1 Dead at Plant in New Albany

Yes it is really quite simple, it's obvious (to me anyway) that you must have misspoke when you claimed to be a strong advocate for civilians carrying private firearms.

Ok let's see - a "belief system" which justifies its use, as if their belief system is somehow different from those folks who do not carry a weapon.

Their mental filters will screen the world so that carrying a weapon seems to be justified, because in their mind they live in an unsafe world.

What exactly is Bard suggesting here? well it's obvious that he's suggesting that folks who carry weapons somehow percieve the world differently than other folks. 

They have a strong tendency to interpret events in this light and rather than seek a peaceful resolution of a problem, they will tend to escalate to using the weapon, if only as a threat.

In this one Bard suggests that folks who carry a weapon are somehow more prone to violence than folks who do not carry, Bard even goes so far as suggesting that they tend to escalate confrontations because they are armed.

They don't see that this behavior stimulates more of the same in other people. Eventually, the weapons will be used - either by you or against you - as in the nutcase who killed a guy at the Pillsbury factory.

This one starts out a little vague, I guessed that he ment "violence begets violence" by his this behavior stimulates more of the same in other people, but then he goes on to claim that anyone carrying a weapon is going to use that weapon, even going so far as to liken those who carry to the "nutcase who killed a guy at the Pillsbury factory".

There is NO woman worth killing someone's son or husband or father for.

JLS,

You accused me of "twisting" what Bard said & I went through his comments line by line clearly showing that there was no "twisting" of Bard's comments are required to come to the conclusion that Bard believes that "folks who feel the need to carry a weapon" are lunatics or at the very least, potential lunatics.

Au contraire Richard, you DID twist what I was saying. I never called anyone a lunatic.  What I explained was that different people use different sets of beliefs to affix meaning to events.  Any single event can have a completely different meaning to each individual involved. The meaning comes from within the person, not from the event itself.

If you believe the world is an unsafe place, you will make a point of noticing every news story which supports that position. You will ignore the fact that the vast majority of your life experience is spent in peaceful, law-abiding places like grocery stores, churches, schools, shopping malls, etc.  That common, everyday peacefulness is subverted by the occasional story like Palehorse's shooting, a situation which most people would statistically never have the opportunity to experience.

To my way of thinking, a person who chooses to believe s/he is living in an unsafe world is a person who has chosen a posture of fear. To mitigate the fear, an individual may choose to carry a firearm, and thereby consider themselves amply defended against their own fear.

At no point did I say that a person choosing this mindset was 'wrong', 'bad' or 'a lunatic'.  It is merely one way out of an infinitude of ways of viewing the world, and carries with it certain propensities depending on the personality.

The fact that you have chosen to view my comments as negatively as you do, especially in contrast to the majority who don't see it that way, is a case in point that different mindsets are predisposed to see things vastly differently. For the record, I believe you distorted my comments to fit your framework and that JLS and Palehorse saw them more clearly.

Whether or not you agree with Bard's comments is inconsequental, however I refuse to be accused of something of which I am clearly not guilty of.

See above.

Now back to the topic at hand, let's say (God forbid) that you're ever a potential victim in a workplace shooting, how quickly can you access your firearm if it's in a locked inside a locked box, inside of a locked vehicle outside in the parking lot?

You should never need it.  Should hospitals allow their employees to carry guns?  Should teachers have one in their desk? Should the pastor or priest of your church carry one in self defense?  Should Dr. William Tiller have carried a gun to defend himself? What about the teller at  your bank and the Wal-Mart cashier?

I chose to believe that I live in a safe world.  Carrying a gun doesn't make me any safer, imo. I am not fearful that I am going to be the victim of a shooting and don't spend a minute of time worrying about it. To my mind, it's a much better way to live.  I don't carry a weapon.  I don't believe it's 'bad' to carry one, I just don't choose to do it.

I am guessing probably not as quick as reaching into your pocket or your belt, but I'll grant that it's maybe a little quicker than what it would take for the police being able to arrive on the scene, would have having a firearm in their vehicle made a difference between living & dying to the fellow who was gunned down at Pillsbury plant? I am guessing it wouldn't have, would have having one in his pocket made a difference? I am guessing that it might have.

If I were a police officer reading your posts, I would probably want to know who you are so I could check out your permit status.  If they stopped you on the street, or in Wal-mart, would you have a weapon on you? From your posts, I assume you would; therefore I  might have probable cause to search you.

JLS,

You accused me of "twisting" what Bard said & I went through his comments line by line clearly showing that there was no "twisting" of Bard's comments are required to come to the conclusion that Bard believes that "folks who feel the need to carry a weapon" are lunatics or at the very least, potential lunatics.

Au contraire Richard, you DID twist what I was saying. I thought it was clear that I didn't need to twist what you said. I never called anyone a lunatic.  Bard don't play semantic games with me. Of all people in the universe, Richard, I am the one most qualified to know the meaning and intent of what I said, not you. You are the only one deciding to play semantics. I told you what I meant and you chose to twist it for your own purposes. Your doing so illustrates exactly what I mean about filters.

What I explained was that different people use different sets of beliefs to affix meaning to events.  Any single event can have a completely different meaning to each individual involved. The meaning comes from within the person, not from the event itself. Your comments were clear enough the first time, lest anyone forget, you specifically claimed that the mental state of those folks who carry differ from those folks who dont, even going as far as comparing them & the Pillsbury gunman. Again, you are distorting and twisting. It is interesting that you are the only one who does this...a minority viewpoint who must be able to know what I meant better than I do, myself.  Hmmm...

