The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > General Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old March 1, 2019, 04:53 PM   #1
DaleA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 4,321
US News World Report Gun Control/Gun Rights cartoons

There's an article in US New about a judge ruling that armed teachers in Ohio do NOT need the 728 hours of training police officers get they only need 27 hours of training.

There's a political cartoon in the article and a link to see 273 political cartoons about Gun Control/Gun Rights. Guess what, most of them portray gun owners and the NRA in a bad light.

If you want to see the article here's a link to it:
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics...e-gun-training

Scroll down far enough and you'll see a political cartoon about guns and then the link labeled "View All 273 Images".

I actually went thru them and a quick and dirty check reveals there were about 35 of the 273 that were NOT anti-gun/NRA.

Last edited by DaleA; March 1, 2019 at 05:32 PM. Reason: quick and dirty check of pro/anti
DaleA is offline  
Old March 1, 2019, 05:15 PM   #2
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 7,932
Here’s how that works: the more money you pay for cartoons, the more cartoons you’ll get reflecting tbat view.

Bloomberg is mounting a two-front war where he is paying generously for anti-gun opinion while chopping off gun manufacturers and gun rights groups from capital, banking, payment processing, and other common financial services unless they toe the Bloomberg line.
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old March 1, 2019, 08:54 PM   #3
kenny53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 30, 2015
Location: My back yard
Posts: 606
Dem's and leftist libs just don't get it. I have had a gun sitting next to me all evening and nothing happened, it's like that every evening. It's the heart of the man not the object he uses as a weapon.
kenny53 is offline  
Old March 1, 2019, 09:00 PM   #4
PhotonGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2019
Posts: 104
Quote:
There's an article in US New about a judge ruling that armed teachers in Ohio do NOT need the 728 hours of training police officers get they only need 27 hours of training.

There's a political cartoon in the article and a link to see 273 political cartoons about Gun Control/Gun Rights. Guess what, most of them portray gun owners and the NRA in a bad light.

If you want to see the article here's a link to it:
https://www.usnews.com/news/politics...e-gun-training

Scroll down far enough and you'll see a political cartoon about guns and then the link labeled "View All 273 Images".

I actually went thru them and a quick and dirty check reveals there were about 35 of the 273 that were NOT anti-gun/NRA.
The article did not mention that the 728 hours of training required for police officers that most of it is not firearms training. There is so much other stuff you have to know if you're going to be a police officer and firearms training makes up only a small fraction of what you do learn when you go through police training. I've spoken with people who have been through the academy and out of all your time in the academy only two weeks are spent on firearms training. So the mandatory firearms training for police officers is very marginal, I myself have had far more firearms training than the minimal requirement.
PhotonGuy is offline  
Old March 2, 2019, 01:04 AM   #5
DaleA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 4,321
In my state, Minnesota, the anti-gun folk have been told to dial back the rhetoric on gun owners.

That is, they are telling their folk NOT to portray all gun owners as over weight, slobbering, white guys with an arsenal of weapons. They are told NOT to use the term "gun nuts". They want to engage with hunters so that they can get reasonable common sense gun laws passed. This year they are ONLY going after "universal background checks" and "red flag-gun confiscation" laws. Sigh.
DaleA is offline  
Old March 2, 2019, 01:05 PM   #6
PhotonGuy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 1, 2019
Posts: 104
Quote:
In my state, Minnesota, the anti-gun folk have been told to dial back the rhetoric on gun owners.
There is no such thing as being anti-gun in this day and age. Some people might be anti gun rights or anti 2nd Amendment but you can't really be anti gun since there will always be somebody with guns, if nobody else the government.

Quote:
That is, they are telling their folk NOT to portray all gun owners as over weight, slobbering, white guys with an arsenal of weapons. They are told NOT to use the term "gun nuts". They want to engage with hunters so that they can get reasonable common sense gun laws passed. This year they are ONLY going after "universal background checks" and "red flag-gun confiscation" laws. Sigh.
Sadly that might work with lots of gun owners. There are lots of people who might own guns that are stashed away in the attic or wherever and only see occasional use during the hunting season. Such people might be all for "universal background check", "red flag laws", "assault weapons bans" and "handgun bans" as long as they can keep their break open shotguns they use for duck hunting.
PhotonGuy is offline  
Old March 2, 2019, 11:32 PM   #7
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,631
Quote:
There is no such thing as being anti-gun in this day and age.
Sure there is. There are people who believe no one, including the police and the military should have guns. There aren't a LOT of them, and they generally lead well insulated pampered lives, but they're out there.

There are a lot more people who are anti-gun in the sense of being against guns in the hands of private citizens. They're ok with guns in the hands of the military, the police, private security and anyone else they believe they own, but not for the rest of us.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old March 3, 2019, 05:49 PM   #8
riffraff
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 21, 2016
Posts: 518
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
Sure there is. There are people who believe no one, including the police and the military should have guns. There aren't a LOT of them, and they generally lead well insulated pampered lives, but they're out there.

There are a lot more people who are anti-gun in the sense of being against guns in the hands of private citizens. They're ok with guns in the hands of the military, the police, private security and anyone else they believe they own, but not for the rest of us.
Its unfortunate but I've known more than a couple military/vet folks who express a bit of support for those ideas too - stating just anyone shouldn't be able to buy x/y/z all willy nilly, pointing to training that ordinary citizens lack and kinda beating their chest about it. Elitists. Drums up support from "experts" on such things. Fortunately that does not seem to be generally shared.
riffraff is offline  
Old March 4, 2019, 09:00 AM   #9
USNRet93
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2018
Location: Republic of Boulder, USA
Posts: 817
Quote:
Originally Posted by 44 AMP View Post
Sure there is. There are people who believe no one, including the police and the military should have guns. There aren't a LOT of them, and they generally lead well insulated pampered lives, but they're out there.

There are a lot more people who are anti-gun in the sense of being against guns in the hands of private citizens. They're ok with guns in the hands of the military, the police, private security and anyone else they believe they own, but not for the rest of us.
Yes there is, all true but I wince at a notion that nobody really recognizes nor caters to, the groups(large) in the middle. It really isn't a binary, zero sum problem..if you are 'anti gun', confiscate all guns nor if you are 'pro gun'..'buy anything at any time for any reason anywhere'..

BUT mention anything about any big or small gun 'control' law, regulation, rule, idea and labeling results.
Quote:
Its unfortunate but I've known more than a couple military/vet folks who express a bit of support for those ideas too - stating just anyone shouldn't be able to buy x/y/z all willy nilly, pointing to training that ordinary citizens lack and kinda beating their chest about it. Elitists.
There are a lot of 'us' in the middle, who own guns, shoot guns, have a CCWP but also see a LOT of 'gun mayhem' occurring almost every day.. and nope, I have no solutions..might not be any..donno..just a retired USN Fighter pilot who owns 4 guns.

__________________
PhormerPhantomPhlyer

"Tools not Trophies”
USNRet93 is offline  
Old March 4, 2019, 01:56 PM   #10
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 19,631
Quote:
a judge ruling that armed teachers in Ohio do NOT need the 728 hours of training police officers get they only need 27 hours of training.
My calculator says 728 hours is 18.2 40hr weeks. Or, put another way, that's FOUR and a half MONTHS of 8hr a day, Monday through Friday instruction.

I'd have to agree with that judge, armed teachers do not NEED four and half months of 8 hr a day instruction in order to be competent to use a firearm.

I believe that is a bit longer than Marine Corps boot camp. I know its almost 3 times the Army Basic Training I went through over 40 years ago...
(and, only one week of that was actual weapons training...)

The fact that someone apparently actually proposed that number a needed training, and the reporting on a judge saying tis not needed as if that were somehow a bad thing just shows how deeply people are committed against the idea, and also shows how some people are idiots, despite their actual IQ.


Quote:
mention anything about any big or small gun 'control' law, regulation, rule, idea and labeling results
Not sure if its just a sign of the times, or something else, but you find it with nearly every subject these days. As soon as something is brought up, certain people jump to the extreme far end of the matter and go downhill from there.

As to people with military experience supporting gun control (or anything else), I can understand that. Not agree, but understand.

Military service teaches (or for many of us, affirms or re-affirms) our belief in our rights and protecting them, along with duty to country and pride of service. But it also teaches something else, something not often talked about, and that is that, certain people are, and will be, irresponsible, outside of a controlled environment.

Quote:
also see a LOT of 'gun mayhem' occurring almost every day.. and nope, I have no solutions..might not be any..donno..j
I see it too. And I believe that there is no solution that will completely end violence. Not as long as human beings are involved. Even in completely "gun free" environments, (such as prison), people are beaten, robbed, raped, and murdered. Its not the gun that does it, its the criminals.

That being the case, I do think there is a "solution" that would reduce the violence (not eliminate), but the cost of doing so is not socially acceptable at this time.

Nothing but physical force will stop the death seeking nihilist, but the rest of the people who harm others generally want to live, so they can continue to harm others, and those people will be deterred (to a degree, at least) if they actually believe they will be caught and put away for good.

And that's what I think would work to reduce the current levels of mayhem. Take the "hit", suffer the innocents blood spilled, but remove the cause, the person who did it, (NOT the tools used) from society, permanently.

We can debate life in prison vs. capital punishment if you wish, other than the "waste" of tax dollars I don't care which one is the choice, what I do care about is that the killer never, ever, ever gets out to do it again. No parole, no time off for good behavior, no insanity defense, no exceptions of any kind.


Look at those old movies, where the crook taunts the cops, with "you'll never take me alive Copper!!!" The reason he was willing to die in a shootout with the cops was that he believed the certainty that if they took him alive he was going to the get the chair or go to the gas chamber, anyway.


I think capital punishment is a deterrent (though its really tough to prove a negative), some people think it isn't. I don't know with certainty, but what I am certain of is that no one who has been capitally punished has EVER been a repeat offender.

A raptor doesn't become a rabbit because you lock it in a cage for 20 years...
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2018 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.06384 seconds with 8 queries