Opinions/Discussions on Guns

NankerPhelge

WANKER
Messages
805
Reaction score
126
Is this the other side of the spectrum of conservative thought?
\

I'm really not sure what you mean by this, or how to respond one way or the other. But, anyway, I am sure most people on this board have now read of the woman who pushed the guy off the subway platform in New York yesterday to be splattered by an oncoming train. I know its just one poor bastard that got killed as compared to 20 kids. But, if you are paying attention, these random killings happen all the time, and by many different means. Why does our society produce an ever increasing number of people who engage in this behavior? Isn't that really the "crux of the biscuit" we should be exploring if we are truly concerned about solving this problem?
 

Downinthebend

New member
Messages
1,035
Reaction score
77
So the gun regulators are arguing that armed guards would be just as ineffective as every single anti-gun law on the books?
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Or we can take the other side and leave that retired officer with his non existent service revolver (no one uses those anymore, don't try saying they do) and let him sit at home. He watches the news and sees that once again a psycho shoots up his girlfriends classroom then kills himself just as police show up, just as they always do. He wonders to himself, "if I were there could I have saved lives?". Possibly, but we will never know because even with tons of gun laws in place we still have these shootings, especially to places where the shooter can do his evil completely unopposed.

I like the way you think! Sixty-four year old dating a much younger teacher! I guess there is hope for me yet! The rest is that same "what if mentality." There is nothing to line up. I don't care if it is a younger peace officer at an earlier stage of his career. He is going to be distracted by his girlfriend working in the building.

Seriously, who would take a job in a school with so many Innocent civilians in the line of fire. I mean my normal self defense round is a .38 special, for my .357 and that would still wander with too much stopping power. (Or "two" for Dick.) There are .357 rounds that shred Kevlar, but they would shred children in classrooms behind walls. (This is why no competent military planner would choose to make a stand at a school.)
 
B

Buster Bluth

Guest
Bogs,

I have seen you use this term "conflation" many times, but I am sorry to say I have never been able to figure out just what you mean. Although I know what the word means, I sometimes disagree with your application of the concept to some points of view with which you disagree. That's really just an aside, though. My main point is a follows:

I don't think the fact that the Secret Service is part of Sidwell's armed security force diminishes the fact this school, as part of its standard operating procedure knows that the best way to protect those kids from threats is with trained armed guards at that school. That is why others of the Washington D.C. elite (including NBC's David Gregory) send their kids there. They know that the kids will be protected.

It is also the reason why armed guards and some armed teachers are in every school in Israel. They also know that the best way to protect children from nuts who want to kill them, be they terrorists or just insane maniacs (like we have here) is to have a good guy with a gun to face the bad guy with the gun, not just some good person standing there (to quote a line from the Godfather) with nothing but his dick in his hand. I guess you can call this "conflation" or whatever other flaw of logic you may see, but I think the NRA is absolutely correct to say the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Hell, if that weren't the case, we'd send our soldiers to war armed with pious platitudes to use in reasoning with our enemies. And whether they are people trying to kidnap the President's kids, terrorists trying to kill Jews, or insane psyhcopaths intent on killing as many kids in as dramatic a fashion as possible, they are armed enemies. Doesn't matter, our kids deserve realistic and effective protection from these kind of enemies, not just another stupid government program, another few gun control laws to add to the over 20,000 that already exist, or more political wrangling over yet another civil rights issue. I abhor the fact that our society has come to this, but the fact is, it has and so we have to deal with where we are at.

Which, once again is the point I have been trying to make in this thread that obviously pkt77242 doesn't get and thinks is just bullshit (thanks for defending me, by the way). The very fact that we are having this debate, and that the necessity of putting armed guards in schools to protect our children is worthy of serious discussion, should, in my opinion, cause every one of us to do some real deep soul-searching as to why our society has gone in this direction. When my father was a kid in the late 40's, he and his buddies would all get on the school bus with their .22 rifles so they could go squirrel hunting right after school. They would put them behind the bus driver in the first seat, and when they got to school, they had to put them in their lockers. Nobody ever got shot, and nobody ever got bent out of shape, because nobody ever even dreamed of the idea that one of these kids was going to go nutso and start shooting his classmates. All I am saying is that this shooting, all the other ones, and all the other ever-increasing crazy violent **** that goes on really deserves a much deeper conversation about core issues that nobody seems to want to address. Just yesterday, I read that someone broke into the house of a 76 year old lady in Elkhart, Indiana, and savagely stabbed her to death for no apparant reason. This kind of **** happens all the time. Is the best we are going to be able to do is to start a debate about butcher knife control? Sometimes I think so. It seems that we, as a society, have lost the will and moral fortitude to really look at ourselves in the mirror and try to understand how the things we value and promote are really, in so many instances, just not all that good and can be directly and empirically related to the increasing number of ill-adjusted, depressed, mentally ill, directionless, and purely evil people who you have worry about committing these heinous types of acts. So, we can blah blah gun control and blah blah more governmental programs for the mentally ill and blah blah economy and on an on and on. But, my opinion is that so long as we live in a society where we, AS A MATTER OF LAW AND POLICY, devalue life, treat matters concerning it as matters of convenience and as commodities to be bought and sold, continue to diminish the importance of the nuclear family as the core building block of a healthy society, promote violence, promote instant gratification as the only value worth striving for, devalue the idea of commitment (and I don't mean the way recruits "commit"--what a laugh--there is no "de-commitment" to a true commitment), marginalize religious beliefs and immediatly deride and impugn any person who brings the idea of God into the public square, and on and on and on, we are just giving feel-good lip-service to the issues of the day, and not really doing anything to truly solve the core problem of the sick society we have created that turns out **** and filth and death in ever-increasing quantity. Pkt77242 doesn't think anything I have said is on the topic. I respectfully disagree--if the topic is trying to solve the problem of a society that produces psychos going into schools and killing kids, then I think I am more on topic than debates about the peripheral, but easy and temporary "solutions" that seem to be the hot topics of public debate. Some good evidence of that is that "gun control" and "violence in movies" and "mental health treatment programs" is all our politicians can talk about. And we all know how good they are at addressing real problems and finding real solutions.

