Daily Rotten Forum Experience

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 21:11

Idiot deserved what he got. He shot two cops and a police dog. Exchanged fire with at least one other officer, a detective I think, later. He obviously, given the chance, would have shot more officers if given a chance. In that situation the guy should be lucky is was a fast death IMO.

Oh, for the record, 68/100 in rough terrain at an indeterminate distance and a moving human sized target while rapid firing really isn't that bad. Take a pistol or rifle out to the range and try to rapid fire the rounds into the target at 25 yds. You'll be lucky if you hit the target 1/2 of the time unless you practice a lot. No add in adrenaline and the fight/flight syndrome and your accuracy will drop to 30%, probably.

From: barbarossa58 [Phallus Maximus]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 21:18

Did this guy beat Bonnie and Clyde's record?

From: facetious [smart ass]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 21:21

florida, wow big surpise. do you realize if it weren't for florida we wouldn't have any good rotten stories.

guess the swat team was just trying to get even.

From: carolina [Carol]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 22:12

selfcleaner.why the racial slur..i bet all these school shootings this week were done by white guys.the fuckin nazis were white too. bushie is white.so was manson and mark david chapman and most serial killers.and many more.

From: neurose [i hate people]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 22:21

What exactly is a "routine traffic stop"? I see this phrase used over and over. Why don't they say the reason for stopping the driver. Also the cop used the term "execution". To me this statement is admitting that this guy wasn't EVER going to get a trial according to our constitution. Most of these cops probably need to go to jail for acting as judge,jury and executioner.

From: studgerbil [Stud]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 22:32

What's this "Constitution" you refer to, neurose? I Googled it and my PC was seized by federal agents before I could get a hit.

From: neurose [i hate people]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 22:55

From: studgerbil [Stud]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 22:32

What's this "Constitution" you refer to, neurose? I Googled it and my PC was seized by federal agents before I could get a hit.

So sad considering that is so possible. Wish I could LOL at your comment, but crying seems more appropriate - crying and purchasing a one way ticket to Canada.

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 23:10

Neurose

Routine traffic stop means:
A: Routine as in the same type the officer does day after day week after week, nothing exceptional. Failure to yield... speeding... illegal lane change... Running a red light... etc... you know the normal stuff

B:Traffic Stop. The suspect was in a car and was stopped.

Not that hard to decipher.

The reason they normally don't put the reson for the inital stop in these cases is because the reporters get most of their info from a copy of the Officer's incident report.

The report probably said something along the lines of:

1920 hrs I made a routine traffic stop on the suspect vehicle. As I approached the vehicle, the driver fled, firing several times in my direction. I waited for my backup officer to arrive and then we initiated a search of the surrounding forest.

Why didn't the cop put the reason for the stop in the incident report? easy. After being shot at and having one of your buddies killed in front of you, the fact that the idiot ran a stop sign is of very little concern to the officer.

Idiot

Oh, and about that one way ticket to Canada... Have fun... *wave*

From: absintheredux [Green Death]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 23:28

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 21:11

Oh, for the record, 68/100 in rough terrain at an indeterminate
distance and a moving human sized target while rapid firing really
isn't that bad. Take a pistol or rifle out to the range and try to
rapid fire the rounds into the target at 25 yds. You'll be lucky
if you hit the target 1/2 of the time unless you practice a lot.
No add in adrenaline and the fight/flight syndrome and your
accuracy will drop to 30%, probably.

....................................

You have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.

Keeping them all damn close to the x-ring at 25 yards on
a standard pistol NRA target is not a great feat and I
know quite a few who will keep them IN the x-ring.

Yes, in rapid fire.

I should hope that the law enforcement personnel would
"practice a lot". That's why we have police ranges.

If they can't maintain accuracy even with the added
factor of "adrenaline" they should be looking for another
job.

You obviously don't know a sear from a transfer bar in
spite of your bullshit smokescreen.

From: 8nford [tractor]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 23:46

About time a murderer got some justice.
Give them cops a extra dozen donuts!

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 00:20

*tsk tsk tsk*

Actually I do know a bit about what I'm talking about on this one.

