CC at its finest

g21sfpistol said:

again putting words in my mouth. allow me to do the same. you think we should carry deadly weapons in public to show people you want to kill other people. you want to win your OC argument with intimidation which does more harm than good for the cause. just look at california

Click to expand...

Utter hogwash, I already threw your stupid California argument out the window. You can't blame people exercising their right for loosing the right. You can't blame the victim of rape for actions of the raper........ever!

No I am not putting words into your mouth, you are the one in this very thread who stated over and over again, that OC'ers are leaving people to victims when bad guys pass them by, whereas you think your quick like reflexes puts you in the the ultimate position to be everyone's savior.

g21sfpistol said:

sounds like you are ok with people killing,raping and robing kids. you shouldn't carry. you are dangerous and are part of the criminal element and believe in their cause.

Click to expand...

Utter absurdity, if you are going to try to regurgitate someone else s thoughts without thinking them through yourself, do us all a favor and least try to make it sound logical.

I would act to protect people from BG's, while they were in my vicinity I am simply pointing out the absurdity that you think we should be responsible for "victims" who chose not to arm themselves.

still love the hypocrisy. i like how people can call me a killer ut when i do it to someone else I'm putting words in their mouth. hey did anyone see the news on the fort hood shooting? guess what. MPs OC weapons on base. looks like OC didn't stop the shooter from committing a crime. twice actually. anyone want to explain that one? i can't wait to hear the BS.

g21sfpistol said:

still love the hypocrisy. i like how people can call me a killer ut when i do it to someone else I'm putting words in their mouth. hey did anyone see the news on the fort hood shooting? guess what. MPs OC weapons on base. looks like OC didn't stop the shooter from committing a crime. twice actually. anyone want to explain that one? i can't wait to hear the BS.

Click to expand...

Do you have cites that the MPs were on scene before shooting?

Didn't think so!

WalkingWolf said:

Do you have cites that the MPs were on scene before shooting?

Didn't think so!

Click to expand...

do you have cites MPs weren't? I've been on a few military bases and they always have armed MPs. thats my cite. and watching the live video feed the guy just stated MPs responded and engaged. so OC doesn't deter crime.

g21sfpistol said:

do you have cites MPs weren't? I've been on a few military bases and they always have armed MPs. thats my cite. and watching the live video feed the guy just stated MPs responded and engaged. so OC doesn't deter crime.

Click to expand...

I wasn't the moron that made the dumb comment...

All military bases are gun free zones, and rely on the same small chance a MP/LEO are present to save them. There are no non LEO concealed carry soldiers to save the day. Until reports indicate otherwise I have no idea, but have a pretty good guess.

Sorry to be so late into this.

g21sfpistol said:

still love the hypocrisy. i like how people can call me a killer ut when i do it to someone else I'm putting words in their mouth. hey did anyone see the news on the fort hood shooting? guess what. MPs OC weapons on base. looks like OC didn't stop the shooter from committing a crime. twice actually. anyone want to explain that one? i can't wait to hear the BS.

Click to expand...

What you apparently can't wait for is too further your pointless argument and provoking ways.

1st - OC works as a deterent (not a guarantee) for everyday people who look to defend themselves. LEOs, security officers and the military are a completely different segment of society. When studies and stats are compiled this latter group is considered separately.

2nd - I don't beleive that the post security who were armed and OCing were targeted. Was the post security even armed with live ammunition? In any event, the shooter chose softer, unarmed victims.

You provide false information and state/imply it as fact. You do not cite legitimate sources for your unsubstantiated statements. You, sir, are violatinng the rules and standards of OCDO and further such will not be tolerated. Be advised.

WalkingWolf said:

I wasn't the moron that made the dumb comment...

All military bases are gun free zones, and rely on the same small chance a MP/LEO are present to save them. There are no non LEO concealed carry soldiers to save the day. Until reports indicate otherwise I have no idea, but have a pretty good guess.

Click to expand...

but the whole argument is OC deters crime. why didn't it work here then? and it has happened twice now.

g21sfpistol said:

but the whole argument is OC deters crime. why didn't it work here then? and it has happened twice now.

Click to expand...

It is unlawful to OC on a military installation, anybody with a IQ above 60 knows that.

g21sfpistol said:

you have even allowed people to claim i want to kill people

Click to expand...

Right. This is the inescapable conclusion of your arguments.

You said:

g21sfpistol said:

OCers pass the problem on to someone else like a pregnant mother and her children. shows how much you care.

Click to expand...

Why do OCers pass the problem on, but (it is implied) CCers do not? The only answer can be that OC acts as a deterrent, [strike]wasting the opportunity[/strike] obviating the need to shoot criminals who then, in your imagination, go on to do unspeakable things to the nearest pregnant mother (and her children).

From this it follows that, in your view, CC is better because it doesn't waste perfectly good opportunities to shoot bad guys.

Furthermore, you have made it clear that you yourself CC.

Therefore, you yourself have firmly established your preference for shooting bad guys over, say, scaring them off.

Finally, since you tacitly acknowledge that OC defers confrontation, and yet you maintain the superiority of CC, it is inarguable that you knowingly and intentionally make a choice which increases the probability of confrontation.

Given your clear, unambiguous, and stated preference for shooting people (vs. not shooting them) should potential confrontation arise, and your similarly unambiguous preference for increasing the chance of confrontation in the first place, it's no stretch to say that you "want to shoot people".

