RD, dude, did you even bother to read the whole thread? Enamored? No, it is just a good quote.
Yup. I did. And when someone starts a dedicated thread to showcase a quote, and even takes the time to prefaces it by calling out the "liberal groupies" who might disagree with it; then yeah, I'd say you're pretty hot on it. "Enamored" was a good choice, I think, even though you clearly don't understand it.
Lawsuits? Suddenly, you're a cop AND a lawyer all at the same time!! Wow. And only a cop that has been screwed by a lawyer knows the law?? No protection you say? Dude, read up on Texas law before opening your mouth next time. Read up on the cases in TX where the law has protected the lawful use of handgun by a civilian.
(sigh). No, never said that. I said I understand the reality of what is involved after a shooting or use-of-force. The author of your quote clearly does not, and neither do you. Please show me all these great cases where the law has protected a private citizen with a firearm who has gone out of their way to be a "sheepdog," as the author of your quote is clearly advocating. "Show me."
I'm not the one quoting stats and case law without supporting it (note:
claiming that you've backed something up doesn't make it so...). What I HAVE done is posted direct examples from my experience in a field in which you have none. Zero. I don't know what you do for a living, but I can tell you for a fact that if pointed out something regarding
your chosen profession and it's one in which I had no experience, I'm wouldn't be stubborn enough to fight over it with you for 5 pages...
because i know that RD will take it out of context!
That's funny, because it looks to me like I'm the only one who has remained IN context throughout this entire thread> I'm still talking about the stupid quote that ignores reality and your blind support for it. Meanwhile, you've accused me of being "afraid," of claiming to know every state's laws, of believing the police are "above" everyone else, and gone off on tangents about how well-trained your wife is (?). Um..
Who cares?
Do you have ANYTHING to say regarding my initial point, or do you just want to keep claiming that this quote means something else, entirely (or spinning it to now mean a "small" group of "sheeps.." - un-freaking-believable) Or is just too much fun to bag on everyone who doesn't share your overly-romantic view of firearms?
When did i change my tone? Don't BS now because that is dumb!!
You're amazing. First, you supported the quote, itself - as written - simply by
posting it. Then, when I pointed out its shortcoming and noted that CCW was more about self-defense, you continued to support its idea that one should be protecting other people:
Do you have CHL?? CHL in my state does allow for protection of others' lives (and property) in immediate danger, such as this theater shooting. It is not recommended but allowable.
Yeah, I do think that you miss his point.
You backpedaled on the issue of protecting "property." And then, after I mentioned that a private citizen should only be using their weapon to protect themselves and their immediate family, you responded with this:
In fact, i will ONLY use it to defend myself and my family against deadly force. I have repeatedly posted that view on this forum.
You only changed your tune to this song AFTER I mentioned it. And you 'repeatedly' posted that? Perhaps, but AFTER this post. Then, you couldn't post it that self-defense concept enough. I wonder why...
In fact, search for ALL my posts regarding guns...and see WHERE I HAVE SAID WHAT YOU ACCUSE ME OF. Trigger happy? Show me the money! Go ahead. Where did i change my tone? You and rebelbowtie are full of crap.
Well, I really don't care to spend half my life searching your
13,000-odd posts to see what OTHER ridiculous notions about firearms you may have. I do have a life outside of the internet. But I never said you were "trigger-happy", so maybe you should take your own advice and read
my posts before you open
your mouth. Just a thought.
It is also interesting that you decide to make your interpretation more valid than mine. Hmmm? Just because you're a cop in a different state? Are cops more educated than civilians? Are cops now educated in the mastery of the english language or the actual law of one's state? What education have you had that makes you seem to know more about this than me? BIG assumptions there dude.
Maybe my interpretation of gun-carrying, liability, and use-of-force is more valid because...um...
I do it for a living? Maybe? Like I said before, if you tell me you're a nuclear engineer, I'm probably not going to sit here and tell you how off-base you are about fission and reactor cores...
Remember, basically, only YOU and REBELBOWTIE agree...everyone else has agreed with my interpretation of the quote...or at least, agreed that it makes sense. And as we found out above, rebelbowtie is only going against me because of an old grudge. So, yeah, YOU ARE ALONE on this one.
Really? I counted ONE person who actually claimed to support you. And I don't think that person was even agreeing with the quote - just supporting you, personally. I don't know RebelBowTie from Adam, but he got what I was saying immediately, as did others.