I've been a police officer for the last 10 years.
I was airborne infantry for four years as well.

Mind you I don't practice with rifles much. Our department doesn't issue them to patrol officers. I spend my time on the range with pistol and shotgun. However I do know a lot about the effects adrenaline has on the body during the fight/flight syndrome.

You lose fine muscle control. Which makes aiming a whole lot harder. Out in the woods hunting for an armed suspect is not sitting on the range. Exactly why do you think a person that fires 90-100 on the range at 15 yds misses 3 out of five shots in a shooting at 15 feet?

Rapid fire is as fast as you can pull the trigger, BTW. Not one shot every second or so.

I wasn't talking about an officer rapid firing on the range, BTW. The average person who goes out to the range with a rifle and tries to rapid fire a mag into a target at 25 yds will probably miss 50% of the shots. That is with no stress and level, open terrain aa well as good lighting.

A relatively well trained person, like a police officer for instance, with a pistol will miss more than that at 15 yds while rapid firing.

Take that same person and walk him through rough terrain for a few hours while searching for an armed suspect and trying to watch everywhere because he doesn't want to get shot. Mental and physical exhaustion. Now add the adrenaline that hits him when they actually find the guy. *snort* 68/110 hits is actually a very decent ratio.

And before some idiot mentions that walking through the woods isn't that hard unless you are a donut eater, I'll go ahead and throw in that hiking... or hunting... is a whole lot different than searching for an armed person. stress is as hard on the system over that time frame as physical exertion.

You may know a few people who can keep it in the X-ring on rapid fire.. if they can maybe they should start training for the biathalon.

I also know a few really good shots. Half of them are on our SRT team. But those men and women are the exception, not the rule. The guy who can fire a pistol while running and getting shot at and hits a kill shot every time exists... in the movies.

From: distortedfanatic [Distorted Fanatic]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 00:25

68 is all that made thier mark? that is a fucking disgrace and those so-called SWAT fuckers need serious re-training or be replaced all together. I wonder if they hit him in the balls? I would have aimed for his balls. That always puts 'em down. Non-lethal, so there's no guilt. If you do it right, they won't even get to lay around in a wheelchair and collect benefits.

From: pressthebutton [pressthebutton]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 01:17

68 shots...

Meet Sponge Bob.

From: neurose [i hate people]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 01:41

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 2-Oct-2006 23:10

Neurose

Figures you are a cop. So your reasoning is that the end justifies the means. I've faced very dangerous folks working unarmed in a mental hospital which also had a forensic unit. We'd have gone to jail if caught holding or tying a violent person down in the wrong manner. No guns, just cloth and leather restraints as the state deemed fit. So don't talk to me about facing danger. Just admit that this was revenge pure and simple.

Funny, idiot cop, you didn't have the balls to address my comment about the officer stating this was an execution and thus was confessing to acting as jury and executioner which is a crime as I recall. Nimrod.

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 01:48

Neurose

Oh, BTW just to clarify the article for you....

The Sheriff said the Deputy the suspect killed was 'executed' by the suspect.

He didn't say his men executed the suspect.

Slight difference.

From: absintheredux [Green Death]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 01:49

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 00:20

Rapid fire is as fast as you can pull the trigger, BTW. Not one shot every second or so.

..................................

Now you "redefine" Rapid Fire.

Here is the NRA standard and what most of us, military and
civilian accept:

"10 shots rapid fire (5 shots fired in 10 seconds, 2 times)."

Even if one is in a firefight and laying a covering fire in
the killbox, squeezing the trigger as fast a one can is
an idiotic way to go about it. The accepted practice is
to fire aimed short bursts with the selector on auto (check the
manual).

Police personnel are hardly known for their firearm proficiency
seeing that, in my experience, it often takes a lot of
of coaxing to even get them on the range twice a year for
their mandatory qualifications. The training programs suck.

Besides, the lack of mandatory low light qualification
is a blot on the system as it results in a significant
drop in accuracy in less than full daylight situations.

