But will your gun still have sex with you after treating it like that?
Shooting at Greenwood Mall
- Thread starter Marvin the Martian
- Start date
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
I wish it were that easy. If you can think that clearly in combat then I laud you. In reality one gals back on training for muscle memory and dropping your gun isn’t part of training.
The problem with these laws that are being proposed doesn’t fix the actual issue. They will use the same framework and agencies that are supposed to be stopping these shooters. So pass as many as you would like but it won’t change anything. What we need and what we get are two totally different things. You go ahead and wait for the policy..I’ll do me.
Ranger, is reacting in combat like hitting in baseball where you have to think clearly and quickly at the same time with the possibility of being fooled?
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
It’s more like running a play in basketball. You do what are called battle drills nonstop in training so you know what to do instinctively. React to Contact, React to Ambush, etc become instinctual.
The defense will try to stop you so you have to improvise sometimes.
Even if the gun wasn’t fired OR DISPLAYED? Jesus, if I have my gun on me I could say I used it in self defense when I checked my mail earlier. WTF good is a stat like that?
There is absolutely opportunity for confusion. I don’t understand what you’re looking for with this question- perfect protocols to address every eventuality when it’s difficult if not impossible to have them? Are you suggesting in this case the guy should have sat back & watched more people get shot? Instructing people that can do so not to save lives by taking action? Should the cops just wait outside for the shooting to stop & then hope it’s the good guy that walks out? Do you have a potential solution or just wanting to shoot holes in the pro-carry argument?
Yes I have a solution for the gun problem. I’ve just been holding back. I’m not suggesting anything at all… I’m suggesting I don’t think the answer is everyone having guns and having shootouts all the time is a good strategy. I’m glad it worked and prevented more loss of life this time. More often than not, it’s not such a happy ending.
The gun was a Sig Sauer M400.
Kudos to the guy with a handgun doing what half the law enforcement in Texas couldn't do for 90 minutes.
Kudos to the guy with a handgun doing what half the law enforcement in Texas couldn't do for 90 minutes.
The guy who stopped him was a 22-year old from Seymour named Elisha Dicken.
realmsofdiscordia.com
Mass shooting at Greenwood Park Mall leaves 3 dead; Police say a witness killed shooter Jonathan Sapirman in an Indiana food court. - realmsofdiscordia
Greenwood's Jonathan Sapirman started the shooting after he exited a restroom at the Greenwood Park mall shortly before it closed Sunday night, Greenwood
realmsofdiscordia.com
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Atta girl. Well done, Elisha.The guy who stopped him was a 22-year old from Seymour named Elisha Dicken.
Mass shooting at Greenwood Park Mall leaves 3 dead; Police say a witness killed shooter Jonathan Sapirman in an Indiana food court. - realmsofdiscordia
Greenwood's Jonathan Sapirman started the shooting after he exited a restroom at the Greenwood Park mall shortly before it closed Sunday night, Greenwood
Not on you, but was that article written in spanish, translated to mandarin, then to portuguese and then to english?The guy who stopped him was a 22-year old from Seymour named Elisha Dicken.
Mass shooting at Greenwood Park Mall leaves 3 dead; Police say a witness killed shooter Jonathan Sapirman in an Indiana food court. - realmsofdiscordia
Greenwood's Jonathan Sapirman started the shooting after he exited a restroom at the Greenwood Park mall shortly before it closed Sunday night, Greenwood
Christ.
Also, was the good Samaritan a woman?
The fear of many gun owners is not the AR15's it is it wouldn't stop there, like pealing an onion you take one layer at a time. Once it becomes easy for one type of gun to be banned there is the thought it would be easier to take the next and then the next.
Many non gun owners say this isn't true, but what would one expect them say?
"Tough time interacting respectfully with anyone with supports the democrats who enable criminals......". Are you saying we had no crime under Mayor Ballard or other republican mayors? I have called this city home since moving here 60 years ago and Republican or Democrat has nothing to do with the level of crime in this city. I support neither of these two parties, but this kind of "enemy" mentality is without merit. Dems or Pubs, (or Independents), we are all Americans.
What cop or cops go into a situation and just start firing? All of the officers I know would never do that, now if you aimed the gun at them different story but if you obey their commands I think this is not an issue. But I do see when trying to make a bad argument one will ask any question.
Yeah, but it makes your dick bigger, so a decision has to be made.
Probably just the Good Samaritan. As @UncleMark likes to remind me, I could be wrong, and often am.
If it was, good on her. That being said, the sources I have seen that would seem to be on the bit more reliable side had a really different spelling of the first name and have indicated the good Samaritan was a male.
And, does it really make sense to claim (as the poster above) that Democrat mayors, city councils and state governments that take steps to reduce gun violence are the ones who are responsible for increasing gun violence (thus making cities "shitholes")? Aren't the corrupt NRA lobbyists and other absolute gunlovers that fight any and all gun control the truly responsible parties?
I urge everyone to read the actual text of the Supreme Court's recent Bruen decision on guns, which overruled steps taken by NYC to reduce gun violence. The Second Amendment states that a "well regulated Militia" is "necessary to the security of a free State" but says absolutely nothing about self defense. On the other hand, the Bruen decision says nothing about militias but still holds that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to carry guns for self-defense regardless whether a militia member or not.
In the Bruen decision, the self-identified "originalists" and "textualists" on the Supreme Court actually admitted there were a number of pre-1791 local ordinances that outright banned possession of guns inside city limits ... but then they ignored this historical precedent. Clearly, they were reaching a result, not trying to demonstrate that the Founding Fathers and public opinion in 1776 or 1789 or 1791 supported open possession of any and all firearms, including not only muzzleloaders, but also weapons far beyond any Founding Father's possible understanding of what a firearm was.
