MP-Pistol Forum banner

21 - 40 of 54 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
Flyin_.45 said:
if you carry correctly, no one should know you're carrying anyway, until you whip it out and save people's lives with it...then I doubt the mall would press charges anyways! Stay safe guys.


God bless the victims and families. Sometimes I "forget" to look for the no carry signs. Most places have so many signs posted its difficult to see even when I do look for them. Problem that I see is that a lot of CCW people that I know refuse to give their business to places that have such signs posted. What that means is less good guys with guns frequenting that location! Think about this, have you EVER seen a bank that has a no carry sign posted? Around here I NEVER have. Doing so so would be an invitation to robbery. If you were a nutcase scouting a location wouldn't you pick a place where guns aren't allowed by the general public? Yes, a few CCW holders may carry anyways but the odds of armed citizens being there are obviously lower.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,062 Posts
medicff0879 said:
[quote name='f-bomb']metal detectors, and those "no firearm" signs... those are two things that make a business lose my money.



there are places i cannot carry understandably- Courts and government buildings. I can respect that, as i can see why it's not permitted.



But, gas stations, restaraunts, or other buisinesses that want my money... they either take me as i really am, or they dont get me at all.



there's always another place up the street that WILL welcome me, where i can get the same stuff.


I agree, as going into some dump that goes this far to disarm an honest folk also goes so far as to make sure I am unarmed in the parking lot all the way up to the business, AND THAT AINT HAPPENIN!! I will go elsewhere to buy the item.[/quote]

When I hear this, I'm glad I live in California. "No guns" signs do not exist here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
130 Posts
medicff0879 said:
[quote name='choochboost'][quote name='G56']Terrible news, reports are coming in saying he was on anti depressants, that's been linked to some of the other incidents over the years.
So lets blame the drugs, just not the guns. Do drugs make people crazy, or do crazy people take drugs? We do know that crazy people kill other people.



I don't know about the CCW laws in Nebraska or that mall's policies, but I saw the "no guns" sign at the Trolley Square Mall.[/quote]



I bet there will be ALOT more people disregard those signs in the years to come. Or lets hope there state reps. pull their heads out of their backsides and pass a law allowing concealed carry everywhere.



My prayers with them, I always carry in the mall. Its not against Texas law and there are no signs (I would ignore them anyway) and sadly I would feel better equipped to protect others in this situation than the $6.00 hr. unarmed security degenerates in the mall :roll:



My absolute biggest fear is that if I did (or was to close to avoid this gunman) decide to engage and shoot that he would be wearing Body armor and only laugh at my 40 Sub Compact. Leaving me to flee and pray for my own life.[/quote]



Always practice, two to body...one to the head. If you train that way, you will fight that way!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
First post heres a good one.



As of the first of this year nebraska allowed CCW with a permit. However lower governments (counties and cities) can choose not to allow CCW on thier district. Two large (relative term in nebraska) cities chose NOT to allow CCW in their district. Omaha and Kearney. This mall shooting took place in Omaha. This will be a tough battle for liberals to argue this point.



Ok that was my first post how was it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
501 Posts
Interesting comments in this archived journal star article: http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2006/0...e4313357926.txt



"Sen. Joel Johnson of Kearney questioned why the “safest people in the safest place on Earth” — Nebraska — need to carry concealed guns."



"“There is no justification for it which would be considered rational,” said Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha. “Nebraska is not engulfed in a crime wave.”"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
ArnisAndyz said:
[quote name='Flyin_.45'] if you carry correctly, no one should know you're carrying anyway, until you whip it out and save people's lives with it...then I doubt the mall would press charges anyways! Stay safe guys.


God bless the victims and families. Sometimes I "forget" to look for the no carry signs. Most places have so many signs posted its difficult to see even when I do look for them. Problem that I see is that a lot of CCW people that I know refuse to give their business to places that have such signs posted. What that means is less good guys with guns frequenting that location! Think about this, have you EVER seen a bank that has a no carry sign posted? Around here I NEVER have. Doing so so would be an invitation to robbery. If you were a nutcase scouting a location wouldn't you pick a place where guns aren't allowed by the general public? Yes, a few CCW holders may carry anyways but the odds of armed citizens being there are obviously lower.[/quote]



I agree. If i was going to rob a place, I'd look for places with the no firearm sign.



it's also crap, because if a man walked in and started firing at people, I could take him down if I "illegally" entered the store with my gun... but to save them, would be admitting that i was in violation of the law myself.



you would hope a prosecutor never burned you on your good deed of ending a killing spree... but they could if they wanted to. the biggest thing to fear is a prosecutor who is a "Brady Bunch" supporter. lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
88 Posts
mikenkansas said:
Interesting comments in this archived journal star article: http://www.journalstar.com/articles/2006/0...e4313357926.txt



"Sen. Joel Johnson of Kearney questioned why the “safest people in the safest place on Earth” — Nebraska — need to carry concealed guns."



"“There is no justification for it which would be considered rational,” said Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha. “Nebraska is not engulfed in a crime wave.”"


Guess this wont change any minds either, awwww blissful ignorance!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
f-bomb said:
to save them, would be admitting that i was in violation of the law myself.


Its worth it...the only law you would technically be breaking would be equivelent to trespassing provided you are not on Federal property or carrying where the CCW laws say you can't. The store posting the sign can't the write laws. The posted sign is a "notice" of the private property holders wish (like no trespassing). If you are caught carrying at a place that says that they don't want you to they have the right to ask you to leave. If you don't leave and they call the police, they will escort you off the property and you may or may not get a citation. But don't take my word for it, I'm not a lawyer...best to seek legal advise in your area.



In any case, what I'm trying to get at is that if you DID carry on private property where a No carry sign is posted and had to use it in Defense, getting a citation should be the least of your worries!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,062 Posts
"No guns" signs in some states carry force of law and you will be arrested for more than trespassing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
910 Posts
choochboost said:
"No guns" signs in some states carry force of law and you will be arrested for more than trespassing.




I love SC's rules for posted "no gun" signs. Very specific details on where the signs have to be, and exactly what size/color/shape/etc they have to be. I've yet to see any building with a sign that actually met the requirements by law - meaning I can legally carry there anyways.



SECTION 23-31-235. Sign requirements.



(A) Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, any requirement of or allowance for the posting of signs prohibiting the carrying of a concealable weapon upon any premises shall only be satisfied by a sign expressing the prohibition in both written language interdict and universal sign language.



(B) All signs must be posted at each entrance into a building where a concealable weapon permit holder is prohibited from carrying a concealable weapon and must be:



(1) clearly visible from outside the building;



(2) eight inches wide by twelve inches tall in size;



(3) contain the words “NO CONCEALABLE WEAPONS ALLOWED” in black one inch tall uppercase type at the bottom of the sign and centered between the lateral edges of the sign;



(4) contain a black silhouette of a handgun inside a circle seven inches in diameter with a diagonal line that runs from the lower left to the upper right at a forty five degree angle from the horizontal;



(5) a diameter of a circle; and



(6) placed not less than forty inches and not more than sixty inches from the bottom of the building’s entrance door.



© If the premises where concealable weapons are prohibited does not have doors, then the signs contained in subsection (A) must be:



(1) thirty six inches wide by forty eight inches tall in size;



(2) contain the words “NO CONCEALABLE WEAPONS ALLOWED” in black three inch tall uppercase type at the bottom of the sign and centered between the lateral edges of the sign;



(3) contain a black silhouette of a handgun inside a circle thirty four inches in diameter with a diagonal line that is two inches wide and runs from the lower left to the upper right at a forty five degree angle from the horizontal and must be a diameter of a circle whose circumference is two inches wide;



(4) placed not less than forty inches and not more than ninety six inches above the ground;



(5) posted in sufficient quantities to be clearly visible from any point of entry onto the premises.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
ArnisAndyz said:
[quote name='f-bomb']

to save them, would be admitting that i was in violation of the law myself.


Its worth it...the only law you would technically be breaking would be equivelent to trespassing provided you are not on Federal property or carrying where the CCW laws say you can't. The store posting the sign can't the write laws. The posted sign is a "notice" of the private property holders wish (like no trespassing). If you are caught carrying at a place that says that they don't want you to they have the right to ask you to leave. If you don't leave and they call the police, they will escort you off the property and you may or may not get a citation. But don't take my word for it, I'm not a lawyer...best to seek legal advise in your area.



In any case, what I'm trying to get at is that if you DID carry on private property where a No carry sign is posted and had to use it in Defense, getting a citation should be the least of your worries![/quote]



dont get me wrong... I'm saying the situation is crap... but i'm NOT going to watch innocents get hurt or die, if i can stop the chump.



However, Chooch is correct... in some states, ignoring the sign is a big deal.



But when it comes down to it, if i saved 4 of your friends or family members one night, and a prosecutor wanted my butt on charges... I bet you, those 4 friends, and all their family members would be in that courtroom yelling to let me go.



any court that would try me for saving lives... is sick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
521 Posts
(2) eight inches wide by twelve inches tall in size;





(1) thirty six inches wide by forty eight inches tall in size;



(2) contain the words “NO CONCEALABLE WEAPONS ALLOWED” in black three inch tall [/quote]





WOW!!! Why don't they just write on the sign "ROB ME!!!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,316 Posts
Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall's Gun-Free-Zone Status



Thursday , December 06, 2007



By John R. Lott, Jr.



The horrible tragedy at the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Neb. received a lot of attention Wednesday and Thursday. It should have. Eight people were killed, and five were wounded.



A Google news search using the phrase "Omaha Mall Shooting" finds an incredible 2,794 news stories worldwide for the last day. From India and Taiwan to Britain and Austria, there are probably few people in the world who haven’t heard about this tragedy.



But despite the massive news coverage, none of the media coverage, at least by 10 a.m. Thursday, mentioned this central fact: Yet another attack occurred in a gun-free zone.



Surely, with all the reporters who appear at these crime scenes and seemingly interview virtually everyone there, why didn’t one simply mention the signs that ban guns from the premises?



Nebraska allows people to carry permitted concealed handguns, but it allows property owners, such as the Westroads Mall, to post signs banning permit holders from legally carrying guns on their property.



The same was true for the attack at the Trolley Square Mall in Utah in February (a copy of the sign at the mall can be seen here). But again the media coverage ignored this fact. Possibly the ban there was even more noteworthy because the off-duty police officer who stopped the attack fortunately violated the ban by taking his gun in with him when he went shopping.



Yet even then, the officer "was at the opposite end and on a different floor of the convoluted Trolley Square complex when the shooting began. By the time he became aware of the shooting and managed to track down and confront Talovic [the killer], three minutes had elapsed."



There are plenty of cases every year where permit holders stop what would have been multiple victim shootings every year, but they rarely receive any news coverage. Take a case this year in Memphis, where WBIR-TV reported a gunman started "firing a pistol beside a busy city street" and was stopped by two permit holders before anyone was harmed.



When will part of the media coverage on these multiple-victim public shootings be whether guns were banned where the attack occurred? While the media has begun to cover whether teachers can have guns at school or the almost 8,000 college students across the country who protested gun-free zones on their campuses, the media haven’t started checking what are the rules where these attacks occur.



Surely, the news stories carry detailed information on the weapon used (in this case, a rifle) and the number of ammunition clips (apparently, two). But if these aspects of the story are deemed important for understanding what happened, why isn’t it also important that the attack occurred where guns were banned? Isn’t it important to know why all the victims were disarmed?



Few know that Dylan Klebold, one of the two Columbine killers, closely was following Colorado legislation that would have allowed citizens to carry a concealed handgun. Klebold strongly opposed the legislation and openly talked about it.



No wonder, as the bill being debated would have allowed permitted guns to be carried on school property. It is quite a coincidence that he attacked the Columbine High School the very day the legislature was scheduled to vote on the bill.



Despite the lack of news coverage, people are beginning to notice what research has shown for years: Multiple-victim public shootings keep occurring in places where guns already are banned. Forty states have broad right-to-carry laws, but even within these states it is the "gun-free zones," not other public places, where the attacks happen.



People know the list: Virginia Tech saw 32 murdered earlier this year; the Columbine High School shooting left 13 murdered in 1999; Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas, had 23 who were fatally shot by a deranged man in 1991; and a McDonald's in Southern California had 21 people shot dead by an unemployed security guard in 1984.



All these attacks — indeed, all attacks involving more than a small number of people being killed — happened in gun-free zones.



In recent years, similar attacks have occurred across the world, including in Australia, France, Germany and Britain. Do all these countries lack enough gun-control laws? Hardly. The reverse is more accurate.



The law-abiding, not criminals, are obeying the rules. Disarming the victims simply means that the killers have less to fear. As Wednesday's attack demonstrated yet again, police are important, but they almost always arrive at the crime scene after the crime has occurred.



The longer it takes for someone to arrive on the scene with a gun, the more people who will be harmed by such an attack.



Most people understand that guns deter criminals. If a killer were stalking your family, would you feel safer putting a sign out front announcing, "This Home Is a Gun-Free Zone"? But that is what the Westroads Mall did.



John Lott is the author of Freedomnomics, upon which this piece draws, and a senior research scholar at the University of Maryland.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,316 Posts
I always carry in stores that have no guns signs posted. The worst they can do is kick me out.



My wife's family is from Omaha and in June we were in this same store (Von Maur) getting a gift certificate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
41 Posts
tigs40cal said:
[quote name='coltman1985']Just f#$%in' GREAT!! Now we have to listen to the libtard bullshit in the media for the next week.


I agree one report already said he used an "m16 type" rifle.[/quote]

Yeah first heard an m16 type rifle then to a sks then this morning i heard an ak 47 lol!!! least know what f'ing gun it was b4 reporting on it!!!
 
21 - 40 of 54 Posts
Top