Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 231
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    84
    If a padlock in a sock works in jail, I'm sure that a padlock at the end of a short cable, stashed in a pants pocket will work pretty well! Most of the time, you won't have time to rifle through your backpack to retrieve a weapon.
    You never know where a situation will go down. A co worker of mine, (mid 50s female) was waiting for a friend to pick her up and give her a ride to work at the Fry's on 60th street and Thomas, at about 10 PM. This mugger with a knife, sneaks up behind her and starts to yank on her backpack, threatening to stab her if she don't let go. Without thinking, she grabs a stethoscope she had draped around her neck and starts beating the **** out of him! Bystanders called the cops and the thug was arrested. Happy ending! Moral of story, you never know where it's going to happen and you need to have something within reach, right then and there!
    About guns. Remember the hiker up on the rim who had to use a gun to defend himself against a crazed dog owner? Well, he had a legal gun with permit and now he's doing life for murder. He's alive, but he'll never put foot on a trail again.
    There's no single best answer, but I think it's important to be aware of surroundings and respond accordingly.

  2. #102
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    mike,, that's why i said i would have to WONDER,, generally when there is a family situation,, especially with a kid involved,, the wife is going to be more likely to plead with the husband not to take such stupid risks putting their entire family in danger.

    i think its the younger single guys who are the most dangerous and more willing to risk everything.

  3. #103
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba Dinglespeed View Post
    Remember the hiker [in Prescott] who had to use a gun to defend himself against a crazed dog owner? Well, he had a legal gun with permit and now he's doing life for murder. He's alive, but he'll never put foot on a trail again.
    There's the problem with Mr Fish: He was unable to prove to a jury that your average person would have reacted the same way in the same situation.

  4. #104
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    mike,, that's why i said i would have to WONDER,, generally when there is a family situation,, especially with a kid involved,, the wife is going to be more likely to plead with the husband not to take such stupid risks putting their entire family in danger.

    i think its the younger single guys who are the most dangerous and more willing to risk everything.
    I know what you're sayin'... I am just not able to give scumbags even the slightest bit of credit for actually having a decent or moral bone in their body.

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Bubba Dinglespeed View Post
    About guns. Remember the hiker up on the rim who had to use a gun to defend himself against a crazed dog owner? Well, he had a legal gun with permit and now he's doing life for murder. He's alive, but he'll never put foot on a trail again.
    Fish's charge got overturned. He died earlier this year from cancer, though.

    Personally, I don't think Fish did anything wrong. He fried himself by talking to the cops without a lawyer. There was also some butthurt that he was carrying a Glock 20, which isn't a common LE weapon. 10mm Auto is good medicine for bears, lions, and two legged predators, though, so I can't fault anybody for that.

    Now, the burden of proof is on the prosecution instead of the defense that you were justified, so hopefully, that doesn't happen to anybody else.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Big_Games View Post
    I was ridding home from work late that night when I had stopped at the rest area along the canal near 7th Street and Northern to take a break. It's a 12 mile commute and I had just worked approximately 15 hours so I was tired. I was resting there for about 5 minutes when this thug runs up to me with a gun pulled out yelling at me to give him my phone and to empty out my backpack. He held me at gunpoint for about 10 minutes while I was emptying out contents of my backpack.

    I was trying to stall him by doing it very slowly and trying to talk him out of harming me. He kept threading to shoot me if I didn't hurry up. I was just hoping that somebody would pass by while this was occurring then maybe I could escape. I didn't want to just hand over all my property and let him shoot me and get away. I had a real bad vibe that he was going to shoot me anyways ... He was definitely tweaking on drugs so he was obviously not thinking rationally, I wasn't about to just be another helpless victim of a robbery and murder if I could help it.

    So after stalling him for several minutes I saw my chance just a he was getting aggressively more angry and getting ready to do something drastic I saw a light coming from a distance about 100 yards away on the bike path. I then pointed and said "is that the cops" as he turned away to look I threw my backpack at him and tackled him to the ground. I started punching him in the head with my right fist while using my left to try to pull the gun from his hand. At this point that light I saw was a man ridding a bike and he was just a few feet away. I shouted to the man to call 911 because I was being robbed by this guy with a gun. The guy backed away and said he was calling 911 now.

    While he was calling for help me and the thug were still in a scuffle in the ground. just when i was about to wrestle the gun from him he bite my arm, he then flung the gun in the air away from us and then I just started going to work on him... punching him repeatedly with both fists. Then I grabbed the dude's throat with both hands and started chocking him while slamming his head into the pavement repeatedly. During the whole struggle he was screaming for me to "please let him go"

    It's beyond me how I didn't knock this guy unconscious... It must of been the adrenalin rush he had from the Meth or PCP he was on. Either way at this point I was so angry and I started taunting him while kicking his ass... I told him he was going to be spending a very long time in prison when the cops get here. Then he shoved a long object into my eye caused me to release my grip on him.

    He then jumped on my bike and rode off before I could react. I was so pissed he got away. Well during the struggle he dropped his own cellphone behind and also a spare magazine clip for the gun. All of which were used to locate and identify the suspect. He got away with my bike and iPhone. I didn't get my phone service disconnected until several days later because I thought maybe the punk would be stupid enough to make calls with it to people he knows and that could be a way to locate and identify him also. The idiot placed several calls and texts to his friends and family members. lol he thought he had gotten away clean. Well detectives had him under surveillance no longer then 24 hours after the incident occurred.

    After about 5 days of surveillance they made the arrest. They were just waiting for enough evidence to make the arrest. Him using my iPhone is what sealed the deal.
    I would of choked him out and broken both of his arms

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    13
    IF I was in your same situation... I reccommend taking up some jiu-jitsu lessons.. never a bad idea.

  8. #108
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    ONLY YOU can decide what level of protection is appropriate for YOU, and with that said, it will be YOUR responsibliity to knows the laws as they pertain to YOUR choices.

    The beatdown crowd is as stupid as the shoot crowd ... Nothing good ever comes from these actions, and regardless of which camp you lean toward, you should give a lawyer a retainer, memorize their number, understand local laws to the best of your ability, and hope you never need to call your lawyer

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    ONLY YOU can decide what level of protection is appropriate for YOU, and with that said, it will be YOUR responsibliity to knows the laws as they pertain to YOUR choices.

    The beatdown crowd is as stupid as the shoot crowd ... Nothing good ever comes from these actions, and regardless of which camp you lean toward, you should give a lawyer a retainer, memorize their number, understand local laws to the best of your ability, and hope you never need to call your lawyer
    Nothing good should come if you decide to point a gun at somebody. If you decide to use a gun to exploit your fellow man, you deserve what happens and it warms my heart to hear of a POS getting shot.

    I'd like to know how human life simultaneously got so cheap and dear at the same time. Life is cheap because people kill each other for drugs, money, wearing the wrong color, fame, or whatever other petty reason there is. But, life is also so dear that we as a society demonize those of us who do decide that we want to protect ourselves. See Fish and Zimmerman. Doesn't make sense to me.

    People who prey on others are of no benefit or use to society. Fcuk them, and fcuk anybody who defends them.

    I stand by my initial opinion that the OP did good beating the perp, and my only regret is that OP didn't kill the guy instead.

  10. #110
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    There's the problem with Mr Fish: He was unable to prove to a jury that your average person would have reacted the same way in the same situation.
    i've followed that Fish case for what is it over 5 years now? He was interviewed a couple years ago and said that no matter the cause of the incident he regretted ever getting into the situation as it cost him so much money and time. Not being there...we can not know who's side of the story made sense, but its certainly got to involve 1 and maybe 2 morons to shoot someone on a trail. Seriously...what is the worst that has ever happened to you on a trail? By all accounts this was not a crime, but a trail conflict that got out of control What is wrong with a wounding shot from a .22, pepper spray etc? Had to be some seriously agro people. This situation should not be a positive example for anyone.

  11. #111
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    Nothing good should come if you decide to point a gun at somebody. If you decide to use a gun to exploit your fellow man, you deserve what happens and it warms my heart to hear of a POS getting shot.

    I'd like to know how human life simultaneously got so cheap and dear at the same time. Life is cheap because people kill each other for drugs, money, wearing the wrong color, fame, or whatever other petty reason there is. But, life is also so dear that we as a society demonize those of us who do decide that we want to protect ourselves. See Fish and Zimmerman. Doesn't make sense to me.

    People who prey on others are of no benefit or use to society. Fcuk them, and fcuk anybody who defends them.

    I stand by my initial opinion that the OP did good beating the perp, and my only regret is that OP didn't kill the guy instead.
    Like I said "Nothing good ever comes from these actions"

    Concerning the perp and the OP ... It could have ended in any fashion imaginable, and I am judging no one.

    As for my actions,
    I know what I would attempt in such a situation, and I would face the consequences that my decision might bring forth.
    Others would need to do the same ... And should consider all options, as part of a mental exercise in potentials and outcomes.

    None will be ideal, but some outcomes are obviously preferred.

  12. #112
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,788
    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post

    Lethal force is also acceptable in response to a physical alteration.
    Such as some tweeker tailor jumping out of the bushes and trying to hem your slacks

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,536
    Fish case? Two colossal morons left to their own devices.
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  14. #114
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    The beatdown crowd is as stupid as the shoot crowd ... Nothing good ever comes from these actions...
    Many times the bad guy dies. That is ALWAYS good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    I'd like to know how human life simultaneously got so cheap and dear at the same time. Life is cheap because people kill each other for drugs, money, wearing the wrong color, fame, or whatever other petty reason there is. But, life is also so dear that we as a society demonize those of us who do decide that we want to protect ourselves.
    EXACTLY. Life is so precious that no one wants to die. But not nearly enough people are willing to take a life that is absolutely worthless to save a life that likely has value.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    People who prey on others are of no benefit or use to society. fcuk them, and fcuk anybody who defends them.
    Agreed.

  15. #115
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    Many times the bad guy dies. That is ALWAYS good.


    EXACTLY. Life is so precious that no one wants to die. But not nearly enough people are willing to take a life that is absolutely worthless to save a life that likely has value.


    Agreed.
    I've already stated that one should retain a lawyer for such things !!

    Try telling that to the Judge/Jury

    Can't argue this !!!

  16. #116
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    4,816
    Nice Job! Here's to hoping he dies in prison!

  17. #117
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    Try telling that to the Judge/Jury
    Why would anyone have to feign sorrow over taking a life when that life severely deserved to be taken? ESPECIALLY, if taking that life was the only way to save my own or someone else's.

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,321
    Not being a black-and-white type of guy, can anyone define the precise circumstances when a life becomes "worthless" and worthy of plugging full of lead?

    I keep seeing "bad guy" thrown around. But how bad is bad?

    What I'm getting at is, let's say a guy is stealing your bike. He doesn't have any weapons, but he's broken into your garage. Is he "bad" enough to kill?

  19. #119
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,788
    Bad = someone threatening my life. If I'm forced to chose, he loses.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AKA Monkeybutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,318
    Quote Originally Posted by PhxChem View Post

    What I'm getting at is, let's say a guy is stealing your bike. He doesn't have any weapons, but he's broken into your garage. Is he "bad" enough to kill?
    This is the same guy that would probably rape your wife if he had the chance.

    Can you kill him for getting into your garage? Probably not a good idea. Will he destroy your family or ruin your life? Probably if he has a chance. To him it is like getting a promotion in his line of work.

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by PhxChem View Post
    Not being a black-and-white type of guy, can anyone define the precise circumstances when a life becomes "worthless" and worthy of plugging full of lead?

    I keep seeing "bad guy" thrown around. But how bad is bad?

    What I'm getting at is, let's say a guy is stealing your bike. He doesn't have any weapons, but he's broken into your garage. Is he "bad" enough to kill?


    To answer your question, yes, if he's in your home, he's legal to kill. Google the AZ "Castle Doctorine" laws. Unlawful forcible entry plus reasonable suspicion he's there to cause you harm or commit a felony(burglary) equals kill the bastard. Also, you have no duty to retreat first in the face of an attack.

    You guys need to remember, we're talking about Arizona. It's one of four states with constitutional carry. If you shoot a scumbag, nobody cares. Don't make stupid(or any comments) to the police about what happened without a lawyer. Ever since 2006, the prosecutor has to prove that you were not justified to shoot. Not the other way around.

    You guys don't have to worry about what you'll say to the judge or jury. If you act within the parameters of the law, you'll never see either. Arizona isn't soft on criminals, they're not going to prosecute you for killing somebody who had it coming. That's the DA stand to gain for doing a witch hunt on a legal citizen who protected himself?

  22. #122
    bland
    Reputation: m77ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,289
    Whats better than AZ logic? Internet logic! Whats the best type of logic? AZ logic on the internet! You boys never disappoint. Thanks for the entertainment.

    Oh, I'm also glad that the OP is okay and the jerk is in jail.

  23. #123
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by PhxChem View Post
    Not being a black-and-white type of guy, can anyone define the precise circumstances when a life becomes "worthless" and worthy of plugging full of lead? I keep seeing "bad guy" thrown around. But how bad is bad?
    This will vary to each person and, in all honesty, is this really that difficult to define? Most of the time "bad" is defined as having the ability to cause grave bodily harm or death. A guy pulls a gun or knife on you in an effort to obtain something of yours. This guy needs to be dead badly.

    My version of bad, were I King, would be substantially loosened.
    Thief = Dead
    Drug Dealer = Dead
    Murderer = Dead
    Gangster = Dead
    Rapist = Anally raped with a rusty baseball bat then dead.
    Child Molester = Anally raped with the same rusty bat, then beaten severely enough so that he dies very slowly and very painfully. Probably would be a good idea if several people took a dump on him while he died.

    Quote Originally Posted by PhxChem View Post
    What I'm getting at is, let's say a guy is stealing your bike. He doesn't have any weapons, but he's broken into your garage. Is he "bad" enough to kill?
    By the law you (unfortunately) can not shoot someone for stealing your property. But, if you are in fear for your life (especially if you are in your own home thanks to the "Make my Day" and "Castle Doctrine" laws passed many places) you can kill him.

    I was just talking with a buddy as we rode about this kinda thing. The problem with society nowadays is NOT that there are so many bad guys around. The problem is that so much of society feels it's NOT THEIR job to protect their own lives and property. Who's is it?

    It has been proven and ruled in many cases that the police have NO duty to protect anyone. The police is reactionary. They will be there to mop up the blood of your loved ones and hopefully catch who did it. It is VERY unlikely that they will stop anyone (very many) from being killed if someone wants to kill them.

    If everyone that was ever killed had the means and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, the DESIRE to save their own asses there'd be a lot of good guys around still as well as a lot of dead bad guys who couldn't do the same thing to someone else.

    But they don't. Society is sheep.

  24. #124
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    This will vary to each person and, in all honesty, is this really that difficult to define? Most of the time "bad" is defined as having the ability to cause grave bodily harm or death. A guy pulls a gun or knife on you in an effort to obtain something of yours. This guy needs to be dead badly.

    My version of bad, were I King, would be substantially loosened.
    Thief = Dead
    Drug Dealer = Dead
    Murderer = Dead
    Gangster = Dead
    Rapist = Anally raped with a rusty baseball bat then dead.
    Child Molester = Anally raped with the same rusty bat, then beaten severely enough so that he dies very slowly and very painfully. Probably would be a good idea if several people took a dump on him while he died.


    By the law you (unfortunately) can not shoot someone for stealing your property. But, if you are in fear for your life (especially if you are in your own home thanks to the "Make my Day" and "Castle Doctrine" laws passed many places) you can kill him.

    I was just talking with a buddy as we rode about this kinda thing. The problem with society nowadays is NOT that there are so many bad guys around. The problem is that so much of society feels it's NOT THEIR job to protect their own lives and property. Who's is it?

    It has been proven and ruled in many cases that the police have NO duty to protect anyone. The police is reactionary. They will be there to mop up the blood of your loved ones and hopefully catch who did it. It is VERY unlikely that they will stop anyone (very many) from being killed if someone wants to kill them.

    If everyone that was ever killed had the means and, MOST IMPORTANTLY, the DESIRE to save their own asses there'd be a lot of good guys around still as well as a lot of dead bad guys who couldn't do the same thing to someone else.

    But they don't. Society is sheep.
    hey i'm just curious...
    the guy who sells legally to a liscencsed medical marijuana patient, and who is also a liscensed care-provider. And then makes a few extra bucks selling a bag to someone for recreation? Still dead?

    kneejerk idiotic posturing like this is why no one can discuss common sense gun laws and everyone falls back to pointless theory 250 years frozen in stone. Enjoy your theory. I'm sure Harold Fish did.

  25. #125
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    I could be wrong, but doubt many that say kill the bastages. Are out looking to pull a weapon at the drop of a hat. The thought of not being able to protect myself or others while the criminal has an illegal weapon is frightening.

    The story of Mr. Fish could be based on any topic, when you have both a political system and biased Judge!

    by Gerard Valentino
    The prosecution of Harold Fish reignited the debate over self-defense laws in America. For those not familiar with the story, Mr. Fish was convicted in Coconino County, Arizona of 2nd degree murder despite staying on site and rendering aid after being forced to shoot a violent attacker.
    Had Mr. Fish fled, the remote area where the shooting took place meant he was unlikely to be identified.
    Despite the opinion of the deputy that processed the crime scene and a mountain of evidence that proved Mr. Fish acted in self-defense, Coconino County authorities bowed to political pressure and pursued a baseless murder charge. When the judge excluded relevant evidence during the subsequent trial, it left the defense at a disadvantage and led to a guilty verdict.
    Thankfully, Mr. Fish won his appeal and is currently a free man. His story, however, shows how laws in America put law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage when forced to use self defense.
    Buckeye Firearms Association attorney Ken Hanson constantly reminds citizens to wait for legal representation before talking to police after a self-defense shooting. Yet most honest citizens think that since they are innocent, it can't do any harm.
    Adding to the confusion, in most states self-defense is an affirmative defense, which means if the case goes to trial, the law-abiding citizen has to prove the act of self-preservation was legally justified. That means if the case makes it to court, the honest citizen sits at the defendant's table and the criminal that tried to commit a violent crime is considered the victim.
    The establishment media coverage of gun owners also works against law-abiding citizens who use deadly force.
    By painting gun owners as a semi-literate knuckle-dragging fringe group, the establishment media has furthered the myth that anyone carrying a gun for self-defense is a crazed vigilante. Since millions of Americans are now legally carrying guns, nothing can be further from the truth. But, because gun owners are portrayed that way in popular culture, it becomes an accepted stereotype.
    Oddly enough, the violent past of Mr. Fish's attacker was ruled by the judge to be inadmissible. But Mr. Fish's history as a gun owner was allowed into evidence during the trial, and the prosecutor used it to portray him as a blood-thirsty killer.
    So, according to the prosecutor and judge in this case, the mere act of exercising the right to bear arms is justification for questioning a citizen's mental state, motives and character.
    As an honest citizen, Mr. Fish did what he considered to be the right thing by calling the authorities and then putting his trust in the criminal justice system. Instead of finding salvation and legal protection, however, his decision cost him three years in prison, and likely will bankrupt his family.
    Everyone wants the victim of a violent attack to notify the authorities after a self-defense shooting, but the persecution of Harold Fish will surely make the next armed citizen think twice.
    Such an outcome is unacceptable, and every American needs to be outraged. Yet, because Mr. Fish used a gun in self-defense, his nightmare barely caused a ripple outside of Arizona; A sad commentary on how self-defense cases are viewed in America today.
    The truth is if someone like Harold Fish can end up in jail, anyone can. He was simply going about his normal day when a violent attacker forced him into a no-win situation. Then, an unjust prosecutor used Mr. Fish's choice to exercise the God-given right to bear arms against him.
    That should never happen in America.
    Gerard Valentino, a former military intelligence analyst, is a member of the Buckeye Firearms Foundation Board of Directors and the author of "The Valentino Chronicles – Observations of a Middle Class Conservative," available through the Buckeye Firearms Association store.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  26. #126
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    I could be wrong, but doubt many that say kill the bastages. Are out looking to pull a weapon at the drop of a hat. The thought of not being able to protect myself or others while the criminal has an illegal weapon is frightening.

    The story of Mr. Fish could be based on any topic, when you have both a political system and biased Judge!

    by Gerard Valentino
    The prosecution of Harold Fish reignited the debate over self-defense laws in America. For those not familiar with the story, Mr. Fish was convicted in Coconino County, Arizona of 2nd degree murder despite staying on site and rendering aid after being forced to shoot a violent attacker.
    Had Mr. Fish fled, the remote area where the shooting took place meant he was unlikely to be identified.
    Despite the opinion of the deputy that processed the crime scene and a mountain of evidence that proved Mr. Fish acted in self-defense, Coconino County authorities bowed to political pressure and pursued a baseless murder charge. When the judge excluded relevant evidence during the subsequent trial, it left the defense at a disadvantage and led to a guilty verdict.
    Thankfully, Mr. Fish won his appeal and is currently a free man. His story, however, shows how laws in America put law-abiding citizens at a disadvantage when forced to use self defense.
    Buckeye Firearms Association attorney Ken Hanson constantly reminds citizens to wait for legal representation before talking to police after a self-defense shooting. Yet most honest citizens think that since they are innocent, it can't do any harm.
    Adding to the confusion, in most states self-defense is an affirmative defense, which means if the case goes to trial, the law-abiding citizen has to prove the act of self-preservation was legally justified. That means if the case makes it to court, the honest citizen sits at the defendant's table and the criminal that tried to commit a violent crime is considered the victim.
    The establishment media coverage of gun owners also works against law-abiding citizens who use deadly force.
    By painting gun owners as a semi-literate knuckle-dragging fringe group, the establishment media has furthered the myth that anyone carrying a gun for self-defense is a crazed vigilante. Since millions of Americans are now legally carrying guns, nothing can be further from the truth. But, because gun owners are portrayed that way in popular culture, it becomes an accepted stereotype.
    Oddly enough, the violent past of Mr. Fish's attacker was ruled by the judge to be inadmissible. But Mr. Fish's history as a gun owner was allowed into evidence during the trial, and the prosecutor used it to portray him as a blood-thirsty killer.
    So, according to the prosecutor and judge in this case, the mere act of exercising the right to bear arms is justification for questioning a citizen's mental state, motives and character.
    As an honest citizen, Mr. Fish did what he considered to be the right thing by calling the authorities and then putting his trust in the criminal justice system. Instead of finding salvation and legal protection, however, his decision cost him three years in prison, and likely will bankrupt his family.
    Everyone wants the victim of a violent attack to notify the authorities after a self-defense shooting, but the persecution of Harold Fish will surely make the next armed citizen think twice.
    Such an outcome is unacceptable, and every American needs to be outraged. Yet, because Mr. Fish used a gun in self-defense, his nightmare barely caused a ripple outside of Arizona; A sad commentary on how self-defense cases are viewed in America today.
    The truth is if someone like Harold Fish can end up in jail, anyone can. He was simply going about his normal day when a violent attacker forced him into a no-win situation. Then, an unjust prosecutor used Mr. Fish's choice to exercise the God-given right to bear arms against him.
    That should never happen in America.
    Gerard Valentino, a former military intelligence analyst, is a member of the Buckeye Firearms Foundation Board of Directors and the author of "The Valentino Chronicles – Observations of a Middle Class Conservative," available through the Buckeye Firearms Association store.
    for a post attempting to portray the subtleties of the situation, this fails miserably. Is there a single thing that asks, not whether Fish should carry or even shoot to protect himself, but whether he should kill? This is my point...lots of people carry, as is their rights, and we are all arguing over right to carry and right to defend instead of appropriate level of force. Or if the people carrying are just plain dumb. If Fish had wounded the guy, this would be a nonstory and everyone would be moving on with their lives. But NO ONE is willing to deal in the details that make reality. No one wants to humanize the situation, only yammer about rights and theory. Half the people in my office started carrying this past week. One of them has never been physical or athletic in his life, and is carrying now without a CCW and with 2 hours training ever in the use of firearms. Is this a good idea? Not whether its his right, but is it a good idea? Do you want to be in a small space with a guy with that little training?

  27. #127
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    I agree not everyone is the right person to carry a weapon. But who is the judge of this, you! Not everyone should be behind the wheel of an automobile, but many that should not are! Do you feel it is your right to pick and choose who gets to have these rights in this country.

    What the above shows, is Mr. Fish made a call in which he was found free of liability. Only reason it achieved this attention was a prosecutor and judge trying to set an example and/or making a name for themselves.

    Mr.Ball, there is no easy fix for this issue. Maybe we should back up and find out if the prep was here legally or not? What was his criminal record! How many times had he been let free to commit more crimes? Address these issues before blaming someone for defending themselves.

    I believe the Constitution states we can defend our rights. Do you feel the Constitution needs to be rewritten?

    Merry Christmas everyone, off to a Christmas party.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AKA Monkeybutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,318
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    Half the people in my office started carrying this past week.


    Shows you how completely irrational people are being.

    Remember people were making a run on banks when the government and irresponsible folks drove our economy off the cliff in 2008? Folks with 10K in the bank were panicking and making runs to withdraw everything even though the account was insured for 100K. This last week has that same panic/fear going on and some smart people that would normally have good sense are acting off emotions and running scared. You can’t fault them, everyone acts different under stress but it usually does not turn out for the better from knee jerk reactions when dealing with panicked people.

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    One of them has never been physical or athletic in his life, and is carrying now without a CCW and with 2 hours training ever in the use of firearms. Is this a good idea? Not whether its his right, but is it a good idea? Do you want to be in a small space with a guy with that little training?
    Personally, I wouldn't advise somebody who barely knows which end of the gun is the dangerous one to up and start carrying. I do feel that most reasonable people are responsible and mature enough to carry.

    The mindset is the stumbling block. All our lives, we, as decent members of society are taught, "don't point guns at people" "thou shalt not kill." Of course, when you have to lethally defend yourself, that flies in the face of all that. That's hard for a lot of people to overcome. A lot of otherwise good cops have died because they were reluctant to apply deadly force in a timely manner. The whole life being cheap and dear thing.

    If you see something that makes your neck hair stand up, put your hand on the gun, or even draw it and leave it at your side. But, if you're presented with the need to actually get a sight picture on somebody, shoot. Shoot right then. Shoot him until he falls. You don't carry a gun to deter. You don't carry to scare them off, or shoot them in the knee to warn them. You carry to take the life of another human before they take yours. That's heavy. That's the heaviest thing there is. If you can't accept that one day you might have to kill somebody's son, father, brother, friend, cousin, or nephew, you shouldn't carry.

    I'm proud that AZ is forward thinking enough to recognize it's citizen's right to defend themselves, but it's not for everybody.

  30. #130
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,411
    I think under extraordinary circumstances, many, maybe most people, act irrationally. It's human nature and to some extent, can't be helped. So if someone "blows away" another human being that was threatening or even just bothering him, it may have been a gross misuse of force, but in that situation it's difficult to not expect that kind of variability to the human response. I keep going back to that situation where the driver in the big truck killed the cyclist because he cut the cyclist off and the cyclist was beating on his truck. You're there in your big safe truck, with the doors locked. It's a dude with a 17lb bicycle, it's not going to hurt you and IT'S NO REASON TO KILL a human being. Stuff like that is going to happen though. How do we stop it? Yes, it frightens me. A few years ago on I-40 coming back from Flagstaff one day some guy pulled a gun out in the car next to me (on the highway). WTF is wrong with people?
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  31. #131
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    I agree not everyone is the right person to carry a weapon. But who is the judge of this, you! Not everyone should be behind the wheel of an automobile, but many that should not are! Do you feel it is your right to pick and choose who gets to have these rights in this country.

    What the above shows, is Mr. Fish made a call in which he was found free of liability. Only reason it achieved this attention was a prosecutor and judge trying to set an example and/or making a name for themselves.

    Mr.Ball, there is no easy fix for this issue. Maybe we should back up and find out if the prep was here legally or not? What was his criminal record! How many times had he been let free to commit more crimes? Address these issues before blaming someone for defending themselves.

    I believe the Constitution states we can defend our rights. Do you feel the Constitution needs to be rewritten?

