search
top

Conclusions From Tragedy

If you listen to the press, or the Brady Campaign, there’s only one conclusion you can draw from violence involving guns; guns are bad.  Breda, a victim of a tragedy herself, has a must read on this topic.  Those prone to PSH might not like what she has to say.

44 Responses to “Conclusions From Tragedy”

  1. Breda says:

    Thanks so much for linking to my blog!

    (but I wasn’t a victim, I wasn’t there when it happened. I’m sorry if it came across that way.)

  2. Jadegold says:

    A pretty silly post; basically, she wants to turn a school into shooting range with the children trusted to her care as obstacles. The gunloon always sees the world as black-and-white (both in terms of context and race) and automatically assumes everyone is emotionally and physically capable of safely using a weapon.

    They aren’t.

    It’s easy to go to a range and punch holes in a piece of paper. It’s quite another matter to be faced with what one perceives to be a life-and-death situation. Virtually no gunloon is either prepared or trained for that. An anecdote: I work with a lot of Navy aviators and I’ve asked them about their experiences when they’ve had to declare an emergency or even send out a mayday. Without exception, each has said they were too busy to be frightened or panicked as they followed and executed a checklist of procedures that had been drummed into them and practiced so many times. That’s training.

    And we haven’t addressed the psychological aspect; is it really wise to allow anyone- whether mentally ill or a substance abuser–acccess to firearms?

    But this is all more obfuscation; we all know that with all the firearms that are out there, few crimes are ever deterred or prevented by their use.

  3. Noops says:

    Jadegold,

    You are one of the most amazingly specious troll I’ve seen in a long time. Persistent too.

    I’m neither police, nor military. I probably do have more hours of safety/tactical/weapons handling training than about 90% of police. I paid for it. Lot’s of other people who have made the decision to carry concealed do the same. By your logic, if a CCW got formal training, should they then be allowed to carry in schools? I’m not a fan of training requirements, because poor people should have the right to defend themselves as well, but if you met some intermediate or advanced weapons training level, should you be able to carry in a school? Your para on that subject would seem to say that should be ok.

    And please, what does substance abuse or mental illness have to do with this conversation? Where was it advocated that mentally ill or substance abusers should a)have access to firearms at all. b) have a CCW. C) Be given teacher or staff positions at schools. AND D) the combination of A,B,C all together?

    And how is it we all know that few crimes are deterred? Even the most conservative studies show number in the hundreds of thousands, and the least conservative in the millions. I will even agree that Lott’s study was problematic, but his was the top end of that.

    What’s more is, it sounds like no matter the number, you don’t feel that people in this country should be able to defend themselves with lethal force?

  4. thirdpower says:

    And now the butterbar will start completely derailing the topic at hand by showing all his “proof”.. Most of which is just throwing out ad hominems , red herrings, and insults in an attempt to get banned here as well and then throw out more nonsense about how pro-gun sites censor posts. Completely ignoring the fact that he’s been banned from dozens of sites over the years.

  5. Breda says:

    for all of jadegold’s typing, s/he has very poor reading skills. I have exactly ZERO children trusted to my care, I am not a teacher.

  6. Noops says:

    Thirdpower,

    Good point…and don’t feed the trolls.

  7. Sebastian says:

    I don’t have much of a beef with Jadegold’s position if we were talking about arming teachers, but we’re not. I agree there are some people who do not have the mental inclination to carry a pistol. It’s not for everyone. But we’re asking why someone who has a concealed weapons license, has gone through the training, and who can carry everywhere else, including many places frequented by children, ought to be barred from carrying in a school. If guns in school are so dangerous, why are police officers exempt from school carry laws?

  8. Clint says:

    “A must read” is exactly right! That’s very cool that Sebastian linked to that. Breda, I am sorry for the loss you and your town suffered.

    I am always amazed at how anti-gunners become instant tactical experts in response to the presentation of these types of stories. Despite the overwhelming lack of evidence of concealed carriers as a whole creating mayhem or acting irresponsibly, the powers that be still do not allow the in loco parentis to protect children with the best available tools. Hopefully that will soon be coming to an end.

  9. Sebastian says:

    You have to admit, if trolling were an art form, Jade would be Michelangelo.

  10. Noops says:

    Yah, it seems I feed the troll. Don’t feed the trolls. Sorry…

  11. Sebastian says:

    Address Jade’s factual misrepresentations. Just don’t get dragged into ad hominems with him. With the exception of his usual snark about gunloons, his point was one that I think was fine to address.

