Posted on 07/26/2012 3:56:34 AM PDT by Kaslin
About the tragedy in Aurora, Colo., rapper/actor Ice-T made more sense -- and has a better understanding of the Second Amendment -- than gun-control proponents.
Asked by a London news anchor about America's gun culture, Ice-T said: "Well, I'd give up my gun when everybody does. Doesn't that make sense? ... If there were guns here, would you want to be the only person without one?"
Anchor Krishnan Guru-Murthy, Channel 4 News: "So do you carry guns routinely at home?"
Ice-T: "Yeah, it's legal in the United States. It's part of our Constitution. You know, the right to bear arms is because that's the last form of defense against tyranny. Not to hunt. It's to protect yourself from the police."
Anchor: "And do you see any link between that and these sorts of (Aurora-type) incidents?"
Ice-T: "No. Nah. Not really. You know what I'm saying, if somebody wants to kill people, you know, they don't need a gun to do it."
Anchor: "It makes it easier, though, doesn't it?"
Ice-T: "Not really. You can strap explosives on your body. They do that all the time."
Anchor: "So when there's the inevitable backlash of the anti-gun lobby, as a result of this instance, as there always is--"
Ice-T: "Well, that's not going to change anything. ... The United States is based on guns."
Security experts say a determined killer, willing to give up his own life, cannot be stopped. The odds, however, can be shifted in favor of the victims and would-be victims. How?
In Pearl, Miss., a gunman who killed two students and wounded seven at a high school was stopped by an assistant principal, who rushed to his car and got his gun. The assistant principal, running back with his .45, spotted the rifle-carrying shooter in the parking lot. Ordering the teen to stop, the vice principal held his gun to the shooter's neck until police arrived.
In Salt Lake City, a man purchased a knife in a grocery store, walked outside and stabbed and critically injured two men. He was threatening others, when a store patron with a concealed weapons permit drew his gun, forced the attacker to the ground and held him until police arrived.
In Grundy, Va., a disgruntled student on the verge of his second suspension at Appalachian School of Law shot and killed the dean, a professor and a fellow student. Two students, both off-duty peace officers, ran to their cars, retrieved their guns and used them to halt the attack.
No one knows whether Aurora would have turned out differently had there been an armed patron or two inside the theater. But at the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting, where 32 people died, there was a no-guns policy -- just as, apparently, at the movie theater in Aurora.
For a guaranteed blank stare, ask gun-control proponents how often Americans use guns to defend themselves. They can't tell you, because they don't ask.
Suppose a guy goes to a baseball game. "Honey," his wife asks afterward, "who won the game?" The husband says, "The Dodgers scored four runs." What's missing? Obviously, the wife still knows nothing about the outcome because she knows only one-half of the equation. Well, how can one responsibly discuss "how many people die because of guns" without discussing the other half of the equation -- how many people would not be alive without their defensive use of a gun?
So, how often do Americans use firearms for self-defense?
Criminologist Gary Kleck estimates that 2.5 million Americans use guns to defend themselves each year. Out of that number, 400,000 believe that but for their firearms, they would have been dead.
Professor Emeritus James Q. Wilson, the UCLA public policy expert, says: "We know from Census Bureau surveys that something beyond 100,000 uses of guns for self-defense occur every year. We know from smaller surveys of a commercial nature that the number may be as high as 2 1/2 or 3 million. We don't know what the right number is, but whatever the right number is, it's not a trivial number."
Former Manhattan Assistant District Attorney David P. Koppel studied gun control for the Cato Institute. Citing a 1979-1985 study by the National Crime Victimization Survey, Koppel found: "When a robbery victim does not defend himself, the robber succeeds 88 percent of the time, and the victim is injured 25 percent of the time. When a victim resists with a gun, the robbery success rate falls to 30 percent, and the victim injury rate falls to 17 percent. No other response to a robbery -- from drawing a knife to shouting for help to fleeing -- produces such low rates of victim injury and robbery success."
When asked if additional gun laws would be beneficial or have no effect, most Americans, like Ice-T, get it. They oppose shifting power to the criminal. And they don't need the National Rifle Association to tell them: The only people willing to abide by additional gun laws are the law-abiding.
