Results 1 to 25 of 25

Thread: NURSING HOME 8 DEAD POSTED NO GUNS

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rockingham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    861

    Post imported post

    http://www.examiner.com/x-2698-Charl...gun-free-zones

    We need to fight so a tragedy like this does not happen again .

    I live about 20 minutes from there and we are praying for all of the love ones and families .

    You might want to read this article in Sunday School and post iton the web .


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    Lawsuit time

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    45

    Post imported post

    Lawsuit time

  4. #4
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    2,350

    Post imported post

    I don't trust your sources. I heard it on the news, but I don't believe them, either. That place had a sticker on the front door that said "No Guns", so there's NO WAY anyone could have been shot!

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430

    Post imported post

    Ray wrote:
    Lawsuit time
    So, I'm assuming what you mean to say is that you want establisheda legal precedentthat any business that posts no weapons signs is responsible for andthus liable for the security of anyone who is legally at this business?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Sneads Ferry, ,
    Posts
    189

    Post imported post

    Can't say that I have ever thought of it in exactly those terms ComradeV but since you put it so well I would have to say that is a concept I could certainly get behind.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Aberdeen, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    23

    Post imported post

    My mother works with gut that got shot first. It's sad, Micheal doesn't know when he's going to get his truck back because the police impounded it for evidence. He did so many interviews the next day, I still don't think the MSM has stopped calling him.

  8. #8
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430

    Post imported post

    I'm practicing to become a Lawyer myself. So I'm quite glad that it came out so well.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Reading through that article he makes quite a few assumptions that I think tend to stretch the limits of what he is trying to say.

    First it is quite often repeated on here that BG's don't pay any attention to signs. I don't soubt that one bit but then he keeps trying to say that the reason that this facility was chosen as well as other mass murder sites was becasuse of the signs. Evidently if the author is correct then BG's do pay attention to signs.

    When someone is planning to carry out a mass murder like this I really don't think that a sign declaring a place a GFZ has any impact on the choice of the site. It is still debatable why this facitilty was chosen but wheter or not his ex-wife working there was a factor is certainly more probable than the No guns allowed sign. Do we really think that a sign one way or the other would have made a difference in what location the Columbine or VT murders occured?

    I am not saying at all that an armed individual would not have made a difference in the numbers of Columbine or VT killings but the author tries to indicate that places are chosen for mass murders because they are GFZ is stretching it too far in my opinion and tends to limit the credibility of any other points that he is trying to make. I really don't think that when a person is deciding to kill as many people as he can that he rides around until he finds a place with a No Weapons Allowed sign to do his killing.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NEAR Chapel Hill/Durham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    208

    Post imported post

    Well imagine that one establishment has a big sign posted at the front door that says "SOME OF THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS HERE ARE LAWFULLY ARMED".

    And then down the road, the other establishment has a big sign posted on the front door that says "THERE ARE NO GUNS ALLOWED IN THIS BUILDING".

    It's kind of a no brainer wondering which establishment the bad guy is going to feel safer and more at ease walking into and opening fire.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Las Vegas NV, ,
    Posts
    1,763

    Post imported post

    BRobb19 wrote:
    Well imagine that one establishment has a big sign posted at the front door that says "SOME OF THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS HERE ARE LAWFULLY ARMED".

    And then down the road, the other establishment has a big sign posted on the front door that says "THERE ARE NO GUNS ALLOWED IN THIS BUILDING".

    It's kind of a no brainer wondering which establishment the bad guy is going to feel safer and more at ease walking into and opening fire.




    It does work just like that. here in Vegas a few years ago one of the pawn shop chains was getting robbed over and over. The staff did not carry. At the other chain of pawn stores in town the staff did carry. They were tried once by the robbers and they fled quickly.



    So yes a armed place is something people think twice about hitting.

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430

    Post imported post

    Reminds me of the story about the guy who tried to rob a gun store. It had a cop car in front, one uniformed police officer inside and several armed patrons. Despite all this he clearly was a motivator and tried to demand compliance, which he was given something like 50 shots fired and 12 different types of rounds found in him.

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430

    Post imported post

    ComradeV wrote:
    Reminds me of the story about the guy who tried to rob a gun store. It had a cop car in front, one uniformed police officer inside and several armed patrons. Despite all this he clearly was a motivator and tried to demand compliance, which he was given something like 50 shots fired and 12 different types of rounds found in him.
    sorry my memory deceived me,

    http://www.snopes.com/crime/dumdum/gunshop.asp

    apparently the Darwin Award's account was slightly glamourised for heightened amusement.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    BRobb19 wrote:
    Well imagine that one establishment has a big sign posted at the front door that says "SOME OF THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS HERE ARE LAWFULLY ARMED".

    And then down the road, the other establishment has a big sign posted on the front door that says "THERE ARE NO GUNS ALLOWED IN THIS BUILDING".

    It's kind of a no brainer wondering which establishment the bad guy is going to feel safer and more at ease walking into and opening fire.
    So all we have to do to make our schools, shopping mall etc. safe is put a big sign out front saying people in here are carrying guns. If we do that then there is no need for anyone to carry or even pass any gun laws. Gee what a simple solution to the crime rate and mass murders. If VT had just put those signs around campus Cho would havehad to go to GMU to do his killing assuming they didn't have the signs.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    ComradeV wrote:
    Reminds me of the story about the guy who tried to rob a gun store. It had a cop car in front, one uniformed police officer inside and several armed patrons. Despite all this he clearly was a motivator and tried to demand compliance, which he was given something like 50 shots fired and 12 different types of rounds found in him.
    Even the true story shows how anyone that thinks criminals actually make logical decisions are overestimating their ability to reason.

  16. #16
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430

    Post imported post

    I think the reasoning here is, that if you allow people to defend themselves, the proposition of an actively engaged and armed public will make the majority of criminals much more cautious in their violentbehaviors and allow for the obstinate ones to be dealt with accordingly.

    The Signage example is I suppose just to give fair warning?

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    4 hours south of HankT, ,
    Posts
    5,121

    Post imported post

    One of the many ideas common in the RKABA movement is this idea that spree-shooters only go after places where guns are prohibited, because they are afraid to get shot.

    I question this theory.

    I haven't seen any evidence that this is true, and of course you can't ask the shooters because they almost always fail to live long enough to get questioned.

    I put forth the theory that spree-shooters are merely looking for places with lots of targets, where they can go out in a blaze of glory and take as many victims with them as they can.

    In many states, including pro-gun states, these places just happen to be the ones which prohibit guns. Schools, post offices, workplaces, even many shopping malls, usually prohibit guns. Even in places where they don't have a ban, most people aren't carrying anyway.

    The kid who shot up a Fairfax County, VA, police station a few years back obviously wasn't deterred by the fact that his intended victims were all armed, including the ones he killed. This tells me that at least some of these shooters aren't scared of the idea that some people in the chosen crime scene may be armed. Some of them may even like the idea, who knows.

    It's just a theory of mine, I have no proof of course, but it makes more sense to me.

    This doesn't change my attitude, though. Even though lack of a gun prohibition may not deter a spree-shooter or some other criminal, it does allow people to protect themselves against these shooters, and that is the real heart of the matter: to not infringe on a person's right to decide how he wants to protect himself from violent crime.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    ComradeV wrote:
    I think the reasoning here is, that if you allow people to defend themselves, the proposition of an actively engaged and armed public will make the majority of criminals much more cautious in their violentbehaviors and allow for the obstinate ones to be dealt with accordingly.

    The Signage example is I suppose just to give fair warning?
    There are two lines of reasoning on this. In the county in GA where the sheriff declared that every home must have a gun the crime rate dropped to almost zero. This implied that having everyone armed cut crime to almost nothing. However several studies pointed out that crime was reduced but in that county the crime rate was low to begin with and did not have the normal crime areas such as public housing to start with and was almost 100% white to make a racial statement. This does skew the results of any study other than having an armed population does help.

    The other type or reasoning is that in one study 87% of incarcerated criminals interviewed said that getting caught was the last thing on their mine. They all felt that they were too smart to get caught. The possibility of something going wrong and winding up in jail never entered their mind. I had lunch with a LEO the other day and he expressed the same sentiment that almost without fail when he catches a criminal they want to know what happened to allow them to be caught. If he talks with a potential criminal they always laugh at the ones that got caught and brag about they are too smart to ever be caught.

    The summary is that never underestimate the intelligence of criminals. They do not think like honest people.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    Tomahawk wrote:
    <snip>
    I put forth the theory that spree-shooters are merely looking for places with lots of targets, where they can go out in a blaze of glory and take as many victims with them as they can.

    In many states, including pro-gun states, these places just happen to be the ones which prohibit guns. Schools, post offices, workplaces, even many shopping malls, usually prohibit guns. Even in places where they don't have a ban, most people aren't carrying anyway.

    The kid who shot up a Fairfax County, VA, police station a few years back obviously wasn't deterred by the fact that his intended victims were all armed, including the ones he killed. This tells me that at least some of these shooters aren't scared of the idea that some people in the chosen crime scene may be armed. Some of them may even like the idea, who knows.

    It's just a theory of mine, I have no proof of course, but it makes more sense to me.

    This doesn't change my attitude, though. Even though lack of a gun prohibition may not deter a spree-shooter or some other criminal, it does allow people to protect themselves against these shooters, and that is the real heart of the matter: to not infringe on a person's right to decide how he wants to protect himself from violent crime.
    I totally agree with your points.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NEAR Chapel Hill/Durham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    208

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    BRobb19 wrote:
    Well imagine that one establishment has a big sign posted at the front door that says "SOME OF THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS HERE ARE LAWFULLY ARMED".

    And then down the road, the other establishment has a big sign posted on the front door that says "THERE ARE NO GUNS ALLOWED IN THIS BUILDING".

    It's kind of a no brainer wondering which establishment the bad guy is going to feel safer and more at ease walking into and opening fire.
    So all we have to do to make our schools, shopping mall etc. safe is put a big sign out front saying people in here are carrying guns. If we do that then there is no need for anyone to carry or even pass any gun laws. Gee what a simple solution to the crime rate and mass murders. If VT had just put those signs around campus Cho would havehad to go to GMU to do his killing assuming they didn't have the signs.
    What the hell are you talking about?

    No one is advocating that anybody put up any signs.

    Putting up a sign that says "SOME OF THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS HERE ARE LAWFULLY ARMED" doesn't change any law or policy. It is merely a reminder of what everyone should already know, which is the fact that law-abiding citizens may very well be armed in that establishment. This was used as a representative example of any place that does NOT post signs prohibiting carry. It doesnt matter whether that sign is posted or no sign is posted or a banana is posted, law-abiding citizens may still be armed in that establishment. Whether you remind people of this or not, it doesn't change any law.

    However, a "THERE ARE NO GUNS ALLOWED IN THIS BUILDING" sign DOES change the policy, and it DOES change the law regarding legal carry into that establishment. A bad guy would understand that no law-abiding citizen would be armed.

    And the point you tried to make about Virginia Tech is about as dumb as any point you've tried to make recently on any of the other threads. Virginia Tech does not allow law-abiding citizens to carry guns on campus. So whether Virginia Tech had put up signs that said "THERE ARE NO GUNS ALLOWED ON THIS CAMPUS", or not, the shooter still knew the policy was the same regardless.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    If everyone in the place was armed there wouldnt have had so many killed. Sorry but true. 1 or maybe 2 shots and he would have been down for the count. I'll put all my OC and CC freinds in a store and put all the People who dont beleive in gun rights in another, Then tell a mass murder to have his choice, witch one do you think he'll chose?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    NEAR Chapel Hill/Durham, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    208

    Post imported post

    looks like the cat's got ahold of your tongue PT.

    lol

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran ComradeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Maple Hill, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    430

    Post imported post

    That's the thing. Law Enforcement even know about this. They know that these typical mass murdering types don't want a gun fight. When the first sign of armed opponents come, they kill themselves! They want to shoot unarmed people because they want to be in control. They're not competitive people, they're just suicidal bullies who want the world to remember them and want to feel powerful a few minutes before the end of what was usually a weak powerless life.

    Obviously a couple of recent incidents highlight events where armed psychos did shoot at armed police officers, but they were not committing massacres of unarmed victims at the time.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    the biggest problem with this type of crime is after shots fired and 8 people are killed the police are called and arrive 10 mins later to a mass murder. once they arrive they still are bond by the tactics to standby and be cautious not knowing what is happening inside or if the suspect is still there. thus wasting more time and prob more lives. couple of trained citizens inside could stop it before it ever started. Reminds me of the local Sundrop- Cheerwine distributer near me that had 2 workers killed by a guy a couple years ago and he has yet to be cought. I bet they have a no Gun policy.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    The company i work for has no gun policy, but atleast we have a razor wire fence and armed gaurds. Makes me feel alittle better that some maniac cant just walk in and murder 500 of my co-workers. NO ITS NOT A PRISON, but it feels like it sometimes. lol

Posting Permissions

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