Orlando shooting

One cop with a handgun against a psycho with a rifle and a handgun, and an unknown amount of ammo?
That's outgunned.
I'm out.

 

Again you may believe what you will but when it's pretty clear that such beliefs are not well supported by facts don't expect to convince many people. I'm not sure why you considered it important to make such a statement either. What did you hope to accomplish by it? You certainly aren't trying to convince anyone your position is correct especially since you refuse to stand up for it in a reasoned debate.

 

You fight with what you have. Moreover, it was his duty to fight, a duty he failed to uphold. Again though, this is why I won't be disarmed and depend on the police for my protection. To paraphrase a common saying, in this case "When seconds counted, the police were three hours away."

 

One of our former members here at one point got in a fight at relatively close range. He had a .45 and his opponent had an AK-47. He walked away (all be it in need of some medical assistance) his opponent didn't. If you check for posts by Unca Walt you may still be able to find his account of the incident. In a case like that if the shooting hasn't started then the cop should have an advantage and maybe able to stop it from even reaching that stage. I hate to criticize cops because they have a difficult and dangerous job but it sounds like this one failed to do what he signed up for. I haven't read the details on this yet which could have considerable impact on how I'd look at this.

 

Here's what I think of that cop.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8IkbCeZ9to

 

A pump shotgun will throw thirty four .24 caliber projectiles (#4 Buck) with each pull of the trigger, and it will hold seven shots (238 projectiles) which can be fired in a few seconds. Fill your pockets with a single box of 25 shells and you have 5,950 projectiles on tap. Yet a semi-auto rifle is too dangerous? At the ranges where these mass shootings occur, each of those projectiles is as lethal as a .223.

This is why all of these bans based on the type of weapon are idiotic. They are based on phobias rather than common sense. They are based on appearance rather than performance.

 

Semi-auto is semi-auto. Pretty much depends on how quickly one can or desires to pull the trigger as to rate of fire. I assume the cop had a 9mm semi with probably a 15 round mag. The shooter may have had a rifle and a pistol, but he can only shoot one at a time, so number of weapons is not a factor unless one of the weapons malfunctions. Transition from one to the other is most likely longer than the time required to change mags, depends on the shooter. The rifle probably had a 30 round mag so advantage shooter for rounds before reload. Don't know if the police officer was wearing his duty belt but if so he probably had at least two extra mags. Depending upon range, and it was in a nightclub so we should assume it was limited, a hand gun is quicker to bring on target and easier to maneuver with in confined spaces. Advantage cop. Rifle has better penetration. If I were in the cops spot I wouldn't have felt outgunned. I would have attempted to close the range, but would have had a plan to egress. I'd have have engaged, probably would have killed or wounded him. If not I would have saved my last several rounds for pulling back to await reinforcements. While the shooter was thus occupied, hopefully people could have gotten out. Psycho vs cool, deliberate and trained, huge advantage to the better trained individual.

I thought the same thing when I first heard it. Didn't say anything because I wasn't sure it was appropriate, but you broached it, so I'll say I agree.

 

A pump action has what 7 shots...one in the spout...so can only shoot a maximum of 8 people before a time consuming reload...one only has to ask why a semi-auto to see why they are more dangerous...they shoot more bullets and are forgiving of bad shots...as stated above NO ONE needs a semi auto...even hunters (Ive never seen an African ranger with a semi auto - they are all bolt actions)
So a hunter doesn't NEED a semi auto...a farmer whos keeping ferrals down and putting down sick animals doesn't NEED a semi auto...indeed the semi auto is a HUMAN weapon designed to kill...HUMANS. So why does a hunter or farmer need that? They don't, Australia has proved that for years.
Heres a stat for you...prior to the banning of semi autos in Australia there were 13 mass shootings in 18 years (including the then world record of 35 in Port Arthur) - Since the ban was put in place? 0...i'll repeat that...0.
As our ex Prime Minister has said "you think that's a coincidence? C'mon..."

 

While I'm sure our beliefs do not coincide on all points, I will strenuously defend your right to speak them here and go further in saying they are as valid as anyone else on the forum. Nor are you obligated to debate a personally held belief, facts yes, but not honest and genuinely beliefs.

My position has evolved over time and while I still believe the Constitution defends the right of every law abiding citizen to own a firearm for their protection, sustenance and recreation I do question the right to some weapons and equipment without more stringent regulations. There is something out of whack when there seem to be greater regulatory efforts to own and operate a automobile than there are for a firearm.

I have trouble seeing the need for high capacity magazines. If you can't stop a intruder or game animal with 8 or ten rounds then it seems your doing something massively wrong. I would love to see greater access to less lethal alternatives like tasers and pepper sprays which seem far more defensive.

I am not opposed to actual collector's or competitive shooters having access to these type of weapons provided they go through more stringent background checks the way a motorcycle or commercial driver must demonstrate their suitability to operate their toy's. If we require insurance to operate a car for accidental injury, why not for firearms? In San Bernadino and Orlando someone who had no business owning these guns had no problem getting them.

We can never stop all crackpot's determined to go out in a blaze of glory, but we can make it harder for them to try by using common sense to weed out the nutjobs from the honest citizen. Comprehensive background checks, coordination between agencies and reasonable limits on who can own what without extensive verification that they are not a threat to society or themselves.

Every social contract is a balance between the right to do what you want to do and the rights of others that what you do does not unduly risk the safety and well being of others.

 

No, it has 34 projectiles in each cartridge (if using #4 Buck). So, with a short barrel firing into a crowd some yards away you might take down dozens each time you pull the trigger. Changing the tool used to murder doesn't change the outcome.

Maybe Ozzies are just more peaceful, I don't know. I know that in November, 130 people died in Paris and the tight French/EU gun laws didn't change a thing. I know that Mexico has tough gun laws and it's a slaughterhouse down there. Honduras, tight gun laws, highest murder rate in the world.

 

I'm OK, your OK, heck even Kodiak is OK after he has had his morning coffee!

 

Since when did terrorist obey laws? We had 30 years of full-on terrorist violence in NI despite having some of the world's toughest gun laws. Nobody in the UK started screaming for those laws to be changed so we could all pretend to be John Wayne; we let the professionals (ie the Army & Police) get on with their jobs.
The guy in Orlando owned his guns LEGALLY.

 

That's a long bow KB...those projectiles have a tight grouping up to a fair range and are smaller pellets only deadly if hit in the head...never seen or heard of "dozens" of people being hit by anything in one shot.
Using your logic, the US should make grenades legal...why not? Its your right to protect yourself...its not a weapon of mass destruction, you can carry it without freaking people out...? So why not?
I cant believe they sell 50 cals in the US either...what on EARTH does a civilian want with that? Im not surprised the authorities wait for an armoured car...I bloody would!

 

With all the bad press our police officers in the states have gotten the last few years, especiallly here in Albuquerque, I myself am not going to count on them coming to my aid after the way they've been treated. I'll call 911 but I'll consider other options.

Also, they do offer shooters insurance through the NRA and other organizations. If you do shoot someone, it can help pay your legal fees when the shooting victim's family sues you. Common occurrence with even justifiable homicide I guess. We were highly advised to get this during our CCW class.

 

Sadly there is as yet no cure for being a Yankee.