either one is going to be just as likely to get you killed.

Just because you guys have a personal dislike for guns doesn't mean that every person with a CWP has road rage, or every person with road rage has a CWP.

[heliochrome85]

true. im not against gun ownership, i am against free distribution of guns though. we have too many on the streets and not enough safety controls in place to make sure they dont get in the wrong hands. The people who love guns the most, are the ones who respect them the most. Mad props to those people.

[Marenta]

Both men were upstanding, law abiding men, and they both let their tempers get away with them. They shouldn't have been arguing in a parking lot. That's just foolish. I used to get insanely upset when I got behind the wheel of a car, now I am just sedate. I don't care anymore, because, what are you going to do? If some idiot in front of me wants to break check me, well, that's his choice, I know I can break in time, because I'm attentive enough to catch his stupid punk *** before he pulls his prank.

The gun problem in America is the fact that they're all illegal guns. They've all been stolen, or smuggled. They've all had the S/Ns wiped off, and they're all dirty. You can't track that, and those are the types of guns that are doing the crimes that you hear about. The gang crimes, the robberies, the bank shoot outs, and the domestic voilence cases. Most of these HUGE cases that you hear about on the news are because they were committed with a legit gun, and a legit guy, and that's why it's such a big deal.

[rn79870]

Here is why I'm so deadset on requiring more training before anyone gets their first rifle (or pistol).

MOUNT VERNON, Wash. -- A 14-year-old bear hunter who shot and killed a hiker was with his 16-year-old brother - not an adult as previously reported, the Skagit County sheriff's office says.

An investigation determined that the boys' grandfather dropped them off in the Sauk Mountain area near Rockport on Saturday morning but was not with them when the shooting occurred, Chief Deputy Will Reichardt said Monday.

The two teens, from Concrete, were on a ledge overlooking the trail when the hiker, 54-year-old Pamela Almli, stopped below to put something into her backpack, he said. The younger boy fired, thinking she was a bear.

Almli was from the Snohomish County community of Oso, which ironically means "bear" in Spanish. Almli was hiking with a friend.

"All I can say is that it never should have happened," Almli's husband, William, told the Skagit Valley Herald. They have a son and three grandchildren.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/....html

I'm not against private gun ownership. I'm against private gun ownership without good, quality professional type training. Especially for those who have never been in the military.

[Cold_Zero]

I wish there was a psychological test for CCP. Someway they could weed out the ones who, in the heat of the moment, lose sight of the enormous responsibility carrying a gun requires.

Bob,While I understand your intent, I would like to point out that most State Laws are crafted so that if you are a felon or a domestic abuser or mentally ill you are not allowed to buy, possess or carry a firearm. There are also Federal Laws on the books for the same issues. Typically our governments wait for you to be convicted of a felony, charged with domestic abuse/battery or be diagnosed with mental illness. Effectively, the governments trust its people, until the people break its and the peoples’ trust.

Getting back to Telco's point. This is so typical of the Liberals MO. Let's not even attempt to address or solve the real problem at hand, violent or uncivilized behavior. No let's distract people by blaming firearms. As Marenta has alluded to, the issue is that some people engage in Road Rage with a +2K lb car in order to get out their frustrations or rage. I live in a state that has harsh penalties for people who are caught engaging in road rage. Because let's face it, people shooting each other on the freeway is dangerous, but people duking it out in cars is much more dangerous to other drivers on the roadways and this activity is lot more prevalent.

[Cold_Zero]

Here is why I'm so deadset on requiring more training before anyone gets their first rifle (or pistol).

Bob,This thread was setup by Telco to talk about Road Rage specifically with the use of firearms to perpetrate this violent activity.

The story you quoted was a hunting accident? Not sure how these two stories are even related. But reading through your story I see a couple of things that went wrong.1. No parental supervision. Instead of urging and encouraging parents and guardians to do their job, no let's just take guns away. I guess if you are not going to supervise your children, then you have NO BUSINESS giving them firearms.2. Teach your freaking kids not to shoot at anything UNLESS they have a clear picture of the target. This is fundamental and is taught in Boy Souts Firearm Training, NRA Eddie the Eagle Program and by the United State Military.

[Marenta]

Road rage comes in all shapes and sizes. It can be the misinterpretation of whether or not you cut them off. If you merged into their lane, and they think you got too close.