We also advocate heavy training at 12 yards considering
that only some 5% of police shootings occur beyond that
distance.

Excuses for the status quo just don't cut it.

My point is that a Police badge per se does not confer any
particular expertise on firearms. I agree that it should,
but, at the present the standards are deplorable.

Mind you, some of my buddies are excellent shots, but it is
because they are active in shooting sports, not because of
their occupation.

I still maintain that firing 110 shots with 68 hits to bring
down ONE individual is an exercise in incompetence and stupidity.

From: genkimon [genkimon]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 02:04

Ah geez, now someone has done it... Who the hell called the NRA over? Bunch of fat-ass wannabe hero types who measure how "tough" they are by the size of their guns. They put a hack actor with Alzheimers up on stage to bellow "From my cold, dead hands!"

*sigh* pass me my rifle, the one with the scope on it, the sumbitch wants to do this the hard way...

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 02:22

One round every two seconds is fast and accurate shooting, but you will not fire like that in a high stress environment. Watch any video of any shooting and see if anyone is taking slow aimed shots like that. You just don't fire like that when the adrenaline is flowing. I'll say it once more, a real life shooting incident is a lot different than the range. You usually are not standing still taking a good firing stance. If you have a steady aiming platform ( a solid stance ) then you are a non moving target. That is generally bad when bullets can be coming back in your direction.

*bang* one-thousand... two thousand... *bang*

Oh and most officers I know love to go out and shoot. The department keeps Fridays as open range days so officers can go in their off time. The only real limits are personal time.

As for the officers firing 110 rds... That does sound like a bit much... However I could see how it would reasonably happen.

A lot of it would depend on how many officers were in the group, of course. One cop sees a gun and yells "Gun!!" and starts shooting and everyone with an eye on the target will open fire, too. 2 officers firing 110 rds would be at least one reload each, but 7 officers firing a 15 rd mag each, or 112 rds is well within the realms of possibility.

Police officers are taught in the academy (at least I was those many years ago) to fire until the threat is neutralized. Translated usually as fire until he can't fire back. If he is hiding under a tree (log?) and is at least partially concealed then they may not have been able to make that determination. Unloading an entire mag each is plausible, especially since it would be impossible to hear if he was shooting with all the gunfire coming from the good guys.

I, of course, have no idea what the officers were armed with. AR-15s? shotguns? pistols? any combination of the above, probably.

Did they fire so much because he had killed a friend of theirs who may have been best man at a few weddings or a good drinking buddy or even a brother or brother in law? I don't know. I'm not from Florida.

I do know that my shift is relatively close. Three of my best friends are on my shift. I know their children, their wives, even their parents in some cases. I've been to their weddings. I helped one of them through the loss of a loved one from cancer. Losing one of them would be like losing a sibling. I imagine other departments are the same.

From: dadofautism [*****]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 04:29

Umm, maybe I need more info than the article is giving but it sounds like the guy was boxed in and located. No running, a static situation. Where's the video?

Absinthe/Morte, your repartee is a great read.

From: peanutslab [68iou1]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 05:16

Sounds like pretty fair training for
the amerikan police action in Iraq.

All they have to bone up on now is
raping fourteen year olds and running away.

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 06:32

Im going to have to agree with morte266 on this one. For those of you stating that 68 hits out of 110 shots under combat conditions is poor marksmanship need to spend less time in front of the fucking TV and get out in the real world once in a while. Trying to hit a moving target who would like nothing more than to blow your brains out is NOTHING like standing on a firing range plinking targets at 25 yards.

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 06:39

I have a feeling the same idiots screaming poor marksmanship are probaly the same morons who wonder why the cops dont just shoot em in the arm or leg. Get real.

From: kwijibo [A fat, balding north-american ape]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 07:01

From: genkimon [genkimon]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 02:04

Ah geez, now someone has done it... Who the hell called the NRA over? Bunch of fat-ass wannabe hero types who measure how "tough" they are by the size of their guns. They put a hack actor with Alzheimers up on stage to bellow "From my cold, dead hands!"

This is the same "hack actor" who marched with MLK in the '60s and was present for his "I Have A Dream" speech in 1963.

He's the recipient of two Academy Awards and two Golden Globes.

And is Alzheimers a character flaw now?

Dripping thoughtless derision is indeed rotten.

From: rhag6942 [Kewl Han Dluke]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 07:03

It would have been great if he had an accomplice taking a piss around the corner.
All the cops empty their guns and he comes around from behind a tree and shoots them all.

From: chinnuts [Got Three For Ya]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 08:07

Let's see: Killed one cop, and a police dog, wounded another, hides
under a fallen tree in a dense forest, 110 shots fired.

Conclusion: The police don't carry enough ammo.

Also, after being shot 68 times, I wouldn't want to have
to clean up that mess

From: pball [packing heat]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 08:24

Ya know...I'm willing to bet Miami SWAT probably carries long arms rather than (or in addition to) pistols; MP5s or M4s are a lot more likely. I'm well aware that being pumped up on adrenaline absolutely wrecks your shooting skills, but speaking from experience, there's no excuse for missing that much (at least with HK's amazing diopter sights) at relatively close range with a shoulder-fired gun. That, and I expect SWAT to be aa bit better trained than a vanilla uniform. Of course, maybe there were some regular cops there as well, they could account for a large percentage of the misses.

Mental masturbation at any rate - I'm wholeheartedly in support of summary execution in situations like this. 110 bullets are a hell of a lot cheaper than a long and pointless trial, appeals, confinement, and ultimately hopefully execution. All of you fucktards whining about "due process" and throwing the cops in jail for being "judge jury and executioner" maybe should start worrying about real injustice instead of appropriate justice that just happens to be swift and vicious.

From: yukovalis [Chris]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:25

oh you can just imagine what happened. They find him in the woods with a gun in his hand and start shooting. Missing a bit from the chase through the woods. Already grieved because of their own killed and that poor dog :( they get him down with a good amount of bullets before pulling in at close range even point-blank and unloading everything else until he stops kicking

From: coondingee [Coondingee]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:35

This story pisses me off. This happened not to far from me. What the article left out is that the cops got backup from all over the state, led a manhunt for almost 24hours, and found him about 100yards from where he killed the cop and dog. The local news interviewed the locals and all were in agreement that the suspect wasn't walking out of those woods alive.

From: kdp [Calif - Ex Patraite]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:36

I'm not saying that 68 of 110 shots fired is poor marksmanship.

Compared to other stories that hit the media it's great!

I'm thinking about a New York story where a guy was shot at like 40 shots and only 5 hit him. And a story in Los Angeles where some 80 shots were fired and none hit.

I still hate cops.

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:43

From: coondingee [Coondingee]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:35

This story pisses me off. This happened not to far from me. What the article left out is that the cops got backup from all over the state, led a manhunt for almost 24hours, and found him about 100yards from where he killed the cop and dog. The local news interviewed the locals and all were in agreement that the suspect wasn't walking out of those woods alive.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Why exactly does this story piss you off? Because a cop was murdered doing his job? Because a police dog was killed? Because justice was served to some piece of shit who was fully prepared to murder some more? Why are you so pissed?

From: kwijibo [A fat, balding north-american ape]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 10:21

From the old negro spiritual:
Cops and the Klan Go Hand in Hand

From: edinhouston [Ed?]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 10:42

From what I saw on TV the cop they interviewed said the killer was down on the ground hiding in the brush on his side and the cops told him to show both his hands a few times. He refused to show his hand under him which had a gun and the cops opened fire on him as he was hiding on the ground.

Ok I can see killing the ass bag but at what time during all the shooting did they think he might be dead already? Abuse of a corpse comes to mind. Why not just shoot him a few times in the head and call it a day? Oh I forgot, cops can't count.

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 11:08

Ok I can see killing the ass bag but at what time during all the shooting did they think he might be dead already?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
They probably figured he was dead when they saw brains splatter all over the tree behind him. Thats usualy the best time to stop firing.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 11:47

I gotta go with Morte here. I've never actually hunted anyone, but I've been hunted by people. I know what the adrenaline feels like and what it does to your judgment. When it's "life or death" hesitation will kill you, or someone else. Empty your gun, then see if he's alive or not.

