Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumPA LAC stops murder spree
Police: Bar patron shot Plymouth homicide suspect
An armed patron stopped a gunman's shooting rampage early Sunday outside a Plymouth bar, shooting the suspect multiple times on East Main Street after he fatally shot one man and critically wounded another, arrest papers revealed.
Investigators said the suspect, William J. Allabaugh, 25, shot a man in the head inside Bonnie's Food and Spirits just before 2 a.m., then fatally shot another customer outside the 133 E. Main St. pub.
When Allabaugh pointed his semi-automatic pistol at another patron, the man, Mark Ktytor, pulled his own gun and fired multiple rounds at Allabaugh, according to arrest papers. The shots dropped Allabaugh to the ground and left him with critical injuries, police said.
Companion Story:
Police: Plymouth shooter wasn't provoked[/url]
PLYMOUTH - Sipping a soda and chatting on his cellphone, Stephen Hollman didn't see the ambush coming - a gunshot blast to his head.
Fleeing the barroom chaos on his way home, Scott Luzetsky walked into the enraged gunman's line of fire on East Main Street, suffering a fatal shot in the heart.
Police and an eyewitness of Sunday's shooting rampage say both shooting victims were innocent bystanders who did nothing to provoke the attack at Bonnie's Food and Spirits, 133 E. Main St.
What do you know! An armed, concealed carrying, LAC stopping a shotgun wielding nut on a shooting spree.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Loudly
(2,436 posts)Whoop de doo.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... aren't a solution to illegal guns? What is ... Candy Floss and Unicorns?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)Turn off the spigot.
Provide a workable solution to prevent illegal guns from out-numbering legal guns in your confiscation scenario?
Remember: Wishing weapons away isn't a workable solution
Loudly
(2,436 posts)You're chasing your own tail.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... you solution is to never sell another legal gun again? How does that make anyone more safe?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)The slogan goes like this:
If you don't want confiscation, accept natural attrition.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... so confiscation only disarms the law-abiding.
Given that half of the weapons in my personal inventory are based-on designs over 100 years old, it's going to be a VERY long time before the existing 200 million or so legal fire-arms disappear.
What you will do is create a very brisk black-market in new weapons and a very lucrative legal market in repair and upgrades for existing weapons. Neither of which will make a single person more safe.
Face it -- if you want to make people more safe -- promote firearms safety training -- just like the NRA.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)The empowerment of people to conveniently kill each other and cause grave bodily harm to each other?
Face it. More guns and ammunition don't make anyone safer.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... compared with legal gun ownership says your basic assumption is wrong.
In fact, they say just the opposite. If you want to make people safer from guns -- train more gun owners in safe usage and accurate shooting.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)Co-workers, estranged family members, schoolmates and innocent bystanders don't want to be thought of as statistics.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)They will always be able to get firearms. The only natural attrition will be with the honest citizen whom you and your like minded allies have put in harms way because of your scheme.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,764 posts)The good news: Easy; it's natural sequelae. They shoot each other. 
The bad news: The better shooters die last. 
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,764 posts)I prefer attrition.
Natural selection will remove from the gene pool those overly committed to the pro-control cause.
Oneka
(653 posts)or a gun banned tomorrow still constitutes nothing more then a gun ban.
Who would enforce such a ban?
spin
(17,493 posts)I believe that the best solution to overcoming our addition to fossil fuels is to move to nuclear fusion. However at this time it is technologically impossible.
Ah, fusion. Long promised, both on Do the Math and in real life, fusion is regarded as the ultimate power source—the holy grail—the “arrival” of the human species. Talk of fusion conjures visions of green fields and rainbows and bunny rabbits…and a unicorn too, I hear. But I strike too harsh a tone in my jest. Fusion is indeed a stunningly potent source of energy that falls firmly on the reality side of the science fiction divide—unlike unicorns. Indeed, fusion has been achieved (sub break-even) in the lab, and in the deadliest of bombs. On the flip side, fusion has been actively pursued as the heir-apparent of nuclear fission for over 60 years. We are still decades away from realizing the dream, causing many to wonder exactly what kind of “dream” this is.
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Nuclear-Fusion-The-Power-Source-of-the-Future...the-Far-Off-Future.html
Seriously how many elected Democrats in Congress do you would believe would support your idea of "turning off the spigot" and stopping the manufacture and sale of new firearms to civilians in our nation?
I'm not trying to be sarcastic or insulting. I am merely pointing out that reality is a bitch.
We are making a lot of headway on reducing violent crime in our nation as it has returned to levels last seen in the late sixties.
Crime in the United States
Crime statistics for the United States are published annually by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Uniform Crime Reports which represents crimes reported to the police. The Bureau of Justice Statistics conducts the annual National Crime Victimization Survey which captures crimes not reported to the police.
In 2009 America's crime rate was roughly the same as in 1968, with the homicide rate being at its lowest level since 1964. Overall, the national crime rate was 3466 crimes per 100,000 residents, down from 3680 crimes per 100,000 residents forty years earlier in 1969 (-9.4%).[1]
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States)
And despite the fact that the sale of firearms including "assault weapons" has skyrocketed in the last decade and victim rights laws such as "shall issue" concealed carry, castle doctrine, and stand your ground laws have passed in many states; the number of firearm related homicides have decreased dramatically.
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States)
Now I do not attribute the drop in violent crime to the victim rights laws that I mentioned, but it is possible that they had an effect. If my profession was as a home invader I might decide to break into homes that were not occupied if I feared facing an armed homeowner. If I earned money by robbing people on the streets and encountered an individual who pulled a handgun on me, I would probably decide to try breaking into cars or stealing them for a chop shop.
Quite possibly the biggest factor for why violent crime has dropped is far more proactive law enforcement plus the advent of cell phones and street cameras. However the high rate of gun sales and victim rights laws did not cause the violent crime rate to dramatically increase as many on your side of the gun control issue predicted. That is simply an indisputable fact, like it or not.
Much of the violent crime rate today is the result of turf warfare between competing drug gangs. This is probably because our War on Drugs was lost years ago. If we were to legalize certain drugs in our nation we might take much of the profit motive out of smuggling and dealing these items. Unfortunately once again this is currently politically impossible.
What I fear is that the level of drug violence between gangs in the United States will increase in the future and we may find ourselves in a situation as currently exists in Mexico. Many of the drug cartels in Mexico are absolutely ruthless and it will be very difficult for our law enforcement to fight these organized, well armed gangs. Drug cartels use weaponry far more deadly than can be purchased in Mom and Pop gun shops or from gun shows in our nation. Modern fully automatic military grade rifles, hand grenades and RPGs are commonly used in Mexico which has very strong gun control laws. Civilian ownership of firearms will do little to decrease such activity. Local law enforcement will find themselves at a significant disadvantage if facing members of the Sinaloa or Los Zetas Cartel. I currently see no realistic solution to this potential problem. I can only hope that my fear will prove wrong.
I feel both sides of the gun control issue can compromise and work together to further reduce gun violence in our nation. Unfortunately compromise is a lost art in our nation.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)The black market is going to provide guns for those that want them. How do you stop the smuggling of weapons across our southern and northern borders? We can't even stop the tons of drugs that enter the country every month. What about the skilled machinist who could make them in their basements or garages?
Why would you want to leave honest citizen's unarmed against the criminal element who would have no trouble acquiring firearms?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)At the moment, we've got FACTORIES turning that product out now.
And RETAIL STORES putting it in the hands of the public.
That's got to stop.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... morally equivalent to molesting a child? I'm curious.
Are you confused on exactly how guns are made? Or are you not aware of how child pornography is made?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)A thing deemed harmful in itself.
You don't need to have had anything to do with creating it.
Merely possessing it is a crime.
In fact, merely possessing it expressed as bits on a digital storage medium is a crime.
As though it were some threat to life and limb.
Isn't that an interesting contradiction relative to guns and ammunition?
Which ARE a threat to life and limb!
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... you must abuse a child. You can't make child pornography without doing that. So, by having child pornography, you have participated in or facilitated the molestation of a child -- a criminal act.
Manufacturing a firearm requires no abuse of anyone anyone -- so your "analogy" is specious.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)No more than the manufacturer of the firearm has participated in or facilitated a resulting murder.
But since you wish to go down that path, the possessor of CP would be an "accessory" AFTER the fact.
And manufacturers of firearms enjoy protection of federal legislation absolving them of responsibility even though they are accessories BEFORE the fact.
Causation of death and grave bodily harm immune from prosecution and civil liability!
Astounding!
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)Do you feel it's ever justified to take a human life?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)Through oversupply and enhanced lethality?
Obviously, you and I are asking different questions.
And mine goes beyond this particular story.
Reasonable_Argument
(881 posts)I get tired of having the same argument over and over again with different people. To be honest, I'm starting to feel like I should just copy and paste old comments. We have vastly different views on gun rights and the 2nd amendment. So let's set that aside for the moment. If you believe it's ok to take a human life in certain situations, should you ever find yourself in such a situation, would you not want the best available weapon to defend yourself?
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... you're OK with taking a human life -- as long as it's difficult?
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,764 posts)
Camera makers and media designers would be accessories BEFORE the fact when it comes to child porn because even if breaking the law wasn't the intended purpose when designed and built they are facilitating the child being abused.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,764 posts)The pre-crime bureau is hard at work now building a case. 
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)comparing skilled machinist's to child pornographers, you really need to edit or delete your post.
You haven't answered the question of how do you stop the smuggling of weapons across our borders?
How do you stop the criminal element, who will always be able to acquire guns, from victimizing the citizens whom you have disarmed?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)Logic before outrage, glacierbay.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)Child porn is a vile crime that will get you killed in prison and to equate skilled machinists with them is a vile comparison and shows that you have crossed the line with your hatred of guns.
Still haven't answered the question of stopping firearms smuggling across our borders.
BTW, I'm a cop, have been for nigh onto 30 years and I fully support private ownership of firearms and support qualified citizens carrying concealed weapons as does most of the dept. I work for.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)But guns in the hands of the public put police officers at risk.
And cause you to need to shoot people.
Stay safe.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)I have never shot anyone yet and (knocks on wood) I hope I don't have to in the little time I have left before the big R.
The only "public" that is a danger to me is the criminal element, not the citizen who has qualified to have a CCL. I have yet to have any problems with a citizen with a CCL, I have had citizens come to my aid when trying to arrest suspects who have had CCL's, no shooting involved, but one did intervene and and stop a suspect that was just kicking my ass.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Photographers who photograph children having sex -- BAD
Photographers who photograph children riding ponies at birthday parties -- GOOD
Are you still unclear on the difference?
Loudly
(2,436 posts)The slogan goes like this:
Clocks good, Glocks bad.
Child pornography's existance means that someone, has actually harmed an innocent child.
and a Glock is an inanimate object, that has done no harm.
When child pornography happens, we don't seek to limit the ownership of cameras , to law abiding citizens, now do we?
We are still comparing producers of child porn, and machinists who build firearms, right?
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,764 posts)Could various replies in this thread including yours be grouped under the heading "How to silence loudly."??
Oneka
(653 posts)Shares, that burden, if our replies are united.
discntnt_irny_srcsm
(18,764 posts) holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)I don't remember the movie but I recently saw a great spoof on the "do I cut the red wire or the blue wire" theme. Just before he looks at the bomb the hero asks that question, then looks and sees that all the wires are the same color.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... the "Skytanic" episode of "Archer" -- 1st Season. There is a hilarious bomb disarming segment.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)krispos42
(49,445 posts).32/.380 machine pistol
http://thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/Expedient-Homemade-Firearms-Vol-II-PA-Luty.pdf
A 9mm submachine gun
http://thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/BSP-SMG_Book.pdf
Make your own silencer
http://thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/DrinkBottleSilencer.pdf
Make your own silenced .22 pistol
http://thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/22pistol.pdf
Make your own zip gun
http://thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/ZipGun.pdf
Make your own 12-gauge pistol
http://www.thehomegunsmith.com/pdf/12g-pistol.pdf
Now, of course, who would build these? Only people planning on using them for a criminal career. But, this would defeat the attempt by you to disarm the criminals by disarming everybody.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)He was (he recently passed) an interesting character. A long time gun-rights advocate in the UK, his books are full of disclaimers that the plans in his books are published to show the futility of banning guns when they can so easily be made with common machine shop tools. He even shows how a version of the Luty SMG can be made with common British plumbing supplies -- available commercially -- without the use of any power tools.
His home-smithed weapons are actually things of beauty and simplicity that can be easily mass-produced (he gives details on how to do just that). His weapon designs are not the kind of thing a thug might throw together with duct tape and steel piping. He gives particular attention to finishing the weapons with case hardening or bluing to make them professional-looking and durable.
I know more than a few people who would love to make one just for the challenge of the project with no criminal intent at all.
I just added a photo of a Luty 9mm SMG (from the Internet) that is right from his plans -- no modifications.
This is a 9mm (but can be made in pretty much any pistol caliber) with a 500 rpm cyclical rate. The magazine is only 18-round for the sake of simplicity and reliability. The barrel isn't rifled and there are no sights -- but it was designed as a CQC weapon (under 50 metres) so these would be expensive and unnecessary additions.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)Find it and eradicate it as a matter of public policy.
krispos42
(49,445 posts)
Loudly
(2,436 posts)krispos42
(49,445 posts)Whole corn, vegetable oil, maltodextrin, salt, and cheddar cheese.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)An economist would ask what is the additional marginal utility of that last one?
krispos42
(49,445 posts)I thought we were posting random sentences unrelated to the topic at hand.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)A legally armed citizen stopped a cold blooded murderer before he could continue his rampage. What would you have done in this situation? Called the police? We are rarely there to stop something like this, the murderer could have shot several more innocent people before we would arrive on scene.
This sounds like a good shoot.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)The sad fact is, Shares, is that when you are confronted with violence it is better to have a weapon to defend yourself than not.
Guns are the best weapon currently available for that job.
Yes, if guns are available for people to defend themselves from violence, then there will be people who will use them to inflict violence.
But since people will inflict violence whether guns are available or not, all getting rid of guns will do is make every single victim of violent crime be at the mercy of anyone stronger than they are.
That is not an acceptable solution.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)is nothing but a poison that kills the patient a little slower then the cancer.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)Great minds think alike.
Missycim
(950 posts)I am just a truck driver
Antivenom (or antivenin or antivenene) is a biological product used in the treatment of venomous bites or stings. Antivenom is created by milking venom from the desired snake
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antivenom
Poison as antidote indeed.
trouble.smith
(374 posts)Thanks for playing. Better luck next time.
ileus
(15,396 posts)
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)According to the anti one or several of the following must happen if an LAC tries to stop a mass shooting:
He will misidentify the shooter and shoot the wrong person.
Even if he does correctly identify the shooter, he will miss and hit innocent bystanders.
The police will arrive and shoot the LAC.
He will get shot by another LAC who thinks he is the active shooter.
He will freeze up, wet his pants, and cry for Momma. (An anti actually posted that LACs would do that in a crisis.)
Instead of all the anti-gun, hand-wringing, stuff that they predicted, he shot the perp and stopped the crime, thereby saving an unknown number of lives.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)The perp had a gun to begin with.
Accordingly, the story *starts* that way.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)by a citizen with a CCL, how is that bad?
This murderer would have probably gone on to murder who knows how many more before the police arrived on scene.
In my book, this is a righteous shoot and no DA in his right mind is going to bring charges.
This citizen will probably get a medal from the city.
Loudly
(2,436 posts)My complaint is that access to guns and ammunition started the trouble.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)which is blatantly false. The trouble started when he was asked to leave, he could have left and gone home and that would have been the end of it, instead, he decided he was going to murder someone and critically injure someone else, the gun didn't cause him to do this, his warped mind did.
He could just have as easily killed one and critically injured another with a knife.
I'll tell ya, I am much more terrified of someone with a knife who knows how to use it over someone with a gun. I've seen what a knife can do and I'll tell ya, it ain't pretty.
Response to glacierbay (Reply #36)
Loudly This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Regardless of his current username
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)...and I will continue to do so.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)Arrest papers filed by state and Plymouth police indicate the altercation in the bar started after Mr. Allabaugh was asked to leave because customers complained he may be armed with a gun.
Witnesses told police Mr. Allabaugh, who denied he had a gun, became "upset" while being booted from the bar. Mr. Allabaugh then pulled a gun and shot bar patron Stephen Hollman, 29, in the head, arrest papers say.
http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/detail-emerge-in-plymouth-shootout-that-left-one-dead-1.1371176
So it's possible the shooter was also concealed carrying?
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)but nowhere does it say he had a valid CCL. Nice innuendo there.
I'll wait for the official police report before I make up my mind about the murderer.
SecularMotion
(7,981 posts)The statement in the article says -
Loudly
(2,436 posts)That's what guns are for.
glacierbay
(2,477 posts)Firearms have a number of uses, hunting for food, target shooting, self defense, competition shooting, lots of other uses that just murder.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)that an armed individual stopped violence, you can't stand it so you've hijacked the entire thread. Please don't think we can't see through that.
Atypical Liberal
(5,412 posts)Looks like we've shot down two memes: you don't need guns in bars and people being shot at don't have a chance to resist with a gun.
BigAlanMac
(59 posts)Atypical Liberal
"Outside a bar no less!
Looks like we've shot down two memes: you don't need guns in bars and people being shot at don't have a chance to resist with a gun."
My point exactly!