    Merry Christmas everyone, off to a Christmas party.
    No, I do not for a minute think I am the judge. Have I once said he should not have been carrying or was wrong to defend himself? only that there is a very significant issue to examine when one guy is dead and he was unarmed. And I bemoan that people, like you Cycle64 in your above post, seem to focus only on rights and the Constitution. High falutin, abstract, with a giant reality gap. Step back from rights, rhetoric etc to just consider plain old stupid, plain old angry or scared or otherwise piss-poor judgment. Did a person need to get hit 3 times in the chest when the other person was unarmed? Answer that...did a guy need to die IF a non-lethal alternative was available. It could be you or me on the other end of that. Just as you accuse me of judging, should Fish have judged?

    Eazy E - I do agree with a lot of your comments about acting with purpose. But clearly, here, even after acquital and back-and-forth...its not clear a guy should have died and 2 lives been ruined. In the OPs case, sure, different story. But your single-mindedness of purpose troubles me when there is ambiguity which inevitably exists in many situations.

    As for the actual judge, he was absolutely right in discarding testimony on the victim\attacker's prior history BECAUSE the question was about what a reasonable person could know in that moment. The guy could have been nuts, but was he threatening then? Any other testimony is simply heresay. That is what judges are supposed to do. The attacker\victim's past can not be relevant, because it biases that characterization of the moment which must be seen from the hypothetical 3rd party's pov. To that fact, the shooter's mindset and history IS relevant because it absolutely bears on the moment. It may seem wrong, but it is absolutely correct for the Judge to have decided that. On this point that is a valid ruling for THIS situation. If a cop did this, there would be a storm of controversy.

    Gun advocates are all about the 2nd amendment and commons sense is ignored, gun control advocates are equally stupid in thinking the gun plain and simple is the problem and likewise common sense is ignored. You, MonkeyButt, Eazy in all your recent response are mostly thoughtful and I deeply appreciate that. We can have differences of perspective, but agree that this is a serious topic with serious consequences for all involved and THINK rather than react. That the NRA would react to the Newton shootings without even giving a nod to the fact that *maybe* assault weapons and extended mags are worth discussing is just disgusting. Not saying they need to concede ground, but fer crissakes to not even be willing to discuss modifications to the discussion...? The NRA exists to further a zero-sum solution, they are an organization with their own internal agenda to further their interests and survive, and we all know the situation is not so black and white. The law is 250 years old, a lot has changed. I am not saying take away the right to carry, only that the Constitution is living and breathing and influenced by day-to-day jurisprudence. Just as the NRA likes to make you think its a slippery slope from banning machine guns to taking away all arms, should the average person be allowed to own an RPG? No, of course not...common sense says not. But the flipside of the NRA's zero-sum approach to any gun legislation is that ALL people should be able to own RPGs because they have a right to bear arms against the tyrannical government. Does that sound nuts...do you need an RPG?

    Please, as you advocate your positions (and for the record I believe people should be allowed to carry, even if I personally am conflicted on it), think about the day-to-day consequences of your actions as they affect real people in the real world. I think most of us would end up in relatively close consensus if we all could do that and take the philosophers out of the discussion. The NRA are philosophers, not governors.
    Last edited by chollaball; 12-24-2012 at 09:44 PM.

  32. #132
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    i know one of the NRA guys said something defensive along the line of "cars kill more people, do we ban them too?"
    well, you do need to take a few months of instruction to get a driver's license,, pass medical tests, written tests, driving tests, follow speed limits and a buttload of other safety (and courtesy) rules,, carry liability insurance, etc,,,
    so the NRA wants to compare the danger of cars to the danger of guns, yet god forbid the idea of gun buyers having to go thru such a lengthy licensing process,, including the hassle of background checks at gun shows?
    but i guess its okay for driving rules to be stricter because cars weren't specifically outlined in the constitution?

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,658
    ^ Cars don't kill people, people kill people.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    421
    In the split seconds that this type of thing happens it is wishfull thinking that people who choose to be armed have received training , advanced training and hopefully more training therefore they respond and don't react to the situation. Having been in a similar situation (auto car jack in N. Long Beach,Ca) nothing triggers the adrenaline than having a gun pointed in your face. Police and Military have developed there habits when it comes to close quarter combat and a few days at the range hardly qualifies a person to make the instinctive correct decision . "Dead Men tell no tales " may be cool to see someone say in the movies or in a video game however that bravado does not embrace the persons reality who pulls that trigger still has to "cope" with their choice after they have killed. This thread reminds me why although I own some very nice weapons I choose not to carry and if the Griz or Mountain Lion attacks me on the trail.... my # was up + I'm to old slow and frikin clumsy to draw by the time the predator has attacked .

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,658
    It's to bad you didn't have one of these in your backpack. You could have poped a cap in his ass!

  36. #136
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    the guy who sells legally to a liscencsed medical marijuana patient, and who is also a liscensed care-provider. And then makes a few extra bucks selling a bag to someone for recreation? Still dead?

    kneejerk idiotic posturing like this is why no one can discuss common sense gun laws and everyone falls back to pointless theory 250 years frozen in stone. Enjoy your theory. I'm sure Harold Fish did.
    Sounds like you just described a perfectly legal transaction. Why would that person be dead?

    Plus, I think drugs should be legal. All of them. We need more overdoses to clean this filthy-ass gene pool.

    But, there's nothing kneejerk about it. There are FAR TOO MANY people walking this planet that do nothing for society other than to keep the police busy. Many obviously feel differently but I don't see a single reason to keep career criminals alive.

    And we have tens of thousands of "common sense" gun laws on the books. Not a single one of them does ANYTHING to deter someone from committing a crime if they are intent on doing it. This should be painfully evident to anyone who reads the paper or watches the news even occasionally.

    Is there anyone out there that is so stupid, and wants to admit it, that they think one more gun law would've kept 26 children and teachers alive in CT?

    And Harold Fish was obviously an idiot or he wouldn't have gotten in trouble.

    I almost forgot one of my top "dead" categories: Drunk Drivers.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by Javelina View Post
    Police and Military have developed there habits when it comes to close quarter combat and a few days at the range hardly qualifies a person to make the instinctive correct decision .
    Aaaahhh yes, the old police highly trained crack shot mercenaries with way more training than the average subject.

    It's not really true.

    NYPD shooting stats show hits & misses - NYPOST.com

    Over the past 10 years, city cops fired 4,702 bullets, accidentally pulled the trigger 323 times, and missed 78 percent of their intended targets, according to data The Post culled from a decade's worth of NYPD annual firearm-discharge reports.

  38. #138
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    Why would anyone have to feign sorrow over taking a life when that life severely deserved to be taken? ESPECIALLY, if taking that life was the only way to save my own or someone else's.
    I'll suggest you research those who have been in this situation.

    It has nothing to do with sorrow, and everything to do with a major life changing event that you can't walk away from.

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,153
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    ^ Cars don't kill people, people kill people.
    Ever see the movie Christine?

  40. #140
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    I could be wrong, but doubt many that say kill the bastages. Are out looking to pull a weapon at the drop of a hat. The thought of not being able to protect myself or others while the criminal has an illegal weapon is frightening.
    FYI: A single blow from a fist has killed.
    Therefore a weapon is not a requirement for a life-threatening situation.

    The problem is,
    Some people act all macho in the Internet, and forget that such words can be used against them in both civil and criminal court.

    Meet the threat with an equal level of violence is more than sufficient to describe ones potential actions.

    Pre-Passing judgement and rendering verdicts is the equivelent of providing evidence for premeditation, IMO.

  41. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    421
    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    Aaaahhh yes, the old police highly trained crack shot mercenaries with way more training than the average subject.

    It's not really true.

    NYPD shooting stats show hits & misses - NYPOST.com
    Easy - Merry Christmas and a cantankerous New Year! This guy does not read that tabloid...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Robbed at gunpoint for my 2011 Trek X-Cal-img_8536.jpg  


  42. #142
    Daniel the Dog
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,742
    Was Gomez an illegal alien?

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,781
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    i know one of the NRA guys said something defensive along the line of "cars kill more people, do we ban them too?"
    well, you do need to take a few months of instruction to get a driver's license,, pass medical tests, written tests, driving tests, follow speed limits and a buttload of other safety (and courtesy) rules,, carry liability insurance, etc,,,
    so the NRA wants to compare the danger of cars to the danger of guns, yet god forbid the idea of gun buyers having to go thru such a lengthy licensing process,, including the hassle of background checks at gun shows?
    but i guess its okay for driving rules to be stricter because cars weren't specifically outlined in the constitution?
    The second amendment was written to protect us from the government so please tell how that is possible if the government regulates which individuals the second amendment applies to? Remember, driving is a priviledge, gun ownership is in the constitution, the ability to protect yourself from harm is a God given right.
    Killing it with close inspection.

  44. #144
    Just Joshin' ya!
    Reputation: PrincipalRider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,981
    Quote Originally Posted by FireLikeIYA View Post
    The second amendment was written to protect us from the government so please tell how that is possible if the government regulates which individuals the second amendment applies to? Remember, driving is a priviledge, gun ownership is in the constitution, the ability to protect yourself from harm is a God given right.
    The government places limits on rights all the time. Protests can be regulated to time, place and manner. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, there are times when the government doesn't need a warrant. A person cannot own an armed tank or a nuclear bomb because the government can place reasonable limits on the right to bear arms. Given that our country has a history of placing limits on rights, it seems reasonable to expect that a mentally unstable person cannot gain access to guns or that all guns need to be registered and their owner needs to be background checked.
    Getting a dropper post is like getting a bidet. I didn't know I needed one until I get one and boy, does my ass thank me.

