Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 32

Thread: ‘Lone Wolf’ terror attacks: Americans with guns are last line of defense. Lott, FNC

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,157

    ‘Lone Wolf’ terror attacks: Americans with guns are last line of defense. Lott, FNC

    What can be done to protect public safety? When police and the military can’t be everywhere, the last line of defense is having more citizens carry guns.

    Simply by using the Internet, ISIS has encouraged “lone wolf” individuals. These “wolves” have initiated attacks on their own with no planning or coordination with others and without leaving a trail of clues about their intentions. Law enforcement authorities and our government are not well suited to defend against such individual terror strikes. As Israel has learned about such attacks, there are just too many targets to defend.

    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/...guns-are-last/
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    I dunno.

    Seems like once again I'm being asked to protect those that have consiously decided not to provide for their own protection. Harsh? Maybe, but that's the way I see it.

    If some lone wolf jihadist or just-plain-crazy seeking fame wants to shoot up the place where I happen to be my first priorities are to me and mine - and that usually revolves around getting to cover and then exiting the danger area (by miles if possible and/or necessary). If someone walks into the front of the store/restaurant while I'm closer to the back I'm very disinclined to run to the sounds of the gun. More likely I'll be looking for/using the back exit.

    If some jhadist is in the process of sawing some other person's head off I am disinclined to immediately rush in and blow them away. The person getting their head sawed off most likely has already suffered fatal wounds and at the moment there is no imminent threat to me or mine, meaning I have time to place that 911 call and wait for the police to arrive. (I'm not sure what I would do if the beheader finished and tried to leave.)

    Very often when I go out (alone or with other OCers) I am told by the people at that location that they "feel safer" because I/we are there - usually meaning our guns are there and we will use them. I've given up trying to explain that I/we are not cops and that there are only a few circumstances when I/we could lawfully use our firearms - and those are most often not the circumstances that the folks who "feel safer" are most worried about.

    I usually get flack for expressing my position, but if it helps create dialog and thought on the subject I don't mind. All I hope for is that I am not backed into the corner of telling someone that if they want to be a sheepdog to the world they ought to join the police force.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    I think that falls under the category of "obviously" for forum members as well as a majority of those who carry (or would carry if not in places that thumb their nose at the Constitution)

    The rest are in denial it can happen or are making plans to shelter in place.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    I dunno.

    Seems like once again I'm being asked to protect those that have consiously decided not to provide for their own protection. Harsh? Maybe, but that's the way I see it.

    If some lone wolf jihadist or just-plain-crazy seeking fame wants to shoot up the place where I happen to be my first priorities are to me and mine - and that usually revolves around getting to cover and then exiting the danger area (by miles if possible and/or necessary). If someone walks into the front of the store/restaurant while I'm closer to the back I'm very disinclined to run to the sounds of the gun. More likely I'll be looking for/using the back exit.

    If some jhadist is in the process of sawing some other person's head off I am disinclined to immediately rush in and blow them away. The person getting their head sawed off most likely has already suffered fatal wounds and at the moment there is no imminent threat to me or mine, meaning I have time to place that 911 call and wait for the police to arrive. (I'm not sure what I would do if the beheader finished and tried to leave.)

    Very often when I go out (alone or with other OCers) I am told by the people at that location that they "feel safer" because I/we are there - usually meaning our guns are there and we will use them. I've given up trying to explain that I/we are not cops and that there are only a few circumstances when I/we could lawfully use our firearms - and those are most often not the circumstances that the folks who "feel safer" are most worried about.

    I usually get flack for expressing my position, but if it helps create dialog and thought on the subject I don't mind. All I hope for is that I am not backed into the corner of telling someone that if they want to be a sheepdog to the world they ought to join the police force.

    stay safe.
    I don't think the details of your position negate Lott's point. If there is some kind of armed attack on people someone is in the line of fire. Your above is what you would do if you are not in the line of fire and how you would protect your family and yourself to vacate the area. Sane approach (and healthy as you clearly have no hero complex and are realistic about such things) and the one most of us would take. You likely won't know what is going on exactly, how many are involved or how heavily armed they are. GTFO. But if you are in the line of fire or encounter another BG while vacating the premisese you obviously are prepared to use lethal force to protect yourself and family.

    I think that is Lott's point - not that armed citizens are going to Rambo towards the fight, but that they will refuse to be helpless victims. That chunk of metal isn't on your hip for decoration and while retreating if not being an immediate target is prudent, if you and your family are the ones who suddenly find yourselves under the muzzle that is why you carry. Many of these events stop as soon as the BG meets any armed resistence. The very act of using your sidearm defensively to retreat to cover and escape may be enough to either stop it or slow it down enough until the calvary arrives better armed and armored.

    So I do not find your prudent, self/family preserving perspective in conflict with Lott nor Lott in conflict with your position.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    We can put everyone into solitary confinement...now that's safety!

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    We can put everyone into solitary confinement...now that's safety!
    Thank you for volunteering to go first.

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Thank you for volunteering to go first.

    stay safe.
    I would but there is no facility that can hold me !

  8. #8
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    I would but there is no facility that can hold me !
    Lmao ok Jason Bourne.....
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    When police and the military can’t be everywhere, the last line of defense is having more citizens carry guns.
    Agreed. The current ratio of law enforcement officers to 10k citizens is 22.257 (source). This figure, however, only includes the most populous 100 communities. Then again, given the fact that most terrorists tend to strike in larger cities, it's an appropriate measure.

    Put another way, that's 1 law enforcement officer for every 450 citizens.

    Given the fact half of all households have guns, that level of protection is 1 armed citizen for every 2 citizens.

    Since approximately 5% of all citizens carry (any form), that's 1 armed citizen for every 40 citizens. That's more than 10 times the coverage of law enforcement. Is it any wonder that roughly 650,000 crimes are stopped in their tracks by armed citizens every year?

    OC numbers are less than a tenth of that, so we're back on par with law enforcement, if not less, when it comes to coverage.

    As Israel has learned about such attacks, there are just too many targets to defend.
    Unless, of course, most of their targets are armed. At that point, it becomes a numbers game, and with less than 2% of the population being Muslim, we win.

    But only if we're armed.
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  10. #10
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    --snipped--
    Given the fact half of all households have guns, that level of protection is 1 armed citizen for every 2 citizens.
    --snipped--.
    Agree with the simple presentation of numbers except for the one above.

    The average household has 2.50 + people in it. If only one person is presumed to have a gun, that would be 1 in 5 = 20%
    http://www.statista.com/statistics/1...lds-in-the-us/
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  11. #11
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by since9 View Post
    Given the fact half of all households have guns...
    What are using as a cite for this? From the recent GSS and Gallup polls I've seen this "half" claim is not supported. Unless you are using 1960/1970 numbers.

    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Actaully, we are the FIRST line of defense ...cops have no obligation to do anything and the military? Run by idiots.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Findlay, Ohio, United States
    Posts
    89
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    What are using as a cite for this? From the recent GSS and Gallup polls I've seen this "half" claim is not supported. Unless you are using 1960/1970 numbers.

    Under the current political climate, would you admit to having a firearm? I wonder how many people said "No", but really do.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by JustJack View Post
    Under the current political climate, would you admit to having a firearm? I wonder how many people said "No", but really do.
    When asked by a gov't official my standard reply is : "you'll find out soon enough"...

  15. #15
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by JustJack View Post
    Under the current political climate, would you admit to having a firearm? I wonder how many people said "No", but really do.
    Could be. I wonder how many said yes but really don't. I know people who don't have guns, don't like guns, but still support 2A because they are hard core Repubs. They might lie to sway poll numbers to be more conservative-friendly.

    Oh, and despite the information in the likely NSA portfolio on me no I don't admit to having guns (wink wink)
    Last edited by twoskinsonemanns; 11-03-2014 at 02:31 AM.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Actaully, we are the FIRST line of defense ...cops have no obligation to do anything and the military? Run by idiots.
    While many see as conventional wisdom that we are the 1st line of defense, I disagree with your comment about the military. From the days of George Washington and Marquis de Lafayette to our modern military leaders - some were brilliant and quite successful.

    That and your comment runs afoul of the Forum Rules.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691
    Defend against "lone wolf" terrorists??????

    Only if they are going after random citizens, ie: mall shootings, etc.


    Targeted attacks on police or .mil are not a threat to the rest of us, I don't believe in jumping into a fight that has nothing to do with me.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    242
    "Targeted attacks on police or .mil are not a threat to the rest of us".

    They ARE us! Are you saying that you wouldnt help out a cop being attacked by a rag-wearing hatchet-wielding nut case? How about a couple of BDU-wearing guys being set upon by a few guys with machetes yelling Allah somthing-or-other?

    Just because you think all cops are bad (they're not) doesn't mean they are not Americans. Same with military folks.

    Pop 'em, then let Allah sort 'em out.

    edit: if the smiley face means /sarcasm, then nevermind.
    Last edited by hafnhaf; 11-03-2014 at 09:09 AM.

  19. #19
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    Well, I might get some flack for this one but conversely to Skid's personal choice in tactics, I am always on the lookout for non-law-abiding suspects violently terrorizing citizens. I use my best judgement, and I don't mean I go searching for gang violence or any excuse to use force. I do feel it is my duty as a citizen to protect other citizens from tyranny, in whatever form it may rear its ugly head.

    Am I going to bumrush some crazy psycho who is sawing someone's head off on Main Street? Nope, but given the known fact that police cannot be everywhere and likely won't be there at a time like that, I see nothing wrong with taking cover and doing what I can to stop the threat. That act could save lives, and the way I see it, if every psycho that decided to saw someone's head off in public was shot by an armed citizen, there is at least some incentive for them not to do so anymore. I might even communicate to a bystander that he/she should call the police and make damn sure they know that I am there to help eliminate the threat if I don't have time to do so myself. Also, not all police are responsible shooters. What may take one, maybe two shots from me could take many not-so-carefully-placed shots from police, also putting other citizens in danger.

    I think an instance like that could even represent OCers in a positive light. It could help further define OC as a "good guy behavior," as if case law and statutory law wasn't enough. It could also help prove that an armed citizen is more effective than calling 911 in the case of brutal violence.

    People hell bent on terror are a threat to our society. The threat must be stopped. You can rely on the state if you want, or you can prove your opinion that all people should be armed by setting an example. You can't get mad at police for not protecting citizens if you are not willing to do the same.

    Skid, I'm definitely not trying to argue about your personal outlook, just want to present the other side to that coin.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Well we cannot allow another socialist organization attacking our socialist government organizations (our military is a socialist organization)...we can kill them ourselves.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    460
    Cue the "the lone wolf terrorist will target the open carrier first" schtick!
    Last edited by Bernymac; 11-03-2014 at 04:24 PM.

  22. #22
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Bernymac View Post
    Cue the "the lone wolf terrorist will target the open carrier first" schtick!
    Did I just read those exact same words on another thread? Might be you need some new material
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  23. #23
    Regular Member The Truth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Henrico
    Posts
    2,139
    I would also like to add that although I am anti-statist, I would not hesitate to help a police officer or member of .mil should the need arise. We are all Americans.
    Sic semper evello mortem tyrannis.

    μολὼν λαβέ

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator
    So in actuality you have no evidence that anything wrong took place, you only believe that it could be spun to appear wrong. But it hasn't been. The truth has a funny way of coming out with persistence, even if it was spun negatively the truth would find its way because these people will not accept less.
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    The truth causes some people so much pain they can only respond with impotent laughable insults. Life must be rough for those people.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    691
    Quote Originally Posted by hafnhaf View Post
    "Targeted attacks on police or .mil are not a threat to the rest of us".

    They ARE us! Are you saying that you wouldnt help out a cop being attacked by a rag-wearing hatchet-wielding nut case? How about a couple of BDU-wearing guys being set upon by a few guys with machetes yelling Allah somthing-or-other?

    Just because you think all cops are bad (they're not) doesn't mean they are not Americans. Same with military folks.

    Pop 'em, then let Allah sort 'em out.

    edit: if the smiley face means /sarcasm, then nevermind.
    I do not consider cops "us", and neither do they. They are a separate class, held to different standards and see themselves as such.
    Police ARE 8-27 times more of a threat to American citizens LIFE than the dreaded "terrorist"(Cato Institute study).

    In regards to attacks on .mil, they are in a war. When the war comes to them here at "home" why should I involve myself, I think they have gotten themselves into it, let them get themselves out. I absolutely LOATHE what this nation has done in the last 50 years in "foreign policy" and want no part of it.

    Like I said if some "terrorist" comes after random citizens in public settings, YES I will feel compelled to act.
    Last edited by Jeff. State; 11-03-2014 at 11:16 PM.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    I just had an altercation with a Army Sgt .. who thought he had some authority over me in the real world .

    He learned several lessons:
    1) in the real world, people swear (you can't swear at me, he said .... more profanity after that, of course)
    2) in the real world, his stripes are not body armor
    3) in the real world, his orders upon civilians have no effect
    4) and USAF vets don't take crap from active army personnel
    5) in the real world, he's not so tough (no matter who you are, there is always someone tougher)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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