From: uppitynegro [Uppity Negro]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 11:54

"That's all the bullets we had, or we would have shot him more"

Why can't FBI agents do this? And talk like this in public? Or Metro DC police?

At least the dead guy didn't hide out in a populated neighborhood.

UN

From: coondingee [Coondingee]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 12:22

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:43

From: coondingee [Coondingee]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 09:35

This story pisses me off. This happened not to far from me. What the article left out is that the cops got backup from all over the state, led a manhunt for almost 24hours, and found him about 100yards from where he killed the cop and dog. The local news interviewed the locals and all were in agreement that the suspect wasn't walking out of those woods alive.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Why exactly does this story piss you off? Because a cop was murdered doing his job? Because a police dog was killed? Because justice was served to some piece of shit who was fully prepared to murder some more? Why are you so pissed?

I'm OK with the cops killing him. He got what he deserved but it pisses me off that it took cops from ALL over the state something like 24hours to find him and he was only 100 yards away from where he killed the cop. They had dogs at least from what I saw of the news chopper video so why did it take them so long to find him. I guess in the long run it's still cheaper to have all those cops out there than if he sat on death row for 20yrs but WTF were they doing that it took so long to find him?

From: studgerbil [Stud]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 12:46

Look, if the killer was hiding under a tree, one good grenade would make a nice lil hole. One shell from an RPG would be even safer, given the distance involved.

This country would be a lot safer if cops could routinely carry much better ordnance.

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 12:48

I'm OK with the cops killing him. He got what he deserved but it pisses me off that it took cops from ALL over the state something like 24hours to find him and he was only 100 yards away from where he killed the cop. They had dogs at least from what I saw of the news chopper video so why did it take them so long to find him. I guess in the long run it's still cheaper to have all those cops out there than if he sat on death row for 20yrs but WTF were they doing that it took so long to find him?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

So you think you could have done a beter job considering

A: He didnt want to be found so I doubt he stayed in the same place those entire 24 hours

B: If he sees you before you see him youre dead

C: He wasnt standing in a open field waving his arms.. he was concealed in the underbrush.

D: Unlike the cop movies Im sure youre basing your experience on I doubt very seriously they went running willy nilly into the woods without forming some sort of parameter and figuring up some sort of game plan to catch this asshole and make sure all of the cops looking for him went home that night.

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 12:53

rom: studgerbil [Stud]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 12:46
.

This country would be a lot safer if cops could routinely carry much better ordnance.
-----------------------------------------------------------

like the BFG9000

From: whaleofashrimp [linus]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 13:21

Leftover Crack lyrics
Artist: Leftover Crack
Album: Fuck World Trade
Year: 2004
Title: One Dead Cop

Power abuse; Authority misuse
They kill and rape
And it won’t be on the news
But you’re the good one
With the badge and a gun
Braggin’ how you blasted
Gunshot forty-one

Policia
Line up on the wall
Policia
Caged animals
Policia
Kill and lie some more
Policia
Conspiracy to cage the poor

One dead cop
No more donut shop
More dead cops
Might make the hurting stop
Kill cops [7x]

Policia
Line up on the wall
Policia
Caged animals
Policia
Kill and lie some more
Policia
Conspiracy to cage the poor

One dead cop
No more donut shop
More dead cops
Might make the hurting stop
Kill cops [7x]

I never took such pleasure in a death
A hatred born of freedom’s dying breath
The police kill and then they lie some more
In a conspiracy to cage the poor

From: sloppy [zitler]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 14:08

I don't believe the police did anything wrong. Just one less scumbag in Florida.

From: genkimon [genkimon]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 18:48

From: kwijibo [A fat, balding north-american ape]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 07:01

And is Alzheimers a character flaw now?
_________________________________________

No, but being a Rethuglican and muppet-on-a-stick "president" (read: "poster child/figurehead") of the NRA is. Sure he marched with Dr. King, and he even campaigned for gun control laws after RFK was shot. Then he was replaced by a pod person, or perhaps his brain started turning to mush well before he announced he had Alzheimers. "The doctors think something is wrong in my head." "No shit. How could they tell."