You know the type, the people that speed up and close the gap to the person in front of them just so you can't merge into their lane.

The perception while driving is that everybody is out to get you and you have to be that ******* that gets them first, and it's sad that some people want to use their cars or guns (if they have them) to take it out on other people. Just don't be foolish enough to assume that everybody else that fits that billet will be just like that.

[Cold_Zero]

The only things that really irritate me are:1. Drivers that are on the phone and obviously distracted. Stay in your lane!2. People who do not move over to the left hand lane to allow other people merging on to the highway. I got nearly run down by some New Yorker in Buffalo merging on to I-90. For me, everything changed when my daughter was born. Now that I have her in the back seat, I am a lot more cautious when I am driving. Her safety is in my hands.

[telcoman]

Bob,This thread was setup by Telco to talk about Road Rage specifically with the use of firearms to perpetrate this violent activity.

The story you quoted was a hunting accident? Not sure how these two stories are even related. But reading through your story I see a couple of things that went wrong.1. No parental supervision. Instead of urging and encouraging parents and guardians to do their job, no let's just take guns away. I guess if you are not going to supervise your children, then you have NO BUSINESS giving them firearms.2. Teach your freaking kids not to shoot at anything UNLESS they have a clear picture of the target. This is fundamental and is taught in Boy Souts Firearm Training, NRA Eddie the Eagle Program and by the United State Military.

This is not just a liberal/conservative issue.

It is a common sense and public safety issue.

I posted because I want to hear the NRA supporters explain why carrying guns in todays society is necessary?

Here is the way I see the gun issue.

Although at the time of our original constitution we were a sparsly settled country. How can anyone compare the right to bear arms in the 1700's with todays crowded roads, cities, etc.In most areas of the United States today there is no longer any need for anyone to carry a gun unless legally hunting, carrying large sums of cash, or some other legitmate reason. To allow every citizen to carry loaded weapons around while driving is INMHO just plain foolish.

Can you just imagine the three million or so daily riders of the New York City subway system each having a gun? Someone accidently steps on someone else's foot and bam their shot dead!

Citizens carrying weapons around in cars makes no sense to me. I don't care what the second ammendment says. Made sense in the 1700's but no longer today.

Telcoman

[Cold_Zero]

I posted because I want to hear the NRA supporters explain why carrying guns in todays society is necessary?

Simple, because a responsible armed populous makes a safer society.

Look,I may not think that certain parts of the Constitution are still applicable due to my personal needs, but that does not mean that I would budge one inch on any of them.

I don’t care about your right to peacefully assemble for your Union Meetings. Am I a union member? NO. Do I need protections for unionized activities? NO. It really doesnt affect me. Yet if the government in the State of Indiana attempted to keep Union Shops, like the Teachers Union that my family are all a part of, from assembling you better believe I would be indignant and would do something about it. Personally, I think the Third Amendment seems pretty antiquated. This Amendment was established in a by gone era. Do we quarter troops or even foreign troops anymore? No. Is this really an issue in the United State now that the majority of soldiers have their own homes? Nope.

We are supposed to go in a forward progression with our Liberties, Telco, not backwards. I DO NOT think that disarming the American populous makes it a safer society.

Lock and load, baby

[96Qowner]

This is not just a liberal/conservative issue.

In that vein, I will agree that the world would be a better place if nobody had a handgun. I even will agree that this society is far different than the one in existence when the Constitution was written.

But there are a whole bunch of problems with trying to eliminate handguns.

For instance, there are already 65-70 million of them in the USA. So ... how do you find them and confiscate them? Do you go house to house and search? I doubt it.

If you outlaw the production and import of handguns, then you still have 65-70 million of them floating around. No improvement.

If you try to limit the right to carry, then just exactly who gets to carry one and who doesn't? The one principle that still remains from the founders time is the principle that the populous should have the power to overthrow an oppressive government. I don't want to allow some special segment of society (including those who don't obey the laws anyway) to carry handguns when the rest of us can't.

And finally, the really odd evidence that no one has been able to dispute so far - in cities where concealed-carry laws are relaxed and handgun ownership by average citizens goes up, violent crime goes down.

No sense in debating the issue until you can explain all that away.

[rn79870]

In theory, you could regulate handguns by regulating ammunition. I've often wondered what would happen if they developed ammunition that expired in 180 days, just plain lost its fizzle. Add that to a special ID card for buying ammo ,with a bi-annual renewal and review of eligibility.

I'm all for responsible people owning firearms. I would like to see the NRA come up with plans to make gun ownership safer for all, owners and citizens alike. As far as I'm concerned, gun owners should be the ones screaming the loudest when some retard shoots another victim.

[Cold_Zero]

Maybe the United States could start making the world a better place by not pumping billions of dollars into the World Arms Market. We sell so much Military Arms to other countries and groups its not funny. So here is a novel concept, since you got me thinking. Why not totally disarm the United States of America? Start from the top on down. From the Military to Law Enforcement to the Populous, disarm EVERYONE in this country! That is right; we can expect the Department of Homeland Security to do their job with out any firearms. We can disarm the United States Military and rely on the United Nations to defend our borders. Think of how safer the world would be by totally eradicating our nuclear arsenal and not to mention how much money we would save not having to maintain fleets, bases and aircraft. Police and other Law Enforcement Agencies, disarm them as well. They do not need firearms to catch criminals after we eradicate all firearms.

Think of how wonderful and safe the United States would be without a Standing Army, Military weapons, or any weapons at all.

[srellim234]

And think of how quickly we'd all be fluently speaking a foreign language, too. We'd be sitting targets and invaded in a hurry for our natural resources. The U.N. is so decadent and corrupt that expecting anything productive out of it militarily is hopeless.

[Marenta]

Can you just imagine the three million or so daily riders of the New York City subway system each having a gun? Someone accidentally steps on someone else's foot and bam their shot dead!

Okay, Telco, here's a good one for you.. say you and your wife and your children are out and you're going to go grab a bite to eat at a restaurant.. and suddenly some wackjob with a gun holds you guys up.

Now, let's just say NRA John just got done filling up his gas tank at the gas station next door and sees this happen. He's carrying his firearm on him, he pulls it out and threatens the wackjob, wackjob flips out and shoots at NRA John. NRA John is a way better shot, shoots wackjob dead, you and your family owe your lives to NRA John and his CWP firearm.

That kinda stuff happens all the time. A law abiding citizen with a firearm, who knows the laws will defend you 99.9% of the time, and that person may or may not have to fire a shot, but you owe your life and the lives of your family to that person and their 1700's mentality handgun.

Like I posted earlier in this thread, it's not the legitimate guns that are the issue, it's the illegal guns that are. If you take away the legal guns from the legal people, then YOU take away YOUR first line of defense. So then you won't have people like ME to defend YOU when wackjob is there to rape your wife and cap your kids in front of you.

[Cold_Zero]

So if it is unwise for us (the United States) to give up the responsibility of our common defense and let others countries provide for our defense, why isnt it just as unwise for individuals to give up the responsibility for their safety and security to State or Local Governments?

[telcoman]

Okay, Telco, here's a good one for you.. say you and your wife and your children are out and you're going to go grab a bite to eat at a restaurant.. and suddenly some wackjob with a gun holds you guys up.

Now, let's just say NRA John just got done filling up his gas tank at the gas station next door and sees this happen. He's carrying his firearm on him, he pulls it out and threatens the wackjob, wackjob flips out and shoots at NRA John. NRA John is a way better shot, shoots wackjob dead, you and your family owe your lives to NRA John and his CWP firearm.

That kinda stuff happens all the time. A law abiding citizen with a firearm, who knows the laws will defend you 99.9% of the time, and that person may or may not have to fire a shot, but you owe your life and the lives of your family to that person and their 1700's mentality handgun.

Like I posted earlier in this thread, it's not the legitimate guns that are the issue, it's the illegal guns that are. If you take away the legal guns from the legal people, then YOU take away YOUR first line of defense. So then you won't have people like ME to defend YOU when wackjob is there to rape your wife and cap your kids in front of you.

Marenta

I kind of agree with your sceniero but although I am a sort of news hound I rarely see instances that you describe and many more examples of the article I posted.There are too many guns in circulation with too many unqualified and unstable people owning them. Since the NRA is the US greatest proponent of gun rights in this country, shouldn't they be doing more to keep guns out of the hands of unqualified and unstable people?What about states rights? Guns is rural Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana etc may be acceptable but not in the congested northeast. I'm sure you are familar with the traffic arround DC. Should drivers be carrying guns there? I think not!Watch as hunting season arrives and notice how many articles appear of hunters shooting each other. I'm curious, have you ever shot and killed another human? Many police that have end up with physicological problems. Many in the military trained to kill also return with mental problems.We as a nation are a very violent one with too many guns. I don't believe having more of them is a solution?I think fewer guns is worth a try?