  12. Clint says:

    Honestly, Sebastian, you have the patience of a saint with that guy. I happened across this the other day on another of his haunts:

    http://whoisjadegold.blogspot.com/

    He has a history of annoying people until they are forced to ban or edit him then he runs back to his own blog and cries “censorship.” His self-claimed credentials are, at best, questionable. Until I saw the research on him, I thought he was a 19 year old living in his parents’ basement. How an adult can be so blind to logic and rebuttal is beyond me.

  13. Jadegold says:

    I probably do have more hours of safety/tactical/weapons handling training than about 90% of police. I paid for it.

    That’s a little like claiming you’re a great lover because you visit a lot of prostitutes. The fact is many of these ‘tactical courses’ are scams taught by folks whose ‘experience’ comes from rereading Tom Clancy novels.

    The fact is these courses are designed to make money, not to necessarily ‘train’; nobody flunks.

    And, please, don’t pretend you’re the equivalent of a police officer. Being an LEO is much, much more than learning to shoot. In fact, I’d offer that a police officer who has to use his/her weapon has already failed to some degree.

  14. thirdpower says:

    “The fact is many of these ‘tactical courses’ are scams taught by folks whose ‘experience’ comes from rereading Tom Clancy novels.”

    And I’m sure you’ll provide us w/ evidence of this? Is it at the same range that the Bears players got into a fight at?

  15. Noops says:

    What evidence do you have that tactical schools like Grayguns, Sigarms Academy, Oregon Firearms Academy, and Thunder Ranch are scams? Especially considering that …..wait for it…. Police and Military organizations train there all the time.

    Also, I didn’t say I’m equivalent to a police officer. I specifically noted that I do have more weapons training than most police officers, which is not the same as being equivalent to a legal authority with enforcement powers and training. A lot of police don’t ever do advanced small arms training, as a lot of them aren’t even shooting enthusiasts. Many of them shoot once or twice a year just to qualify.

    I don’t want to arrest people, enforce the law, maintain peace and order, wear a uniform, or ride around in shiny cars. And nowhere in my post did I claim that. I claimed only knowledge in weapons training for my own defensive purposes. I think, if you did any real research or had any real first hand knowledge, you’d find out that a lot of civilians do this.

    Further, you’d find that even police do this! About half of the classes I go to are usually military or police who are off duty, paying out of their own pockets for training and ammunition to get more advanced training that agencies often won’t or can’t afford for their people. But it must be a scam for them too. On top of that, agencies that DO have budgets for this training, often send their officers to these very same schools. Sounds like a scam to me.

  16. Linoge says:

    Hell of a story you provided for us, Breda. Must have been difficult for you to write, in light of your acquaintance with one of the individuals shot, but thank you regardless.

    As for the situation involving educational facilities, I have never comprehended why someone qualified to carry a firearm in a concealed manner everywhere else could not do so on school grounds. It is almost as if the lawmakers intentionally wanted schools to become shooting galleries… oh, I am sorry, the PC term these days is “gun free zones”, just to perpetuate the myth of “all guns are killers”.

    Far too many of those school shootings might have been prevented if the shooters had been aware that some of the teachers might have been carrying a firearm, and all of them probably could have been cut short by an armed teacher. Thankfully people like Peter, from your recounting, Professor Librescu, from Virginia Tech, and other such heroes exist and are willing to put themselves in harm’s way, regardless of whether our government is willing to allow them to fight back. At least there is still partial hope for our society.

    Sebastian, you definitely have unparalleled patience… far more than I demonstrated. Of course, in this application, I am not sure if that is a good thing or a bad one, but at least it is there.

  17. Jym says:

    Jadegold is my favorite commenter in this blog, he’s hilarious. I don’t know why everybody gets so worked up over him. Every once in awhile he makes a decent point, and when he doesn’t, he’s funny.

  18. Sebastian says:

    I don’t really see what the big deal is. It’s not a bad thing to have to defend your ideas, and Jade does come up with decent comments sometime if you read through the snark. When he descends to useless trolling, just ignore him.

    That said, there are limits to my tolerance, but I think we’re all adult here, and can take it.

  19. Linoge says:

    You know, call me batty (you would not be the first), but I keep having that Cake song, “Going the Distance”, running through my head…

  20. The Duck says:

    Well Guy’s
    JG knows more about the NRA & Self Defense, Use of Force, just ask him, he will have no first hand knowledge, no facts he just knows & he will tell you over & over he knows & that you are wrong.

  21. Jadegold says:

    Again, the vast majority of these courses are scams–nobody flunks. It’s the equivalent of those adventure-based vacations where you ‘fly’ a MiG in ‘combat’ or where you learn to drive a ‘race car’
    at a Racing School.

    Another aspect is the fact the folks who really do this are physically fit and are continuously screened and tested for proficiency. They don’t attend a one week course in a year–their training is nearly continuous year-round.

    And let’s not ignore the operative issue: currently, you don’t have to have the foggiest notion of which end is which on a firearm to purchase one. Heck, you can be legally blind or a substance abuser or mentally ill or physically unable to lift a firearm –and you can go buy any firearm you wish.

  22. Sebastian says:

    It’s pretty clear by this point one of your tactics is to take the existence of something, and use that to paint the entire community with that brush. Yeah, some courses are pretty worthless. For instance, there are still schools of shooting that teach point shooting. But there are plenty of good training programs out there for people who are interested.

    Police training on firearms isn’t all that intense. Most of us can shoot as well or better than most cops. That’s not to say there’s anything wrong with this, as employing a firearm is not a major aspect of police work. I’d much rather have them train on other things. When it comes to employing a firearm in self-defense, you only have to be “good enough”. Most of us are interested in being decent marksmen.

    I actually agree with you on training, but not as a prior restraint for purchasing a gun. I think every American citizen should know how to safely employ a firearm. The fact that so few schools these days teach gun safety to kids is rather outrageous, I think.

  23. thirdpower says:

    “Again, the vast majority of these courses are scams–nobody flunks.”

    So you have no proof and are just repeating yourself. Got it.

    “Another aspect is the fact the folks who really do this are physically fit and are continuously screened and tested for proficiency.”

    Proof of this? Are you saying that most police departments have fitness requirements past academy?

  24. The Duck says:

    I flunked two last year, nor can you train someone in a week long course, you show them the way, the training comes with practice.

    Even getting most LE’s to the range once or twice a year is dam near impossible, more civilians train in a continuous matter, than 95% of LE’s,
    And many are not, physically fit, that’s why they train with a firearm.

    So JG why don’t you put your money where your mouth is & enroll in a course?
    (oh right YOU KNOW ALL why would you need training?, )

  25. Jadegold says:

    Sooo, Sebastian allows that some training courses are worthless. But then he turns around and says training doesn’t matter.

    These are facts that are not in dispute:

    1. Anyone can procure virtually any firearm–in any quantity–they can afford.
    2. Complete lack of training is not required for said purchase.
    3. Lack of physical capability or mental impairment is no bar to firearm ownership.
    4. Marksmanship, or lack thereof, is no requirement of gun ownership.

    Frankly, none of us (except for possibly the dim Thirdpower) would go see someone ‘who is really interested in medicine” as opposed to an MD if we had a medical illness. None of us would fly aboard an aircraft piloted by “someone who likes aviation” as opposed to a licensed pilot. Save for Third.

    Yet, Sebastian seems to believe marksmanship is the equivalent to self-defense. It isn’t.

  26. Sebastian says:

    That’s not what I said. You know that’s not what I said. Now it’s “don’t feed the troll” time.

  27. Jadegold says:

    Untrue, Sebastian, you said exactly that:

    I actually agree with you on training, but not as a prior restraint for purchasing a gun.

  28. Sebastian says:

    I said I agree that everyone ought to have firearms training. I said that, because it’s a right, I don’t agree to allow that as a prior restraint on its exercise. I agree with you on the goal, just not the method. I’d prefer that stuff were taught as part of school curriculum, or as part of a short (a few weeks) compulsory military service for recently minted adults.

    If a lot of the folks out there buying guns were too stupid not to shoot themselves, you’d expect gun accidents to be more common. Given the rates of gun ownership in this country, they are not that common. Requiring training as a prior restraint to purchasing a gun is trying to solve a non-problem, regardless of the constitutional implications.

  29. thirdpower says:

    Ah, I see it’s “Selective Editing and Response by JG” time again.

  30. Sebastian says:

    I should also point out to everyone that I think learning how to safely shoot a gun is just something everyone should know, much like knowing how to swim, how to fish, drive a car with a manual gearbox, along with a host of other things. I believe more people should be trained to shoot a gun, it’s just my reason for it isn’t because I think gun accidents are a problem. It’s just something I think people should be exposed to.

  31. The Duck says:

    Jade is a good example that training should be required before entering the information superhighway.

    Really proper firearms training in school would likely drive down the number of accidential shootings by another 50%

    Since the accident rate has dropped 64% on average in the last 10 years, due mostly to safety education, while ownership has grown, more training would make everyone safer.

    But training should not be required prior to ownership, as that would infringe on “The Right To Keep & Bear Arms”

  32. Jadegold says:

    It’s not a right, Sebastian, as you know.

    If a lot of the folks out there buying guns were too stupid not to shoot themselves, you’d expect gun accidents to be more common.

    You set the bar far too low. It’s not just the fact that people are wounding or killing themselves (and others) accidentally–it’s the fact guns are being used to kill others deliberately. As we both know, most gun violence doesn’t occur between strangers–it occurs between family and intimate acquaintances.

    Right now, we’re seeing the equivalent of a 9/11 every month in the US in terms of gun violence. The Al Qaeda manual advises its adherents to take advatage of our lax gun laws. Gun violence costs us $4B a year in terms of healthcare that you and I get to tack onto our bills. The cost to business is enormous and that, again, is passed on to you and I.

    Your comment that laerning about guns is something everyone should do is an article of faith without grounding in fact. Why? What utility does it bring?

  33. Jadegold says:

    Since the accident rate has dropped 64% on average in the last 10 years, due mostly to safety education,

    Actually, auto safety improvements have little to do with increased education. Instead, it has to do primarily with building roads conducive to higher speeds, safer autos in terms of impact standards, safety belts, air bags (not Third).

  34. Sebastian says:

    Training will help deliberate shootings how?

  35. Linoge says:

    I have absolutely nothing against people getting more training concerning their firearms. I definitely am going to be looking into some FrontSight training before I escape this hellhole known as Kalifornistan (may as well use the geography to my advantage). That said, mandating training before ownership is not going to solve a non-problem. People are going to be stupid. Trained people are still going to be stupid. Cops somehow manage to shoot themselves and each other an amazing number of times a year… and yet they have the most basic of training under their belts, and sometimes more than that. And has already been pointed out, firearm ownership is massive, and growing every year, yet accidents are dropping every year. Needless to say the growing-but-dropping ratio indicates a markedly dropping accident rate, not just your basic rate.

    I would be all for teaching children how to properly and safely handle firearms while they are in school… I mean, hell, those same schools are teaching those same children how to screw around, may as well teach them how to defend themselves as well, especially considering how our Founding Fathers considered that education (the latter part) vital to the growth of young citizens.

  36. The Duck says:

    Excuse me
    “Since the accident rate has dropped 64% on average in the last 10 years, due mostly to safety education, ”

    This is about firearms education! you decide to change the subject?
    If you want to discuss automotive safety go to a car blog.

    We are cranking out the same old guns, on the same old ranges, and more of them so if it’s not education what is it?

  37. thirdpower says:

    Wow, Jade throws out lots of stats and talking points that aren’t true.

    Show me the over 30K+ people from “gun violence”.
    Show me this “Al Qaeda” manual.
    Show this $4B in in yearly healthcare.
    Show that the majority of killings are between family and “intimate acquaintances” .

  38. Jadegold says:

    Training will help deliberate shootings how?

    Training is one piece of the picture. The other is accountability and responsibility. Have effective means of ensuring guns don’t fall into the wrong hands; right now, there aren’t any. Have licensing and registration. Impose some standards on firearm manufacturers.

    If you want to discuss automotive safety go to a car blog.

    Ummm, Duck, you may wish to up the dosage on the gingko tabs.

  39. The Duck says:

    firearm manufacturers are one of the most regulated businesss in this country!

    So how does licensing & registration, keep guns out of the wrong hands?

    Hey JG you are the one that brought up cars, not me, perhaps you need the gingko. How is it when you don’t get your way you resort to insults & name calling?

  40. straightarrow says:

    Hell Duck, what do you expect from a moral midget?

  41. Alcibiades McZombie says:

    I thought the auto accident rate had more to do with states allocating LEOs in a more efficient manner.

  42. straightarrow says:

    “The gunloon always sees the world as black-and-white….”- the ever full of shit JadeGold.

    The gunloon always sees the world as black-and-white (

  43. straightarrow says:

    Don’t know what happened, but here we go again.

    “The gunloon always sees the world as black-and-white…. ” the ever full of shit, Jadegold.

    The world and right and wrong is in black and white, stupid.
    There is a sharp demarcation between right and wrong, even you can’t deny that.

    The problem is that as humans we are not always able to see the exact placement of that line. We have a problem with infallibility, we don’t have any. Therefore, sometimes we see gray areas. They don’t actually exist, we just see them because our moral vision is not perfect and often our desire for what we wish to see interferes with what is actual.

  44. straightarrow says:

    Of course, JG, you have no such problem, you just lie.

top