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,781
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincipalRider View Post
    The government places limits on rights all the time. Protests can be regulated to time, place and manner. You can't yell fire in a crowded theater, there are times when the government doesn't need a warrant. A person cannot own an armed tank or a nuclear bomb because the government can place reasonable limits on the right to bear arms. Given that our country has a history of placing limits on rights, it seems reasonable to expect that a mentally unstable person cannot gain access to guns or that all guns need to be registered and their owner needs to be background checked.
    No, it all sounds logical (just like a lot of things sound logical) but history does tell that your two limits on gun ownership have been the precursors for every modern society to ban gun ownership. I am not afraid of guns or loonies because the number of incidents are so low. I think before we start talking about going to those extreme measures the probability rate needs to be higher. Just because something is in the news today or even tomorrow doesnt mean it is happening down the street.
    Killing it with close inspection.

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by PrincipalRider View Post
    Given that our country has a history of placing limits on rights, it seems reasonable to expect that a mentally unstable person cannot gain access to guns or that all guns need to be registered and their owner needs to be background checked.
    Why don't they just make it illegal to kill people? I mean, going on the mentality that more laws works, just making killing people illegal will solve the problem, right? Making drunk driving illegal sure did wonders for stopping that. Prohibition sure lived up to it's intended purpose too.

    What's gun registration do? The people who you don't need to worry about will line up to comply, while the people you do need to worry about, they won't. Criminal types typically don't go to the local FFL and show ID to buy the Lorcin they want to use in a robbery. Background checks, same thing. Nobody goes to a dealer to buy the guns they want to use for a crime. Lanza stole his from his mother.

    England has some of the most wacko gun laws in the civilized world, yet they have rates of gun violence and stabbings that are very disproportionate. Why? Could it possibly be because criminal scumbags don't care what laws they break and if they want a gun, they'll get one, regardless of what some hosebag politician says?

  47. #147
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,411
    Well, the fact is that the cat is out of the bag, so to speak. There are people that own dozens upon dozens of guns, sometimes hundreds, flooding the market so to speak, and making it easy for criminals and anyone else to buy them. How? They get sold at gun shows, pawn shops, sold on the street, stolen and they start to fall through the cracks due to how flooded the market is and how many transactions are taking place. I know personally of some gun transactions that shouldn't have taken place, but that's the system we've built. How many of us own 20+ bikes? There are plenty of gun-nuts out there that own 20+ guns though and maybe a small percentage of them get into the wrong hands, but it's because there are so many to start with, it ends up being significant. This is the problem, we are absolutely flooded with guns. Someone gets pissed off? Go grab a gun. Often times legally bought, but people are unpredictable and in exceptional situations, they may not act rationally. Our gun-culture has enabled the killings, due simply to how many there are. Putting more restrictions on the types of guns or something like that won't really do anything. Look at all the crazies right now that are lining up to buy AR15s? How many have been bought? I bet the numbers are staggering (overall numbers in households). You don't have THAT MANY guns and expect that human beings are not going to go for the irrational solution and kill people more often than not. That is the problem. That is the difference between us and other nations IMO. Many other civilized nations have guns, but they have the laws in place that prevent it from getting to the point like it is here. They actually set some pretty good examples of sound policy and laws (Canada, others), unfortunately it's not going to do much with the hundreds of millions of guns we have out there in houses. Now we are at this point. 99% of them should be melted down and made into bicycles.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  48. #148
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    let me get this right.

    -dangerous assault weapons were not spelled out in the constitution, but they should automatically fall under the 2nd amendment.
    -dangerous cars were not around spelled out in the constitution, but they are okay to regulate?

    any rights only extend to the point where they begin to infringe on others' rights.
    when your neighbor is stockpiling high powered weapons and you have kids,, your right to not have to **** yourself worrying about it everyday is being infringed.

    and please dont pinch the god loaf as an endorsement...

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    let me get this right.

    -dangerous assault weapons were not spelled out in the constitution, but they should automatically fall under the 2nd amendment.
    -dangerous cars were not around spelled out in the constitution, but they are okay to regulate?

    any rights only extend to the point where they begin to infringe on others' rights.
    when your neighbor is stockpiling high powered weapons and you have kids,, your right to not have to **** yourself worrying about it everyday is being infringed.

    and please dont pinch the god loaf as an endorsement...
    If your neighbor owns guns and you are sh!tting yourself worrying about it, you're the one with a problem, not him. A gun is like any other mechanical object, it can't operate without human input. A bus can be used to take a bunch of nuns to choir practice, or it could be used to run into a school cafeteria. Is a bus inherently evil? If somebody ran a bus into a bunch of kids, would you denounce "assault vechicles" and say how no reasonable man needs more than 8,000lbs GVW? The bus didn't do anything, it's the human that's evil.

    I own guns, multiple guns. I even own some of those "assault weapons" with the "high capacity assault clips" That's the first thing I did once I was 18. You know why, because 'Merica!, that's why. My dad had guns around all my childhood. My grandfather bought a Winchester Model 12 at JC Penney for $80 when he was 12 years old. Pretty much all males on my dad's side own guns, and it's pretty heavy on my mom's side too. Nobody ever killed anybody. Now, ducks and pheasants, that's another story.

    Point I'm trying to make is, worrying about what guns your neighbor has just means you're the unstable one. The fear mongering about OK Corral, and people going off, and traffic dispute killings, that by and large doesn't happen. The day to day people like you and me, you don't need to worry about.

    One of my favorites. Weep. Weep hard.


  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AKA Monkeybutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,318
    Are we ready to stop this silly thread?

    Let's get to some biking. Post some photos of bike parts Santa brought you. If you want to post off topic, post some Ms. Clause pics Post a ride you did this week.

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,781
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    let me get this right.

    -dangerous assault weapons were not spelled out in the constitution, but they should automatically fall under the 2nd amendment....
    Actually, at the time the constitution was written almost all weapons were privately owned including the canons. The revolutionary war, which does pre-date the constitution, was fought almost entirely with private weapons. When the second amendment was written it was made as short and to the point for a reason...

    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    -dangerous cars were not around spelled out in the constitution, but they are okay to regulate?...
    Being able to drive on public roads is considered a privilege...not an inalienable right but I see your point. If you get in too many accidents or speed too much you lose your license. Kind of like being convicted of a felony and you lose some of your constitutional rights (Like the right to bear arms)... although, as you probably heard, most criminals do not obey the law.

    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    any rights only extend to the point where they begin to infringe on others' rights.
    when your neighbor is stockpiling high powered weapons and you have kids,, your right to not have to **** yourself worrying about it everyday is being infringed.
    ...
    How does this infringe on any of your rights? Did he threaten you? That obviously would be against the law and I could understand your reasoning... otherwise you are just stereotyping. According to Wikipedia, practically all gun crimes are caused by those in the 14-24 age bracket being dominantly black followed by Hispanic males and in metropolitan areas... if you want to stereotype that should help you narrow it down... and depending on where you live, that may or may not help you sleep better at night. Either way, 14-24 year olds can't afford to hoard guns...and definitely not the ammo! Gun crimes are also at one of the lowest levels in recent history but I guess you wouldn't know that if you constantly watch the for-profit news stations..
    Killing it with close inspection.

  52. #152
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    let me get this right.

    -dangerous assault weapons were not spelled out in the constitution, but they should automatically fall under the 2nd amendment.
    -dangerous cars were not around spelled out in the constitution, but they are okay to regulate?

    any rights only extend to the point where they begin to infringe on others' rights.
    when your neighbor is stockpiling high powered weapons and you have kids,, your right to not have to **** yourself worrying about it everyday is being infringed.

    and please dont pinch the god loaf as an endorsement...
    Bernays' Ideas on Propaganda Continue to Haunt Americans

    When Americans see the bizarre responses of the mainstream media and the progressive politicians to tragedies such as the Tucson shootings — for instance, the proposal to ban rhetoric or symbols perceived to be violent — many wonder how the country has come to this strange place where elitists are moving to gain control at the expense of individual liberties. Perhaps one need not look past the Woodrow Wilson administration for the answer.
    Educate ... Please.

    Michael Badnarik's Constitution Class 1 of 43 - YouTube

  53. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,536
    Quote Originally Posted by m77ranger View Post
    Whats better than AZ logic? Internet logic! Whats the best type of logic? AZ logic on the internet! You boys never disappoint. Thanks for the entertainment.

    Oh, I'm also glad that the OP is okay and the jerk is in jail.
    Yeeeeesssss......ROTFLOL!
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  54. #154
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    This thread has run it course. People like guns and people dislike guns. Harold Fish was an idiot, yet does not represent the majority of gun owners.

    Can we move on to some riding stroke or at least debate when Skinny Tire will turn on his A/C.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  55. #155
    Meatbomb
    Reputation: Phillbo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    5,788
    I'm curious what people hunt with an AR 15?

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AKA Monkeybutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    I'm curious what people hunt with an AR 15?
    Black bear, wild boars, deer and everything smaller.

  57. #157
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    I'm curious what people hunt with an AR 15?
    Chupacabra.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by AKA Monkeybutt View Post
    Black bear, wild boars, deer and everything smaller.
    I wouldn't explicitly hunt a bear with an .223 AR. An AR-15 is powerful prairie dog medicine. It'll also really ruin a coyote's day. One of the better things about the .223/5.56 round is that you can have light and fast 40gr varmint rounds all the way up to 77gr Sierra Matchkings, which the military uses in the Mk262 round.

    Or, you could buy another upper and switch it out to 6.8 SPC, 6.5 Grendel, .300 Blackout, .450 Bushmaster, .458 SOCOM, .50 Beowulf.

    Or, buy an AR-10 variant in .308 and be able to kill anything in the lower 48.

    The AR is an amazingly versatile hunting platform.

  59. #159
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by Big_Games View Post
    what a ****ing *******. glad you ok and got to beat his ass

  60. #160
    Registered Bike Offender
    Reputation: 1fast29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    118
    Quote Originally Posted by Phillbo View Post
    I'm curious what people hunt with an AR 15?
    Apparently other people. Isn't that what Assault Rifles were designed for; soldiers?
    "Grab life by the bars"

  61. #161
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by 1fast29er View Post
    Apparently other people. Isn't that what Assault Rifles were designed for; soldiers?
    Yea, sure LOL

    Armalite Rifle
    Design Rights sold in 1959

    My AR is designated as a Homeland Defense Rifle

  62. #162
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    Try telling that to the Judge/Jury
    Why would anyone have to feign sorrow over taking a life when that life severely deserved to be taken? ESPECIALLY, if taking that life was the only way to save my own or someone else's.
    I'll suggest you research those who have been in this situation.

    It has nothing to do with sorrow, and everything to do with a major life changing event that you can't walk away from.
    Your original comment was about the appearance you give a judge or jury. Nothing to do with a person's mental well-being before during, or after a deadly force encounter.

    And, do you really read what I'm writing and think I don't know a little on the subject? Haven't thought about he subject a lot. Haven't read at least a couple books on the subject? Haven't trained for such encounters both mentally and physically?

  63. #163
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post

    And, do you really read what I'm writing and think I don't know a little on the subject? Haven't thought about he subject a lot. Haven't read at least a couple books on the subject? Haven't trained for such encounters both mentally and physically?
    to be honest, it doesnt seem to me that you know much about what you are talking about. Most people who know a lot about a subject are the first ones to acknowledge the gray areas, the subtleties, the point\counterpoint of any position. Rarely do experts sound like kneejerks.

    hey, you asked...

  64. #164
    bland
    Reputation: m77ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,289
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    to be honest, it doesnt seem to me that you know much about what you are talking about. Most people who know a lot about a subject are the first ones to acknowledge the gray areas, the subtleties, the point\counterpoint of any position. Rarely do experts sound like kneejerks.

    hey, you asked...
    word

  65. #165
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    to be honest, it doesnt seem to me that you know much about what you are talking about. Most people who know a lot about a subject are the first ones to acknowledge the gray areas, the subtleties, the point\counterpoint of any position. Rarely do experts sound like kneejerks.
    Your original question asked something to the affect of "what is 'bad'?". I gave you a list of my ideal bad people that don't deserve to live. Of course there are gray areas. Not as many as most would like there to be, though.

    But, to hear of a shooting and think we need to talk about guns and how to make people "feel" safer is the ultimate in kneejerkedness.

    We do not have a gun problem. We have a people problem. Find the people that are causing the problem and kill them. Problem solved. I'm not so sure why that's such a difficult concept to grasp.

  66. #166
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    We do not have a gun problem. We have a people problem. Find the people that are causing the problem and kill them..
    oh my bad.

    spending the rest of the evening on wikipedia to find all the venerable and respected people in history who held this view, and the sterling legacies they left.

  67. #167
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,411
    Quote Originally Posted by AKA Monkeybutt View Post
    Black bear, wild boars, deer and everything smaller.
    Doubtful, many states have laws against taking deer with anything smaller than a .243, because it tends to prolong death and it's not very sportsman like.

    An AR round is a very bad idea for taking game like above, since it fragments and goes into little pieces with any energy, which is why it's so deadly against humans, but animal's tougher hides, sinews and skeletal structure usually requires something more substantial.

    Although not exactly the same as other states I've lived in, the arizona laws still make using something like an AR fairly ridiculous:
    R12-4-303
    Unlawful Devices, Methods, and Ammunition
    A. In addition to the prohibitions prescribed in A.R.S. §§
    17-301 and 17-309, the following devices, methods, and
    ammunition are unlawful for taking any wildlife in this
    state. An individual shall not use or possess any of the
    following while taking wildlife:
    1. Fully automatic firearms, including firearms capable
    of selective automatic fire;
    2. Tracer, armor-piercing, or full-jacketed ammunition
    designed for military use
    ;
    3. Shotguns larger than 10 gauge or shotguns capable
    of holding more than five shells in the magazine,
    unless plugged with a one-piece filler that cannot
    be removed without disassembling the gun, and that
    limits the magazine capacity to five shells;
    4. Semiautomatic centerfire rifles with a magazine
    capacity of more than five cartridges
    , unless the
    magazine is modified with a filler or stop that cannot
    be removed without disassembling the magazine;
    5. Contrivances designed to silence, muffle, or minimize the report of a firearm;
    6. Poisoned projectiles, or projectiles that contain
    explosives; or
    7. Pitfalls of greater than 5-gallon size, explosives, poisons, or stupefying substances, except as permitted
    in A.R.S. § 17-239,
    I have an AR. It's made for killing people. I use it for plinking, but make no mistake, it's primarily for killing people.
    Last edited by Jayem; 12-26-2012 at 10:40 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  68. #168
    I Ride Bikes
    Reputation: Mazukea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,745
    Awesome man. I'm glad you got away in one piece. I love stories like these where the good guy gets some justice.

    Aloha my braddah.
    I like to hug trees at FULL SPEED!
    INSTAGRAM -> hawaii808MTB
    FACEBOOK -> Big Island Mountain Biking

  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    527
    the argument of using it as a hunting rifle to me is just funny. I am sure any comparison to an AR to a good quality bolt-aciton hunting rifle would show that the only advantage the AR has is the additional round capacity. If you get more then one or two shots off and miss your target, when the hell would I want you to have 28 more to send flying around? If you need that many rounds to hunt then you do NOT have any use having one in your hands.

    I am a gun owner that supports stricter laws. I agree that criminals will always get guns if they want too. there are too many "responsible" gun owners that are all to happy to sell something on the side to anyone to make a few $$$. When we get to the point that we have as many kids bringing guns to school as we do, there is a bigger issue. They are not searching out black market venues to find people with questionable ethics that will not do the right thing, they are walking down the hall of a "responsible" gun owner and just picking it up. The argument could be made that they are not responsible if their kids get ahold of them but how can we tell the difference?

    the car comparison is a good one. If there were no laws/restrictions on speed you would probably have heard me roar past you in my mustang gt while explaining I am just trying to stay ahead of the vette running me down. People need limits set on alot of the decisions they make and I think this is one of them. Back when the constatution was written the weapons the citizens used to hunt were the same ones they used to go to war with. That is not the case today.....
    and the lurker returns to the dark corner

  70. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AKA Monkeybutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Doubtful, many states have laws against taking deer with anything smaller than a .243, because it tends to prolong death and it's not very sportsman like.

    An AR round is a very bad idea for taking game like above, since it fragments and goes into little pieces with any energy, which is why it's so deadly against humans, but animal's tougher hides, sinews and skeletal structure usually requires something more substantial.

    Although not exactly the same as other states I've lived in, the arizona laws still make using something like an AR fairly ridiculous:


    I have an AR. It's made for killing people. I use it for plinking, but make no mistake, it's primarily for killing people.

    Worked for these guys. ar15 hunting - Google Search

    I overheard someone once tell another person a .22 would bounce off a leather jacket. Therre is a lot of ******** out there.

    If I can still hunt (tree stands are for rookies) and kill deer with an arrow, I can kill a deer with a high power rifle at close range.

  71. #171
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,411
    Quote Originally Posted by AKA Monkeybutt View Post
    Worked for these guys. ar15 hunting - Google Search

    I overheard someone once tell another person a .22 would bounce off a leather jacket. Therre is a lot of ******** out there.

    If I can still hunt (tree stands are for rookies) and kill deer with an arrow, I can kill a deer with a high power rifle at close range.
    Well, no, it ain't going to bounce off leather, and there are lots of people that are mistaken about the ballistics. After a certain velocity, it slows down, doesn't fragment, yaws and wobbles more, etc. .45s have been known to not penetrate heavy clothing, in fact at "the range" in prescott I've been surprised by the lack of penetrating power, certain things that I thought it was sure to go through, it didn't. If you think the myths you heard were bad, you should hear it in the military during basic and advanced training. I had idiots swear up and down that an M60 was ".60 cal". So I asked what an M2 .50 cal was, 2-cal? You'd think that would silence it, but nope, completely idiotic, with all sorts of other similar outrageously wrong claims.


    I'll reiterate the above though, shooting a deer from a few feet away with an AR is just dumb. The ballistics are not as favorable on bigger animals due to the light high velocity round and the fragmentation characteristics, and if you're really shooting deer close enough, it's not going to make any difference if you use that or a 9mm handgun, but you don't go buy the worst suited rifle for hunting . Better off with something bigger and heavier, in fact that's why hunting rounds tend to be 7mm, 300 mag, etc. The .223/5.56 is known as a "varmint" caliber in the "hunting" circles, due to being a very small and light round. Good for the prarie dogs and the such, but not bigger game.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  72. #172
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    Your original comment was about the appearance you give a judge or jury. Nothing to do with a person's mental well-being before during, or after a deadly force encounter.

    And, do you really read what I'm writing and think I don't know a little on the subject? Haven't thought about he subject a lot. Haven't read at least a couple books on the subject? Haven't trained for such encounters both mentally and physically?
    Not knowing you, and going by your choice of words, and their use ... All I can do is believe what I read in a literal sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    We do not have a gun problem. We have a people problem. Find the people that are causing the problem and kill them. Problem solved. I'm not so sure why that's such a difficult concept to grasp.
    And I find your latest to be filled with ill-chosen words, and an attitude that might someday bring you trouble

    Wanna define "The Problem" before you start your little spree ... Judge, Jury, and Executioner ?

    I'm gonna try to stay out of further conversation with you, because I sure didn't come to MTBR so that I might argue about The Constitution, Bill Of Rights, The Meaning of Liberty, and what defines Personal Responsibility.

  73. #173
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation: big0mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by chollaball View Post
    oh my bad. spending the rest of the evening on wikipedia to find all the venerable and respected people in history who held this view, and the sterling legacies they left.
    No, actually, it's my bad. When you first asked the questions of who the bad guys were I thought maybe you've just never thought about it because defining the really bad people that don't deserve to live is relatively easy. If I'd thought you wanted an extensive list of Yes, No, and several levels of Maybes I would not have made my list so short thus avoiding some confusion.

    I was short on time last night and as I was driving home it dawned on me that you think I know nothing on the subject simply because you do not agree with me. Which is kinda sad but it's expected sometimes.

    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    Wanna define "The Problem" before you start your little spree ... Judge, Jury, and Executioner?
    I thought I already did in one of my first posts?

    Murderers, rapists, child molesters, drug dealers, gangbangers, drunk drivers? I certainly hope we can agree that society would be best off without these people, yes? Hell, if pressed for it with no other resolution I would accept throwing them all in prison for life. I think it's an incredible waste of tax payer money but getting them out of society forever is the goal.

    And, contrary to what you obviously think, I have no plans for spree. Not my job. That's why we pay the gubment a good portion of our income. Now, if someone comes knocking on my door in the middle of the night just begging to get shot he will have made the choice for me.

    I get it that some people don't FEEL comfortable executing people that deserve it. I am more comfortable KNOWING that the people that want to do others harm are not around to do it.

    And that's a big difference between people. Many want to FEEL safe and pass laws making things illegal. Usually, it's something that's already illegal so they make a new class of law for it like "Road Rage" or "Hate Crime", neither of which address the real problem.

    Others, like me, are misguided enough to actually treat the root of EVERY problem: bad people.

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,536
    Dang, lots of angry, middle-aged, white man here today.....
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  75. #175
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    let me sum up my position, and i will leave it at this.
    you have way too many rounds going off when even michael j fox can hit a squirrel in his backyard

    while i dont like guns,, i 'm not advocating that they be banned altogether. i think there should be a better mandatory paperwork trail, especially on the larger ones. perhaps even endorsements on licensing for them (similar to type-ratings on a pilots license for planes over 12,500lbs gross)

    its obvious that many sellers only see the $$ and dont want to lose a sale holding that up. ATF should periodically send in undercover buyers to make sure that all places are thorough with checks (including gun shows). a gas station clerk gets immediately hauled off to jail if they sell a case of beer to an undercover minor, but gun shows dont require checks.. might as well open a Jack Daniels both at sponge-bob-on-ice.

  76. #176
    parenting for gnarness
    Reputation: chollaball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    6,127
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post

    you think I know nothing on the subject simply because you do not agree with me.
    dang! you figured me out. your persuasive arguments rivaling the average Supreme Court Justice had no impact on me. my 3 yo was deeply moved, however.

  77. #177
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by Mrwhlr View Post
    Dang, lots of angry, middle-aged, white man here today.....
    Profiler.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  78. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Casual Observer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,206
    Quote Originally Posted by big0mike View Post
    No, actually, it's my bad. When you first asked the questions of who the bad guys were I thought maybe you've just never thought about it because defining the really bad people that don't deserve to live is relatively easy. If I'd thought you wanted an extensive list of Yes, No, and several levels of Maybes I would not have made my list so short thus avoiding some confusion.

    I was short on time last night and as I was driving home it dawned on me that you think I know nothing on the subject simply because you do not agree with me. Which is kinda sad but it's expected sometimes.


    I thought I already did in one of my first posts?

    Murderers, rapists, child molesters, drug dealers, gangbangers, drunk drivers? I certainly hope we can agree that society would be best off without these people, yes? Hell, if pressed for it with no other resolution I would accept throwing them all in prison for life. I think it's an incredible waste of tax payer money but getting them out of society forever is the goal.

    And, contrary to what you obviously think, I have no plans for spree. Not my job. That's why we pay the gubment a good portion of our income. Now, if someone comes knocking on my door in the middle of the night just begging to get shot he will have made the choice for me.

    I get it that some people don't FEEL comfortable executing people that deserve it. I am more comfortable KNOWING that the people that want to do others harm are not around to do it.

    And that's a big difference between people. Many want to FEEL safe and pass laws making things illegal. Usually, it's something that's already illegal so they make a new class of law for it like "Road Rage" or "Hate Crime", neither of which address the real problem.

    Others, like me, are misguided enough to actually treat the root of EVERY problem: bad people.
    Don't forget about the mentally and physically disabled.
    Nobody gives a s#$t you singlespeed.

  79. #179
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    mike,, just be careful that what you post here will be traced back in the event you DO get into a situation where you need to use deadly force.
    it will then be used against you to show premeditation that you were just itching for an opportunity to use it.

  80. #180
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    parents,, lock that **** up,,
    no matter how much of a perfect teen you may think you have.
    teens are hormonal & emotional and can accelerate from zero to irrational in 2.5 seconds with very little provocation.

    luckily this parent of a Red Mountain high school student had their guns secure.
    http://www.azcentral.com/community/m...eers-abrk.html

  81. #181
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    mike,, just be careful that what you post here will be traced back in the event you do get into a situation where you need to use deadly force.
    It will then be used against you to show premeditation that you were just itching for an opportunity to use it.
    Bingo

  82. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    parents,, lock that **** up,,
    no matter how much of a perfect teen you may think you have.
    teens are hormonal & emotional and can accelerate from zero to irrational in 2.5 seconds with very little provocation.

    luckily this parent of a Red Mountain high school student had their guns secure.
    http://www.azcentral.com/community/m...eers-abrk.html
    As a youth, my dad just had a bunch of guns stacked in soft cases in a closet. The horror. You know how many people I killed with them? None. And I went through all that emotional teenager stuff.

    Maybe, just maybe, we're seeing people who utterly fail as parents.

  83. #183
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    keep in mind that when we were kids,, bullying, taunting, and fighting could only be done in person, and you could just walk away. the next day everyone would usually be cool again, even looking back and laughing about it.

    now it happens 24/7 on smartphones and social networks, tensions escalate a lot quicker without any chance to simmer down. when one person blogs or about things they're upset about,, 20 trolls will jump in with comments that just make things worse. people will reach the snapping point a lot sooner.

  84. #184
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    keep in mind that when we were kids,, bullying, taunting, and fighting could only be done in person, and you could just walk away. the next day everyone would usually be cool again, even looking back and laughing about it.

    now it happens 24/7 on smartphones and social networks, tensions escalate a lot quicker without any chance to simmer down. when one person blogs or about things they're upset about,, 20 trolls will jump in with comments that just make things worse. people will reach the snapping point a lot sooner.
    So place a ban on the internet.

    For Christ sake, like noone in the 60's, 70's or 80's got thier little feelings hurt. What next everyone must play an inning in little league. Maybe place the ball on a stand so everyone can hit the ball.

    HTFU
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  85. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    Quote Originally Posted by longhairmike View Post
    keep in mind that when we were kids,, bullying, taunting, and fighting could only be done in person, and you could just walk away. the next day everyone would usually be cool again, even looking back and laughing about it.

    now it happens 24/7 on smartphones and social networks, tensions escalate a lot quicker without any chance to simmer down. when one person blogs or about things they're upset about,, 20 trolls will jump in with comments that just make things worse. people will reach the snapping point a lot sooner.
    Hey bud, I'm only 26. I'm not "exactly" that generation, but I'm pretty close to it.

    If you reach the snapping point over some crap on the internet, your parents have failed you in a colossal Titanic fashion. It's the internet. It's not real. You think I'd ever come to blows over some crap somebody posted on MTBR or Facebook? Jeez. I don't care what people think about me in real life. I REALLY don't care what people on the internet think about me.

    If you go on a shooting spree or kill yourself over Facebook, your parents raised a total loser. Probably because they themselves were losers.

  86. #186
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    wow dude,, why are you jumping out me like that? i never said anything about banning the internet,, only saying that technology, as it plays an increasingly higher role in our lives, will also have drawbacks along with the advantages. we just need to keep ourselves more vigilantly aware of the drawbacks. no matter what new thing comes out, there's going to be someome writing malware for it

    EASY_E: that said, i do think that parents' roles, although not going so far as to call them 'shitty', do need to continuously adapt as well. the parenting standards and level of parental involvement in the 80s that kept kids safe is no longer sufficient for the 2010's. placing that entire task on a single parent certainly makes it all the more difficult.

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eazy_E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,564
    We're in the midst of a cultural shift, no question. I'd call it for the worst too. Keep in mind, this is the perspective of a 26 year old.

    My grandparent's generation, you didn't get divorced, you just lived miserable.
    My parent's generation, you got divorced. It was a little weird to me as a kid because my parents were early 30's when I was born(first child), and they were still married. When I was in early grade school, a lot of kids had parents that were my age now, or they talked about spending the weekend with their dad and the step-mother they didn't like.
    My generation, you were never married. Hell, you were never "together." Kids now are just the product of a booty call that went awry. It's not about being a man, or being a dad, it's just about hooking up for a night and "I got mine."

    The next step down on the ladder, I hate to think of.

    So, now, you've got an entire generation of kids, raised by women(themselves a moody and emotional creature.) Kids with no male influence. Kids whose surrogate father is the state in the form of welfare, WIC, and SNAP, and TANF.

    And, thanks to technology, kids today have zero interpersonal skills. Everything is text, Facebook, or email. Spelling and composition has sure taken a hit too.

    So, let's summarize. You've got a generation of welfare babies from broken homes, raised by moody and emotional women to be moody and emotional themselves, with zero actual social outlets in the real world. Is there any question why we're in the crap we're in?

    Stop the bus, I want off.

  88. #188
    My other ride is your mom
    Reputation: Maadjurguer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,072
    ^^^Should have ridden your bike rather than getting on the bus in the first place...

  89. #189
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    We're in the midst of a cultural shift, no question. I'd call it for the worst too. Keep in mind, this is the perspective of a 26 year old.

    My grandparent's generation, you didn't get divorced, you just lived miserable.
    My parent's generation, you got divorced. It was a little weird to me as a kid because my parents were early 30's when I was born(first child), and they were still married. When I was in early grade school, a lot of kids had parents that were my age now, or they talked about spending the weekend with their dad and the step-mother they didn't like.
    My generation, you were never married. Hell, you were never "together." Kids now are just the product of a booty call that went awry. It's not about being a man, or being a dad, it's just about hooking up for a night and "I got mine."

    The next step down on the ladder, I hate to think of.

    So, now, you've got an entire generation of kids, raised by women(themselves a moody and emotional creature.) Kids with no male influence. Kids whose surrogate father is the state in the form of welfare, WIC, and SNAP, and TANF.

    And, thanks to technology, kids today have zero interpersonal skills. Everything is text, Facebook, or email. Spelling and composition has sure taken a hit too.

    So, let's summarize. You've got a generation of welfare babies from broken homes, raised by moody and emotional women to be moody and emotional themselves, with zero actual social outlets in the real world. Is there any question why we're in the crap we're in?

    Stop the bus, I want off.
    Start at 1:30 ... This might help explain what we now witness on an almost daily basis.
    Creation Seminar 5 - Kent Hovind - Dangers of Evolution *FIXED* (FULL) - YouTube

  90. #190
    My other ride is your mom
    Reputation: Maadjurguer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,072
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    Start at 1:30 ... This might help explain what we now witness on an almost daily basis.
    Creation Seminar 5 - Kent Hovind - Dangers of Evolution *FIXED* (FULL) - YouTube
    Wow.....you're all kinds of awesome. First this thread, predictably, goes tangential over the gun issue....now you're taking it to the next level of batsh!t crazy by blaming evolution for our modern problems.

    Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.

  91. #191
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Maadjurguer View Post
    Wow.....you're all kinds of awesome. First this thread, predictably, goes tangential over the gun issue....now you're taking it to the next level of batsh!t crazy by blaming evolution for our modern problems.

    Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
    Opinions vary

  92. #192
    SamuraiBunnyGuy
    Reputation: longhairmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,585
    instead of drawing the only cultural shift-line at the invention of the internet or cell phones,, how about a secondary one with the ability to record and upload streaming video of anyone anywhere. that has certainly enabled those who like to instigate drama and provoke. if you want to humiliate or degrade another person in front of the entire world,, facebook & youtube are there for you.

    i think that given the choice of being 38 or 18 today. i'll take the age...

  93. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Maadjurguer View Post
    Wow.....you're all kinds of awesome. First this thread, predictably, goes tangential over the gun issue....now you're taking it to the next level of batsh!t crazy by blaming evolution for our modern problems.

    Dumb, Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
    Actually, our problems stem from us stopping the evolutionary process of our own species. Our government offers incentives for people to lay around and do nothing and get paid for it.

  94. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    3,536
    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    Hey bud, I'm only 26. I'm not "exactly" that generation, but I'm pretty close to it.

    If you reach the snapping point over some crap on the internet, your parents have failed you in a colossal Titanic fashion. It's the internet. It's not real. You think I'd ever come to blows over some crap somebody posted on MTBR or Facebook? Jeez. I don't care what people think about me in real life. I REALLY don't care what people on the internet think about me.

    If you go on a shooting spree or kill yourself over Facebook, your parents raised a total loser. Probably because they themselves were losers.
    Oh, yer gonna be a real peach when you hit 40!
    Nice KOM, sorry about your penis.

  95. #195
    My other ride is your mom
    Reputation: Maadjurguer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5,072
    On the subject of moral decay, it's almost like we are seeing the disintegration of the American dream in an era of unprecedented prosperity and material excess.....we all have so much more now than folks in previous generations had before us...and it does not make us any happier. I think it's right of us to opine on the decay in social and moral values, overwhelming cynicism, greed, and the hedonistic pursuit of pleasure. To top it all off, we have a system that is designed to benefit the top portions of the socio-economic ladder and leaves everyone else just wanting more.

    Someone should write a bit more about this recent phenomenon that is due to evolution, and cell phones and video games and facebook and the internet and bad parenting and whathaveyou......

    Ohh wait....nevermind....F. Scott Fitzgerald beat us to it back in the early 1920's with his book the Great Gatsby.......it's kinda a big deal.

    What was it that you folks were saying about cultural shifts? I could not hear you earlier because my ears were ringing with irony over the fact that a writer dead for over 70 years just pwn3d you........

    Need I mention he ripped it off from writers before him....and they from others back through the age of earliest human experience? You kids have fun with your sophomoric observations on complex subjects, I'm going to go do something new and hip and go ride a bike on a mountain.....they call it mountain biking. You should try it some time....it's a blast!

  96. #196
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,658
    Quote Originally Posted by Eazy_E View Post
    We're in the midst of a cultural shift, no question. I'd call it for the worst too. Keep in mind, this is the perspective of a 26 year old.

    My grandparent's generation, you didn't get divorced, you just lived miserable.
    My parent's generation, you got divorced. It was a little weird to me as a kid because my parents were early 30's when I was born(first child), and they were still married. When I was in early grade school, a lot of kids had parents that were my age now, or they talked about spending the weekend with their dad and the step-mother they didn't like.
    My generation, you were never married. Hell, you were never "together." Kids now are just the product of a booty call that went awry. It's not about being a man, or being a dad, it's just about hooking up for a night and "I got mine."

    The next step down on the ladder, I hate to think of.

    So, now, you've got an entire generation of kids, raised by women(themselves a moody and emotional creature.) Kids with no male influence. Kids whose surrogate father is the state in the form of welfare, WIC, and SNAP, and TANF.

    And, thanks to technology, kids today have zero interpersonal skills. Everything is text, Facebook, or email. Spelling and composition has sure taken a hit too.

    So, let's summarize. You've got a generation of welfare babies from broken homes, raised by moody and emotional women to be moody and emotional themselves, with zero actual social outlets in the real world. Is there any question why we're in the crap we're in?

    Stop the bus, I want off.
    Iv'e been a playboy most of my life. Reading this makes me feel bad about myself. Never got anyone pregnant though. You are correct with what you said.

  97. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,321
    Quote Originally Posted by Cycle64 View Post
    This thread has run it course. People like guns and people dislike guns. Harold Fish was an idiot, yet does not represent the majority of gun owners.
    .
    Then there are some of us who don't mind guns, support the ownership of guns, but are a bit perplexed that there are some on the board who are just itching to unload on someone "bad" because it would be "legal". There are some here that are probably not being wise with their word. If they are in the unfortunate situation of having to use deadly force (especially one where there may be no armed assailant and only two witnesses -- one alive and one dead), there is no doubt this thread will be read in a court of law and published in the Republic. And it's probably not going to help you...


    Now, let's go ride bikes.....

  98. #198
    Shovel Ready
    Reputation: Cycle64's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    5,780
    Quote Originally Posted by PhxChem View Post
    Then there are some of us who don't mind guns, support the ownership of guns, but are a bit perplexed that there are some on the board who are just itching to unload on someone "bad" because it would be "legal". There are some here that are probably not being wise with their word. If they are in the unfortunate situation of having to use deadly force (especially one where there may be no armed assailant and only two witnesses -- one alive and one dead), there is no doubt this thread will be read in a court of law and published in the Republic. And it's probably not going to help you...


    Now, let's go ride bikes.....
    I have never said I wanted to empty a clip because I was in a legal position to do so! Matter of fact I would hate to take a life period. But would defend the life of another or myself if I had to do so.

    I did ride today.
    Currently at Mayo Clinic being tested for a kidney transplant. Donors welcome.

  99. #199
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,033
    I went riding, also ... And it's threads like this, with the sort of comments you find out in public, that keep making me repeat that a good CCW class is worth taking, even if the law now says you don't need to take such a class, or ... Might not even own a gun.

    CCW courses are about learning local laws, and also ... What one should/shouldn't say about fictitious/real situations.

    Safety is about much more than the ride

  100. #200
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,983
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeabuser View Post
    I went riding, also ... And it's threads like this, with the sort of comments you find out in public, that keep making me repeat that a good CCW class is worth taking, even if the law now says you don't need to take such a class, or ... Might not even own a gun.

    CCW courses are about learning local laws, and also ... What one should/shouldn't say about fictitious/real situations.

    Safety is about much more than the ride
    ANY half way decent shooting class is worth taking. Lots of people think they can shoot till they spend some time getting training, at which point they realize how scary and inept they were before.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •