Have You Ever Had a Gun Pointed At You?

That doesn't sound so bad to me. At least the police actually had a reason to treat you that way, even if it was due to their own incompetence in keeping the records.
What happened to you only happened because you reported the car, which you were later driving in, stolen.
What I mean is that at least there was an actual real crime (committed by someone else) that triggered this.

I do think that when police pull out a gun in this sort of situation, they should keep the gun pointed towards the ground and not directly pointed at the suspect. In other words, have it pointed towards you but not pointed directly at you.

 

Nah what I teach is this=MOVE. try to get to cover.

 

Someone like that is not a suitable gun owner, but the 2nd A overrides common sense.

 

your concept of common sense is why the USA is now an independent nation. anything someone can do to harm innocents with a firearm is already illegal in the USA. Making something else illegal to pretend that will stop those who violate substantive existing laws is both specious and dishonest

 

I'm reminded of a martial arts class I was in. Arnis. Lots of knife/stick fighting stuff with some hand to hand and a lot of footwork. One guy was visiting from another town and was obviously trying to be a badass. He wasn't careful about his distance or speed while sparing and had bruised a few of us when we were just supposed to be doing some foundational work. Finally, he decides he wants to challenge the instructor. The instructor, for context, was this scrawny ~60 year old guy, though I had personally seen him throw bodybuilders across the room in a Judo class that he also taught. Wannabe badass goes up to the instructor as we are wrapping up and asks, "So what do you do if someone comes at you with a knife and demands your wallet?"

The instructor, who always had this cold stare, locks eyes with him and says. "Why speak in hypotheticals?" He throws him a dummy knife (metal, but unsharpened) and says, "Go ahead, come at me and try to take my wallet!"

The wannabe badass marches forward, brandishes the dummy knife and screams at the instructor to hand over his wallet.

I've never seen anyone that old move that fast. The instructor threw his wallet directly at the wannabe's face and bolted out the door. He came back later and said, "And at that point, I'd be calling and cancelling all of my cards." The wannabe didn't come back. The instructor later had us come back with all black clothes and chalk knives and told us to fight. Then he had us look down at the marks on our clothes. Even those of us who thought that we "hadn't been hit" were covered in marks. I had loved fighting in his class, but his words that day really stuck with me. "The best way to win a fight is to not get into one."

 

No one is making guns illegal.

 

really? so a british citizen can buy an AR 15 or a Beretta M92? Democrats want to make lots of guns in the USA illegal to buy-some want to confiscate the ones already owned-remember that laughable Eunuch Beta ?

 

Now you're on about regulations. You purchase a car that is on the market because it follows the regulations of suitable vehicles. You purchase a gun that is on the market because it follows the regulations of suitable guns.

Just because someone feels the car or gun doesn't have the required features they want, doesn't mean cars and guns are banned.

If you want to know which guns are available in the UK, this video will help -

 

that's a dishonest argument

if the Jewish and Islamic faiths are banned, you cannot claim that there is freedom or religion because Muslims and Jews could attend a Catholic Mass or whatever Jehovah's witnesses attend. And if a government bans a bunch of books that government is a book banner even if everyone can get a copy of the Little Red Book for free

 

Did you watch the video

 

I have represented the USA in England as part of the USA shooting team and I have shot driven birds near Somerset several times. I am familiar with the nanny state British gun laws. I met a couple members of the British Olympic team at a world cup and what happened to their pistol team as a result of the Dunblane bed wetting

 

That's fantastic. By the way, did you watch the video?

Cos I know for sure, your future posts will continue to highlight your lack of UK gun knowledge.

 

no, I already know England bans handguns and AR 15s for the vast majority of its citizens

 

Growing up in Los Angeles, I have looked down the barrel of a gun several times. I have been robbed at gunpoint twice and once had a gun pointed at me from someone on the freeway.

 

yes, border of Sudan and Uganda 1982....no big deal.

 

I almost forgot about another story, back when I was a leasing agent in College Station, Texas. Most of the folks I knew in real estate at the time, especially the women, were concealed carry holders -- you never know what you might run into when strangers are calling you to meet them at vacant houses, after all. My encounter was with a current occupant, though. Some folks wanted to see this two bedroom close to campus. The day before, I call up the current occupants and let them know we are coming by. The woman on the phone said that was fine; she sounded a little out of it, but I didn't think much of it. I show up at the property the next day and my prospective clients are already there . . . and there's a very angry, very large man on the front porch with a revolver at his side telling us to get the hell off of "his" property and that he doesn't know who any of us are. I gave him my business card (had to chuck it at him since he didn't want me getting any closer) and told him he could call the property manager to confirm who I was and why I was there. One of the guys who wanted to see the property wanted to press the issue, but I decided to deescalate. I took them to see some other properties instead and the property manager called up the current occupant to let him know he'd be losing his deposit over this fiasco and that he's lucky no one was calling the cops. That same guy ended up committing suicide a few weeks later and it turns out he was cooking meth in there.

