Discussion in 'Civil Rights & Privacy' started by Caradoc, Jul 20, 2012.
How about Lexapro to a 13yo girl recently diagnosed with depression?
Umm I can think of a 230gr terpinese would take care of that quack. The use of pyschatric meds in children I am very opposed to; more times then not the issues are from the parents lack of parenting skills and/or dscipline that has resulted in this problem.
umm considering that forest labs is in trouble with the FDA for offlabel unapproved uses of there meds a safe bet would be to lump them in with TSA, DHS and the like.
While I like the 1911 frame, I've been highly impressed with the Springfield XD(m), especially in .40S&W. Rounds are currently a bit on the pricy side, but should be relatively easy to scavenge if need be.
I have (carry) a Sig P245. This model is no longer in production and is limited by its single stack mag. For a 45 it fits my hand better than the Glocks I have held. I used a Glock 9mm for a qual several years back and all I remember is how bad my hand hurt after shooting a box out of that gun. I would be interested in the XD and my sister, a cop, likes the the .40 so sounds like a good combo. If we had open carry here I would strap on my DE 44 mag just to watch faces.
The XD and XD(m) have some slight differences - I've not handled the XD, but I've put about a thousand rounds through an XD(m) in .40.
I've got sizable hands, and had to put the largest backstrap on it, but I've also had a 12-year-old lefty put about fifty rounds through it without an issue.
Capacity is 16+1.
Are the differences mainly the XD (m) having a longer barrel length, higher capacity, and having the grip backstrap inserts? Anything else of importance?
Like I said, I've not handled the XD - but there are also some differences in the slide release (the XD requires a trigger pull, the XD(m) does not) and the guide rod (open guide on the XD(m) and closed on the XD).
The "striker cocked" indicator and "round chambered" indicators appear to be really similar.
This is one of the many reasons why citizens have the right to bear arms:
From what I have gotten from Springfield, is the tolerances are much tighter, match grade and polished components. Im looking at a XD(M) and have shot friends and during a range test being done. I can tell they have done some work compared to std XD as I had a XD 9mm in the past. As for barrels XD(m) has lengths of 3.8", 4.5" and 5.25" available.
Available in 45?
Yes. Check springfield-armory.com for all of the variations. Different barrel lengths, different capacities.
XD(m) 45ACP available in 3.8, 4.5, & 5.25 lengths
Although I do know that demand has been very high so there is a little bit of a wait. Im still waiting on my XD(m) 5.25 in 9mm, and 3.8 in XD(m) and I ordered them first week of July. Supposed to be here middle of next week.
I'm really uncomfortable with this statement, the line of reasoning, and the ensuing discussion it has inspired.
I have struggled with how to address it for several days now.
This type of thinking is not cool. It's the epitome of "us against them" that is exactly the problem.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions here, and free to express them. But, please, let's be respectful.
I personally don't find gun control to be effective. However, to say it is right that those who do deserve to be "mown down" is downright barbaric.
We have every political stripe represented here. Let's be cool with that, please.
I've been struggling with this topic myself. My husband is a retired Marine and we did have a gun for awhile but got rid of it when our grandchildren were born. My best friend is a real estate agent, her husband is retired Navy and a hunter. They've always had guns. Recently my friend took courses at a gun range and got a carry permit. Good idea in my opinion as she frequently shows empty houses to people she doesn't know. My neighbors want to get a gun (or maybe already have one) because they think the revolution is coming - but he's retired Navy and familiar with firearms and isn't a hot head. My other neighbor is a retired Marine and I don't know if he has guns but it would be ok with me if he did. But last year an 8 year old took a gun from his mother's house that was laying on a table, put it in his backpack and brought it to school where it accidentally discharged and hit a little girl who almost died. Not the kid's fault but his parents for leaving a loaded gun where it shouldn't have been left. So here's my dilemma in this discussion. How do we separate the responsible gun owner from the irresponsible gun owner? We can do background checks for criminal behavior but how do we determine who would be a responsible gun owner and who would not? And I believe anyone can purchase a gun at a gun show and no background checks are done. At the moment I have mixed feelings. I do not like the idea of those who are up to no good being the only people armed - but at the same time am concerned about the responsibility issues.
There are copious state laws criminalizing carelessness like this. In Kalifornia, you even have to secure ammunition for handguns, IIRC. In addition, NRA spends a LOT of money educating and advocating proper firearm storage and safety (eddie eagle program). The result has been a HUGE drop of incidents such as you have described over the past 30 years. These things now a very, very rare. A tragedy when they do occur, of course.
I do agree that basic ability with a firearm, and safety awareness, as well as knowledge of the state's gun laws should be proved before a firearm can be purchased. As far as assessing the person exercising 2nd Amendment rights, there simply has to be a court adjudication of some type before those rights can be removed. Some local police putz cannot be the arbiter of this.
I also agree with Barbell's statement. People should be free to differ in opinion without being subjected to vitriol. However, on this issue, the onus of explanation is still on those who are OK with dispensing with something explicitly protected in the bill of rights. We cannot pick and choose. That is what the government does with TSA's airport groping and nude scanning.
I would also claim that what is even more important than improving the process of acquiring a firearm, is to require EVERYONE who carries, above all police officers, a high degree of proficiency and marksmanship. We must not tolerate incidents like the one in NY a few days ago, when two cops firing wildly, emptied their magazines into a crowd of bystanders injuring several of them. If they cannot demonstrate proficiency on a monthly basis, they get shifted to a desk job.
They are probably pretty accurate when shooting paper targets and not under pressure. Police need to be placed under stress when qualifying and if they cannot handle stress and shooting at the same time the need to have their weapons taken away. I truly believe police are to quick on trigger in many cases.
Unfortunately cant fix stupid or those that lack common sense...let alone proper firearm storage and securing. The laws of the land have a way of dealing with these idiots. Hearing about a child being injured/hurt is one thing and I know what your talking about and experiencing. I pray you never have a first hand experience... its something that cant be unseen nor forgotten.
TSA has proved that background checks do not mean anything and can not predict behavior. They can only give insight to past behavior that could be a indication of future behavior. CBC are only so effective, and the same would be trying to pick out responsible from irresponsible.
The private sale of firearms between two private citizens is legal. I have bought and sold many firearms this way, there is nothing wrong with this. Private sale between private citizens has gone on since the days of this countries founding. All of the laws you see today are the result of "gun-control" laws enacted after "massacres".
Speaking of responsibility and such... Just look how broken / non-existent it is ala Fast and Furious debacle along with all the fallout/deaths in the process.
I wish this would happen as I second this, more on that below.
This would be the case of most police and most holders of a CHL, even ones that on qualifying targets shoot 240+ out of a possible 250 points. Shooting paper is one thing but when your adrenaline is running (in a defensive situation) it really drops you score/accuracy.
A year ago I shot my first IDPA rules club match and got dealt a big slice of crow stuffed humble pie. That first match I finished 2nd to last and I'm not about to say what was my score as its embarrassing. Only reason I didn't finish dead last was last place left after stage 3 with a "family matter" to deal with. Prior to this I was routinely shooting 235+ out of 250 points on CHL qualifying targets. The issue is even in a club match you have the pressure to do well (especially if you open your mouth and say something stupid) and adrenaline kicks in. In my case when my adrenaline kicked in and accuracy went to and the rest is history.
Now a year later just like when I was a new paramedic I have learned to control my bodies sympathetic nervous system response (also known called the fight or flight response). I don't get the adrenaline dump as bad anymore ( I can control what I do get) and my scores are picking up, as well as my CHL target scores are going up (consistently 245+ out of 250 possible points).
If you have only shot qualifiers or at paper and want an idea of what adrenaline will do to your shooting see the following drill. I will preface the following situation that all safety precautions should be used and if at anytime safety standards are compromised stop this drill as I don't anyone to get hurt.
1. Place a B27 (CHL Qualifying target) at 7 yards
2. Load and make ready firearm (2 rounds only), put on safe and place on a table (if no holster) or in holster
3. Face the target
4. Have a friend or range Safety Officer either blow a whistle or signal via a bull-horn
5. When the horn goes off, draw weapon take off safe and fire 2 rounds (double tap if you like)
6. Put firearm on safe and holster or put on the table
Then look at your target, and see just how much adrenaline effects your shooting... you will be surprised. Did you hit the barn?
I have a even "conflict" that is thrown in my face from time to time. It's really not a conflict I have but people seem to think I should. As Paramedic my training is to save lives, yet I carry (not on duty that is a quagmire and I'm not gonna go there) and I advocate others to carry.
I joke with co-workers that if ever in a situation where I have to draw and shoot again... I will not leave a fellow paramedic to save/clean up the mess... I will leave that job for the Medical Examiner/Coroner. Some people (mostly those outside of civil-service (PD, FD, EMS, and military) and healthcare) that rubs them the wrong way and they voice there opinion to that effect but they don't understand in as much as our training teaches us to save lives just as much on how to end it.
I like the idea of more training (in almost any form) for LEOs, we are doing a disservice to them by giving them the basics and tossing them to the wolves. Some of you have indicated that stress training should be included, and there is merit to that thought process, I happen to agree with that train of thought - however, you will lose many existing and future LEOs in this process, and not all of them are the "bad" ones. The LEO job has changed so much over the last 3 decades, it is more of a public relations, personal counselor, babysitter, feel the pain of those around you for a better understanding of how to deal with them, touchy feely, always on camera lifestyle now. I have family that retired from being a LEO back in the 90s, after 30+ years of carrying a badge, I also have another family member that carried a badge in the late 90s until about 3 years ago, to listen to the two of them talk about the job is like listening to two people talk about different planets in the same solar system. Many of those changes are good, some of them not so much, but the situation calls for all types of people to interact with the public. We need those folks on the force, that may not necessarily be able to function as well as, say you Monica, because of the expanded capabilities it gives the department. Other peole will also point out that in order to get the reactions and responses under stress down to a manageable level, so that draw and sight picture are the same under stress that they are under normal shooting, would be exorbitant in training time and ammo costs. SEALs train for this stuff all the time, and shoot over and over and over until the draw target shoot process for them is no different under most levels of duress. I guess this is a long winded way of saying I love the idea of extra training and stress training for our LEOs, but if you place a requirement of that nature on the LEO forces in general, you will wind up losing a ton of folks that give the department other capabilities and make policing easier in many areas.
Not all cops need to carry. Make stress training a part of the academy process starting on day one. Those that can learn and cope become full fledge officers others can do things like investigations, parking monitors, admin and so forth.
Separate names with a comma.