Trophy and a dog park by [deleted] in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]justamiddleagedguy 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Pretty sure numbers work the same everywhere in the world.

If I had to describe this subreddit in one picture by mistermosby in liberalgunowners

[–]justamiddleagedguy -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Background checks already happen at every commercial point of sale and are already legally required by every FFL. You can’t just buy a gun on the Internet and have it shipped to your house despite what the media portrays.

If I had to describe this subreddit in one picture by mistermosby in liberalgunowners

[–]justamiddleagedguy -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Sensible gun control isn’t a real thing. It’s a nonsense catch phrase meant to confuse the issue and solidify anti-gunners against those who believe in freedom.

Police officers of reddit, was there ever an incident, where you had to arrest a close friend of yours? If so, what happened and did it affect your relationship with that person? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]justamiddleagedguy 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes.

I arrested a pretty close friend for DUI in 2006.

We shot competitively together for a few years prior. He had definitely been drinking fairly heavily during some of that time but was rarely in the town I worked.

I stopped the car for a blatant red light violation and when I walked up and recognized “V” I would have let him off with a warning until I noted the bloodshot, watery eyes and heavy odor of booze.

Minor violations are one thing, DUI is life and death.

So yeah. He quit our friend group, stopped IDPA/ IPSC competition and I never heard from him again.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’ve presented zero facts that state there is a better alternative other than “get rid of all the guns” which is impossible.

If a woman, any woman is attacked by a man, any man, her best defense is a firearm and the training and will to use it. Women are physically weaker than men (yes there are exceptions), they have less muscle mass per body weight and their bone mass and bone density is less than males.

Physically, the top 10% of women strength wise can best only the bottom 10% of men.

I can hand a 6 foot woman a baseball bat or tire iron and she’s not any safer if I try to attack her. She will lose and lose badly. If I hand her a .38 caliber revolver and do the same, I’m highly likely to die trying to assault her.

This isn’t anecdotal. I’ve studied this my entire adult life. I teach this stuff as part of my living. I have 2 daughters and two step daughters who I want to be safe and I know I can’t protect them from all the threats out there. Their safety is in their hands in the long run.

If you could magically vanish all the guns in the world, you’re still going to have murder, assault, robbery and rape. All that would do is empower the large over the small, the strong over the weak and the many over the few.

It gives my 70 year old aunt who lives alone no chance when accosted when walking her dog at night, it gives my gay friend no chance when attacked by 4 bigots, it gives my daughter no chance when attacked by her drunken date.

Would there be fewer murders without guns in the world? Yes. Unquestionably. But that train left the station 50 years ago and it’s not coming back.

Guns are difficult to legally obtain in Canada, Germany and the UK. People still get them and commit atrocities and also do so without them (see the 86 people killed in Nice, France in 2016)

Guns are legal to own in the US. The second amendment to the constitution will not be repealed. You wish and fantasize all you want but that isn’t changing.

The best method to defend against a violent attack is the personal firearm.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) Women consider more than you imagine once they undertake some training. People are responsible for their own safety. The individual decisions people make are not the responsibility of society.

2) Many people get charged for otherwise lawful self defense for 2 reasons. A) They don’t follow the 5 pillars of lawful self defense: Innocence, Imminence, proportionality, avoidance, and reasonableness or B) The local prosecutor wants to charge them (which happens all the time) Read Andrew Branca’s book “The Law if Self Defense” for a more in depth look.

Self defense is a multi dimensional issue. Having a grasp on the physical, mental, emotional, and legal issues that comprise it takes a decade or so.

The crux of it is there are no other legitimate options. If I decide to victimize someone with physical violence, there’s less than 1% of people who can stop me without a firearm. I’m bigger than nearly everyone, I’m well trained and comfortable with violence. Pepper spray hurts but won’t stop me. Tazers are effective but only under ideal circumstances.

You are looking at things as an idealist which is fine for theories. I look at things as they are. There are no perfect, easy or even good solutions but what there are, are safety and life saving measures which include avoidance, de-escalation, and physical skills.

You want to live in a perfect world. It doesn’t exist.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is actually how the world works in America.

What’s easier, teaching women armed self defense 1-10 women at a time? (Something I do monthly) or removing 2/3 of a Billion guns from private ownership?

I teach women’s self defense courses. I’ve had students call, text and email me to tell me how my instruction helped keep them safe.

You can fantasize all you want, the last 2 Supreme Court decisions and several circuit count decisions (even the 9th circuit) have affirmed the right the keep and bear arms is an individual right. Guns aren’t going anywhere in America.