From this is easily follows that you also "want to kill people", unless your plan is to shoot them in the arms and legs.

QED.

WalkingWolf said:

It is unlawful to OC on a military installation, anybody with a IQ above 60 knows that.

Click to expand...

ok are you listening. I'm talking about the MPs. do you have a IQ above 60? do you know who MPs are? military police. which would mean they are on duty and can carry weapons.

WalkingWolf said:

It is unlawful to OC on a military installation, anybody with a IQ above 60 knows that.

Click to expand...

g21sfpistol said:

ok are you listening. I'm talking about the MPs. do you have a IQ above 60? do you know who MPs are? military police. which would mean they are on duty and can carry weapons.

Click to expand...

WalkingWolf does not state otherwise.

Military police are allowed to carry there - others are not. No MPs were shot. Perp shot himself when OCing MPs arrived. Clear?

Still you belabor the point and make your remarks personally insulting. Don't think you can really afford to do that - there will be no more warnings.

Grapeshot said:

WalkingWolf does not state otherwise.

Military police are allowed to carry there - others are not. No MPs were shot. Perp shot himself when OCing MPs arrived. Clear?

Still you belabor the point and make your remarks personally insulting. Don't think you can really afford to do that - there will be no more warnings.

Click to expand...

cite? the general last night stated it was after a MP and LEO shot at him.

Damn Grape don't boot him off too soon he is hilarious! (and sad)

Desperately trying to twist a tragedy into fitting his agenda, he's as bad as any Brady nutter.

OC of MP's wouldn't have deterred what this guy wanted to do, he had a very specific mission and was determined to carry it out. His mission wasn't one of robbing a store, or mugging someone, his mission was of death one where it appears his life was no longer of any value to himself. People who have given up the innate human nature of self preservation may not be deterred by openly carried weapons. These cases are rare, and like cop shooters (like four cops in Lakewood Washington who were gun downed) they don't have the usual modus operandi of the normal crooks we may run into.

Nice to see you have sunk to a new low though.

sudden valley gunner said:

Damn Grape don't boot him off too soon he is hilarious! (and sad)

Desperately trying to twist a tragedy into fitting his agenda, he's as bad as any Brady nutter.

--snipped--

Click to expand...

I difference of opinion is not an unhealthy thing and is not in and of itself discouraged here.

When asked for a cite (per forum rules) he still only gives his version of what he read or infers w/o any acceptable/recognized source = no cite.

I have other, better things to do....like change the litter box and cleaning my shoes - don't ask how those two things are connected :uhoh:

The difference between a good post and an unacceptable one can be found by thinking about the preceding sentence.

Ever notice that cats never eat their dinner in the sand box. (rhetorical)

Allegorically, OCDO is not g21sfpistol's sandbox.

g21sfpistol said:

ok are you listening. I'm talking about the MPs. do you have a IQ above 60? do you know who MPs are? military police. which would mean they are on duty and can carry weapons.

Click to expand...

You realize MPs don't even guard the post right? Check the news. There's video of who responded. Its not MPs. The base is secured by a separate police that's non military.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

You realize MPs don't even guard the post right? Check the news. There's video of who responded. Its not MPs. The base is secured by a separate police that's non military.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Police of any type on base provide as much security as the CT state police provided at Sandy Hook. Everybody would have to be a cop for cops to eliminate crime, and that is not going to happen. Unfortunately soldiers on base cannot take responsibility for their own safety.

A military base should be one of the safest places in the country, damn shame they are not. Arm our soldiers 24 hours everyday, it is their job, they are supposed to be "Armed Forces" not unarmed victims forces.

Grapeshot said:

I difference of opinion is not an unhealthy thing and is not in and of itself discouraged here.

When asked for a cite (per forum rules) he still only gives his version of what he read or infers w/o any acceptable/recognized source = no cite.

I have other, better things to do....like change the litter box and cleaning my shoes - don't ask how those two things are connected :uhoh:

The difference between a good post and an unacceptable one can be found by thinking about the preceding sentence.

Ever notice that cats never eat their dinner in the sand box. (rhetorical)

Allegorically, OCDO is not g21sfpistol's sandbox.

Click to expand...

I agree that's why I like OCDO, I know I have learned tremendously and have adjusted my viewpoints over the years from the lively debate and difference of opinions here.

WalkingWolf said:

Police of any type on base provide as much security as the CT state police provided at Sandy Hook. Everybody would have to be a cop for cops to eliminate crime, and that is not going to happen. Unfortunately soldiers on base cannot take responsibility for their own safety.

A military base should be one of the safest places in the country, damn shame they are not. Arm our soldiers 24 hours everyday, it is their job, they are supposed to be "Armed Forces" not unarmed victims forces.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

In think the reason they don't let them all be armed is things like this shooting. Initial reporting was saying it was soldier on soldier. Not sure if that's confirmed yet.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Shooter shot himself. OC or CC had nothing to do with his demise. properly armed service members would mitigate the number of deaths and or casualties.

Now, should a dental tech be armed? Not my call. But, if they demonstrate proficiency with a sidearm allow them to be armed.....they are soldiers after all.

WalkingWolf said:

It is unlawful to OC on a military installation, anybody with a IQ above 60 knows that.

Click to expand...

I believe, that through its posts which lack everything intelligent or intelligible, for that matter, it can be safely deduced that its IQ is below sea level.

It is like a monkey who learned to peel a banana and decided that everyone else is inferior.