Strib has gone full frontal -

[ronin069]

Not even trying anymore.

http://ow.ly/i0zyV

[LarryP]

I see low need to use a gun as a good thing. Better than the other way around.

[tman]

I see low need to use a gun as a good thing. Better than the other way around.

Exactly.

[CraigJS]

From the above article:
“I think it does undermine the argument that there’s a tremendous need for self-defense, to carry weapons,” said Jennifer Green, an associate professor and director of human rights litigation with the University of Minnesota Law School. “It shows that we may still have some problems as to who is carrying guns.”

Jennifer, it is one of our rights! ( NOT A NEED) She teaches, we pay her salary, we aren't getting our moneys worth...

[Paul]

“I’m a perfect example of that,” said Mike Briggs, a firearms instructor and permit holder who lives in Ramsey. Briggs said he was pumping gas in February 2012 about 4 a.m. in north Minneapolis when he saw four people drive up in a car with the headlights off. Briggs said he made eye contact with the driver and that the two stared at each other for three minutes until the group slowly drove away. Briggs said he never pulled out his Wilson Combat .45 pistol.

Really? A three minute stare down? Maybe if there was dramatic music playing and a camera panning back and forth focusing on squinting eyes and flared nostrils.

Likely another example of people being piss poor at estimating time accurately.

[Countryfried Frank]

You need to make time for the musical montage in the made for tv movie.

[jdege]

If you were to say that most people don't need a gun, most of the time, I'd agree with you.

If you're not involved in gangs or illegal drugs, and if you're not living with an abusive partner, your odds of being a victim of a violent crime are vanishingly small.

But things can change very quickly.

I used to pose a hypothetical - how you might come home from work, someday, and find that your wife's college roommate was staying with you, after having run away from an abusive ex. The first three weeks to three months after leaving are the most dangerous for a victim of domestic violence - the rates at which the abuser they've fled hunts them down are disturbingly high.

But, as I said, this was just a theoretical. Until about two years ago. Well, she wasn't a college roommate, but she was in hiding from a violent ex. She seemed amazed that my partner would be able to invite someone into our house, without permission, or without even talking to me about it first. Which is, in my mind, a clear indication that she'd been hanging out with the wrong kind of people.

In any case, she stayed with us for about six weeks, while she finished out the semester, and then moved in with her daughter up in St. Cloud. She was working on some sort of nursing degree - I lent her a monitor for her computer (I have a dual monitor setup on my desktop, but I could work with one), and helped her with her algebra.

Personally, I've never done drugs. I only rarely drink. And I live a pretty dull life. But my risks were significantly higher, while she was here.

Now given her emotional state, I'm not sure she'd have been safer had she had a gun. But I know that she was safer for having the people she was living with having guns. In her case, the violent ex never appeared. Which is good. But then, he knew that we had guns in the household. Would he have decided to forgo violence had he not known that? I can't say. But it's not a risk I'm willing to take, with me and mine.

[301spartan]

The star tribune paper makes a great mat for puppy training that would be the only use I have for the commie rag.

[LarryFlew]

Guess we won't need insurance anymore either since we rarely if ever use it.

[tman]

Have a fire extinguisher in the house?


Ever had to use it?


Sent from my iPhone using that app which shall not be named.

[Paul]

“I’m a perfect example of that,” said Mike Briggs, a firearms instructor and permit holder who lives in Ramsey. Briggs said he was pumping gas in February 2012 about 4 a.m. in north Minneapolis when he saw four people drive up in a car with the headlights off. Briggs said he made eye contact with the driver and that the two stared at each other for three minutes until the group slowly drove away. Briggs said he never pulled out his Wilson Combat .45 pistol.

Really? A three minute stare down? Maybe if there was dramatic music playing and a camera panning back and forth focusing on squinting eyes and flared nostrils.

Likely another example of people being piss poor at estimating time accurately.

Someone forwarded me this video.



Here is 3 minutes of staring at someone.

[AFTERMATH]

“I’m a perfect example of that,” said Mike Briggs, a firearms instructor and permit holder who lives in Ramsey. Briggs said he was pumping gas in February 2012 about 4 a.m. in north Minneapolis when he saw four people drive up in a car with the headlights off. Briggs said he made eye contact with the driver and that the two stared at each other for three minutes until the group slowly drove away. Briggs said he never pulled out his Wilson Combat .45 pistol.

Really? A three minute stare down? Maybe if there was dramatic music playing and a camera panning back and forth focusing on squinting eyes and flared nostrils.

Likely another example of people being piss poor at estimating time accurately.

Ehh... I've been in situations that were kinda iffy - where seconds seem like minutes and minutes seem like hours. Adrenaline can have that effect on people. Plus, Minnesotans naturally have a poor perception of time. After all, we use it to measure distance.

[Snowgun]

I love this beautiful use of descriptive statistics:

Of the 124 gun-related crimes committed by permit holders in Minnesota since 2003, 19 were assaults, 10 were for carrying under the influence, six were for drug-related crimes and one was a homicide.

Ok, 124-19-10-6-1 = 88 gun related crimes ( or 71% of them) that were not mentioned were for what? I'm assuming not worse than the assaults, influence, or drugs...

[AFTERMATH]

I love this beautiful use of descriptive statistics:

Of the 124 gun-related crimes committed by permit holders in Minnesota since 2003, 19 were assaults, 10 were for carrying under the influence, six were for drug-related crimes and one was a homicide.

Ok, 124-19-10-6-1 = 88 gun related crimes ( or 71% of them) that were not mentioned were for what? I'm assuming not worse than the assaults, influence, or drugs...

Judging by posts on this forum, I'd have to say speeding....

Here's the real question - How many of those crimes were the same person in the same incident?
Could be one drunk guy: 10x the legal carry limit(.4 is possible) That's 10 crimes for under the influence.
He had 6 Percocets(not his perscription) in his pocket - That's the 6 drug crimes.
Dude got in his car and drove speeding down the road, completely blitzed he drove down the road pointing his gun at a bus with 19 passengers. That's 19 assaults.
Then he runs over a pedestrian. And there's the homicide.

[tazdevil]

Judging by posts on this forum, I'd have to say speeding....

Here's the real question - How many of those crimes were the same person in the same incident?
Could be one drunk guy: 10x the legal carry limit(.4 is possible) That's 10 crimes for under the influence.
He had 6 Percocets(not his perscription) in his pocket - That's the 6 drug crimes.
Dude got in his car and drove speeding down the road, completely blitzed he drove down the road pointing his gun at a bus with 19 passengers. That's 19 assaults.
Then he runs over a pedestrian. And there's the homicide.

Careful, your trying to use facts there, the anti's don't like that much.