Telcoman

[Marenta]

I'm curious, have you ever shot and killed another human? Many police that have end up with physiological problems. Many in the military trained to kill also return with mental problems.

I have a lot of friends who are SEALs and Recon, and I know the quirks. I know how to act around them, and I know what they've been through. I don't know the details, but I know the burden they carry. I see it in them, they wear it like it's a ball and chain connecting their neck to their ankle. I see the same thing with Eric. I choose to not talk about the war, the guns, the politics, the bull****, and all the other stuff that goes along with it because I know that they all have to live it. I see it first hand with my friends and family, and it sucks.

So, have I ever killed another person? No. Would I? Yes. Absolutely. "How?" Do you ask.. Well, because I've been around these men for so long, I think I can make that disconnect. I think I have adapted well enough to be able to determine the right and wrong of the situation and make that snap decision and break off my emotions to kill somebody for justice.

I would like to live in a world that didn't need guns, Telco. I really would. But, the truth of the matter is, we have them now, and we've got to live with them. And, while those hunting accidents go up and you always hear about all the gun crimes; nibble on this.. How many failed military missions have you heard of? How many successful military missions have you heard of? Nobody ever reports the good, good news doesn't sell. It's sad, but true. In the end, Telco, you just have to hope that the good guys win the war with the guns. Because, if they start taking away all the guns from the good guys, well, then we're all in trouble.

[Cold_Zero]

Marenta

I kind of agree with your sceniero but although I am a sort of news hound I rarely see instances that you describe and many more examples of the article I posted.

Telco,What is your street address? I will drop ship you (at no cost to you) my last 2 years of American Rifleman Magazine. Typically on page 2 or 3 they have a section where they cut out news articles from Local News Papers about citizens who use firearms to lawfully defend themselves. You don't see it in the Mass Media because it doesnot serve their agenda. And these types of things dont pull in ratings.

I will post up an example of it when I get home. Repo's and My buddy is in town from Hawaii, so we are going to fill our bellies with good German Food and Beer!See you guys later.bud

[telcoman]

Telco,What is your street address?

bud

LOL

After all of your rants on liberals, YOU WANT MY ADDRESS?

I'm afraid you and your militia might one day show up on my door step with all your guns?

Telcoman

[rn79870]

Hope you have a good stuffin' there Bud...

I think what telco's getting at is something like this.A doctor invents a new shot that saves lives. The down side is that there will also be an untold number of innocent lives lost by those who misuse the shot. What should the government do?

[AZhitman]

I don't care what the second ammendment says.

Ah, so typical.

Toss out a brilliant and ingenious document that has withstood the test of time, when you fail to comprehend it (or it doesn't fit your worldview).

[AZhitman]

too many unqualified and unstable people owning them

Guns is rural Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana etc may be acceptable but not in the congested northeast.

The "unqualified and unstable" didn't BUY them, they stole them. Or traded for them. Or borrowed them. You think the gang-bangers are attending CCW classes and buying retail? Please....

Rural AZ? Are you kidding? Most of AZ is far from rural. Phx is the 5th largest city in the US, and the metro area has a landmass exceeding that of LA.

Now, if you'd said the NE is a bad place for guns because of the residents' relative mental instability, I'd go along with that...

[ishkabibble]

Now, if you'd said the NE is a bad place for guns because of the residents' relative mental instability, I'd go along with that...

You've got my support. People out here are sociopaths.

[Marenta]

Hey, that's not fair.. I like driving through NE.. the speed limit is 80 on the interstates.. But, on the other hand it does take a decade to drive.. and at least all of the Linkin Park CDs and 3 rest area stops later.

[ishkabibble]

The NE is a nice place to visit, but you wouldn't want to live there.

[srellim234]

You guys are talking about two different places.

NE = Northeast (mentally unstable)and

NE = Nebraska (80 mph interstate highway)

[AZhitman]

You've got my support. People out here are sociopaths.

LOL - Send them to AZ.

We're all riding horses, wearing chaps and carrying twin pearl-handled Colts on our belt.