Keep in mind that the first firearms cartridge was not even invented until 1846.
The Complete History of Small Arms Ammunition and Cartridges | Small Wars Journal
I recently wrote a short history of body armor article for Small Wars Journal. Here, I deal with the other side of the story and take you through the history of ammunition for small arms.
Hey, Republicans, come on, man.
I have argued that long before this decision. Several locations prohibited concealed carry immediately after the Constitution. For some reason they do not view that as precedent but Scalia previously viewed one Georgia state case as a shining beacon for originalism.
You know that there's a lot of paperwork to own a fully automatic gun but now they make "semi-automatic" guns that fire when the trigger is pulled and fire again when it's released so while not as fast as a fully automatic gun it's still darn fast.
Why do you assume it’s just a Republican stance? I know a lot of Dems who conceal carry, hunt and collect firearms. Some of them are LGBTQ. I’m not kidding. Some of the LGBTQ did multiple tours. This shouldn’t be framed that way.And, does it really make sense to claim (as the poster above) that Democrat mayors, city councils and state governments that take steps to reduce gun violence are the ones who are responsible for increasing gun violence (thus making cities "shitholes")? Aren't the corrupt NRA lobbyists and other absolute gunlovers that fight any and all gun control the truly responsible parties?
I urge everyone to read the actual text of the Supreme Court's recent Bruen decision on guns, which overruled steps taken by NYC to reduce gun violence. The Second Amendment states that a "well regulated Militia" is "necessary to the security of a free State" but says absolutely nothing about self defense. On the other hand, the Bruen decision says nothing about militias but still holds that the Second Amendment protects a person's right to carry guns for self-defense regardless whether a militia member or not.
In the Bruen decision, the self-identified "originalists" and "textualists" on the Supreme Court actually admitted there were a number of pre-1791 local ordinances that outright banned possession of guns inside city limits ... but then they ignored this historical precedent. Clearly, they were reaching a result, not trying to demonstrate that the Founding Fathers and public opinion in 1776 or 1789 or 1791 supported open possession of any and all firearms, including not only muzzleloaders, but also weapons far beyond any Founding Father's possible understanding of what a firearm was.
Keep in mind that the first firearms cartridge was not even invented until 1846.
The Complete History of Small Arms Ammunition and Cartridges | Small Wars Journal
I recently wrote a short history of body armor article for Small Wars Journal. Here, I deal with the other side of the story and take you through the history of ammunition for small arms.smallwarsjournal.com
Hey, Republicans, come on, man.
So we know that the shooter was a 20 yr old Greenwood resident who had recently lost his job and (according to his family) was facing eviction from his apartment. Just another 20 yr old in a red state conceal carry allow state who (likely) bought his guns legally (he had 2 rifles) and was just another 20 yr old "good guy" exercising his constitutional right to purchase a gun, a large magazine of ammo, and carry it on to the street and into a mall food court until he no longer was a "good guy"...
Seems he turned from good guy with a gun to armed shooter with a gun after he emerged from an hour or so from inside the mall restroom and decided to start shooting. And that is a possible consequence once you have a legislature that decides you don't need to apply for a permit or receive any specialized training in order to own a gun and basically carry it where ever you want. Had the 20 yr old Sapirman not fallen on hard times recently and not decided to "turn bad", then it's possible he could have had a different history and there might have been a scenario where he might have thwarted a shooting in public.
But we'll never know because in Indiana you don't have to qualify to carry a weapon. So we don't know if psychologically he was someone that should own and carry weapons in public legally, because for some reason we've taken that sort of screening out of the evaluation process. We can't regulate whether or not the shooter should have had a gun in the first place, because we've decided that everybody should have a gun unless - what?
Seems he turned from good guy with a gun to armed shooter with a gun after he emerged from an hour or so from inside the mall restroom and decided to start shooting. And that is a possible consequence once you have a legislature that decides you don't need to apply for a permit or receive any specialized training in order to own a gun and basically carry it where ever you want. Had the 20 yr old Sapirman not fallen on hard times recently and not decided to "turn bad", then it's possible he could have had a different history and there might have been a scenario where he might have thwarted a shooting in public.
But we'll never know because in Indiana you don't have to qualify to carry a weapon. So we don't know if psychologically he was someone that should own and carry weapons in public legally, because for some reason we've taken that sort of screening out of the evaluation process. We can't regulate whether or not the shooter should have had a gun in the first place, because we've decided that everybody should have a gun unless - what?
5 year olds aren't allowed to drive cars. Maybe someday in America, the "bad guys" won't be able to have guns.
In Florida a 20 yo cannot buy a gun. Even DeSantis was OK with that. Passed after Parkland.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Seems like a male. They misspelled the name and used the wrong pronouns (THE HORROR!) in that crappy article.
You’re so freaking ridiculous.
“Seems he turned from a good guy with a gun to an armed shooter with a gun after he emerged from an hour or so from inside the mall restroom and decided to start shooting”.
That doesn’t even make sense, but you got your buzzwords in, which is what’s important.
It’s no wonder no one takes you seriously.
Sounds like this dude(or dudette) knew what they were doing.
Outstanding.
Outstanding.
Last edited:
Please. Persuade us that Democrats are the ones blocking gun control.
Go ahead. Your turn.
The full employment economy, with two open jobs for every job seeker? Dude must have been a real loser.
None of this matters to gun supporters. They say it's their right to carry overly dangerous weapons with large magazines that can pump bullets almost as fast as machine guns. Why? Because they claim its their right.