People KILL.
Some use guns, some use knives, some use rocks, some use ropes, some use their bare hands some use dogs, some use poison and may other methods.
How I wish one other person at that bat man movie had been armed.
We wouldn't be looking at that red haired idiot smirking on TV. He would be room temperature.
“GUNS DO NOT KILL”
That’s right. Cars do not run red lights. Baseball bats do not hit foul balls.
“FROM MY COLD DEAD HANDS”!
All the bannings of ‘assault weapons’ and high capacity mags are the obvious solutions. And they’re the wrong solutions. The real solution is counterintuitive to many people. It is the opposite of what many people would think is the right choice. Not fewer guns, more guns. Everyone carry. Sounds crazy to many people but it’s the truth. What if every woman in the theatre had been carrying a gun in her purse and knew how to use it? What if just half of them had been carrying? How would this shooting have gone differently? Does the idea of an armed public seem frightening? Are you a person who shudders at the thought of being surrounded by hidden weapons? Do you think ‘Well then even more people would have been killed, you idiot!’? Like I said, it’s counterintuitive. What many think would be a more dangerous situation would actually be safer. Though I will agree with one point - at least one person who is alive right now would almost certainly be dead. Any guesses as to who that would be? Hint - he has orange hair.
Good choice in home protection weapons. Shotguns are great.
I’ve never understood the “kick” thing though. I own two 12Ga. Mossberg 500 pump shotguns. They look identical, although they were manufactured 12 years apart.
The newer shotgun will bruise my shoulder each and every time I fire it; the older shotgun has absolutely no kick at all. I could be shooting a 22 for all the kick that’s there.
Pencils write books. /sarcasm
Holmes needs to die. (”Whoever sheds man’s blood, by man his blood shall be shed. For in the image of God He made man.” Genesis 9:6)
It is a crime that it did not happen earlier, moments before (or after) he opened fire. No one should surrender his right to self defense to see a stupid movie. Justice demands that rights-denying institutions be held accountable.
The worst offenders are the antigun whack jobs and nihilists that create the environment and promote the life-denying philosophies and policies which encourage and enable Holmes and his ilk to act with impunity. These are the same crowd pushing for more gun bans right now—woe to these blind guides and hypocrites.
I loved Ice-T’s response about “you can strap explosives to your body, they do that all the time”, or words to that effect. Must have raised the hair on that Brit reporter’s neck!
I don’t agree with the guy on everything, but he was dead-on here.
Bookmark!
But we don't care about those people.
Anyone who doesn't passively allow themselves be victimized is uncivilized.
Could be the choke - more = more perceived recoil
Page 41
I heard the defensive use of a firearm happens about 2.5 million times a year??? I heard and saw that statistic back in the 90’s...I stand to be corrected...
Perhaps what needs to be banned are people
I don't agree with him on much, but he is right on this subject.
Because we have no outdoor ranges in my suburban area, I recently paid for a shotgun training class at an indoor range to practice with my Remington 870. The local indoor ranges don't allow shotgun fire anymore due to people spraying all over the firing line.
After an orientation, we shot a .410, 20guage, 870 12guage, and a semi-auto 12guage (that was fun).
Point is: We were instructed to shoot from the hip (keeping an inch or so from the body), under the armpit (for a little better aim), and the shoulder (best aim using the forward site). From the hip and under the armpit, your arms automatically swing back and absorb the recoil, unlike the shoulder position that kicks your upper body.
I was surprised I hit the target from the hip first time. Your horizontal aim is precise, it's just a matter of vertical aim. If you don't trust your vertical aim from the hip, I recommend a UTG 2-1 flashlight/laser combo (model ELP-38) that attaches to your barrel. You can use small felt pads if you don't want to scratch your barrel.
The flashlight is blinding in the dark of night (lights up a living room!) and the laser is close enough for daytime. Got the unit from Amazon for less than $100. There are more expensive military grade units, but I'm comfortable with this for home defense. It's solid and well built and won't move once torqued down.
Shoot from the hip/armpit and don't worry about the shoulder impact. Unless you are using slugs, you don't need much of an aim. That's the whole point of a shotgun.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.