 

The person you responded to never stated or argued or pretrended that regulating firearms to make certain weapons more difficult to sell will end crime. So for you to claim that is in fact specious and dishonest.

It is also specious and dishonest to state laws exist that restrict the sales of specific weapons or that existing gun regulations make gun crimes illegal.

You have an agenda on this and every thread you come on to be anti all gun regulation. You also pose as training others on how to use weapons including making a ridiculously pat statement that you teach people to take cover.

You are in fact exactly the kind of person I came to loath.

I did my time and the people I saw shot who could not duck and put their lives on the line precisely so that a person like me can walk the streets free of having to carry a weapon.

I defer to any soldier or police officer on weapons. I would never address the subject with them. They would also understand my bias and know my concerns are medical and practical from treating wounds and more importantly being angry their sacrifice is not understood but glorified making what they went through some fun adventure.

I wish a world where no one has to carry a weapon and so requiring innocent civilians, police and soldiers to die because we humans fail to find civilized ways to deal with one another. I am angry putting innocent civilians, first responders of any kind in the line of fire.

Take cover? What world do you live in what a police officer is ambushed or answers a traffic stop or domestic call?

What world do you live in when a soldier can be shot at any time from any angle and can't duck precisely because they are sitting ducks?

You ever walked a crowd with a uniform on where the knife or bullet or bomb could come from anyone, at any time?

You teach people to take cover? Right.

Not a subject I will make pat simplistic comments about. That is an insult to the first responders whose lives are on the line or innocent civilians exposed to maniacs with assault weapons.

 

you seemed to have not read what I actually wrote but I will deal with the nonsense: if someone advocates restricting lawful gun owners and they DO NOT CLAIM doing so will decrease time than their arguments are complete garbage. THERE IS NO VALID reason to restrict what people do in this area other than to argue (and prove) that doing so will decrease crime.

The first sentence that I bolded is confused, irrelevant an unresponsive to what I wrote. This is what I said

Making something else illegal to pretend that will stop those who violate substantive existing laws is both specious and dishonest

I have a hatred of actions designed to harass lawful gun owners and gun ownership that are dishonestly purveyed as enhancing public safety. And Yes, seeking cover if it is available is one of the best strategies if you are caught in an active shooting. That's what is taught at the top defensive academies in the country and it's what the FBI seminar on this topic taught as well. BTW I taught police officers, private citizens and federal law enforcement officers. I also taught one serious bad ass how to shoot-he's currently a LtC in the special forces who did three combat tours in the Rangers, three with the SF. I am glad you "loath me". I am doing something right. You said you "did your time" was it federal or state?

 

You circled back and repeated your same false statements as to the person you addressed.

In regards to the first statement above, if I advocate for the prevention of the sale of specific weapons and bullets to anyone in the public the argument for that is by preventing sales, and removing such weapons from circulation, necessarily the chance of those weapons then getting into the hands of someone to commit a crime is prevented. I did not say crime will be reduced. I said necessarily it reduces the likelihood of a crime being committed with those specific bullets or weapons. Stop misstating it.

Next repeated your misrepresentation that if specific weapons are not sold to the public or allowed to be owned it won't reduce crime. That is a deliberate and your second misrepresentation. The concept of removing specific weapons from circulation is to cut down on the likelihood they will be used in any crime. No one has said crime will stop. This is the second time you have misrepresented what has been argued because your argument which is illogical is quite simply that you believe in no gun regulation of any kind because criminals will get guns anyways and commit crimes.

I again repeat restricting specific weapons and specific ammunition from circulation is called risk mitigation. Police have repeatedly asked for it. They have repeatedly asked we remove from circulation specific ammunition and weapons that make it easier to kill police and innocent civilians.

Please do not argue to me you must have cop killer bullets because criminals do. Neither of you should have them.

So I repeat one last time, neither I nor has anyone else ever stated or pretended stopping the ownership or sale of specific ammunition or weapons is a panacea or will prevent all crime which is what you are saying.

Next you are no victim because you feel self entitled and want to live in a society where to hell with anyone else you need cop killer bullets, assault weapons. There is a direct correlation between selling you weapons and how they then end up on the streets. The only one "pretending" is you when you pretend there is no correlation between the sale of weapons to "lawful" people like you and how these weapons then end up used in crimes. You are the one who pretends there is no connection and you can live in a bubble where only your need to own an assault weapon and cop killer bullets matters. Your rights are not the only rights. The right of the public and police and first responders to be safe does not vanish.