And he won 5 Golden Globes, not 2. He still overacted terribly in mostly terrible movies.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 19:35

What's wrong with the NRA?

From: genkimon [genkimon]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 20:06

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 19:35

What's wrong with the NRA?
---------------------------
On the plus side, they keep the bleeding hearts from banning all guns for everyone. On the minus side, they insist everyone should have access to any and all kinds of firearms. Assault rifles, uzis, you name it. They fight any reasonable attempt to control the all-too-pervasive flow of firearms.

I am all for responsible people owning guns for personal protection or hunting. But why is it that you must pass tests and be licensed to drive a car, and that's fine, but attempts to do the same for gun owners are "communist/fascist/mean the boogey-man is coming"? And NO private citizen has any business with military hardware such as AKs or M2s. Even if they are "fixed" to semi-auto mode only. Those folks always hide behind the 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Try reading that again a WELL-REGULATED MILITIA. That is not Bubba in his gun-rack equipped truck.

And yes, I also know about USC 10,311 stating that all US males are part of the "militia". But before anyone brings that up, go back and read it: it is "all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard". The exception noted is for those actually in the National Guard, and the upper age limit is 64.

So, if you are a male under 17 or over 45 and not in the Guard, or over 64, or a woman of any age not in the Guard, you are not in the US Militia, period. So the 2nd amendment cannot be construed as allowing you to have firearms. It's right there in black and white - the right to keep and bear arms is predicated on the neccesity of a US Militia. And US Code defines that militia. When Chuck was waving that flintlock around bellowing "from my cold, dead hands!" his ass was NOT covered by th 2nd Amendment. Nor were the fat asses of a large number of people in the audience.

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 21:12

An unarmed society is a society of victims. The best defense you can have against violence in your home (home invasion, rape, robbery, etc.) is a 12 guage. The best defense against violence when not at home is a Weapon Carry Permit and a .45

I would much rather pick up the shattered pieces of a would be rapist than pieces of a victim.

From: genkimon [genkimon]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 23:07

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 21:12

An unarmed society is a society of victims.
---------------------------------------

Then riddle me this: why are countries with high rates of gun ownership always leading the world in murder and violent crime rates, while those with tighter controls are low? The US ranks 24 in the world for murder, the only "developed" countires higher are Russia and Poland. The US rate beats every Western European nation, and is TEN TIMES higher than Japan. NO statistic exists to show that gun ownership reduces crime, in fact EVERY objective survey done shows exactly the opposite. oh, that's right, "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." True, but it would be a damn sight harder to kill someone IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE FREAKING GUNS, now wouldn't it? Look at that moron in Paradise, PA. The guy walks into an Amish school carrying SIX HUNDRED rounds of ammo. Jeebus H Keerist - what the hell does ANYONE who is not serving in Iraq need SIX HUNDRED rounds of ammo for? And the sad part? He probably just walked into Wally World and bought them, no checks, no one said "boo". Probably thought he was just going out for a weekend of target practice or something.

Morons. I pity Canada and Mexico for having the US as a neighbor.

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 23:11

I don't remember the NRA ever fighting the automatic weapon ban from 1934 or so.

What's the matter with semi auto AKs, that isn't the matter with other higher powered semi auto rifles?

From: genkimon [genkimon]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 00:26

From: aulduron [Aulduron]
Date: 3-Oct-2006 23:11

I don't remember the NRA ever fighting the automatic weapon ban from 1934 or so.
-----------------
Fair enough, I will give them that.

"What's the matter with semi auto AKs, that isn't the matter with other higher powered semi auto rifles?"

Please tell me you're playing devil's advocate here, Aulduron. You always seemed so intelligent...

