arma virumque cano (et alia)
Hi Mike, an inspiring video. I also enjoyed the second half of the video which took a look at NCAA marksmanship competition in colleges. I recall in the past that you advocated requiring physical and psychological examinations for a gun owner's license. Would this young man fall victim to such a system?
Would this young man fall victim to such a system?I think you can safely bet your ass that he would, SSG, and that Mikeb is just fine with that.
Well. it all depends on what you mean by "victim." Perhaps preventing a severely handicapped person like this from owning and using guns would save his life or the life of another.The requirements for gun ownership in my scheme are all designed to keep people safer. Since guns do more harm than good, the net benefit would carry through.
. . . would save his life or the life of another.It would certainly help extend the life of someone trying to kill him.Tell me, Mikeb, in what way does his "severely handicapped" condition make his use of guns unsafe?Since guns do more harm than good . . . Wrong. Perhaps you forget that guns are inherently harmless. They are, admittedly, also inherently "goodless," making the amount of harm and good they do precisely equal (because 0=0).
"Perhaps preventing a severely handicapped person like this from owning and using guns would save his life or the life of another.The requirements for gun ownership in my scheme are all designed to keep people safer. Since guns do more harm than good, the net benefit would carry through."Ah, you want someone's rights to own a firearm to be left up to some sort of committee to determine who is "too handicapped" to safely operate a firearm. I can imagine how that would work out, especially since technology makes continuous advances in helping the handicapped live more normal lives. After watching this young man perform quite competently in a competition, what would be your basis for denying him his right to possess a firearm? And this isn't even a particularly new story, that of someone with motivation overcoming obstacles and achieving great things. Ever read about Douglas Bader? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Bader
Yeah, blind guys and guys with no fingers can do proper muzzle and trigger control, right?
"Yeah, blind guys and guys with no fingers can do proper muzzle and trigger control, right?"Mr. Cayll seems to be doing just fine......
Yeah, blind guys and guys with no fingers can do proper muzzle and trigger control, right?Right.
Did you not watch the video? I didn't see anything wrong with his muzzle and trigger control.
We cannot base our gun control regulations on an anomaly like this guy. Severely handicapped people are a danger to themselves and others when armed.
"We cannot base our gun control regulations on an anomaly like this guy." We already base gun control regulations on low percentage events like crimes committed with military style semi-auto rifles. In 2013 homicides with any kind of rifle was 2% of the total firearm homicides. And that number is dropping by the way. Yet, there is the fixation by the gun control lobby to ban these firearms. And of course there is the concept that if its an actual right, you shouldn't have to "qualify" for it, and you cant lose it without due process.
We cannot base our gun control regulations on an anomaly like this guy.Oh--now I understand. It's not "this guy" who is unsafe with firearms--it's other handicapped people who might be, so he has to be disarmed because of them. And if he refuses to be rendered defenseless because other people might be unsafe with guns, and acquires a gun illegally, he must be arrested and imprisoned, and if he resists (what happens when the cop says, "Show me your hands"?) . . .
MikeB: "We cannot base our gun control regulations on an anomaly like this guy."Whoa there. You're whole idea of "proper gun control" calls for screening tens of millions of people and deciding on a case-by-case basis who is worthy of being award the privilege of being armed with the best tools for self-defense. Why wouldn't it be the same for handicapped people? And who decides if someone's handicap qualifies as "severe"? His doesn't seem that severe to me.
Wow--he even outperformed Jerry Miculek on some shotgun stages in a 3 Gun competition--and yet Mikeb wants him forcibly disarmed, for his own "safety."What kind of subhuman savage would demand that this young man's ability to defend himself be a crime? The Mikeb kind, of course.
guns for everyoneHe seems to be doing pretty well with them. What's your issue?
guns for everyoneAs opposed to "screw the disabled--let 'em die defenseless."And you call me a "monster."
Preventing a man like this from owning guns does not equal "let 'em die defenseless," except in your fanatical paranoid mind.The reason you're a monster is that you yourself have admitted that no amount of preventable gun violence is justification for gun control restrictions. You would rather see Sandy Hook type shootings every week than accept the slightest restrictions on your "freedoms," even if those restrictions were guaranteed to eliminate the shootings altogether. That's sick. That's monstrous.
I think this is an empowering activity for this unfortunate individual. It has the double beauty of giving him something that he excels at. Can you even imagine the disability that this man has faced since his birth? Growing up, I knew a thalidomide baby that only had one arm. That's as close as I ever came.I would give my right testicle to cure my grandsons of playing video games. But if it involved guns, I would consider them already dead to me. It's a win-win for this young man. I mean, who cares if it makes him happy?It's funny how SSG and Kurt read your mind as far as your more cynical point-of-view. I would have never guessed. I thought it was more or less a feel good story.It would be my estimation that Hunter may continue with his shooting sports. I don't see him becoming a paranoid individual who would carry guns to randomly kill people everywhere he goes. It's difficult for me to defend my position in light of the recent story with Lynne Russell.Maybe her husband might have planned their route a little bit more carefully. I can guarantee you I won't be staying at any dive motels with my woman in New Mexico. Why bother? Nothing like being ready to kill anyone you meet! Maybe you guys are right. Is it really true that we need to be prepared to kill any person at any time?I think it's all about paying attention to where you lay your head down to sleep. Still, it is a sorry state of affairs that a scumbag like that idiot who was killed by the bullet is allowed to carry on his desperate enterprise.Maybe Mike has a legitimate point.
I think it's all about paying attention to where you lay your head down to sleep.People are murdered in "nice" places, too. Sure, the odds of encountering someone like this dear, departed presumable Obama voter are undoubtedly higher at cheap joints, but poor people like to travel, too, and have just as much right to defend themselves against predation as anyone else..Maybe Mike has a legitimate point.There's a first time for everything, I suppose.It don't reckon it's here, though.
"Maybe her husband might have planned their route a little bit more carefully. I can guarantee you I won't be staying at any dive motels with my woman in New Mexico."Howdy FJ. It appears they picked the motel in question because of their dog,"Russell, who worked for Headline News (now HLN) from 1983 to 2001, said the couple was heading to California and, after stopping in Albuquerque to have dinner with friends, they decided to get a motel room. They chose Motel 6 because it allows dogs, she said."http://wtvr.com/2015/07/02/cnn-anchor-lynne-russell-motel-shoot-out/
It sounds like the dog is okay. Too bad they didn't make it to California without incident. Arizona is fairly safe. I would love to go back to the Rhythm Room in Phoenix.Just about every hotel is dog-friendly in California because there is big money in it.Kurt,What makes you think this desperate criminal cared enough about his country to vote?
What makes you think this desperate criminal cared enough about his country to vote?How much does one have to care in order to vote? It's pretty easy. For all the theatrical outrage over "vote suppression," one need not go to a great deal of effort to exercise one's right to vote.
By the way, I find this guy an inspiration and someone to be admired greatly.
By the way, I find this guy an inspiration and someone to be admired greatlyBut you want what he does to become a crime, and if he continues to do it, you want paid, armed government muscle to come and arrest him. And if he resists . . .
...and then disarmed for his own good.
At least this clown can see what he's shooting at. Lets hear again from the gun loons how blind people should be shooting guns. HAQ HA HA HA