BREAKING: California High School Shooting - at least 2 injured

Originally posted by network dude

The type of gun is irrelevant. The will of the shooter is key. Find out why anyone would want to kill innocent people, and you can fix the REAL problem.

The reason why people would want to kill each other is irrelevant. The mood of the moment is key.

Take away guns and people find it a lot #ing harder to kill each other when they get angry/drunk/high.

reply to post by godofme


Obviously you have a skewed vision of what the U.S. is REALLY like. Stay home, enjoy the MSM lies they are feeding you and keep living in a belief that the U.S. is the wild west

Originally posted by network dude
Here is a test question,
Which one would you fear more? Which one could kill more people?
( the sniper is using a bolt action rifle. Not on the ban list.)

So you have a teenager who has never served but has lots of cool guns, or a trained killer.

These days with the optics and the quality of the rifles you really don't have to be all that "trained". The common bolt actions with decent ammo come off the assembly line shooting sub MOA.

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by network dude
Here is a test question,
Which one would you fear more? Which one could kill more people?
( the sniper is using a bolt action rifle. Not on the ban list.)

So you have a teenager who has never served but has lots of cool guns, or a trained killer.

These days with the optics and the quality of the rifles you really don't have to be all that "trained". The common bolt actions with decent ammo come off the assembly line shooting sub MOA.

Really? SO...all they have to do is buy one of these highly accurate production rifles, and a modern quality scope, and then some "decent" ammo, and what...?

The gun/scope/ammo combo kills people for you? Without having to be "all that trained"?

Could you specify the brands of these amazing items that compensate for ability and knowledge? Because, I have been around guns for most of my life....I have sold guns for a living, I have a decent collection, but I have never heard of these guns, that can take all of the training out of purchasing and installing the right scope bases, setting the eye relief, for the shooter and the caliber, zeroing the scope to the proper distance, and then compensates automatically, for things like, elevation, bore temperature, windage, bullet drop, humidity, and even the Coriolis effect, at great distances....

Not to mention, stacking the trigger, adjusting the take up and the over travel, and setting the optimal break pressure...Hummmmph....

I mean, you are aware that these sub MOA rifles do not come with iron sights, right?

where are the threads about actors ?

mysterious cars ?

unanswered questions ?

bodycount matters....

sad

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt


This is probably the scope they were talking about.

elitedaily.com...

The future of warfare could depend on a controversial “smart-gun,” which boasts a computerized scope that lets anyone achieve a head shot, no matter what their level of marksmanship is.

The smart-gun goes on sale at the beginning of next week, and is WiFi-enabled.

The TrackingPoint rifle uses its three on-board processors and precision guided firing system to evaluate environmental factors such as wind speed and direction in order to accurately hit a target from nearly a mile away.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

Really? SO...all they have to do is buy one of these highly accurate production rifles, and a modern quality scope, and then some "decent" ammo, and what...?

The gun/scope/ammo combo kills people for you? Without having to be "all that trained"?

Not really, some of the worst shootings were done by people with no training...

Could you specify the brands of these amazing items that compensate for ability and knowledge? Because, I have been around guns for most of my life....I have sold guns for a living, I have a decent collection, but I have never heard of these guns, that can take all of the training out of purchasing and installing the right scope bases, setting the eye relief, for the shooter and the caliber, zeroing the scope to the proper distance, and then compensates automatically, for things like, elevation, bore temperature, windage, bullet drop, humidity, and even the Coriolis effect, at great distances....

Not to mention, stacking the trigger, adjusting the take up and the over travel, and setting the optimal break pressure...Hummmmph....

Well it is clearly apparent you are more concerned with rattling off technical crap then about anything I said. Well you may be used to someone just acting like they are in awe of your little rant, I could care less. But many people are getting .7 .6 sub MOA out of Savage rifles and Remington 700s.
But your average mass shooter is not going to be going for 1000 yard shots and probably nothing over 100 yards .

I mean, you are aware that these sub MOA rifles do not come with iron sights, right?

You are aware that optics does not mean strictly iron sights right?

Originally posted by JBA2848
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

 

This is probably the scope they were talking about.

elitedaily.com...

The future of warfare could depend on a controversial “smart-gun,” which boasts a computerized scope that lets anyone achieve a head shot, no matter what their level of marksmanship is.

The smart-gun goes on sale at the beginning of next week, and is WiFi-enabled.

The TrackingPoint rifle uses its three on-board processors and precision guided firing system to evaluate environmental factors such as wind speed and direction in order to accurately hit a target from nearly a mile away.

Apparently, you didn't read his/her description....There is nothing "common" about the smart-gun...And, I'm sure it will be quite cost prohibitive, for many, many years to come...And, it would still have to be set up, by someone who knew WTH they were doing, before anyone could run around making headshots, over their shoulder and behind their back, with their eyes closed...

And, the unit would still have to be programmed, with ammuntion specs, for long range accuracy, I'm sure, as well!

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Apparently, you didn't read his/her description....There is nothing "common" about the smart-gun...And, I'm sure it will be quite cost prohibitive, for many, many years to come...Adn, it would still have to be set up, by someone who knew WTH they were doing, before you could run around making headshots, over your shoulder and behind your back, with your eyes closed...

Nothing common about the scope but I said common rifles and the quality of the optics. But most people just take their guns to a gunsmith and have them put on what you want.

Originally posted by Superhans
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

 

Really? SO...all they have to do is buy one of these highly accurate production rifles, and a modern quality scope, and then some "decent" ammo, and what...?

The gun/scope/ammo combo kills people for you? Without having to be "all that trained"?

Could you specify the brands of these amazing items that compensate for ability and knowledge? Because, I have been around guns for most of my life....I have sold guns for a living, I have a decent collection, but I have never heard of these guns, that can take all of the training out of purchasing and installing the right scope bases, setting the eye relief, for the shooter and the caliber, zeroing the scope to the proper distance, and then compensates automatically, for things like, elevation, bore temperature, windage, bullet drop, humidity, and even the Coriolis effect, at great distances....

Not to mention, stacking the trigger, adjusting the take up and the over travel, and setting the optimal break pressure...Hummmmph....

Well it is clearly apparent you are more concerned with rattling off technical crap then about anything I said. Well you may be used to someone just acting like they are in awe of your little rant, I could care less. But many people are getting .7 .6 sub MOA out of Savage rifles and Remington 700s.
But your average mass shooter is not going to be going for 1000 yard shots and probably nothing over 100 yards .

I mean, you are aware that these sub MOA rifles do not come with iron sights, right?

You are aware that optics does not mean strictly iron sights right?

edit on 11-1-2013 by Superhans because: (no reason given)

No, Sir/Ma'am...My point is that ALL of that "technical crap" would have to be accounted for and completed, before anyone could even begin to make an accurate shot with an out of the box, sub minute of angle, bolt gun.

It's not a rant. It's the FACTS! You see, you and most of the anti-gun folk, think that mere possession of a firearm, automatically makes almost every joe blow, an expert marksman! When the FACTS are, that it takes a great deal of skill to even make an accurate shot, out beyond a few hundred yards. And, it's darn near impossible, without having set up the weapon's optics, first!

Sorry. Was that too technical?

Try this...Leroy and his homies, don't instantly transform into Navy S.E.A.L.s, the second they pick up a firearm.
And, even if they stole a weapon that had already been set-up, they most likely don't have the skill to use it effectively.
That's why they prefer handguns! The original point and click, interface...

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

No, Sir/Ma'am...My point is that ALL of that "technical crap" would have to be accounted for and completed, before anyone could even begin to make an accurate shot with an out of the box, sub minute of angle, bolt gun.

The mass shooter is not going to be going for long shots that would require a lot of that.

It's not a rant. It's the FACTS! You see, you and most of the anti-gun folk...

Oh I see. Not only are you used to people oohing and ahhing over your ability to go into rants showing off you knowledge of guns while ignoring what is being said, you also think im "anti-gun". That is pretty funny.

think that mere possession of a firearm, automatically makes almost every joe blow, an expert marksman! When the FACTS are, that it takes a great deal of skill to even make an accurate shot, out beyond a few hundred yards. And, it's darn near impossible, without having set up the weapon's optics, first!

See? You are more concerned about ranting than you are about things like reading. why bother quoting a post if you are not going to read it? You must have skipped part where I said "But your average mass shooter is not going to be going for 1000 yard shots and probably nothing over 100 yards ."

Sorry. Was that too technical?

No, it just came off as a rant. That you are talking at me and not with me. You are really just feeding the stereotype of the pig headed loud mouth American with a gun.

Try this...Leroy and his homies, don't instantly transform into Navy S.E.A.L.s, the second they pick up a firearm.
And, even if they stole a weapon that had already been set-up, they most likely don't have the skill to use it effectively.
That's why they prefer handguns! The original point and click, interface...

And what does that have to do with the price of tea in china? You are just arguing this horrible strawman. read more and post less

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Apparently, you didn't read his/her description....There is nothing "common" about the smart-gun...And, I'm sure it will be quite cost prohibitive, for many, many years to come...Adn, it would still have to be set up, by someone who knew WTH they were doing, before you could run around making headshots, over your shoulder and behind your back, with your eyes closed...

Nothing common about the scope but I said common rifles and the quality of the optics. But most people just take their guns to a gunsmith and have them put on what you want.

I am a gunsmith! I never had a gang-banger bring in his Browning A-bolt chambered in 7mm WSM and his Leupold Mark 4 and ask me to zero it to 600 yards...I guess they have someone else do it, for them...

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt

Apparently, you didn't read his/her description....There is nothing "common" about the smart-gun...And, I'm sure it will be quite cost prohibitive, for many, many years to come...Adn, it would still have to be set up, by someone who knew WTH they were doing, before you could run around making headshots, over your shoulder and behind your back, with your eyes closed...

Nothing common about the scope but I said common rifles and the quality of the optics. But most people just take their guns to a gunsmith and have them put on what you want.

I am a gunsmith! I never had a gang-banger bring in his Browning A-bolt chambered in 7mm WSM and his Leupold Mark 4 and ask me to zero it to 600 yards...I guess they have someone else do it, for them...

What in the world are you talking about?? Who said anything about gang-bangers making 600 yard shots???
Here is what you should do
1. Read a post
2. Think of your reply
3. Look objectively and ask yourself "Am I really replying to what this person said or am I just saying whatever comes to mind"
4. If you really are replying post it, if not put it in a blog somewhere.

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by network dude
Here is a test question,
Which one would you fear more? Which one could kill more people?
( the sniper is using a bolt action rifle. Not on the ban list.)

So you have a teenager who has never served but has lots of cool guns, or a trained killer.

These days with the optics and the quality of the rifles you really don't have to be all that "trained". The common bolt actions with decent ammo come off the assembly line shooting sub MOA.

ATS entity with dude pic avatar....I started HERE, with your conversation...I took offense at your baseless asumption, that a common assembly line rifle with a nice scope and decent ammo, would suddenly make a mostly, untrained shooter, a good enough shot, to compare to a true marksman...

Being a "True Marksman", I found your analogy to be degenerating, and obtuse...That's all...

If I mistook your comparison of the subject, please excuse my "technical crap" and subsequent "rants". As, I have spent many a year, honing my skills and expanding my craft, while electing to pass on the mind-reading classes...If only I would have made time for the latter, I might have avoided the leap of conclusion.

Sue me.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

ATS entity with dude pic avatar....

wait what??? lol

I started HERE, with your conversation...I took offense at your baseless asumption, that a common assembly line rifle with a nice scope and decent ammo, would suddenly make a mostly, untrained shooter, a good enough shot, to compare to a true marksman...

Well we are getting close to a reply that fits what I said, we are not there yet.
please highlight in bold where I said a line rifle with a scope would make an untrained shooter a good enough shot to compare to a "true marksman".
Just curious, in your mind can you tell the difference between stuff you make up and stuff I write? I honestly want to know

Being a "True Marksman", I found your analogy to be degenerating, and obtuse...That's all...

please what analogy is that? I want to know specifically. Do you know what an analogy is?

If I mistook your comparison of the subject, please excuse my "technical crap" and subsequent "rants". As, I have spent many a year, honing my skills and expanding my craft, while electing to pass on the mind-reading classes...If only I would have made time for the latter, I might have avoided the leap of conclusion.

Sue me.

There we go, I was not asking you to mind read but to regular read. Just read the text, don't make up things that get you angry.

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by network dude
Here is a test question,
Which one would you fear more? Which one could kill more people?
( the sniper is using a bolt action rifle. Not on the ban list.)

So you have a teenager who has never served but has lots of cool guns, or a trained killer.

These days with the optics and the quality of the rifles you really don't have to be all that "trained". The common bolt actions with decent ammo come off the assembly line shooting sub MOA.

Again...You quoted network dude's post here...

reply to post by network dude
[more

Then you stated...

These days with the optics and the quality of the rifles you really don't have to be all that "trained".

When "reading" your statement, in context with the post that you quoted, I inferred that you were stating that the chubby kid, with the right "line gun" would not have to have much training, to do what the sniper, could...

Is this not what you meant? Because it is what you wrote. Therefore, my assumption of your analogy of the chubby kid with a sub MOA production gun, would be nearly as feared, as the trained marksman with his rifle, even though the prior, did not possess an equal level of training, seems logical.

Originally posted by WeRpeons

The teacher in the room, who was trying to evacuate the classroom of about two dozen students, began engaging the suspect in conversation. The sheriff said at one point, the shooter told the teacher, "I don't want to shoot you" and named the person he wanted to shoot. A campus supervisor also joined the conversation, and they were able to get the young man to put the shotgun down. Police arrived and took the suspect into custody by 9:20 a.m. Police officials say the teacher's action saved many of the students.

With all the flack teacher's get because of the state of education in this country, a majority of those serving to educate kids are devoted professionals who don't think twice about protecting children whose parents have intrusted to them. They put their lives in danger not only when there's a shootings, but breaking up fights, defusing dangerous confrontations between students, protecting students from bullying and coming to a students aid when they have a school related accident. This is not to mention the many times they lend an ear to students who come to them for comfort and support because of broken homes, verbal and physical abuse.

What is wrong with this country is that, in recent decades, we have been made to lose our trust, in others, our institutions, our communities. For our form of govt to function properly, for the good of all, our elected leaders in Congress need to trust one another; witness the dysfunction and paralysis without such trust. We have gone from being The Home of the Brave to The Land of the Afraid.

What saved this horrible situation was the trust, and respect, already built up between two people, the shooter and the teacher. Trust saved lives. Trust made a situation better.

The Taft gunman was armed with a shotgun. He was reportedly carrying a dozen or more shotgun shells in his pocket, which, had he had the time and motivation, would have to be manually loaded. Kern County sheriff's officials say between two and four shots were fired at two students, and only one was hit. Had the shooter been wielding a semi-automatic gun the outcome most certainly would have been different. According to an FBI study, even a novice shooter can fire off three rounds a second with a semi-automatic rifle. A shotgun can certainly be deadly -- especially in a crowded place, given the way the shot disperses -- but it's much more cumbersome and certainly doesn't have the rapid-fire capabilities of an AR-15 with high-capacity magazines, where a sustained spray of bullets can make up for poor aim.

It could have been soooo much worse ...

For that we can be thankful that we live in a state with some of the strictest gun laws in the nation. California already bans the sale of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. And it has much stricter requirements for registration and training and rigorous background checks on gun sales. Interestingly, our strong gun laws can be traced to Republican Gov. George Deukmejian, who passed the nation's first assault weapons ban in California.

The shooting in Taft also points out the major weakness in proposals by the National Rifle Association and others that the only way to counter a bad guy with a gun is with a good guy with a gun. It was the heroic actions of an unarmed science teacher and a campus supervisor that neutralized the shooter at Taft High -- by way of simple conversation.
......
At the end of the day, it was a close-knit community, a teacher well-liked by his students and a campus supervisor who stopped an incident from potential escalation into a full-fledged national tragedy.

Bakersfield Californian

We have our guns here. (My shotgun is in my bedroom.) We target shoot. We hunt in season on our farmland and national forests. That 16 year old could have been one of many in this area who get tags to hunt deer and bear, or enjoy the taste of game birds.

Apparently we also have something in this rural area, and that is good old fashioned trust and sense of community. We may be in the West, but it is not the West of the myth of the rugged individual, who has no community and must go it alone. People go crazy doing that.

This nation has gone crazy trying to be a nation of rugged individuals. Instead of fighting each other, out of fear, we need to understand that we're all in this together, and act heroically, like this teacher did. Until we quit running away to hide, in powerlessness and fear, and start coming together as a visible community force, with strength and courage, nothing will change for our collective good. Trust and respect. We couldn't have our Constitution and Nation without it.

reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

When "reading" your statement, in context with the post that you quoted, I inferred that you were stating that the chubby kid, with the right "line gun" would not have to have much training, to do what the sniper, could...

Is this not what you meant? Because it is what you wrote. Therefore, my assumption of your analogy of the chubby kid with a sub MOA production gun, would be nearly as feared, as the trained marksman with his rifle, even though the prior, did not possess an equal level of training, seems logical.

He was saying who would kill more people the kid with the guns or the sniper with a rifle. My point was you don't have to be some trained sniper to kill people with a bolt action. It is not a magic gun.
Charles Whitman the "true marksman" killed 16 people
The kids have surpassed this number.

I think it is stupid....cars do not need more than 50 HP, no one NEEDS to go over 50 at anytime to get anywhere...we need to regulate cars a lot more with the 30k plus deaths and 100k of injuries. Why should anyone ride a motorcycle too...no one needs one...

Do you all think it is a bigger priority that we fix what kills 30k and not really worry about rifles that less than 400 people a year are murdered with?

Originally posted by Superhans
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt

 

When "reading" your statement, in context with the post that you quoted, I inferred that you were stating that the chubby kid, with the right "line gun" would not have to have much training, to do what the sniper, could...

Is this not what you meant? Because it is what you wrote. Therefore, my assumption of your analogy of the chubby kid with a sub MOA production gun, would be nearly as feared, as the trained marksman with his rifle, even though the prior, did not possess an equal level of training, seems logical.

He was saying who would kill more people the kid with the guns or the sniper with a rifle. My point was you don't have to be some trained sniper to kill people with a bolt action. It is not a magic gun.
Charles Whitman the "true marksman" killed 16 people
The kids have surpassed this number.

Not with a bolt gun, they haven't!

Which leads me to my point...You deflected his question, by minimizing the difference in skill, between the two.
And, now, you attempt to compare apples to oranges, once again, by imagining a competition between a nut from yester-year in a tower, picking off random pedestrians at distance, and a nut assassinating trapped and helpless children.

What was your point to that, again?