imported post
Placementvs.Calibur wrote:
OK...... I don't need someone I don't know telling me to relax when I perfectly am, and I certainly don't need an education on what can be utilized as a weapon. I believe I stated that I know anything can be used as weapon. Hell, even a freakin' spork could scoop your eye out.I carry a firearm where ever legal and a knife 100% of the time. My job requires I carry some kind of blade always. However, I don't see the need to be armed in a situation where metal detectors are being used for security. Any incident involving an OC'erwould fuel the anti-gunners more than any statement I've made in this post. Just as there's left wing commie liberals there are paranoid-psycho right wingers.Granted, I trust the fellow members on this blog would know what they're doing, and in control of their anger/fears if they make it through the metal detectors even though the same respect wasn't afforded to me.Switch blades and OTF knives are illegal to purchase and carry in VA unless you're an emergency response person(police, fireman, emt). Before the hater's start I know there are ways around the purchase of OTF/switchblades in VA, but if you get caught carrying it, weapons charge. I don't like the law and would rather carry a Microtech-Ultratech, but have settled for my speed-safe Kershaw. My point with my original post is that nothing was done(by Clinton) before 9/11 to prevent it and now the things being done don't make much sense. This is an example of something available to the terrorist's over the counter, and there's no background check involved. Similar to the training received by the terrorist who didn't learn how to fly a plane, but instead keep it stable until.......:cuss:
So maybe I did not understand your first post. And I sure as heck do not seem to understand this one, either.
Unless the understanding you wantedme to take away was that you are strongly in favor of background checks being required for the purchase of firearms, and that you feel those same background checks should be extended to the purchase of plastic knives. Oh, yes, almost missed this part - Clinton was responsible for the terrorist acts committed on Sept. 11, 2001 because he did nothing about those things before those acts were committed.
Hope I got everything covered, and that I'm understanding you correctly now. No sarcasm intended but there is no non-smiley to indicate that I do not intend to be sarcastic.
You say "This is an example of something available to the terrorist's over the counter, and there's no background check involved" after saying "I believe I stated that I know anything can be used as weapon." So are you saying that there ought to be a background check completed before I buy an ice cream cone? Because I guarantee you I can kill you instantaneously with a common pointy-ended ice cream cone. Using the cup cones may actually require two or three seconds for death to take place because you deploy those cones differently.
(No, I am not a ninja, have never studied ninjitsu, and never served as any kind or type of special force soldier. I have, however, been exposed to an awful lot of nastiness and learned lessons well. Just saying that in case you wonder how I know how to kill with a cup cone.)
I do not have the "official" statistics in front of me, and am not going to go look for them. I'm going to presume some things and sit back waiting for anybody to present evidence that refutes my presumptions. I'm going to presume that:
1 - background checks run on folks who should not be allowed to play with firearms or sharp/pointy things stop only a relatively small fraction of the people who submit themselves to background checks, and
2 - most folks who already know they are likely to flunk a background check but want a firearm or sharp/pointythings are going to find a way to obtain said items without going through any background check.
If both presumptions hold water, it suggests that background checks merely vett the good guys and do little to stop the bad guys.
But you and I both know that making people pass background checks shows that we areDOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT - whatever that something is and whatever the "it" is. Just as checking the shoes of little old ladies for explosives before we let them get on a plane has DONE SOMETHING to prevent some lunatic terrorist from seizing control of a jetliner and crashing it into a building. But the problem is that the previous lunatic terrorists had boxcutters, not explosives. And the lunatic (still not sure he was also a terrorist) who had explosives in his shoe was so incompetent as to be comical rather than frightening.
I'm going to lump "However, I don't see the need to be armed in a situation where metal detectors are being used for security. Any incident involving an OC'erwould fuel the anti-gunners more than any statement I've made in this post" together just like you did. Metal detectors do not provide security - they merely serve as a means of alerting those who provide security that there is something they might want to check on to see if it needs to be taken away. And any incident involving an OC'er (or CC'er) would be cause for being thankful that someone was there to DO SOMETHING while everybody else was waiting for the cops to show up - if they wanted to, as opposed to fueling the antis. Sure, afterwards somebody is going to say that in general everybody is better off being a good witness and calling 911. But they forget that those who might be witnesses (good, bad, or indifferent) or who might call 911 may also end up being dead or injured while playing that role.
I am not advocating that anybody ignore the laws or rules/policies that prohibit carrying firearms past certain points. I'm just trying to point out that by creating dead lines (places beyond which you cannot go) you are creating places where there is a greater chance people can become dead merely because they are forbidden a convenient and effective means of self protection.
If you still think that I did not get your point, I ask that you treat me as a very simple person and spell it out in words of few letters, using very direct statements.
stay safe.
skidmark
