Quantcast

Dallas Shooting

Discussion in 'Activism Discussion and Planning' started by hso, Jul 9, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. R.W.Dale

    R.W.Dale Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    11,442
    Location:
    Northwest Arkansas
    Probably of greater importance to us was how did the murderer arrive at the scene and conduct himself immediately prior to shooting.

    If he used "open carry" to get to where he wanted to be I would expect an anti OC backlash at all levels.
     
    dave pittman likes this.
  2. DaveP (UK)

    DaveP (UK) Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    129
    Location:
    West Midlands, UK
    This seems like an appropriate moment to ask a question that has been in my mind for a couple of days.
    When I have read about open carry and concealed carry I have always assumed that the terms referred to hand guns. My view was challenged during a recent conversation, and now by the post above.
    Is it really legally permitted to walk around in a built up area with a rifle slung over your shoulder?

    Please note my user name and believe that this is a totally straightforward request for enlightenment from an overseas shooter. Not any sort of wind up.
    Thanks!
     
  3. R.W.Dale

    R.W.Dale Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    11,442
    Location:
    Northwest Arkansas
    Yes it is legal in Texas and in my opinion (and yes I get that it's a right) is in the long run going to be far far more detrimental to our 2a liberties than helpful.
     
  4. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,657
    Pretty sure OC of long guns is permitted in at least 40 states or perhaps better stated, it is prohibited in probably no more than 10.
    Texas is a recent handgun OC state but they've long been allowed long guns in public.

    Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk
     
  5. Prijador

    Prijador Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    127
    The other point I would make is this is very rare for another reason: the vast majority of murder with a firearm takes place at very close range - something like 99% is at 15 meters (edit). While *we* can argue, a scawy "assault weapon" isn't much different than a handgun at close range. Banning "assault weapons" will merely result in madmen using pistols (such as the Five SeveN, which has 20-round magazines as standard, and 30-round extended).

    *Many* anti's still know better than to try for a handgun ban...
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016
  6. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    614
    Location:
    Central Texas
    In Texas, it's legal to open carry long guns because it's not specifically addressed by the law whereas handgun carry has been addressed by the law in one way or another since the 1800's.

    The long gun is more a working tool historically as opposed to the handgun, which tends to be more for personal defense.

    Long gun carry in the open is extremely rare per capita throughout the state, even considering the uptick in the last few years by activists. When I arrived in Central Texas years ago, gun racks were common in the truck windows and there were ranches all around me. It stopped over time mostly due to vehicle break-ins and applied good sense. Move away from the cities and they're still out there without flash, fireworks, or political statements.

    Does long gun carry hurt the pro-2A movement? No. The damage to 2A liberties is caused by the criminal uses of said firearms, combined with media sensationalism and, indirectly aided by pro-2A supporters shirking away from a Bill of Rights fight that's been building for decades. To think otherwise is to attempt to protect a right by not exercising it with good sense and consideration of circumstances.

    I agree that, at times, the less waves are made, the easier to get along. But, the liberal and anti-gun waves are coming over the bow for some time and getting higher. At some point the "fight" must occur instead relying purely on appeasement and compromise.

    One way or another, someone's going to lose something in this fight. Will this end the fight once and for all? No. If the anti-gunners lose, the tide will ebb and flow again. If the pro-2A crowd loses, it's debatable if 2A will ever exist again from that point forward.
     
  7. hso

    hso Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2003
    Messages:
    55,615
    Location:
    0 hrs east of TN
    Prijador,

    Mass shootings are not typically carried out with assault weapons of any sort, but instead handguns are used more often. The information on this is out there, but Antis don't want the public to know about it and we just regurgitate their perceptions without checking the facts. Including Columbine, there have been 56 mass murders involving firearms and only 14 (now) of those involved "assault weapons". 1 in 4 in spite of the fact the Antis make it seem like they all involve ARs (btw, only 9 involved "ARs").

    The facts are that since Columbine in 1999 there have been 401 people killed in the 56 random mass murders involving firearms using the FBI's objective criteria, that of those only 14 involved "assault weapons. During that same time homicide rates dropped from about 6/100,000 to 4.5/100,000. Of those homicides for the last complete data year (2014), rifles of all types, not just "assault rifles" were used in only 248 intentional homicides, shotguns were used in 262, clubs and other blunt objects were used in 435, hands and feet were used in 660 and bladed weapons were used in 1,567 cases. Notice that nearly 3 times as many people died at the hands (and feet) of their killers as die in all rifle homicides. In 2006 there were 438 rifle related homicides vs. 490 shotgun, 618 blunt objects, 841 hands & feet and 1,830 bladed weapons used. Note the drop across the board, but especially note that nearly half the number of rifle homicides occurred in 2014 as in 2006. Statistically, you're half as likely to be killed with any sort of rifle now as then AND you were even less likely now to be killed with a rifle as hands and feet. YET the antis use the AR15 as the boogeyman to lie to people about their risk of murder and they lie to people about an "epidemic of violence" where our homicide rate is a fraction of what it was just 20 years ago.
     
  8. Prijador

    Prijador Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2014
    Messages:
    127
    I *think*, historically, the recent murder spree in Orlando marks the first time an "assault weapon" has been the primary weapon used in the deadliest mass shooting in the country. Previous cases which were the deadliest incident up to that point in history were other weapons, like handguns at Virginia Tech, Luby's, etc.
     
