View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 12:40 pm



Reply to topic  [ 62 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL" 
Author Message

Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:29 am
Posts: 35
Post What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
Since joining this group I was motivated :lol: to organize my smaller FAVORITE author library. When we moved 10 years ago I donated 9 copy paper boxes of hard and soft sci fi books to local library. Now I was able to go right to "BEYOND THIS HORIZON" c1942. The projected model society has every one packing heat or a protective armbrassard if they wouldn't carry a weapon or were police. These being CITIZENS IT WAS FORBIDDEN TO FIRE AT ANYTIME.
What would have happened in that Colorado movie Theater or When Gabby from Arizona or in West Va Univ. were set on by a maniac. After the first shot the culprint would have been shot so many times , he couldn't be identified! :shock: Oh by the way these are very Liberal I mean CONSERVATIVE :o about gun control states.
My first answer is this would only work in a HEINLEINIAN society, which we are 180 degrees away from. It's probaly a good thing UNCLE Bob is dead, cause if hewas alive, IT WOULD KILL HIM to see what OUR SOCIETY HAS BECOME. I am not being political I just don't like INNOCENT PEOPLE MURDERED EVERY STINKING DAY. This is approaching the carnage we allow DRUNKS & TEXTERS to commit with their much more powerful and lethal weapons (AUTOs). :evil:


Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:19 pm
Profile
Heinlein Nexus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:10 am
Posts: 2228
Location: Pacific NorthWest
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
Allow me to give you a hint as to how to get people to consider and respond to your posts here. We welcome literate, thoughtful opinions. Postings that look like ransom notes just won't get attention. Rant if you want, but that's who we are.


Tue Aug 21, 2012 4:51 pm
Profile WWW
PITA Bred
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:17 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: The Quiet Earth
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
Do continue to post, Charles, but please take time to make your posts a little less scattered. Maybe you could write the drafts off-line and then upload them.

I'll just note that Colorado's extremely liberal gun laws enabled a known nut to amass a substantial arsenal - completely legally - and then use it, while not producing a single armed citizen-vigilante to stop him. The NRA and CC crowd arguments never do quite seem to hold water, especially when tested by reality.


Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:58 pm
Profile

Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:40 pm
Posts: 537
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
Jim, the Cinemark theater in Aurora was posted by management as "No Firearms Allowed". Concealed Carry permit holders are generally pretty fastidious about following such notices -- they don't want to do anything that will give issuing authorities reason to deny renewal of their permits.

Consider that, please, when you say that no armed citizens were available to stop the shooter.


Thu Aug 23, 2012 8:16 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 603
Location: Reno, NV
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN CONTROL"
What Bill said. I've got a concealed carry permit, and usually carry. I might avoid going to a location that forbids concealed carry even to permit holders, but I wouldn't ignore a "gun-free zone" notice even if I think those who post them are foolish. Those who bother to get the training and undergo the background check required for a concealed carry permit tend to be law-abiding. (And not fond of the idea of shooting people, for that matter.) The people who shoot up movie theaters, political rallies, Sikh (and other) temples, or courtrooms generally don't care about the law or courtesy, on the other hand.

BTW, another distinction that should be made: legal *ownership* of a gun is not the same a possession of a concealed carry permit. Last I heard, one in four to one in three Americans owns one or more guns, the vast majority legally. Even in Nevada, where concealed carry is fairly common in comparison to (say) California, less than 10% of gun owners get the concealed carry permit. That means that they cannot carry a concealed firearm legally, unless they are a sworn police officer or (in some cases) active-duty military.

Personally, I don't think a ban on guns accomplishes anything useful except when carefully targeted to people who have demonstrated that they shouldn't own a gun. (Violent criminals, people with certain type of mental illnesses, etc.) The reason is that a ban doesn't prevent them from getting a gun, and (alternatively) doesn't prevent them from wreaking mayhem by some other means. :/ What we need is the ability to spot and stop violent people. We don't yet know how to do that effectively.

_________________
Catherine Jefferson <ctiydspmrz@ergosphere.net>
Home Page: http://www.ergosphere.net


Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:00 am
Profile WWW
Centennial Attendee
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:21 am
Posts: 783
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN CONTROL"
sakeneko wrote:
The reason is that a ban doesn't prevent them from getting a gun, and (alternatively) doesn't prevent them from wreaking mayhem by some other means.


All true, and the statistics seem to suggest that the places with the strictest gun control laws have the highest incidence of gun violence, but I have a hard time getting past the apparent fact that the *vast* majority of mass murderers choose the gun as their weapon of choice. I have no idea what to do about it. I'm trained in psychological assessment, and prediction of violence was a huge topic in my academic work. Nobody knows how to do it. We can diagnose psychopaths, sociopaths, narcissists, and psychotics, but none of that is predictive of future behavior with anything like the validity and reliability we would need to lock someone up in advance of commission of a crime.

_________________
“Don’t believe everything you see on the Internet.” –Abraham Lincoln


Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:15 am
Profile YIM WWW
PITA Bred
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:17 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: The Quiet Earth
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
BillMullins wrote:
Consider that, please, when you say that no armed citizens were available to stop the shooter.

Noted. Has there been any report of a permitted CC'er being at the theater, with or without a weapon?


Thu Aug 23, 2012 9:50 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 603
Location: Reno, NV
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
Not that I've heard of, Jim. On the other hand, I doubt any would have stepped forward if they were carrying and didn't shoot because I *think* in Colorado "gun free zone" notices have the force of law. (In other words, they'd have been likely to loose their permit.)

In my experience, most people who have concealed carry permits avoid going to places with "gun free zone" notices unless they have to go there specifically, as opposed to somewhere else where they could get the same goods/services and there was no such restriction. (The Post Office, a courthouse, etc.) I avoid first nights of blockbuster hits because I don't like crowds, but when I go to a movie, I avoid the theater chain that posts a "gun free zone" notice. There are plenty of other choices.

_________________
Catherine Jefferson <ctiydspmrz@ergosphere.net>
Home Page: http://www.ergosphere.net


Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:26 am
Profile WWW
PITA Bred
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:17 pm
Posts: 2401
Location: The Quiet Earth
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
I'm not asking if there was anyone who could have fired back - I am asking if there was a single CC permittee in the audience. What I've read so far is that there was not. Until someone steps up and convincingly states they were a carrier, were there and would have drawn their weapon if they'd had it (legally) with them, I'll stand by my statement. Bill M's comment is irrelevant if there were no potential vigilantes in the audience.


Thu Aug 23, 2012 10:29 am
Profile

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:32 pm
Posts: 13
Post Re: What would RAH think about "GUN COTROL"
[quote="JamesGifford"]I'm not asking if there was anyone who could have fired back - I am asking if there was a single CC permittee in the audience. What I've read so far is that there was not. Until someone steps up and convincingly states they were a carrier, were there and would have drawn their weapon if they'd had it (legally) with them, I'll stand by my statement. Bill M's comment is irrelevant if there were no potential vigilantes in the audience.[/quote

In my experience (I was in the firearms business for over 30 years), most permittees would not patronize a business with such a policy simply as a matter of principle.


Fri Aug 24, 2012 6:40 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 62 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF