It's interesting that every time I comment on a site eventually I get accused of being paid by the NRA, some other gun lobby or the Republican party.
The facts are, I'm independent and have voted equally on both sides of the spectrum.
I pay the NRA for membership (like hundreds of thousands of other law abiding Americans) they don't pay me.
My vocation is data analysis and research. My training includes science and history.
And yet somehow I and the other people on the pro-gun argument get called names, are told we are stupid, or worse. So please, if you are going to argue, use peer reviewed sources, be open to other information and review what is given, if you still disagree tell us why but stop calling us NAMES or accusing us of being PAID.
Please stop spamming the comments with your repeated posts. You have made your point and refuse to even acknowledge that your information may be inaccurate. I spent several hours last night reviewing your info and it does not match the Department of Justice, FBI, National Institute of Health and MANY other reputable sources (and many biased anti-gun sources).
"When Mr. Wright said, "you don't have to be accurate, you just need to be close" I thought he was referring to proximity not aim. "
His suggestion was to carry a 45 as "you don't have to be accurate..." The fallacy being that a large weapon would do the trick. Doesn't matter what the caliber if you miss the target, and there is always the chance of hitting someone else.
May I suggest you do a little research on the "21 foot Rule" that discusses the fact that a trained officer is still in danger with his weapon holstered opposing a individual with a serrated edge weapon (a knife.) The best officers were able to draw in fire in 1.7 seconds, the same time an assailant was able to travel the distance and inflict a lethal wound. Now these are trained, experienced officers, not civilians.
The facts remain the same, regardless of the legal issues of disparity of force. An untrained citizen with a weapon presents as much of threat to themselves than the perpetrator, and Sheriff Wright wrongly implied that simple gun possession would eliminate or neutralize the threat. And he suggested lethal force by a third party would be a proper recourse. These reckless comments clearly indicate he is unfit for duty and by his actions make a mockery of the fine men and women that serve as officers in police department across the country.
I live in Spartanburg, believe in the second amendment and the right to carry a concealed weapon. That being said, Sheriff Wright is an idiot for grandstanding and making suggestions, that could ultimately prove fatal to bolster his own ego and further his career.
Anyone with any substantive knowledge of weapons and law enforcement knows that weapon retention is a concern for trained police offers, no less untrained inexperienced civilians. There is a high probability of loosing control of the weapon and it ultimately being used against the carrier. In this case, the woman most likely would have been killed by her attacker by her own weapon. To then suggest a larger hand gun as he suggest it requires less accuracy is sheer lunacy and certainly suggest Sheriff Wright is untrained and unqualified for his position. And to suggest someone with a carry permit should have been there to kill the perpetrator is suggesting someone commit murder, shocking by an ordinary citizen, but unacceptable by an officer of the court.
A prudent and thoughtful response would have been to organize and support self defense classes in his jurisdiction, providing citizens with a means of protecting themselves.
I do hope Governor Halley instigates an investigation into his comments as a representative of the court and law enforcement. They are clearly inaccurate and dangerous, no less an violation of the public trust by recommending or suggesting lethal force by bystanders.
Why not be part of the solution?
As a resident of Spartanburg, why don't you recommend adding weapons retention as part of the CCW class study? When Mr. Wright said, "you don't have to be accurate, you just need to be close" I thought he was referring to proximity not aim.
Also, the self defense laws of the State are easily accessible and clear. A law abiding Citizen taking on the responsibility of carrying a deadly weapon would read the laws carefully. I did.
Lastly, self defense classes? Are you serious? Maybe you should spend some time reading up on the self defense laws of your State. You may learn concepts such as disparity of force in a self defense encounter.
I wish we could clone Sheriff Wright and put him in every single county in the United States.
Living in South Carolina it seems that a man can walk down the street, look cross-eyed at someone, and be shot and possibly killed by a householder. "Judge, he threatened me with his weird looking eyes and I was afraid for my life, I had to shoot him."
I understand how you my come to this conclusion, but the reality is that most of the people who reside in South Carolina are not this way. Yes, there is a small group of uneducated, well armed lunatics like Sheriff Wright, but the majority of the people are not. Its actually, a very safe town despite Sherif Wright's idiocy and incompetence.
It's not enough to pack. You really need to draw down on anyone that gets within about 15 feet of you so they don't get to you before you have your gun ready and aimed to fire. That's why you need to have your gun out and pointed at the nearest person to you at all times. It's the only way to be sure. My coworkers seem to dislike my tendency to point my loaded gun at them day in and day out but they really need to understand my need to protect myself.
My family is embarrassed to eat out with me. My wife hates it when I draw down on the waiters and waitresses as they come to our table to serve us. But, it's better to be safe than sorry.
You never know who is going to attack you. If you carry a gun to actually protect yourself, it's useless if the attacker suddenly attacks you and you still have it holstered or in your pants. You have to have it out and trained on the closest potential perp so you can load them with bullets should the need arise.
Smirk5 you are a fool and most likely a liar, pointing a gun at people without just cause is aggravated assault in most states of the union. So either your full of BS or live somewhere I wouldn't want to live. I am a Concealed Carry Permit holder and you give all gun owners a bad name keep your ******* opinions to yourself
smirk5. I realize you are making a very weak attempt at sick humor. But you are NOT funny. As a trauma nurse practitioner I have cared for human beings from age 2 months to 100 years who have been victims of gun shot wounds. Any bullet rips through flesh and organs with horrific tearing and destruction. A .457 round through a 2 month old baby doesn't leave much behind...except a lot of heartbreak for family members. This sheriff's literal call to arms is absolutely outrageous. You are correct, *smirk*, that it does take preparation and incredible presence of mind to fire a weapon...especially at someone who already wants to hurt you. The likelihood of having that weapon wrestled from a woman's hand and used on her is probably 100%. This sheriff is advocating suicide. Women, this sheriff has quit doing his job with any pro-active policing. Whether it is a handbag, your cash, or a car..just give it up. I really hope this sheriff is punished severely for his unwise statements by his superiors. This sheriff is a real loser and idiot! And CBS news is just as culpable by printing such a salacious and inflammatory story. Where is the follow-up by the agency for this sheriff's statements? Is he the official states person for his department? Or is this ust an easy way for CBS to get people to read their stories. The National Enquirer would be proud of this sort of irresponsible journalism.
Concidering the average IQ and education of the people in this country, you might as well put land mines in your front yard and give every grandmother an AK-47.
How about making all hand guns illegal, with a 20 year sentence for their possession? Might slow these jerks down a little bit....
tryingtodogoodwork You don't feel the need to protect yourself or your loved ones, that is your right to lock yourself up in your self imposed prison, fine, but don't ever try to take my guns away for no other reason than the govt wants citiziens disarmed, you better bring a gun along cuz their will be blood
If I'm not mistaken, a story came out recently (this week?) that stated gun ownership is up and violent crime down. CBS news however reported gun ownership up but no data to show a drop in crime. If the courts would put these animals away like they should then citizens wouldn't feel like they need to carry a weapon but in the mean time protect yourself.
Nice to hear someone taking the side of the victim for a change. Other solutions would be to broaden the scope of the death penalty to include rape, kidnapping et cetera, and start executing the large herd of butchers we call murderers on death row. Put their picture and their execution on the front page of every newspaper in the country. Explain what they did and who and how they did it instead of blaming it on their childhood.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
The facts are, I'm independent and have voted equally on both sides of the spectrum.
I pay the NRA for membership (like hundreds of thousands of other law abiding Americans) they don't pay me.
My vocation is data analysis and research. My training includes science and history.
And yet somehow I and the other people on the pro-gun argument get called names, are told we are stupid, or worse. So please, if you are going to argue, use peer reviewed sources, be open to other information and review what is given, if you still disagree tell us why but stop calling us NAMES or accusing us of being PAID.
Please stop spamming the comments with your repeated posts. You have made your point and refuse to even acknowledge that your information may be inaccurate. I spent several hours last night reviewing your info and it does not match the Department of Justice, FBI, National Institute of Health and MANY other reputable sources (and many biased anti-gun sources).
"When Mr. Wright said, "you don't have to be accurate, you just need to be close" I thought he was referring to proximity not aim. "
His suggestion was to carry a 45 as "you don't have to be accurate..." The fallacy being that a large weapon would do the trick. Doesn't matter what the caliber if you miss the target, and there is always the chance of hitting someone else.
May I suggest you do a little research on the "21 foot Rule" that discusses the fact that a trained officer is still in danger with his weapon holstered opposing a individual with a serrated edge weapon (a knife.) The best officers were able to draw in fire in 1.7 seconds, the same time an assailant was able to travel the distance and inflict a lethal wound. Now these are trained, experienced officers, not civilians.
The facts remain the same, regardless of the legal issues of disparity of force. An untrained citizen with a weapon presents as much of threat to themselves than the perpetrator, and Sheriff Wright wrongly implied that simple gun possession would eliminate or neutralize the threat. And he suggested lethal force by a third party would be a proper recourse. These reckless comments clearly indicate he is unfit for duty and by his actions make a mockery of the fine men and women that serve as officers in police department across the country.
Anyone with any substantive knowledge of weapons and law enforcement knows that weapon retention is a concern for trained police offers, no less untrained inexperienced civilians. There is a high probability of loosing control of the weapon and it ultimately being used against the carrier. In this case, the woman most likely would have been killed by her attacker by her own weapon. To then suggest a larger hand gun as he suggest it requires less accuracy is sheer lunacy and certainly suggest Sheriff Wright is untrained and unqualified for his position. And to suggest someone with a carry permit should have been there to kill the perpetrator is suggesting someone commit murder, shocking by an ordinary citizen, but unacceptable by an officer of the court.
A prudent and thoughtful response would have been to organize and support self defense classes in his jurisdiction, providing citizens with a means of protecting themselves.
I do hope Governor Halley instigates an investigation into his comments as a representative of the court and law enforcement. They are clearly inaccurate and dangerous, no less an violation of the public trust by recommending or suggesting lethal force by bystanders.
As a resident of Spartanburg, why don't you recommend adding weapons retention as part of the CCW class study?
When Mr. Wright said, "you don't have to be accurate, you just need to be close" I thought he was referring to proximity not aim.
Also, the self defense laws of the State are easily accessible and clear. A law abiding Citizen taking on the responsibility of carrying a deadly weapon would read the laws carefully. I did.
Lastly, self defense classes? Are you serious? Maybe you should spend some time reading up on the self defense laws of your State. You may learn concepts such as disparity of force in a self defense encounter.
I wish we could clone Sheriff Wright and put him in every single county in the United States.
My family is embarrassed to eat out with me. My wife hates it when I draw down on the waiters and waitresses as they come to our table to serve us. But, it's better to be safe than sorry.
This sheriff's literal call to arms is absolutely outrageous. You are correct, *smirk*, that it does take preparation and incredible presence of mind to fire a weapon...especially at someone who already wants to hurt you. The likelihood of having that weapon wrestled from a woman's hand and used on her is probably 100%. This sheriff is advocating suicide.
Women, this sheriff has quit doing his job with any pro-active policing. Whether it is a handbag, your cash, or a car..just give it up.
I really hope this sheriff is punished severely for his unwise statements by his superiors. This sheriff is a real loser and idiot!
And CBS news is just as culpable by printing such a salacious and inflammatory story. Where is the follow-up by the agency for this sheriff's statements? Is he the official states person for his department? Or is this ust an easy way for CBS to get people to read their stories. The National Enquirer would be proud of this sort of irresponsible journalism.
How about making all hand guns illegal, with a 20 year sentence for their possession? Might slow these jerks down a little bit....
You don't feel the need to protect yourself or your loved ones, that is your right to lock yourself up in your self imposed prison, fine, but don't ever try to take my guns away for no other reason than the govt wants citiziens disarmed, you better bring a gun along cuz their will be blood