  9. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,657
    I think we error by looking at historic uses of firearms as well as past crime statistics.
    My own county has marked an increase in violent crimes that runs counter to what the FBI reports.
    I don't wish to sound anti gun but we are awash in guns that fire semi auto and are loaded with detachable mags. This last guy was at best marginally trained but given the current trend I still anticipate we have yet to see shooters who for what ever reason are much better trained or working in groups who will raise their effectiveness to a level we have yet to see. When that day comes we must be able to project a clear coherent position that places the blame in the proper place and somehow assures Americans that the gun owning public should not be feared.
     
  10. gbran

    gbran Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    2,987
    Location:
    california
    HSO

    Though I know you know, it should be noted prior to Orlando, out biggest was Seung-Hui Cho, at Virginia tech, he killed 32 and injured far more, with two handguns, one 9mm and one 22lr.
     
  11. X-Rap

    X-Rap Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Messages:
    6,657
    I agree but whether it's a Glock, SKS or an AR i don't wish to have them taken from my hands anymore than my bolt actions or revolvers. As long as we continue to assign blame to the tool rather than the individual or rights will be in danger.
     
  12. Apachedriver

    Apachedriver Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    614
    Location:
    Central Texas
    It's a very important point that's shared by many others as well.

    BUT, that's the where we run into a majority of the problem. The true believers of anti-2A and anti-personal freedoms don't care.

    Let's place to one side everyone that has 2A rights. Let's focus on the licensed/permitted owners and/or carriers alone. We know they are among the most deeply vetted in the nation before getting licensed/permitted. The anti gunners know and understand this fact. They don't care. It's not good enough for them.

    Licensed carriers are one of the lowest crime committing groups, especially crimes involving firearms. Public records prove this fact. The anti-gunners know and understand this fact. They don't care. It's not good enough for them.

    They have called for, and enacted, more firearm regulations and laws over the years. Compromises and concessions are made to them. Requirements are met and surpassed and yet, the anti-gunners know and understand this fact. They don't care. It's not good enough for them.

    We have highly proficient military personnel in the use of arms, decision making processes, risk assessment, planning, etc. Once they are out of the military, the anti-gunners want to treat them as if everything they are just suddenly departed their person when they leave the service. These skills don't just disappear. The anti-gunners know and understand this fact. They don't care. It's not good enough for them.

    So if we can't convince them to ACCEPT and ACT on the facts above, how can we ever convince them to accept everyone else's right to the 2A? I don't know the answer to this question. I know it has to be a multifaceted answer but what's the combination?

    I also know that anti-gunners are familiar with all the logic and facts we present them. It's just not good enough because they don't care. It's not what they want, or agree with, or what flows with their progressive agenda, or etc. At best, they'll acknowledge the facts, proceed to ignore them, babble some nonsensical argument, and then look at you incredulously for still not agreeing to give up your rights.

    At the minimum, we can only hope to win over the fearful, one at a time. But be ready because it's like a fight for their souls, especially in the urban areas where, by the way, the most "enlightened" anti-gun ideologists reside and preach.

    Oh, and "that day" has been here for a while; 8 years at the bare minimum.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2016
  13. R.W.Dale

    R.W.Dale Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    11,442
    Location:
    Northwest Arkansas


    And that is NEVER going to stop.

    FACTS are not going to win this argument because the opposition doesn't care about them.

    Right now this is purely a PR campaign for our rights and I gotta say from what I see we one we are losing miserably at
     
  14. old lady new shooter

    old lady new shooter Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,869
    The photo I saw showed him smiling with the rifle in a sling on his back. He was wearing camouflage pants though.
     
  15. Double Naught Spy

    Double Naught Spy Sus Venator

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    10,569
    Location:
    Forestburg, Texas
  16. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    4,659
    Location:
    CAAZ;TX?
    Going back to my suggestion that we need to get the focus off the tool and back to the motivation,,


    Examples such as this one and the Christopher Dorner episode could be used in effort to address the motives and warning signs as the only way to prevent something bad from happening.
     
  17. DaveP (UK)

    DaveP (UK) Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2007
    Messages:
    129
    Location:
    West Midlands, UK
    Thanks for spelling it out for me.
    Honestly! The differences between here and there - but that would be major thread drift, so I'll just leave it as Thanks :)
     
  18. Deltaboy1984

    Deltaboy1984 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2008
    Messages:
    7,033
    Location:
    Johnson County Texas
    Thanks for the prayers this event hit the DFW area hard.
     
  19. Carl N. Brown

    Carl N. Brown Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    8,752
    Location:
    Kingsport Tennessee
    Wikipedia this morning: "Clay Jenkins, the Dallas County chief executive and the director of homeland security and emergency management, stated that Johnson used an SKS. The Wall Street Journal and CNN, both citing unnamed officials familiar with the investigation, [later] reported that Johnson used a different rifle, an Izhmash-Saiga 5.45mm high-powered rifle, which is a variation on the AK-74."


    The rifle used has been upgraded to a Saiga Sporter, just close enough to an SKS to fool some. Rember the Dallas police official who saw the assassination rifle carried down a hallway and told a reporter it was a 7.65 Mauser? Or the conspiracy theories that misidentification spawned?
     
  20. vtsteve

    vtsteve Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2015
    Messages:
    118
    ...
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2016
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice