Boston bombing coverage... how much is too much?

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by theriver

Betcha just about every one in Watertown on that fateful day wishes they had one if he came a'knockin.

Not something we're likely to ever know.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

It apparently took almost 9,000... that's a 9, with three 0s after it... 9,000 law enforcement officials including hundreds of armored vehicles, the FBI, and the National Guard to catch a 19 year old kid with some homemade explosives, a pistol, and absolutely zero combat training.

I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this comment. Yes, it took a small army of LE to catch him, and he didn't have any combat training that we know of.

The kid was in hiding. I suspect if any of us decided to play hide and seek with LE it would take an equal amount of resources to find us providing the situation was the same of course.

Are you implying LE was less than prepared? Not adequate? I'm a little lost here.

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Are you implying LE was less than prepared? Not adequate? I'm a little lost here.

Not at all.

The argument from the anti-gun crowd is that the population does not need to be armed. Law enforcement is there to protect you and to take care of the problem. If someone is out to harm you, there are multiple ways to defend yourself. You should have a whistle... urinate on yourself... hide and call 911... etc. Each and every way they advocate has the basic premise of counting on a LEO to come to your rescue.

What I am saying is that after seeing the amount of resourses needed to stop just 1 untrained kid... do you (generic "you", not you specifically) really believe that a few local cops are going to be able to protect you if someone is intent on causing you harm?

... or would you rather be prepared to protect yourself and your family on your own terms, should you ever need to?

When it comes down to it, the person most capable of protecting you in a situation like that, is YOU.

[Torch Red Tim]

Originally Posted by RedLS1GTO

Are you implying that if we weren't over there with a military presence, these EXTREMISTS would suddenly be ok with us and leave us alone?

Their hatred and violence is to ANYBODY who believes differently than them. Look at the hundreds of individual terrorist attacks over the last decade. Almost every single 1 of them was carried out in countries with zero military presence in "their" lands. It has nothing to do with "our wars abroad". It has everything to do with the fact that they want to kill ANYBODY who does not agree with them and subscribe to their ways of life... which puts America at the very top of their list, regardless of where our military is.

Thinking otherwise is very naive.

The US has propped up brutal dictators in the Middle East and other places for a long time. See Iran history 1950s.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

do you really believe that a few local cops are going to be able to protect you if someone is intent on causing you harm?

Absolutely not. Never did.

or would you rather be prepared to protect yourself and your family on your own terms, should you ever need to?

Certainly. If someone breaks into my house, I'll haul out my bad-ass Winchester 22 and defend myself. If I'm out in public and someone assaults me? I'll have to make the best of it. We've discussed this in the past. I've never had ANY training outside of a gun safety course a million years ago. OK, TWO million, I'm old.

I think I've sorted out where my problem lies with the entire CCW debate. (I don't have any statistics to back this up, it's just my opinion) You can shoot all the targets and cans you want. But if you're standing there and some thug has a pistol pointed at you and your wife, how many of us would have the where with all to get ourselves out of this jam? I'm not against CCW. Not at all. But the concept makes me a bit nervous.

When it comes down to it, the person most capable of protecting you, is YOU.

No argument.

[...Whitepower...]

I was really annoyed this weekend when i had to go online to see coverage of the explosion in West TX and the gun bill vote. I think for every 3 hours of news coverage 10 minutes at the most was devoted to other national news stories (forget international) on the news networks. .

Oh and good job news networks teaching everyone how to make a pressure cooker bomb. Now in addition to potential gun violence w/ the mentally fuct people out there the national news networks taught them how to make a bomb too.... Sweet.

[Zed16]

Originally Posted by ...Whitepower...

I was really annoyed this weekend when i had to go online to see coverage of the explosion in West TX and the gun bill vote. I think for every 3 hours of news coverage 10 minutes at the most was devoted to other national news stories (forget international) on the news networks. .

Oh and good job news networks teaching everyone how to make a pressure cooker bomb. Now in addition to potential gun violence w/ the mentally fuct people out there the national news networks taught them how to make a bomb too.... Sweet.

Since you brought up West and the media, today I spoke with my employee whose nephew was killed in the explosion. The family is having to use police escorts to get through the media camping on the family's doorstep. They are prisoners in their own home.

[MEC5LADY]

When the reporters start showing their ignorance which is usually after the first day:

Oh, Come On Now, CNN

[71corv]

The post by "Thomas" above is quite interesting. I would ask: Why did you let yourself and wife get into that situation? (at gun point). Have you no knowledge of situation awareness? I have practiced and still practice with targets other than the tin cans you refer to. My families lives are too important to me to not go the extra step to protect them.

Gene

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by 71corv

The post by "Thomas" above is quite interesting. I would ask: Why did you let yourself and wife get into that situation? (at gun point). Have you no knowledge of situation awareness? I have practiced and still practice with targets other than the tin cans you refer to. My families lives are too important to me to not go the extra step to protect them.

Gene

"Quite interesting?" Huh.

Welcome anyway.

[Jeff '79]

Originally Posted by 71corv

The post by "Thomas" above is quite interesting. I would ask: Why did you let yourself and wife get into that situation? (at gun point). Have you no knowledge of situation awareness? I have practiced and still practice with targets other than the tin cans you refer to. My families lives are too important to me to not go the extra step to protect them.

Gene

It's all fun & games until you're in that situation.. I'm glad that I am prepared.

[AU Eagle]

And what about Texas, what happened there was equally saddening.

Maybe I feel a bit stronger because of the Fire/EMS personnel that lost their lives...my girlfriend is a volunteer EMT...maybe I'm a bit more sensitive because of that

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

What makes me nervous isn't the lifelong gun enthusiast. We have members here who obviously have many many years handling firearms. Some in LE, some in the Military, and to some it's a lifelong hobby.

It's the new guy. The new guy who less than one year ago had ZERO interest in guns, gun rights, and the CCW debate. The new guy with a six month old CCW permit who's suddenly "Prepared." The "Come on bad guy, let's play!" individuals. This group makes me nervous.

But, it's their constitutional right to bear arms and I support it wholeheartedly.

71corv, If your interested in my position, check out Will's post about the gun control bill going down.

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Thomas

You can shoot all the targets and cans you want. But if you're standing there and some thug has a pistol pointed at you and your wife, how many of us would have the where with all to get ourselves out of this jam? I'm not against CCW. Not at all. But the concept makes me a bit nervous.

I am in absolutely no way claiming to be some Rambo badass but I have seen more of those types of situations than I care to remember (military related, not as a civilian).

You are right in 1 sense... shooting at cans is obviously not the same. With that said, that practice, the training that makes drawing and firing second nature will help at least in part. I do also believe that any person carrying a gun should take it upon themselves to get the training required to make themselves useful in a SHTF scenario. Luckily, I was fortunate enough to be trained by some of the World's finest badasses and when those times did come, I knew exactly what to do... and was able to do it well. In return, I gladly pass that training on whenever possible.

Even in the case of your average Joe whose training consists of shooting at paper and cans, if someone decides to pull a gun on you and your wife, I would sure as hell rather have the option to fight back instead of being completely helpless at the mercy of some asshole. If I am going down, it will be on my terms. I can think of no worse feeling than being helpless as the ones you love are done harm.

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

any person carrying a gun should take it upon themselves to get the training required to make themselves useful in a SHTF scenario

Perfect.

If this was perhaps a requirement to obtaining a CCW permit, I'd feel a whole lot better about the entire situation. A WHOLE lot better.

[Sea Six]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Perfect.

If this was perhaps a requirement to obtaining a CCW permit, I'd feel a whole lot better about the entire situation. A WHOLE lot better.

That would open up the door for any group that didn't like guns to make the requirements so difficult that nobody would bother, or perhaps even qualify to get a gun carry permit.

It's one of those things that sounds good on paper until you realize what a slippery slope it is.

[RedLS1GTO]

Originally Posted by Sea Six

That would open up the door for any group that didn't like guns to make the requirements so difficult that nobody would bother, or perhaps even qualify to get a gun carry permit.

It's one of those things that sounds good on paper until you realize what a slippery slope it is.

That's why I was very exact in my wording with the "take it upon themselves" part. The fact that something is a good idea doesn't mean it should be mandated and regulated.

[JRD77VET]

Originally Posted by RedLS1GTO

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

It apparently took almost 9,000... that's a 9, with three 0s after it... 9,000 law enforcement officials including hundreds of armored vehicles, the FBI, and the National Guard to catch a 19 year old kid with some homemade explosives, a pistol, and absolutely zero combat training. But hey, if you want to believe that a few local LEOs will protect you when somebody has the intent of harming you... go for it, just don't try to force force your willful ignorance of reality on the rest of us.

Originally Posted by Thomas

I'm not sure I understand where you're going with this comment. Yes, it took a small army of LE to catch him, and he didn't have any combat training that we know of.

The kid was in hiding. I suspect if any of us decided to play hide and seek with LE it would take an equal amount of resources to find us providing the situation was the same of course.

Are you implying LE was less than prepared? Not adequate? I'm a little lost here.

Originally Posted by Thomas

What makes me nervous isn't the lifelong gun enthusiast. We have members here who obviously have many many years handling firearms. Some in LE, some in the Military, and to some it's a lifelong hobby.

It's the new guy. The new guy who less than one year ago had ZERO interest in guns, gun rights, and the CCW debate. The new guy with a six month old CCW permit who's suddenly "Prepared." The "Come on bad guy, let's play!" individuals. This group makes me nervous.

But, it's their constitutional right to bear arms and I support it wholeheartedly.

71corv, If your interested in my position, check out Will's post about the gun control bill going down.

You know what makes me nervous----- Regular law enforcement with military armorment.

Have we become so numb to "O" 's dog and pony show that we're willingly accepting full blown military hardware in the hands of police?

Why do they have it? What are they planning for that they already have that hardware?

[Torqaholic]

I haven't watched any of it because I don't have a TV and at work I watch the weather channel. Maybe if they harp on about it for another month or two some of you guys will shitcan your TVs too? Nawwwww

[Giraffe (He/Him)]

Originally Posted by RedLS1GTO

That's why I was very exact in my wording with the "take it upon themselves" part. The fact that something is a good idea doesn't mean it should be mandated and regulated.

I said "Perhaps" for the same reason.

RedLS1GTO's idea is a good one. If you're carrying for a specific situation, maybe get some training to prepare you if that situation presents itself.

We train our military and LE, what's the harm in training civilians?