2000+ call for guns during the RNC
03-27-2016, 12:30 AM
Bud, I am an infantry combat veteran and I spent a year with my battalion sniper squad. I am also a competitive pistol shooter. I do my own gunsmithing, load my own rounds, and whenever I'm not stuck in the shithole Northeast I shoot at long range as much as I can. So, I'm glad you've read some books, but I don't need any lectures and I have actual real world experience when it comes to killing people with guns and having people try to kill me.
I think you've missed my point, but fortunately, you're making my point for me. The candidates are vulnerable all over the place. This is no different.
So, what's your rationale for endangering all the other attendees of the event who
don't have a twenty man security detail by forcing them to disarm when there have been untold thousands of threats of violence from people like the Black Lives Matter nuts, and actual riots in the streets?
You're seemingly convinced there's something magical about guns that make them a threat to candidates in a way that other things aren't. But there are loads of ways for the candidates to be attacked that have nothing to do with guns. If the USSS had to choose between some assclown trying to kill their protectee with a handgun and their protectee's plane going down because someone was bribed to sabotage the plane, which do you suppose they would prefer?
Sure, my examples weren't entirely reasonable. That's because I was mocking your ridiculous notion that the crowd will be packed with crazy people who are willing to die to kill a candidate when, I reiterate,
there hasn't been a serious attempt on a president or candidate on US soil since 1981. You just got through telling me how vulnerable Trump was in transit, and the same thing applies to all the other candidates and the president himself. So if the country is so full of these crazy-but-competent fucks, why haven't they taken their shots? Your logic is lacking.
Incidentally, your comparison of a presidential candidate to Lee Harvey Oswald is ill considered. A low value, much hated jerkoff who was involved in a highly suspicious shooting being escorted by some cops who aren't even looking around at the crowd--I've seen the footage--vs an extremely high value target with a vigilant security detail of highly trained professionals... yeah, totally the same. A better example is the one I alluded to before (twice), when John Hinckley Jr shot Reagan in 1981. The Secret Service has changed their TTPs since then, I assure you.
Let's consider some scenarios here. There's a shooter in the crowd while the candidate is speaking at a podium. He draws his weapon and starts shooting. What is the better option for stopping him quickly?
Scenario 1 - Only USSS agents are armed:
Scenario 2 - Some members of the audience who are normal CHL holders are armed:
Which of those looks better? And for fun, let's consider your multiple batshit crazy shooters at once scenario:
Would you rather a handful of USSS agents be the only people capable of returning fire in that scenario, or that the members of the crowd--99.9% of whom will be good people--could effectively help out?
You know the real, fundamental difference between us? I believe that generally, Americans are good and capable people. The sort of person who carries a gun responsibly is the sort of person I want nearby when the shit hits the fan. People who think Americans can't be trusted with guns around politicians are the sort of people who say things like "Well, I know I can handle a gun, but I don't think
those people should be able to have them" with a sneer of contempt.
Quote:Quote:
I want my guns and I don't want anymore fucking restrictions on them. Having 20K people locked and loaded at a convention with Trump there is asking for trouble when people have continuously been making death threats towards the guy. If even one shot were fired they would immediately put more restrictions on guns.
I'm not worried about that. Gun control has been losing for the last 12+ years. Sandy Hook showed that Americans have soundly rejected the notion that the answer to crazy fucks is more gun laws. Since then, we've had a few other high profile mass shootings and gun control has gained no more traction in the sane parts of the nation. So why would something happening at the RNC change that?