Yes I care more and prioritize the safety of police, first responders, students, innocent civilians to you as an individual when considering what we have to do to keep such people safe from criminals with such weapons and if you have to compromise and not own specific weapons or possess cop killer bullets, oh you bet I argue you claiming to be a victim because I may take certain weapons out of circulation is bullshit.

You are not the victim, police, students, innocent civilians, first responders, all caught in the line of fire are.

Finally you asked me about my service. Its not the damn issue and neither is you claiming to be a weapons expert telling people to duck. However unlike you I have provided emergency response to bullets, knives, and bombs. No I will not account to you a damn thing. The moment you made your pat comment you teach people to take cover, you lost any such right.

By stating what you did you mock people in the line of fire who can not or could not duck. Those people you mock are the only people I give a damn about and defer to. The people I saw in the line of fire who served I so not speak to about it. They have nothing to say to me. My mouth is shut in their presence and I have nothing but humility in their presence. I would never say a damn thing to them about weapons if they were in the line of fire. Not a damn thing. You try figure out why before you pose as an expert on weapons.

 

so many silly words for a complete bit of wasted non relevance. I think others can see that your posts are misrepresented what others say. I get the fact that you are hard left and dislike gun rights activists. You also purvey the silliness that those willing to shoot innocents or police are going to be disarmed by your beloved banning of guns. Banning certain types of guns only deprives honest people from owning them.

when you use the term "cop killer bullets" I can safely write your opinions off as based on a great deal of ignorance or dishonesty

 

Not in anger. During military training, with blanks in the mag, yes. And the MILES gear said I was shot on multiple occasions, but people will do things when they know it's blanks that they won't when the round are real.

 

From a private seller, yes, like criminals do, and there is vast inventory in US.

 

they cannot legally use it and are forced to keep it on the down low. that is the real goal of gun banners-preventing any open and lawful use of firearms, Not disarming criminals

 

1. Speak for yourself. You are not others. Trying to puff yourself into a plural is a defensive tactic to try achieve instant credibility claiming others agree with you. This is not about others and even if others agree with you, the fact they do does not make your comments more or less credible.

2. I never stated that persons willing to commit crimes with weapons are all going to stop using weapons. You again misrepresent and you do so deliberately. This is the fourth time you have repeated that falsehood. I did not nor have I ever argued a criminal will not commit a crime, let alone a crime with a weapon if we can get specific weapons and ammunition from being sold to the public. I said if people no longer buy and own such weapons, the likelihood of them then getting to the streets to be used by criminals is diminished. The more you misrepresent what I stated the more you make it obvious you deflect from the fact that you will not acknowledge the connection between sales of weapons to you and then how they get into the hands of criminals. By falsely misrepresenting what I stated over and over, you hide from that refusal to admit the nexus between ownership of weapons and how some of those weapons get in the hands of criminals. Then again anti any gun regulation advocates like you hide from that nexus. Al you do is focus on your own self entitled rights and to hell with others.

My position that you deliberately and repeatedly misrepresent is NOT and has never been what you stated and is found as follows:

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/ban-assault-weapons.html

Stop misrepresenting my position.

3. Next you made this personal posing as an expert on weapons. You know damn well what bullets are cop killers or cause devastating wounds. Your refusal to acknowledge the issue speaks loudly. Let us be clear you don't need bullets that pierce bullet proof vests or cause lethal force by blowing away huge amounts of tissue. Here is the bullet issue you run from and tried to suggest makes me dishonourable for raising:

https://www.americanprogress.org/article/bullet-control/

https://www.thetrace.org/2023/01/bullet-ammunition-regulation-guns/

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/...control-what-types-of-ammunition-are-illegal/

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...mass-shootings-bullets-ammo-laws/10760437002/

Just so people know there are a plethora of types of ammunition that come under the "cop killer" reference including flechette, dragons breath, bolo, hollow point and dum dum to name just a few.

Turtle is well aware of them and refuses as you can see to acknowledge them.

 

"An alien legally in the U.S. is not prohibited from purchasing firearms unless the alien is admitted into the U.S. under a nonimmigrant visa and does not meet one of the exceptions as provided in 18 U.S.C. 922(y)(2)"

So, yes, foreign nationals can legally own guns.

As to your argument that people want to ban only legal guns and not from criminals.......well, it would be nice if you could quote someone saying that. Why would they be against banning guns from criminals. Don't you think they'd want to do that and then brag about bringing violence down? Its pretty much what politics is all about/