"Old grudge?" WHAT "old grudge?" I don't even know you and have only been a member here for a short time. You know, just because I pointed out that you're wrong about something doesn't mean everyone is trying to gang up on Thai. Geez.
Here is my quote again...and interestingly, you did not address it.
Actually, the potention repercussion was brought up by you and has NOTHING to do with the quote. You need to do more case studies in Texas. (Note: i won't claim to know case studies outside Texas because i am not familiar with them...again, assuming something that i don't know well is ridiculous and dumb...but that's just me.)
Where you fear that law?? Dude, have you read your own posts?! That is all you talk about! Yes, if you use your gun, then you may get sued. We get it. We know about it. But, that will NOT stop me from using my gun as last resort to defend myself and my family against a deadly force by evildoers.
Can you show me a case where a CHL person has shot a cop after an incident?? For every case like that, i can probably show you 10 more about cops misusing their firearm!! You talk previously about CHL person doing crime. How often is that? Show me statistics! And then compare that to muggers and robbers. Hell, compare that to cops misusing their power! This has been repeatedly confirmed that CHL folks are among the most law-abiding folks.
Show me.
[/QUOTE]
If I address everything you claim, to include everything that's not germane to my initial point, I'll be here all day. But OK, if it'll make you happy, we'll address it now:
First, the repercussions were brought up by me and have
everything "to do with" the quote, simply because
they are not mentioned there, not addressed, i.e. IGNORED.
Also, if I'm really not "telling you anything new" about the potential liability, you would never have posted and blindly-supported such a a ridiculous quote, to begin with. Because people who know the law and the reality of what can happen don't actually advocate what this quote does.
You may "know the law" as far as most concealed-carry classes teach - where you can carry, when, how long your permit is good for, how a gun works, etc. But please tell me where - in that whopping 10-hour Texas CHL class - you learned as much about the "laws" as you claim. Education notwithstanding, I've been to several different law enforcement academies (because I've worked for multiple agencies), but have also "lived" these laws every day. So if you're trying to say you "know the law" and are even
remotely on a par with what I or any other LEO know, you're barking up the wrong tree, junior.
Obviously, you DON'T "fear" the law, and if that's the case, you have no business carrying a firearm. Yeah, I talk about it because you IGNORE it. It's just really cool to be a "sheepdog" right? Regardless of the consequences. I forgot.
Just so you don't accuse me of not addressing
everything - no one is trying to stop you from protecting your family and that was never advocated (I know you wanted to get that "protect the family" statement in there again, to show everyone that that's what you've been about all along. Problem is, your little quote doesn't address that and neither did your initial support for it. And neither did YOU until I pointed it out. Welcome to Tune-Changing 101).
I won't start google-searching for incidents, but will tell you that I have been
almost shot and shot
at by people who meant well, but were in way over their heads and doing things they should not have. That's enough for me. Maybe you need an actual stat and a dead body, but I don't. Not when we're talking about MY life and having to deal with people who carry guns only because TV makes it look cool - which is the vast majority of people I get to deal with. Do you have the same experiences? If not, how would you know otherwise?
And now we'll resort to the "all cops are bad and misuse guns..." argument. Let's take it down to that level, because that's all we have left. You know, every time a cop does something bad, we hear about it in the news. But how many guys and gals went to work that day and did things RIGHT? I'm no math whiz, but I'll wager a lot more.
Also, please stop playing the "at least in Texas" card. There's this little thing called "reciprocity", which means there are MANY other states where you are allowed to carry. Do you "know the laws" in THOSE states? Probably not. There are actually probably very few people who know all of them. I'm not one of them and never claimed to be (despite your best efforts to paint me that way).
What I DO know and understand - and which you clearly do not, both from your posting of the quote and you subsequent failure to understand it - is that carrying a firearm isn't about being a crime-stopper and there ARE consequences to taking action. A lot times, there are consequences even for taking the RIGHT action.
I'm done addressing your nitpicking, off-topic statements, and insults to me and my profession.
Show you what? Stats? Funny how you keep asking for them, pounding your chest and demanding that I "show you the money" - but you never post
any, yourself (?).
Well, I've made no claims that are
statistically-based, so that would be kinda hard. It's all based on my experience and on what I've seen in real life. I don't really need a stat to tell me that I shouldn't try to be a one-man crime stopper.
I'm out.