There is nothing wrong with AKs that isn't also wrong with other high-powered semi-auto rifles. AKs, AR-15s, H&K G36, etc. are all military weapons. They are designed for one thing: throwing large amounts of rounds out rapidly and dependably and killing large numbers of people. They are not much good for hunting, the AR-15/M-16 and G36 are too small for most big game, and anyway unless facing down a charging grizzly the semi-auto feature is useless. They are also too bulky for effective home defense, plus they require you to aim and WILL pass through an intruder, and the wll behind him, and whoever happens to be on the other side (like sleeping family members). NATO 5.56 rounds are also highly over-rated in terms of stopping power (they have next to none). A pump shotgun is far more effective in clearing a house. Plus the psych angle - rack a round into it and people who weren't doing shit will freeze.

Civilians have no need for that kind of firepower, anymore than street drivers need Nitrous, which AFAIK is banned from the roads everywhere.

From: thelordofcheese [The Lord Of Cheese]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 04:27

Accused
and they still shot him dead
without proof

assholes

From: maidenmaiden [whatever]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 05:27

I really do hope it was the right dude...

From: kuzzy [Kuzzy]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 08:44

From: thelordofcheese [The Lord Of Cheese]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 04:27

Accused
and they still shot him dead
without proof

assholes

--------------------------------------------------------------------

So uh... if someone breaks into your house and starts killing your family Im sure youll wait until you have some sort of proof that THAT particular person is the one who killed your family before you start defending your household? A cop just watched his partner get wasted.. how much fucking proof do you need?

From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 09:37

YES it was the right guy.

the dead asswipe had the murdered officers gun in his hand when they shot him full of holes.

Any idiot who shoots a cop in Florida or any other state for that matter is on borrowed time from the moment he drops the hammer .

Bag of crap had it comin,too bad the amish babykilling retard didnt try to shoot cops instead of babies .then he would be just another statistic ,not a
serial killer.

P>S LIBERALS SUCK

From: jonny2975 [jonny]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 11:57

You Americans are far from perfect but at least you do something right. In Britain he would have got a conditional discharge and a £200 fine payable at £4 a month.

From: morte266 [Old and Tired]
Date: 4-Oct-2006 12:04

genkimon [genkimon

You haven't read much about Mexico's crime rate have you. Canada has their own problems in their high urban areas, too.

The difference is that Canada has a huge landmass to population ratio. 30 million people live up there. 300 million+ live in the US. And the crime rate goes up in high density urban areas. A lot of reasons for this, of course. Too many to take a simplistic view. NYC has a pretty high crime rate, though and guns are banned in the city.

Crime has more to do with access to victims than access to weapons. There are few per capita home invasions, murders, violent rapes where my parents live and it is a rural area with a pretty high minority population. Breaking into a house there while the occupants are home would probably have to be considered suicide, though. Most violent deaths involve bar fights and their aftermath. He who gets to the truck first is armed, so to speak.

The City where I work is another story. None of my non-work friends have weapons in the house. Crime rate is not as bad as a lot of cities but it is getting worse as Meth takes the place of crack as the inner city drug of choice. Very few of the victims that I've had to deal with were armed, thuogh. And of the ones that were armed most were dealers.

Luckily a good percentage of our violent crime atm is criminal on criminal. I would rather a low crime rate but if they have to kill someone, taking out a dealer for his stash is better than a mother of three for her paycheck.

911 only works to limit the damage. It takes time for an officer to respond unless you're lucky enough to have him in your neighborhood when the call
comes out. Figure a ten minute response time as a good average because cops do not go into a possible armed encounter without backup unless there is absolutely no choice. How much damage can be done to you and your family in ten minutes from the time an intruder shatters the sliding glass door?

Grab the shotgun then the phone. pull all the family members into one room, the master bedroom. Sit in a corner with the gun on the door and stay on the line with 911 so you don't accidentally shoot a cop. If the asshole kicks in the bedroom door then deal with him, otherwise let the cops handle the problem.

This isn't vigilante justice or a gun crazed homeowner. It is a person protecting their family. And everyone has the responsibility to protect their children, their spouses, and themselves.

You can hate cops, that is your choice. You can hate crime, too. Hating both is kinda dumb, though.