If you believe the world is an unsafe place, you will make a point of noticing every news story which supports that position. Or the person has been a victim & knows first hand just how unsafe the world can be. Sounds a little like possible PTSD. You will ignore the fact that the vast majority of your life experience is spent in peaceful, law-abiding places like grocery stores, churches, schools, shopping malls, etc. And you ignore the fact that violent crimes can & do happen in those places every single day. Not in statistically significant numbers within the average American lifespan.That common, everyday peacefulness is subverted by the occasional story like Palehorse's shooting, a situation which most people would statistically never have the opportunity to experience. Statistically a person's home isn't going to burn down, yet it's still a good idea to have a fire extinguisher on hand just in case, especially considering how many homes burn to the ground every year. Even in a place like Summerlake where it's said that 'if one house catches fire, three burn to the ground', you don't have very many fires. It strikes me that insurance companies may be one of the main reasons for having a fire extinguisher around. To pre-empt you here, please note in advance that I never said 'it was a bad idea'.

To my way of thinking, a person who chooses to believe s/he is living in an unsafe world is a person who has chosen a posture of fear. Or it was forced upon them. A belief is never forced upon you. It is always free will, even in regards to the Stockholm syndrome. To mitigate the fear, an individual may choose to carry a firearm, and thereby consider themselves amply defended against their own fear. Against their "fear" or defense against the reason for their fear? Exactly what I said.

At no point did I say that a person choosing this mindset was 'wrong', 'bad' or 'a lunatic'.  It is merely one way out of an infinitude of ways of viewing the world, and carries with it certain propensities depending on the personality. You specifically stated that "those who feel the need to carry a weapon tend to escalate confrontations instead of seeking peaceful resolutions" so stop trying to spin what you said. This is not spinning. Your very comments to JLS showed that you yourself want to be prepared to up the ante so to speak.

The fact that you have chosen to view my comments as negatively as you do, so it's my fault you said what you said? especially in contrast to the majority who don't see it that way, the majority or just Palehorse & JLS who both often parrot your opinions?  Your aggression is evident, Richard, and provides more evidence for your willingness to escalate a conflict. Palehorse and JLS have their own opinions which may or may not be like mine. Sometimes you and I agree about things, but I do not consider you a 'parrot' of my opinion, nor do I 'parrot' yours. is a case in point that different mindsets are predisposed to see things vastly differently. For the record, I believe you distorted my comments to fit your framework For the record I think you are being more than just disengenuous No, I know my meaning and intent far better than you do and they appear to understand my meaning better.  You distort my words to mean something different from what I ever intended. and that JLS and Palehorse saw them more clearly.

Whether or not you agree with Bard's comments is inconsequental, however I refuse to be accused of something of which I am clearly not guilty of.

See above. See my line by line rebuttal. I alone can judge who comes closest to my meaning. It is not rational to insist that you know my intent better than I do, myself, so please stop insisting you do.

Now back to the topic at hand, let's say (God forbid) that you're ever a potential victim in a workplace shooting, how quickly can you access your firearm if it's in a locked inside a locked box, inside of a locked vehicle outside in the parking lot?

You should never need it. Tell that to the dead Pillsbury guy's family Should hospitals allow their employees to carry guns?  Should teachers have one in their desk? Should the pastor or priest of your church carry one in self defense?  Should Dr. William Tiller have carried a gun to defend himself? It might have been a good idea considering he was murdered with one What about the teller at  your bank and the Wal-Mart cashier? What about them? if they want or dont want to exercize their 2nd Amendment rights I don't care, so long as they are able to make that decision for themselves. They don't have second amendment rights in those venues if it's not okay with their employers.

I chose to believe that I live in a safe world.  Carrying a gun doesn't make me any safer, imo. I am not fearful that I am going to be the victim of a shooting and don't spend a minute of time worrying about it. To my mind, it's a much better way to live.  I don't carry a weapon.  I don't believe it's 'bad' to carry one, I just don't choose to do it. That's all fine and dandy, cept there maybe a moment in your life where you might actually have need for one. That will never be the case in mine, Richard.

I am guessing probably not as quick as reaching into your pocket or your belt, but I'll grant that it's maybe a little quicker than what it would take for the police being able to arrive on the scene, would have having a firearm in their vehicle made a difference between living & dying to the fellow who was gunned down at Pillsbury plant? I am guessing it wouldn't have, would have having one in his pocket made a difference? I am guessing that it might have.

If I were a police officer reading your posts, I would probably want to know who you are so I could check out your permit status.  Why? am I not allowed to publically comment on issues of gun control without agents of the government investigating? Of course. I'm just saying that if I were an LEO, I might be intrigued enough to investigate you personally. If they stopped you on the street, or in Wal-mart, would you have a weapon on you? I dunno would I? Cagey response, but telling imo. I don't believe I've ever said one way or the other whether or not I own any firearms let alone carry them. Not to worry; I'm not an LEO. From your posts, I assume you would; therefore I  might have probable cause to search you. Then you have no idea what "probable cause" means. I didn't mean that in the LEO sense.  I should have said, I'd have enough curiousity to check it out.