An Opportunity?
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 34

Thread: An Opportunity?

  1. #1

    An Opportunity?

    I clicked on a link provided by "NavyLCDR" in another thread. It was a blog by a Brady member that has actually purchased a Glock and is carrying for 30 days and writing about it. I feel it is an opportunity to show the shooting community in a positive light by giving support and offering mentorship and training to get this person headed in the right direction. How 'bout it? Can we help?

    My Month With a Gun: Week One

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    On what the hay...ill click it. I wanna see the bradys turn on each other lol

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    It seems...She doesn't want to learn about firearms. She doesn't want to actually see what the firearm world is like. She is on a witch hunt.
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  5. #4
    The article is garbage and has NO valid merit. The writer has done everything to not learn about what she has purchased to make the point that anyone can be an idiot. She has succeeded quite nicely in proving that point.
    I'd rather be a Conservative Nutjob. Than a Liberal with NO Nuts & NO Job

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    2,348
    Blog Entries
    2
    If this really were an opportunity, my comment would have made it onto the page. Since this is just a mentally ill woman who sits at starbucks with an empty gun in her holster thinking about shooting customers, my comment urging her to seek the help of a psychiatrist will never make it through moderation.

  7. #6
    I didn't bother trying to leave a comment, but I did read them all. They ran about 50-50 for and against what she was doing. And lots of them stated the obvious, "get training if you're going to do that". But bottom line, I have to agree with the cop. She's an idiot.

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Peggy Reist View Post
    I didn't bother trying to leave a comment, but I did read them all. They ran about 50-50 for and against what she was doing. And lots of them stated the obvious, "get training if you're going to do that". But bottom line, I have to agree with the cop. She's an idiot.
    Training would be good, just like it is for everyone else...but training isn't the answer for this problem. I'm fine with citizens carrying with no training, but most citizens aren't as mentally unfit as she is.

    No amount of training can help her mentality. She seriously can't trust herself to not spontaneously start shooting people.
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Firefighterchen View Post
    Training would be good, just like it is for everyone else...but training isn't the answer for this problem. I'm fine with citizens carrying with no training, but most citizens aren't as mentally unfit as she is.

    No amount of training can help her mentality. She seriously can't trust herself to not spontaneously start shooting people.
    I agree with you up to a point. I agree nothing's going to help her mental state. She's still an idiot. And I'm OK with peoples' RIGHT to carry without training. But I still don't think it's a good idea. I wouldn't want to be around a bad guy when they decided to protect themselves against them (right or wrong). Because chances are very good they'd miss him and hit me.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Pasco, Washington, United States
    Posts
    6,271
    Quote Originally Posted by Peggy Reist View Post
    I agree with you up to a point. I agree nothing's going to help her mental state. She's still an idiot. And I'm OK with peoples' RIGHT to carry without training. But I still don't think it's a good idea. I wouldn't want to be around a bad guy when they decided to protect themselves against them (right or wrong). Because chances are very good they'd miss him and hit me.
    I understand that possibility, but it just doesn't hold true. Washington has no training requirement, and I know the majority of carriers here do not train. We do not experience innocent bystanders being shot more than states that do require training. Same goes for Nevada and Vermont.

    I agree trained carriers are a good idea. But untrained carriers aren't a bad idea. That's a bad road to be on to think otherwise, especially with out support.
    “One of the illusions of life is that the present hour is not the critical, decisive one.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Peggy Reist View Post
    I agree with you up to a point. I agree nothing's going to help her mental state. She's still an idiot. And I'm OK with peoples' RIGHT to carry without training. But I still don't think it's a good idea. I wouldn't want to be around a bad guy when they decided to protect themselves against them (right or wrong). Because chances are very good they'd miss him and hit me.
    I would not want to be around a bad guy when the police start shooting at them:
    GUNS - The Untold Truth

    "Don't think that just because the police are trained in the use of firearms that they are less likely to kill an innocent person. A University of Chicago Study revealed that in 1993 approximately 700,000 police killed 330 innocent individuals, while approximately 250,000,000 private citizens only killed 30 innocent people. Do the math. That's a per capita rate for the police, of almost 4000 times higher than the population in general. OK, that is a little misleading. Let's just include the 80,000,000 gun owning citizens. Now the police are down to only a 1200 times higher accidental shooting rate than the gun-owning population in general.

    That still sounds high. So let's look at it in a different light. According to a study by Newsweek magazine, only 2% of civilian shootings involve an innocent person being shot (not killed). The error rate for police is 11%. What this means is that you are more than 5 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen. But, when you consider that citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as do police every year, it means that, per capita, you are more than 11 times more likely to be accidentally shot by a policeman than by an armed citizen. That is as low as I can get that number."
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast