Thread: Yet another shooting incident in the states

Originally Posted by Littledog

To those who don't want CCW then you have no fear, as no one is forcing you to carry-it would be up to you entirely to choose to or not (not that I think CCW will come to NZ anytime soon).

Flawed argument littledog. Think about smoking regs. The reason for no smoking in public places is not the harm it does to the smoker, but passive smoke for those who choose not to smoke.

You need to look at the argument from both sides.

Originally Posted by Tussock

But your not making the logical link between those two things? The purpose of the knife is not to attack the person. Thats not defense. Its to keep the attacker away. And for that its an extremely effective tool. No real way around it. If you can only use it when the close with you, then its doing its job. They cant close with you, and thats the objective.

Your thinking about offense, not defense.

Tim the moment you pull the knife YOU are escalating the situation and taking on an offensive role.

As for the rest of your post.... Er maybe a bit more time walking in the bush than worrying about who is out to get you ?

Originally Posted by Tussock

Everyone has that attitude. Everyone thinks they are super man and everyone else knows nothing. You just dismissed a large number of potentially useful items, and not dismissing those items is a fundamental of self defense training. Iv done self defense classes with heaps of cops, soldiers, nurses. Not blowhards, just nice genuine professionals, and they never displayed an attitude like yours. They were open to suggestions and would not have reacted that way to Gimps suggestions. There are not many self defense items better than a knife, they are bloody hard if not impossible to get off someone, and its very hard and dangerous to grab hold of someone with a knife. Cant grab hold of them, cant keep them there, can't do anything to them. Basic stuff.

You say that everyone who wants something wants it for the power and the desire to walk round all tooled up, and that people get a rush from it. Equally true of the police is it not? You think our police is free of people who get a rush from the power of the position? I would suggest there would be no "civilians" left who get a rush from the power. They are all already in the police force. Our cops are getting more guns while getting very vocal about wanting the public to have less. Could this not be viewed as the exact same thing? A desire to have all the power?

Its the exact same logic your using.

First of all, I do self defence classes and I'm probably one of the 'most open to new ideas' kind of person you would ever meet. Through what experience I have, in my opinion suggesting a knife for self defence is stupid. I was referring to Beavis' not Gimp's suggestions. Pulling a knife is like pulling a gun but less effective and far more dangerous to the defender. However a knife is a great offensive weapon in certain situations.

To me there are much better options than a pistol in NZ for defence in public, pistols and knives can only be used in a life/death situations, while sober, which are extremely rare in NZ.

The Police need the tools to do their job, if you were going to start responding to every armed incident or violent situation in your district then I would say you would need them to. Every person I've met that wanted to CCW had never been in a situation where one could be used nor were ever likely to and when pressed about it, it just come down to them 'wanting' to carry because it would make them feel better. They also dismissed the idea of carrying mace instantly which spoke volumes to me.

I'm sure a lot of Police Officers do get a rush going to armed incidents tooled up, I never said otherwise, they are only human like us.

I don't remember the Police saying they wanted the public to have less guns, I remember them wanting people to have an endorsement for certain types but not saying you can't have them.

I can understand CCW in relations to pistols in the US but not here in NZ. I haven't made up my mind about others such as mace and taser.

Originally Posted by ebf

Flawed argument littledog. Think about smoking regs. The reason for no smoking in public places is not the harm it does to the smoker, but passive smoke for those who choose not to smoke.

You need to look at the argument from both sides.

You need to take your own advice...

Originally Posted by Tussock

Your just making all this up right? Who said anything about pulling it. Self defence training, which is what the context of this discussion is, is about defending yourself. As in preventing yourself from coming to harm. Your describing it as escalation in the legal sense. Better get raped than jeopardize your legal position right?

The current line that your supposed to let anyone do anything they like to you, dont defend yourself because thats "escalating" the situation, wait for the police and then get counselling afterwards does not sit well with me.

It would sit better if we had police you could call and they would actually come. Maybe they should stop worrying about rifle magazines and go follow up on a few burglaries.

I assume your "worrying about whos out to get you" line relates to my comments on people swallowing emotive rhetoric. It amuses me that humans have a few thousand years of recorded history and through that time, have done the exact same things, in the exact same way, over and over. And then, in 60 years people decide its stopped, and we can just repeal all the laws we put in place to stop it in the first place. Then if you make the rash suggestion that history does in fact have the potential to repeat its self, like it has done for millennia, its implied your a kook and worried about whos out to get you

A fine definition of stupidity is to do the same thing over and over and expect a different outcome.

You are twisting what he said to suit yourself, pulling a knife which is likely to inflict lethal wounds in a normal confrontation in the street is escalating the situation. Read section 48 and 56 of the Crimes Act, you may learn something. There is nothing wrong with defending yourself, but a knife condstitutes deadly force, there are much better tools than a knife for general self defence.

When did you call Police and they didn't come? Circumstances? I know of no Police Officers that have been tasked to find people with large magazines, however I know of plenty that are regularly been tasked to attend burglaries and target burglars. Do some research before posting bullshit, you have no idea.

Originally Posted by Tussock

Your just making all this up right? Who said anything about pulling it. Self defence training, which is what the context of this discussion is, is about defending yourself. As in preventing yourself from coming to harm. Your describing it as escalation in the legal sense. Better get raped than jeopardize your legal position right?

hang on, so explain to me how you are going to "defend yourself" with a knife without pulling it and brandishing it toward this attacker ? are you just going to tell him/her that you have a knife and they will mysteriously stop attacking you ?

Originally Posted by Sidney

You need to take your own advice...

sidney, dude ! come on...

the argument they are putting forward is like saying well it's ok for me to drive at 200 km/h because if you don't want to then you don't have to... actions have consequences. saying something like CCW is ok, coz you dont have to do it if you dont want to completely ignores the majority of the population that specifically do not want every second or third person walking around with a concealed firearm. and forget about tactical or self-defense training, what most folks need is to train the muscle between their ears to think clearly and calmly during a crisis.

i am more than happy living in a society where we have a small armed police force, responsible for maintaining order, as opposed to every tom, dick and harry walking around packing. the cops here are very aware of the extremely serious repercussions of shooting someone, and in the majority of cases would rather try to calm the situation than escalate it. that is the balance I prefer, like I said early on, there are loads of places around the globe where you can live with alternate regimes, personally the setup in NZ works fine for me

Take this



Add two teaspoons of this thread ....

Now you have what this is Custard .. or just a simple desert ...

And the winner is .....

Happy, I think the technical term is "a cluster of custard"

Waited for this thread to run its course................i lived in california for 8 years, an illegal alien (love that term) i had a Glock 17 that my 'legal mate' (green card) bought for me!

we only ever shot it at the local range's (indoor & outdoor) i had a 35 round mag (yes, thirty five) for it that i was allowed to 'brandish' at both ranges, even though (at the time)

california state law prohibited any mag over 15......how, because it was bought before the ban!!!!.......thats how fukin ridiculous the gun laws are over there, almost every gun law

be it state or federal, can be circumvented LEGALLY, so as for 'crims'...........the good ole US of A is totally fuked, dont expect it to change in your grandchildrens lifetime....

pandoras box has had the lid ripped off by the hinges.......Obama or anybody else is only paying lip service....there will be plenty more school, cinema, work ect shootings......ITS NOW PART OF THEIR FUKED UP CULTURE, THATS WHY I GOT OUT!!!!!!

Why do we end up constantly debating this topic. Honestly you're a fool if you think that the way it is is fine; you're a fool if you think that you can change it. Barking at each other isn't going to change much. Really none of us have a clue what the f**k we're talking about. Each side is sure they are right and the other is biased. Anyway personally i think self defense ownership is bullshit. If someone has the means to kill you, and is going to kill you, they will kill you. No James Bond shit, by the time you've drawn your weapon (if they intended to kill you) you're dead. plain and simple. Aside from that do many of us have the training that makes us quick enough to react to a situation like this and react appropriately. Try this: You're walking by a house and are armed. A man runs out with a knife covered in what looks like blood, stops screams I'm going to kill them, and starts to run back inside. What do you do, let him run away and maybe kill whom ever or what ever, or do you shoot the man and maybe save a life by taking one.

Originally Posted by Eion

Why do we end up constantly debating this topic. Honestly you're a fool if you think that the way it is is fine; you're a fool if you think that you can change it. Barking at each other isn't going to change much. Really none of us have a clue what the f**k we're talking about. Each side is sure they are right and the other is biased. Anyway personally i think self defense ownership is bullshit. If someone has the means to kill you, and is going to kill you, they will kill you. No James Bond shit, by the time you've drawn your weapon (if they intended to kill you) you're dead. plain and simple. Aside from that do many of us have the training that makes us quick enough to react to a situation like this and react appropriately. Try this: You're walking by a house and are armed. A man runs out with a knife covered in what looks like blood, stops screams I'm going to kill them, and starts to run back inside. What do you do, let him run away and maybe kill whom ever or what ever, or do you shoot the man and maybe save a life by taking one.

first part, totally agree....

second part, keep walking and call the police......

Originally Posted by ebf

sidney, dude ! come on...

the argument they are putting forward is like saying well it's ok for me to drive at 200 km/h because if you don't want to then you don't have to... actions have consequences. saying something like CCW is ok, coz you dont have to do it if you dont want to completely ignores the majority of the population that specifically do not want every second or third person walking around with a concealed firearm. and forget about tactical or self-defense training, what most folks need is to train the muscle between their ears to think clearly and calmly during a crisis.

i am more than happy living in a society where we have a small armed police force, responsible for maintaining order, as opposed to every tom, dick and harry walking around packing. the cops here are very aware of the extremely serious repercussions of shooting someone, and in the majority of cases would rather try to calm the situation than escalate it. that is the balance I prefer, like I said early on, there are loads of places around the globe where you can live with alternate regimes, personally the setup in NZ works fine for me

Please feel free to continue offering opinion not subject to you own advice then ...Doesn't matter what people want, that is purely a emotional cultural response...

The issue as debated which you completely have missed, is that the antis use exactly the same argument that could be used to promote CCW. And guess what... they are both correct.. but where the balance may fall in terms of loss of life, or deterioration of society is entirely debatable.

What we end up with as a result may or may not be desirable, and we currently don't choose to go down that road. Personally I don't want to. The process of the shift is often worse than either position. I was a police officer, I left the police in 1990 partially because I believed that we were rapidly heading towards having to be armed as a matter of course..that would have changed the dynamic of interaction with the public to such an extent that I was unwilling to stay... thankfully I am still wrong about that happening..

Having an armed population is unlikely to promote a more trusting culture, as evidenced by the paranoia exhibited by the average american. However on the other hand attempting to deny people the lawful right or the ability to protect your own person or life, or the life of any innocent that you are capable of protecting - is unconscionable. And please don't not assume that the police can or even want to achieve that these days in this country. Response and prevention is a lot further down the list than collecting traffic revenue, and suppressing response from those trying to protect themselves.

Whether you understand it or not, these are the two realities that exist. Reconciling them is the issue. Thats when it gets difficult..

So far I condense this thread down to:

Anti-CCW: Someone with a CCW might shoot me or someone else, I don't like people wanting to CCW because they already have the mindset that they want to kill

Pro-CCW: Want to carry to diminish the chance of being killed or seriously injured by a violent criminal, should they ever be confronted by one, realize that when the shit hits the screw, a cop won't be there to save you.

+1 Tussock, I worry about my partners safety more than my own