Another Cyclist Murdered
- Thread starter xmonger
- Start date
The day our country resembles Russia, Afghanistan, or Vietnam, we have much bigger problems to worry about. A few armed citizens are not going to make a difference.
Most of those “goat herders” were supplied with military hardware.
TJYeti
Knows about bikes
Does the mustang tow that comfortably, and is it hard to conceal?
Attachments
serviceguy
Well-Known Member
I forgot to mention in my previous post (about why people want to stop the debate) that the alternative technique is to start throwing temper tantrums accusing the other side of doing the same. Also, just because you (generic) put the word factual before whatever BS it doesn't actually make it factual.
Just for kicks I'll add that I do not own a gun, and when I was trusted with one by my government (not the US) I considered it a huge responsibility as I was supposed to carry it with me at all time and use it if necessary, even if I wasn't personally in danger (Leo in LEO).
Back to the original topic, I don't think packing a gun while riding would actually serve any purpose, unless the attacker were to give enough warning for you, the attacked, to grab your gun and respond. In the specific case, the perp ran the cyclist over and stabbed him while already unconscious, or at least incapacitated, on the ground...good luck trying to unholster or even running away if you're so inclined. I believe that the cases when carrying a weapon while riding would be beneficial are very limited.
With reference to the gun debate, I believe it's one of those thing that prove that some people either cannot use simple logic or are intellectually dishonest. The most recent events in Michigan kind of confirm this in my opinion, as the killer was able to purchase a gun legally because an earlier gun related charge was reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor by an apparently pro-gun control DA. If you ask me, I think he would have killed anyway either getting a gun illegally or using a different mean, according to the pro-gun control crowd instead...we need to pass new, stricter gun control laws, so they can bypass them too...
Just for kicks I'll add that I do not own a gun, and when I was trusted with one by my government (not the US) I considered it a huge responsibility as I was supposed to carry it with me at all time and use it if necessary, even if I wasn't personally in danger (Leo in LEO).
Back to the original topic, I don't think packing a gun while riding would actually serve any purpose, unless the attacker were to give enough warning for you, the attacked, to grab your gun and respond. In the specific case, the perp ran the cyclist over and stabbed him while already unconscious, or at least incapacitated, on the ground...good luck trying to unholster or even running away if you're so inclined. I believe that the cases when carrying a weapon while riding would be beneficial are very limited.
With reference to the gun debate, I believe it's one of those thing that prove that some people either cannot use simple logic or are intellectually dishonest. The most recent events in Michigan kind of confirm this in my opinion, as the killer was able to purchase a gun legally because an earlier gun related charge was reduced from a felony to a misdemeanor by an apparently pro-gun control DA. If you ask me, I think he would have killed anyway either getting a gun illegally or using a different mean, according to the pro-gun control crowd instead...we need to pass new, stricter gun control laws, so they can bypass them too...
xmonger
Active Member
Yes, the Michigan gun shooting was tragic and was avoidable imho. He was a felon, the DA let him off and dropped charges completely previously because that is what they are doing now.
Our local PD left a voice message last year. "Please lock your vehicles and don't leave any keys inside. Even when we catch the perpetrators they are not detained for long and suffer no consequences. So they return to steal vehicles again."
They stopped leaving those messages because they were told to. It appears that the local DA has an agenda and property theft and public safety isn't it.
Last edited:
rick81721
Lothar
Ah the old I can't craft a rational argument so just resort to ad hominem. So typical of the left.
Tim
aka sptimmy43
The first thing plead out in court by career criminals are the gun crimes. They usually carry the stiffest penalties (as @Johnny Utah mentioned above, mandatory 10yrs in prison or more) and can be leveraged by prosecutors to get a guilty plea for other charges, often with a lighter sentence. But hey, a win is a win.
The rub is that if a squeaky-clean honest citizen with no criminal intent makes a simple mistake with how they transport a firearm, or makes an "unnecessary" stop on the way to the range, or violates any multitude of other restrictions placed upon legal gun ownership, they will face the mandatory 10 years in state prison with no other charges to leverage a plea. The criminals carry on and honest citizen's lives get ruined by technicalities of the laws that are meant to "save" us all.
At the most basic level, criminals, by definition, don't follow laws. I can't understand the logic of how enacting more laws will affect or reduce criminal behavior.
The reference to Chicago is a good one. The gun laws there are probably the strictest in the entire nation. There is essentially no legal gun ownership there. How can it be that murders in Chicago are off the charts?
rick81721
Lothar
The left's "answer" is - they all come from surrounding states like Indiana. The facts: 50% were bought in IL, 30% from surrounding states, the other 20% from elsewhere
https://abc7chicago.com/chicago-crime-shooting-guns-illinois-gun-laws/11937013/
serviceguy
Well-Known Member
Also, that answer implies that the gun purchased out of state 'forced' the shooter to commit the crime...as opposed to the right's answer that the shooter would not be deterred from committing the crime by the fact that he had to purchase the gun somewhere else, or illegally.
Captain Brainstorm
Well-Known Member
Wrong. SOME were once legal. Criminals aren’t walking around with $1200 Sigs and H&K’s. Most are cheap foreign knockoffs. Along with illegal drugs, there’s a very healthy illegal gun import business that piggybacks on it.
Tim
aka sptimmy43
Also, the guns purchased out of state and brought into IL are still illegal to own in IL. Again, it's the criminal mindset that is the problem, not the gun. Above and beyond the guns being illegal, the crimes they committed with are also illegal. Murder is illegal. Rape is illegal. Armed robbery is illegal.
As was stated above, the guns don't force the owners to kill people. It's the other way around.
As was stated above, the guns don't force the owners to kill people. It's the other way around.
TJYeti
Knows about bikes
Watch any of the live PD type shows and you’ll quickly see (if you’re a gun person) that 9 out of 10 are glocks or smith and Wesson m&ps. I was working at rtsp when they were broken into and only the cabinet of $10k+ boutique 1911s were taken. They did not end up with street level criminals.
Johnny Utah
Well-Known Member
Because the Chicago gun laws are some of the strictest in the country.
Great shot at deflecting doe.
Mahnken
Well-Known Member
And in New Orleans anyone over 18 can buy a private sale gun with no background check.
Johnny Utah
Well-Known Member
Great, so you are agreeing the strict guns laws in Chicago do not help anything than?
Mahnken
Well-Known Member
Chicago is more nuanced than you make it out to be. Are you agreeing that lax gun laws are worse at keeping violent crime down than strict gun laws?
rick81721
Lothar
Of course he ignores the fact that Baltimore, MD is much worse than New Orleans. And is in one of the least gun- friendly states. I would also point out that Newark, NJ also has a higher murder rate than Chicago.