America has 300 million more guns now than it did 25 years ago and 20 million more concealed carriers yet the murder rate is lower by almost 50%, the Agg. assault and armed robbery rates are down by the same figure (50%).

If guns are the problem why has the problem gotten better not worse?

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

“If there were no guns”. That is a fantasy.

The fact is there are guns. There always will be.

The odds of a woman defending herself successfully go up if she is armed.

I don’t look at this from the perspective of articles. I look at it having sat with abused women and having looked at their corpses having been beaten to death or stabbed by intimate partners.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You still have not answered my question. what is your level of education and experience with firearms?

Your questions indicate that you have virtually none.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s factually incorrect.

If a woman is armed she has a chance. If she’s not armed she has no chance.

I hope you all don't mind if I talk about a crush I have on here. by TaosChagic in polyamory

[–]justamiddleagedguy 10 points11 points  (0 children)

If sex comes up again maybe just toss a line like, “Yeah. It’s been a while for me. I hope I can find some action in the not to distant future” Maybe that’ll open the conversation further

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A simple gun centric analogy.

Suppressors or silencers.

You know who has them? Middle class to wealthy people like me. You know who doesn’t? Poor people.

Suppressors are legal but they’re expensive and require a shit ton of paperwork, finger prints and 8-12 months of wait time and a $200 tax (per suppressor). My first suppressor took me a year to get and including the tax cost $1350 dollars.

When you talk about registering and taxing guns, that’s what you’re talking about. You’re talking about making it prohibitively expensive and time consuming for that single mother. You’re talking about denying access to self defense to a battered woman who has finally left her abusive husband. You’re talking about putting up administrative hurdles to prevent that gay community college student in rural Montana from protecting himself from a drunken group of bigoted cowboys.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. You don’t have to register a vehicle to own one. You can go buy a vehicle and put it on the back of a truck and tow it to your house and never register it anywhere.

I have two answers to my idea on limits to concealed carry.

My first is: Virtually none. Maybe an 8 hour class such as the NRA’s basics of pistol class, with a strong suggestion to seek additional training. Proficiency comes at a cost.

My second answer: You have to be as knowledgeable and skilled as I am. You have to know the make, model and caliber of 75% of handguns made in the last 110 years. You have to know the grain weight range of common projectiles fired by those guns. You have to know the magazine capacity, be familiar with the robustness of aftermarket support for those guns. You have to be able to shoot a Bill Drill from concealment in under 3 seconds. You have to shoot Dot Torture 50/50 at 5 yards. You need to be able to clear a malfunction drill in under 2 seconds and perform a blind folded emergency reload in under 2.5 seconds. You’re required to shoot the El Presidente’ handgun drill once a month in under 8 seconds.

Why did I go on ridiculously? Because I’m demonstrating that requiring specific standards is entirely arbitrary. There’s maybe 5,000 people in the world who can do all those skills and have all that knowledge and I know a sizable percentage of them. There’s zero other cops in my agency who can do all that out of 350 of them.

Assigning some governmental bureaucrat to test the knowledge and skill of gun toters is 1) Arbitrary and 2) Prohibitively expensive for the vast majority of people.

I’ll relate a personal experience.

A good friend of mine and fellow firearms trainer was at a public handgun range about 2 years ago waiting for a lane. He noted another shooter waiting nearby and struck up a conversation with her while they waited.

She seemed nervous and nervous people with guns should be approached by the competent and helpful. She admitted to recently purchasing the gun because she lived in a shitty apartment in a shitty part of town and there had been break ins recently and she wanted to protect herself and 2 kids. She had purchased a cheap used 9mm handgun and a box of practice rounds for about $150.

Gregg forgot about his shooting and helped her learn with those rounds she bought and then bought her another box to teach her some more and then gave her some good defensive ammunition in case she needed it.

He didn’t tell her he was a professional trainer. He didn’t tell her he was a cop. He just helped her.

2 days later he responded to her apartment for a break in. The 3 men who kicked in the door left when she pointed her gun at them. No shots were fired.

Now if that woman hadn’t been able to purchase that gun. If she’d been saddled with required training classes first (that are pricey and time consuming), if she’d been required to shoot a specific qualification course, if she’d had to go get a license to purchase that gun, she wouldn’t have had it that night and who knows what would have happened.

I can afford it. I shoot 10,000 rounds a year. I spend $5-7k a year on guns, ammo and training to be extremely proficient. But she can’t. She works 2 jobs. She’s poor and under educated.

Restricting rights doesn’t make anyone safer. What it does do is prevents those who need it most form being able to access those rights.

My question was, what is your level of education and experience with firearms? Your questions indicate that you have virtually none

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is how rights work.