So many words. So few paragraphs...

7DzPH.gif
 
Last edited:
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Bogs,

I have seen you use this term "conflation" many times, but I am sorry to say I have never been able to figure out just what you mean. Although I know what the word means, I sometimes disagree with your application of the concept to some points of view with which you disagree. That's really just an aside, though. My main point is a follows:

I don't think the fact that the Secret Service is part of Sidwell's armed security force diminishes the fact this school, as part of its standard operating procedure knows that the best way to protect those kids from threats is with trained armed guards at that school. That is why others of the Washington D.C. elite (including NBC's David Gregory) send their kids there. They know that the kids will be protected.

It is also the reason why armed guards and some armed teachers are in every school in Israel. They also know that the best way to protect children from nuts who want to kill them, be they terrorists or just insane maniacs (like we have here) is to have a good guy with a gun to face the bad guy with the gun, not just some good person standing there (to quote a line from the Godfather) with nothing but his dick in his hand. I guess you can call this "conflation" or whatever other flaw of logic you may see, but I think the NRA is absolutely correct to say the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Hell, if that weren't the case, we'd send our soldiers to war armed with pious platitudes to use in reasoning with our enemies. And whether they are people trying to kidnap the President's kids, terrorists trying to kill Jews, or insane psyhcopaths intent on killing as many kids in as dramatic a fashion as possible, they are armed enemies. Doesn't matter, our kids deserve realistic and effective protection from these kind of enemies, not just another stupid government program, another few gun control laws to add to the over 20,000 that already exist, or more political wrangling over yet another civil rights issue. I abhor the fact that our society has come to this, but the fact is, it has and so we have to deal with where we are at.

Which, once again is the point I have been trying to make in this thread that obviously pkt77242 doesn't get and thinks is just bullshit (thanks for defending me, by the way). The very fact that we are having this debate, and that the necessity of putting armed guards in schools to protect our children is worthy of serious discussion, should, in my opinion, cause every one of us to do some real deep soul-searching as to why our society has gone in this direction. When my father was a kid in the late 40's, he and his buddies would all get on the school bus with their .22 rifles so they could go squirrel hunting right after school. They would put them behind the bus driver in the first seat, and when they got to school, they had to put them in their lockers. Nobody ever got shot, and nobody ever got bent out of shape, because nobody ever even dreamed of the idea that one of these kids was going to go nutso and start shooting his classmates. All I am saying is that this shooting, all the other ones, and all the other ever-increasing crazy violent **** that goes on really deserves a much deeper conversation about core issues that nobody seems to want to address. Just yesterday, I read that someone broke into the house of a 76 year old lady in Elkhart, Indiana, and savagely stabbed her to death for no apparant reason. This kind of **** happens all the time. Is the best we are going to be able to do is to start a debate about butcher knife control? Sometimes I think so. It seems that we, as a society, have lost the will and moral fortitude to really look at ourselves in the mirror and try to understand how the things we value and promote are really, in so many instances, just not all that good and can be directly and empirically related to the increasing number of ill-adjusted, depressed, mentally ill, directionless, and purely evil people who you have worry about committing these heinous types of acts. So, we can blah blah gun control and blah blah more governmental programs for the mentally ill and blah blah economy and on an on and on. But, my opinion is that so long as we live in a society where we, AS A MATTER OF LAW AND POLICY, devalue life, treat matters concerning it as matters of convenience and as commodities to be bought and sold, continue to diminish the importance of the nuclear family as the core building block of a healthy society, promote violence, promote instant gratification as the only value worth striving for, devalue the idea of commitment (and I don't mean the way recruits "commit"--what a laugh--there is no "de-commitment" to a true commitment), marginalize religious beliefs and immediatly deride and impugn any person who brings the idea of God into the public square, and on and on and on, we are just giving feel-good lip-service to the issues of the day, and not really doing anything to truly solve the core problem of the sick society we have created that turns out **** and filth and death in ever-increasing quantity. Pkt77242 doesn't think anything I have said is on the topic. I respectfully disagree--if the topic is trying to solve the problem of a society that produces psychos going into schools and killing kids, then I think I am more on topic than debates about the peripheral, but easy and temporary "solutions" that seem to be the hot topics of public debate. Some good evidence of that is that "gun control" and "violence in movies" and "mental health treatment programs" is all our politicians can talk about. And we all know how good they are at addressing real problems and finding real solutions.

Nanker, a chara,

First, I am not defending you, I am being civilized, and a good friend (as I would so desire), limited as one can be on the Internet.

I am using the term conflation to highlight the following: "Just because there is a Secret Service Detail of 12, that school or the children that attend, may not be any safer than any other, AND FURTHERMORE, one armed guard and a Secret Service detail have nothing in common as far as ability to respond. The Secret Service works via information. I would like to see how many threats per day the Secret service sorts through, to the point where they have a pretty clear idea of where the threat is coming from. We would be so far away from that setting up for the unpredictable defense from an unknown random gunman. The same thing is true of the Israeli Army, and their schools; they live in the middle of a war.

People don't want to admit to their powerlessness. I get that.

And I am not sure overall violence has increased all that much. I just think the technology of reporting on it got better, then ratings happened and we noticed the "Massive media frenzy made of many events", then our society, politicians, media, and whomever, picked this problem and began focusing on it.

Beir bua agus beannacht,

Bogs
 
B

Buster Bluth

Guest
Would you say its the government's job to help mentally ill people or its the government's job to help insure mentally ill people can't get their hands on guns? or both?

I wonder what George Orwell would say about the government being able to even decide who is mentally ill would turn out? It is such a weird subject. Just a whole bunch of room for corruption, and the gray area must frighten lawyers...or even worse, give them rock-hard lawyer-boners for previously mentioned room for standard lobbying wiggleroom. Sly bastards, equal parts both.

I am not in favor of ANY national law on this matter. But I am in favor of allowing local school districts to decide on their own to issue a firearm to a state-certified instructor. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if my local school district hired, say, a veteran from Iraq as a janitor who has a service permit to have a gun in his office locked up. Or the principal. Whatever. I wouldn't be against that. If you don't like it, don't send your kid there.

That said it's probably worth noting (if it hasn't been), that Columbine has armed people on site (two, I think) and it didn't work. Crazy people will be crazy. I think it's ignorant and arrogant to think we can stop it. Go ahead and buy bullet-proof windows and super-duper doors if you wish though, by all means.
 

brandonnash

New member
Messages
214
Reaction score
9
I like the way you think! Sixty-four year old dating a much younger teacher! I guess there is hope for me yet! The rest is that same "what if mentality." There is nothing to line up. I don't care if it is a younger peace officer at an earlier stage of his career. He is going to be distracted by his girlfriend working in the building.

Seriously, who would take a job in a school with so many Innocent civilians in the line of fire. I mean my normal self defense round is a .38 special, for my .357 and that would still wander with too much stopping power. (Or "two" for Dick.) There are .357 rounds that shred Kevlar, but they would shred children in classrooms behind walls. (This is why no competent military planner would choose to make a stand at a school.)

The psycho's girlfriend, not the guard.

You and others can argue this till you're blue in the face. The fact is that even with any further gun control this will continue to happen. One thing I do know is that when police show up to the scene there is usually one more shot then its over. When faced with the possibility of dying by police bullets or jail time the shooter takes his own life. The killing stops.

You can make new gun laws and the killings won't stop. This is evidenced by killings around the world that happen in countries that have gun laws. People will grab a knife or make a bomb.

You can create different mental health standards and the killing won't stop. Crazy people will always slip through the cracks. Sane people will crack for one reason or another.

Criticize today's TV and video games and even ban them and the killing won't stop. People were doing school shootings/mass killings before we had video games and also before violent movies had taken hold of society.

Point is the killings won't stop with new laws. The only thing that is constant in these school shootings is a lack of armed presence in the schools that have been attacked. That's the one avenue nationally that has not been explored. The places that have armed security magically have less attacks and less frequent deaths.

You may be right about a military planner never tackling that job. Our police in Nashville have pre planning set up for every school. Not to get into specific plans about the schools, but police have mapped out all schools, locations of exits, classrooms, etc. It gets much more detailed past that so I am glad to say that if something bad happened in a Nashville school I am confident that every step has been taken to control a situation and minimizing casualties. This also includes armed police in nearly all schools. Some are older, but still no slouches. One of my best friend's father is a school resource officer. Started with pd in the 70s I would take his shooting skills and general know how over most young cops any day of the week. Even if he still carried a revolver.
 
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
237
\

I'm really not sure what you mean by this, or how to respond one way or the other. But, anyway, I am sure most people on this board have now read of the woman who pushed the guy off the subway platform in New York yesterday to be splattered by an oncoming train. I know its just one poor bastard that got killed as compared to 20 kids. But, if you are paying attention, these random killings happen all the time, and by many different means. Why does our society produce an ever increasing number of people who engage in this behavior? Isn't that really the "crux of the biscuit" we should be exploring if we are truly concerned about solving this problem?

I'm just saying your argument basically says divorce (gay marriage?), lack of religion, etc are the true problems, but if one looks closely there is also a critique of the free market . Which I found strange, that is all...
 

pkt77242

IPA Man
Messages
10,805
Reaction score
719
Bogs,

I have seen you use this term "conflation" many times, but I am sorry to say I have never been able to figure out just what you mean. Although I know what the word means, I sometimes disagree with your application of the concept to some points of view with which you disagree. That's really just an aside, though. My main point is a follows:

I don't think the fact that the Secret Service is part of Sidwell's armed security force diminishes the fact this school, as part of its standard operating procedure knows that the best way to protect those kids from threats is with trained armed guards at that school. That is why others of the Washington D.C. elite (including NBC's David Gregory) send their kids there. They know that the kids will be protected.

It is also the reason why armed guards and some armed teachers are in every school in Israel. They also know that the best way to protect children from nuts who want to kill them, be they terrorists or just insane maniacs (like we have here) is to have a good guy with a gun to face the bad guy with the gun, not just some good person standing there (to quote a line from the Godfather) with nothing but his dick in his hand. I guess you can call this "conflation" or whatever other flaw of logic you may see, but I think the NRA is absolutely correct to say the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Hell, if that weren't the case, we'd send our soldiers to war armed with pious platitudes to use in reasoning with our enemies. And whether they are people trying to kidnap the President's kids, terrorists trying to kill Jews, or insane psyhcopaths intent on killing as many kids in as dramatic a fashion as possible, they are armed enemies. Doesn't matter, our kids deserve realistic and effective protection from these kind of enemies, not just another stupid government program, another few gun control laws to add to the over 20,000 that already exist, or more political wrangling over yet another civil rights issue. I abhor the fact that our society has come to this, but the fact is, it has and so we have to deal with where we are at.

Which, once again is the point I have been trying to make in this thread that obviously pkt77242 doesn't get and thinks is just bullshit (thanks for defending me, by the way). The very fact that we are having this debate, and that the necessity of putting armed guards in schools to protect our children is worthy of serious discussion, should, in my opinion, cause every one of us to do some real deep soul-searching as to why our society has gone in this direction. When my father was a kid in the late 40's, he and his buddies would all get on the school bus with their .22 rifles so they could go squirrel hunting right after school. They would put them behind the bus driver in the first seat, and when they got to school, they had to put them in their lockers. Nobody ever got shot, and nobody ever got bent out of shape, because nobody ever even dreamed of the idea that one of these kids was going to go nutso and start shooting his classmates. All I am saying is that this shooting, all the other ones, and all the other ever-increasing crazy violent **** that goes on really deserves a much deeper conversation about core issues that nobody seems to want to address. Just yesterday, I read that someone broke into the house of a 76 year old lady in Elkhart, Indiana, and savagely stabbed her to death for no apparant reason. This kind of **** happens all the time. Is the best we are going to be able to do is to start a debate about butcher knife control? Sometimes I think so. It seems that we, as a society, have lost the will and moral fortitude to really look at ourselves in the mirror and try to understand how the things we value and promote are really, in so many instances, just not all that good and can be directly and empirically related to the increasing number of ill-adjusted, depressed, mentally ill, directionless, and purely evil people who you have worry about committing these heinous types of acts. So, we can blah blah gun control and blah blah more governmental programs for the mentally ill and blah blah economy and on an on and on. But, my opinion is that so long as we live in a society where we, AS A MATTER OF LAW AND POLICY, devalue life, treat matters concerning it as matters of convenience and as commodities to be bought and sold, continue to diminish the importance of the nuclear family as the core building block of a healthy society, promote violence, promote instant gratification as the only value worth striving for, devalue the idea of commitment (and I don't mean the way recruits "commit"--what a laugh--there is no "de-commitment" to a true commitment), marginalize religious beliefs and immediatly deride and impugn any person who brings the idea of God into the public square, and on and on and on, we are just giving feel-good lip-service to the issues of the day, and not really doing anything to truly solve the core problem of the sick society we have created that turns out **** and filth and death in ever-increasing quantity. Pkt77242 doesn't think anything I have said is on the topic. I respectfully disagree--if the topic is trying to solve the problem of a society that produces psychos going into schools and killing kids, then I think I am more on topic than debates about the peripheral, but easy and temporary "solutions" that seem to be the hot topics of public debate. Some good evidence of that is that "gun control" and "violence in movies" and "mental health treatment programs" is all our politicians can talk about. And we all know how good they are at addressing real problems and finding real solutions.

First I am going to point out that you have provided zero proof or scholarly studies that this has anything to do with it, so it is your opinion not a root cause. Second it is bullshit because you are taking the focus away from things that could actually fix the problem to focus on personal pet issues that will not improve the situation. I could just as easily say that relgion is the problem as religion breeds hate and hate breeds violent acts and it would be just as truthful and on topic as anything you said.

Now it is time to actually talk about things that will help fix the problems (and yes restrictive gun laws do seem to help prevent these types of acts (and I will show evidence here of it unlike you).

1. Gun laws, ban assault rifles, ban large capacity magazines, require trigger locks.
America's Gun Violence Map - The Daily Beast
And the classic studies, that more guns=more homicides
Homicide - Firearms Research - Harvard Injury Control Research Center - Harvard School of Public Health

2. Mental health is an issue (I am looking at the Virginia Tech, Gabby Giffords and CO shooting in particular where our mental health system failed).

3. If you really want to talk about the root cause, how about we talk about poverty (which has a strong correlation America's Gun Violence Map - The Daily Beast
Or we can talk about education level The Geography of U.S. Gun Violence - Neighborhoods - The Atlantic Cities

See we can talk about things that have a strong correlation to gun violence or we can avoid the root causes of violence and live in a fantasy land were religion, and all the other things that you bring up.

Also we could talk about why african americans and latinos are signifcantly more likely to die from gun violence than caucasians, as that might actually help solve this issue (hint it has to do with poverty, and education levels).

I would love to link more studies and maps but I need to spend some time with the children so have fun.
 

pkt77242

IPA Man
Messages
10,805
Reaction score
719
The psycho's girlfriend, not the guard.

You and others can argue this till you're blue in the face. The fact is that even with any further gun control this will continue to happen. One thing I do know is that when police show up to the scene there is usually one more shot then its over. When faced with the possibility of dying by police bullets or jail time the shooter takes his own life. The killing stops.

You can make new gun laws and the killings won't stop. This is evidenced by killings around the world that happen in countries that have gun laws. People will grab a knife or make a bomb.

You can create different mental health standards and the killing won't stop. Crazy people will always slip through the cracks. Sane people will crack for one reason or another.

Criticize today's TV and video games and even ban them and the killing won't stop. People were doing school shootings/mass killings before we had video games and also before violent movies had taken hold of society.

Point is the killings won't stop with new laws. The only thing that is constant in these school shootings is a lack of armed presence in the schools that have been attacked. That's the one avenue nationally that has not been explored. The places that have armed security magically have less attacks and less frequent deaths.

You may be right about a military planner never tackling that job. Our police in Nashville have pre planning set up for every school. Not to get into specific plans about the schools, but police have mapped out all schools, locations of exits, classrooms, etc. It gets much more detailed past that so I am glad to say that if something bad happened in a Nashville school I am confident that every step has been taken to control a situation and minimizing casualties. This also includes armed police in nearly all schools. Some are older, but still no slouches. One of my best friend's father is a school resource officer. Started with pd in the 70s I would take his shooting skills and general know how over most young cops any day of the week. Even if he still carried a revolver.

No one is arguing that all killing will stop, but smart effective gun laws and an efficient mental heath system would cut down on the amount of mass murders and most likely limit the innocents harmed. Read my previous post for studies on gun laws and deaths.
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
Hey, guys,

Back to the original point. Remember LA half a dozen years ago? Two armed perps, in full, head-to-toe body armor, with automatic weapons, wiped out a dozen years ago? The injured count rose to nearly twenty. The one gunman died when he accidently or purposely shot himself in the head, and the other took off his body armor as he ran low on amunition. Swat couldn't stop this, they could barely contain this. How is a couple of trained guards going to make a difference, other than sacrificing their lives?

North Hollywood bank heist erupts in gunbattle;
6 civilians, 10 officers injured; 2 robbers killed:
March 1, 1997
By Gregory J. Wilcox, Jaxon Van Derbeken and Jeannette DeSantis, Staff Writersdailynews.com
Posted: 09/24/2010 05:22:12 PM PDT
September 25, 2010 1:40 AM GMTUpdated: 09/24/2010 06:40:39 PM PDT


Related
Shooting in North Hollywood: A retrospective
Sep 24:

LAPD sergeant gets a sendoff to match his medals Counselors comfort community's fears:

March 7, 1997 Customer, dog wounded in bank shootout: March 1, 1997

Sgt. Steven Gomez, the last active LAPD SWAT officer involved in the Bank of America shootout in North Hollywood in 1997, retired Friday. Here's a look back at the now-infamous shooting that injured 19 officers and civilians after two heavily armed gunmen opened fire with fully automated rifles. From an article that appeared in the Los Angeles Daily News on March 7, 1997 —

Armed with automatic weapons and body armor, two masked men robbed a North Hollywood bank Friday and then were killed trying to blast their way to freedom, spraying bullets into houses and cars as the world witnessed it live on television.

For five long hours, the heist gripped the east San Fernando Valley in terror, closing the Hollywood (170) Freeway, gridlocking North Hollywood streets, rerouting air traffic at Burbank Airport and shocking the city and nation with the naked brutality of these two robbers.

Nearly 350 heavily armed Los Angeles Police Department officers and FBI agents converged on the Bank of America branch near Laurel Plaza, trading shots with the two robbers. One was killed when his gun jammed. A second was badly wounded and bled to death in the street after trying to commandeer a pickup truck from a passing motorist who ran for his life.

Police searched into the night working methodically house to house looking for a third and possibly a fourth suspect. The search was unsuccessful but police did not discount the possibility that other accomplices may be at large.

Friday's robbery helped seal Southern California's reputation as "bank robbery capital of the world," with its average of three heists a day.

"It is the worst display of violent gunfire in Los Angeles since the Symbionese Liberation Army shootout in 1974," police Chief Willie L. Williams said during a news conference. "This is the thin blue line in all of our cities."

Through it all, despite the enormous firepower, amazingly only the robbers suffered life-threatening injuries. At times, civilians put their lives at risk to help police in tremendous displays of heroism.

Ten police officers were injured, including one of the first to respond to the 9 a.m. robbery. Shot in the leg and arm, Stuart Guy was rescued by a colleague, Tracy Angeles, who pulled him into a patrol car that then backed away from the bank at high speed.

In the ensuing firefights, six citizens were wounded by errant gunshots, flying shrapnel and traffic accidents caused by the confusion. None of the injuries was believed to be serious.

"This is a pretty good example of what police officers anywhere in the country can be faced with any day," Williams said. "The only group of people out there in this city that intentionally put themselves in harm's way are the LAPD."

Mayor Richard Riordan arrived at the scene and praised the police for their bravery and diligence under fire. "The training that they had paid off in this dangerous situation," he said.

The mayor used the event to condemn the sale of assault weapons to citizens, saying: "Today was a very good example of why they should be outlawed."

Within moments after the holdup, police began to cordon off several square miles of North Hollywood so they could search for suspects. A military-style armored personnel carrier with a battering ram was dispatched to level a garage where police thought suspects were hiding. No one was found.

"There were only two we know who were actively involved," Williams said, adding that he did not expect that any additional robbers escaped the cordoned-off area. "When you're dressed for war, it's hard to melt into the population."

The robbers are believed to be military veterans, now members of what the FBI says is the notoriously violent "Shoot 'em Up Bandits," also nicknamed the "AK-47 Bandits." The FBI has tied the group to two heists at Bank of America branches in the Valley, one May 2 and the other May 31, 1996.

As in past robberies, Friday's began when two robbers wearing ski masks and dressed entirely in black entered the bank, ordered customers to the floor and let loose a burst of automatic gunfire. Using armor-piercing bullets, the robbers blasted their way through barricades designed to protect tellers.

"It is nothing short of full-scale military battle facing this kind of thing," said Bill Rehder, bank robbery coordinator for the FBI's Los Angeles office. "I've never seen anything like it. There hasn't been anything like it."

The LAPD officers responded as best they could, Rehder said. "They just covered themselves in heroism," he said.

It all began when a bank employee tripped an alarm. The two robbers left the bank wheeling a handcart filled with money. And then for some reason, one of them went back into the bank and opened fire, injuring an undetermined number of people inside.

The first to respond were two uniformed officers, but they quickly were strafed with automatic gunfire. They called for backup, but officers responding also found themselves under a rain of bullets.

"At the time we rolled up, we were pinned down by lots of gunfire. We were just trying to take cover," said Lt. Nick Zingo, a North Hollywood watch commander. "I was concerned at the time that we did not have the gun power to battle these suspects. And I was worried that my officers were going to get killed."

Thousands of rounds flew through the neighborhood, bounded by Kittridge and Hamlin streets and Victory and Laurel Canyon boulevards. Residents peered out windows - and then hid.

In the street, the officers radioed for more ammunition and made sure they were wearing bulletproof vests. They already were hearing that the suspects were dressed in full body armor.

"We had reports that the suspects were being hit but not going down," said Sgt. Sam Layton of the LAPD's North Hollywood Division.

Armed only with their shotguns and 9 mm handguns, the officers went to a nearby gun shop, where employees broke out shotguns and rifles and more powerful ammunition. Officers faced what Williams said were armor-piercing, automatic rifles that could slice through a police-issue bulletproof vest 200 yards away.

"They had our officers, who were undergunned, at bay for almost an hour. It was a horrendous situation," said Cmdr. Tim McBride.

With an assault rifle in hand, one robber walked slowly down Kittridge Street, taking cover behind a white sedan driven by his accomplice. At one point, police say, his gun jammed and almost immediately he was shot to death.

Adding to the surreal scene, unaware motorists drove along Kittridge, slowing when they saw the white sedan bearing the second robber. At one point, the robber blasted through the windshield at a brown pickup truck.

The truck's driver ran.

Caught between the truck and sedan, the surviving robber traded shots with police, until officers outflanked him. Badly wounded, he raised his arms, apparently in surrender, and then dropped to the ground in a fetal position.

Officers rushed around the car, grabbed his gun and spread him out.

It wasn't clear immediately to police whether there were other robbers trying to escape. At one point, police thought that with two dead they were looking for three more suspects.

Vans with blacked-out windows disgorged scores of officers wearing helmets and carrying high-powered automatic weapons. Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies arrived, as did officers from the California Highway Patrol.

Thirty-five-year-old Jack Klian, a free-lance cameraman from North Hollywood, rushed to the area with a video camera and expected to record a car chase - but he found a terrifying scene unfolding.

"The bullets were flying left and right, it was terrible. I was trying to stay alive," he said.

SHOOTOUT: The victims

Hospitals called in extra personnel and tightened security as victims flooded in for treatment. In all, 10 officers were hurt, seven of them with gunshot wounds, two with knee injuries and one in a traffic accident. At least five civilians also were hurt, some with multiple gunshot wounds. Two suspects died in the street after gunbattles with police.

Here is a breakdown of the injured.

LOS ANGELES POLICE

Sgt. Larry D. Haynes, 41, of the North Hollywood Division; 16 years on the job. He was treated at Northridge Hospital Medical Center for gunshot wounds to the shoulder and legs. Released.

Officer Martin Whitfield, 29, of the Van Nuys Division; six years on the job. He remains at Northridge Hospital Medical Center with a broken right femur, injuries from shrapnel on his left side, chest and arm. Also had glass in his chest. Underwent surgery.

Officer James Zboravan, 26, of the North Hollywood Division; eight months on the job. Treated for a gunshot wound in the buttocks at Northridge Hospital Medical Center and released.

Officer David Grimes, 29, of the North Hollywood Division was treated at North Hollywood Medical Center for traffic accident injuries and released. He has two years with the department.

Officer Manuel Valladares, 51, of the North Hollywood Division, received a superficial wound to the head and was treated and released from North Hollywood Medical Center. A 26-year Los Angeles Police Department veteran.

Officer William Lantz, 28, of the Foothill Division was treated at North Hollywood Medical Center for abrasions and contusions, and released. He is in his sixth month on the job.

Detective William Krulac, 49, of the North Hollywood Division suffered a gunshot wound to the right ankle. He was treated at Valley Presbyterian Hospital. Like Valladares, he is a 26-year police veteran.

Detective Tracy Angeles, 29, of the North Hollywood Division's juvenile division, suffered a graze wound to the stomach and buttocks. Angeles was treated at Encino-Tarzana Medical Center and released. Six years on the job.

Officer Stuart Guy, 31, of the North Hollywood Division, was treated at Holy Cross Medical Center for a gunshot wound to the right leg and arm. Seven years on the job.

Officer John Goodman, 28, of the Van Nuys Division was treated at Kaiser-Permanente in Woodland Hills for abrasions and released. Six years on the job.

THE CIVILIANS

Tracy Fisher, 28, of Studio City was grazed by a bullet while on her way to the Bank of America ATM. She received eight stitches at North Hollywood Medical Center and was released.

An unidentified man with Fisher underwent surgery at North Hollywood Medical Center for gunshot wounds in the torso.

Four other civilians also were hurt, although no further information is available. One is believed to have been critically wounded in the traffic accident with Officer Grimes.

THE SUSPECTS

An unidentified gunman was shot by police after he tried to commandeer a pickup truck from a bystander.

An unidentified gunman emptied the rounds from his AK-47, then resorted to a handgun. He swaggered down the street firing at officers and was shot and killed.

Copyright 2012 LA Daily News. All rights reserved.
 
Last edited:

In Lou I Trust

Offseason gon' be long
Messages
1,108
Reaction score
188
Now New York can become even safer... right? I mean, they already had some of the most strict gun laws in the country which have contributed to their low crime rates... I imagine Cali will try to one-up these idiots.
 

GO IRISH!!!

Nashville Livin'!
Messages
3,695
Reaction score
428
Now New York can become even safer... right? I mean, they already had some of the most strict gun laws in the country which have contributed to their low crime rates... I imagine Cali will try to one-up these idiots.

You're probably right. I would love to know how many tax dollars were spent on the discussion about lowering the number of rounds in a magazine from 10 to 8. Limiting those two extra bullets are going to make the streets much safer, right? The number is so arbitrary, it isn't even funny.

I also love the limiting of the "military rifle features" including a folding stock, flash hider, and pistol grip. All of which have ZERO to do with the actual functionality of the weapon. It is just a fear based campaign to make it look like politicians are doing something.

I really hope I don't have to go buy all new magazines for my pistols. That will get expensive.
 
B

Bogtrotter07

Guest
You're probably right. I would love to know how many tax dollars were spent on the discussion about lowering the number of rounds in a magazine from 10 to 8. Limiting those two extra bullets are going to make the streets much safer, right? The number is so arbitrary, it isn't even funny.

I also love the limiting of the "military rifle features" including a folding stock, flash hider, and pistol grip. All of which have ZERO to do with the actual functionality of the weapon. It is just a fear based campaign to make it look like politicians are doing something.

I really hope I don't have to go buy all new magazines for my pistols. That will get expensive.

Not to be the least bit controversial, but mags for assualt rifles usually follow a 5, 10, 20, 30 . . . round capacity. Maybe they want to limit them like they do to for shotguns; three rounds.
 

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
I am an advocate of gun control, but I'm always open to hearing others points of view. At the time I lived very close to Columbine High School when the shooting happened. My in laws house overlooked the school and my niece and nephew are both Columbine graduates. I have quite a few friends on facebook who's lives were impacted by the tragedy and a few of them are currently sharing this article, so I feel I should share it here to respect their point of view.

Columbine Student's Father 12 Years Later
Submitted by celeste on Sun, 12/23/2012 - 15:18
in
Daily Paul Liberty Forum
Mr. Darrell Scott, the father of a victim of the Columbine shootings, did in fact deliver the stirring testimony before Congress that has been widely quoted in forwarded emails. Circulating since 1999.

"I am here today to declare that Columbine was not just a tragedy-it was a spiritual event that should be forcing us to look at where the real blame lies! Much of the blame lies here in this room.

Much of the blame lies behind the pointing fingers of the accusers themselves. "I wrote a poem that expresses my feelings best. This was written way before I knew I would be speaking here today:"

Your laws ignore our deepest needs,
Your words are empty air.
You've stripped away our heritage,
You've outlawed simple prayer.
Now gunshots fill our classrooms,
And precious children die.
You seek for answers everywhere,
And ask the question "Why?"

You regulate restrictive laws,
Through legislative creed.
And yet you fail to understand,
That God is what we need!

"Men and women are three-part beings. We all consist of body, soul, and spirit. When we refuse to acknowledge a third part of our make-up, we create a void that allows evil, prejudice, and hatred to rush in and reek havoc. Spiritual influences were present within our educational systems for most of our nation's history. Many of our major colleges began as theological seminaries. This is a historical fact.

What has happened to us as a nation? We have refused to honor God, and in so doing, we open the doors to hatred and violence. And when something as terrible as Columbine's tragedy occurs politicians immediately look for a scapegoat such as the NRA. They immediately seek to pass more restrictive laws that contribute to erode away our personal and private liberties.

We do not need more restrictive laws." Eric and Dylan would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre. The real villain lies within our own hearts.
 

GO IRISH!!!

Nashville Livin'!
Messages
3,695
Reaction score
428
Not to be the least bit controversial, but mags for assualt rifles usually follow a 5, 10, 20, 30 . . . round capacity. Maybe they want to limit them like they do to for shotguns; three rounds.

My point is, the number is purely arbitrary in order to make the politician appear to be doing something. In actuality, if they really wanted to affect a change, they would completely ban semi-automatic firearms altogether. But they won't do that because semi-automatic weapons are, by far, the most common type of firearm on the market today. They know trying to ban semi-autos is a lost cause. So, they do something which is absolutely pointless just to make themselves look better to their constituents.

Moving the limit on magazine capacity from 10 down to 8 is stupid. It does nothing. In CA we have had the 10 round limit (down from 15 in handguns) for a while now. I can do a tactical reload, on the move, in about 2 or 3 seconds. Does that really impede the number of rounds I can get off in a quick amount of time as opposed to if I had 15 round mags? No. Absolutely not. And going from 10 down to 8 will do nothing but make me have to replace all my magazines if I want to be in compliance with the law. The criminal won't care about compliance. They will go on using 10, 15, 30, or 100 round magazines because they do not care about the laws.

So, back to my question of why 8 rounds? Who determined that was the magic number in New York? If they were truly serious, they would ban everything but single shot weapons, but they know a law like that wouldn't pass in a million years. It is all smoke and mirrors.

Don't get me wrong, I like some of the parts of these proposals. Background checks, even annual checks, are good. Ensuring the mentally ill lose their weapons if it is deemed they are a threat. I don't think background checks for ammo purchases make fiscal sense, but I get it.

All this other stuff is truly dumb if you take the emotion out of the decision.
 

IrishJayhawk

Rock Chalk
Messages
7,181
Reaction score
464
Moving the limit on magazine capacity from 10 down to 8 is stupid. It does nothing. In CA we have had the 10 round limit (down from 15 in handguns) for a while now. I can do a tactical reload, on the move, in about 2 or 3 seconds. Does that really impede the number of rounds I can get off in a quick amount of time as opposed to if I had 15 round mags? No. Absolutely not.

Jared Loughner was finally subdued in Tucson (after getting off 31 rounds) when he had to reload. He killed 6 and injured 13 more, including Gabby Giffords. Imagine how much less damage he would have done if he had to reload after 5 or 10 rounds.

I don't claim to know what to do here. But I do think there are reasonable limits that wouldn't affect anyone's constitutional rights.
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
Chicago's gun control laws are working so well. The president must be so proud. As should Rahm Emmanuel.
 

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
Curious to see what the president has to say. He's going to present his gun control plan in a few minutes.

Wow 55% approve of stricter gun laws.
 

Polish Leppy 22

Well-known member
Messages
6,594
Reaction score
2,009
Yeah, screw democracy. someone should put a bullet in the heads of those fvckers.

We don't have a democracy. We are a democratic republic. And those polls are often swewed...I could get 90% of people to support military action against Sudanese militants if I frame it the right way.
 

BobD

Can't get no satisfaction
Messages
7,918
Reaction score
1,034
The gun debate has a lot of parallels to cigarettes.
 
Top