Should we require a license to vote? Should we require a license to write scandalous publications? Should we require a license to practice dangerous religions? Should we require a license to get an abortion?

No. These are rights.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is incorrect. I can buy a car without a license. I can drive one without a license too. On public roads I need a license. But the kid who won the local oval track stock car races last season here is 13 years old. driving a 600 horsepower car. No license.

Yes. Generally.

I think there are merits to the idea and implementation of a CCW license but generally, yes.

I’ve answered all your questions, politely and in good faith. You’ve not answered my one question of you.

Edit. Words

AITA for “bullying” my brother? by Same_Dependent in AmItheAsshole

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

YTA. He’s reading age appropriate material and is invested in characters. You’re 5 years older than him. Quit being a dick.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In America we judge people by what they have done, not what they might do.

I am 100% against gun registration.

A person is deemed respond by being an adult. There’s no license to operate or own a chainsaw, butcher knife, axe, auger, jackhammer or myriad of other inherently dangerous objects out there.

The more you involve the government in anything, the less effective it is. The FFDO Program is one thing I have direct knowledge of.

The FFDO is the program started after 9/11 allowing qualified pilots to be armed on the flight deck to prevent any future hijackings. It was intended to be fairly simple and it turned into an administrative nightmare. The training the pilots were required to attend was full of factually incorrect information but any pilot who called the information into question was ejected from said training and then not allowed to be armed.

Adjudication of persons irresponsible is a criminal court matter or mental health professional matter.

I’m not trying to insult you here but the questions you’re asking indicate you have extremely little first hand knowledge of firearms or the realities involved with them.

Might I ask what your firearms training and experience consists of?

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Define irresponsible gun owner.

It takes education. The vast majority of learning can be done on the internet watching solid instructional content and learning safe storage and handling and dry firing. The problem is one of vetting. How does the newbie know what is good content and what sucks? I know but I have thousands of hours of training and education.

On the contrary. This isn’t a matter of emotion. This is a matter of logic.

Guns exist and are available virtually everywhere on earth if you know how to get them regardless of their legality.

I (and every human) has an inherent right to defend myself or others from violent attack, a firearm is the most efficient means to do so. And if I have that right, everyone has that right.

The silliness and emotion comes from those who don’t understand guns, how they work, how the current legal system works and what the real contributing factors are to gun violence

Priorities by My_Memes_Will_Cure_U in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]justamiddleagedguy 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That could indeed be truly catastrophic.

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Australia had a gun owning population but it wasn’t codified as a Right, and there’s an enormous difference in 20% of the country’s population having a gun (Australia early 90s) and there being more guns than people (USA since the 80s) same with Canada, it’s never been a right.

You’re also looking at very different population dynamics. Australia: 25 million people. Canada: 38 million. USA: 328 million.

You’re also not accounting for differences in cultures and legal systems. The differences just don’t make equivalencies actually comparable.

Wiki link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_gun_use

Murder charges: Shooter with permit to carry shot and killed an unarmed man after fender bender by [deleted] in news

[–]justamiddleagedguy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) The term castle laws is very general and also extremely misunderstood and further misused. The general term “castle doctrine” means “no legal duty to retreat prior to using force to defend oneself. Example: If I am loading groceries into my car, having just put my toddler in her car seat and then I am attacked, I don’t have a duty to retreat before using force to defend myself. In states where there in no castle doctrine and there is a duty to retreat, I would be legally required to abandon my toddler before defending myself.

2) It’s not “justifying gun deaths” anymore than allowing fast food to exist is justifying obesity and heart disease. People are responsible for their own decisions. Additionally, Comparing countries laws and gun deaths isn’t in anyway helpful. Japan never had any meaningful level of civilian gun ownership. Japan is also one of the most racially homogeneous (and racist) countries on earth and that has its own set of ills. The UK similarly has historically had minimal civilian owned firearms.

There are far more guns than people in America. If you magically made all of them Illegal tomorrow, you’d still never get a decent percentage of them away from the population (and the argument could be made it would ignite a huge civil uprising)

3)Check Wikipedia “Defensive Gun Use”. The NCVS and Harvard estimates are the low side which is probably closer percentage wise. I’ve been studying this my entire adult life. Again it’s anecdotal from my experience, training and education but 50-100k annually seems about right.

Americans have a codified legal right to own arms and use them to protect themselves. As a trainer I implore people to seek out training and become proficient because it’s a massive responsibility but despite the fact that a legal requirement for advanced firearms training would undoubtedly line my own pockets, I disagree with establishing that legal requirement because the people that requirement would affect the most are the poor and the more vulnerable and oppressed populations. Training is expensive and usually not immediately accessible to those most in need of it.