TexasCHLforum.com

Arlington can be a wild and crazy town at times, especially on the southeast side.

I don't blame the OP for wanting to carry a carbine at all. Just remember your four firearms safety rules if you have to use it, especially if you have to use a carbine in an urban environment like Arlington. Keep it secured with a good locking gun rack, preferably one out of plain sight, know what the laws are concerning where you can and can't carry it, and take a good training class from a reputable instructor.

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

eureka40 wrote:I'm old enough to remember when Charles Whitman was killing innocent people from the UT tower. It was private citizens with deer rifles that slowed that rampage down until police could get up there and kill him.

Many lives were saved that day because of armed citizens shooting back at the bad guy.

Yep... they say in stories that it forced him to shoot from the water spout holes which severely limited his range. It seems to me the citizens firing at him helped. I wonder if in todays world the stray bullets flying all over from all the citizens firing back might be as dangerous as the sniper himself? The area around there is much higher in population today than back in the day. The world is now a much different place. I am not so sure the police would welcome such help if the same situation were to occur in the same place. Austin has become much more "liberal" than it once was.

I agree though. In that situation, the cops were helped by the citizens.

Rifles are also good for SWIFT JUSTICE.

This is getting ridiculous. Some people choose to carry a long gun in their car; I'm one of them. I'm not going to attack someone for NOT doing so. That's their choice and their legal right, same as me. There are multiple situations in which a long gun would be highly useful. Likely? Doubtful. But I carry a pistol for unlikely situations as well.

It blows my mind that we have arguments like this on a GUN forum.

MadMonkey wrote: There are multiple situations in which a long gun would be highly useful. Likely? Doubtful. But I carry a pistol for unlikely situations as well.

(Clears throat).....THIS.

MadMonkey wrote:This is getting ridiculous. Some people choose to carry a long gun in their car; I'm one of them. I'm not going to attack someone for NOT doing so. That's their choice and their legal right, same as me. There are multiple situations in which a long gun would be highly useful. Likely? Doubtful. But I carry a pistol for unlikely situations as well.

It blows my mind that we have arguments like this on a GUN forum.

True... and NOBODY attacked anybody for carrying a rifle in their trunk. Discussing the need for it is not ATTACKING.

03Lightningrocks wrote: Bad example. Pure speculation to say what "could have happened". Besides, those guys were shot with everything from high powered rifles to handguns and kept right on going. An armed citizen trying to play batman would have simply increased the innocent killed count to 19.

FYI, I'm very familiar with the N. Hollywood story. Those guys were not engaged by long guns (or 'high powered rifles') until the police raided a local gun store, and their SWAT showed up. All the police had initially were shotguns and handguns.
The police had to break local gun laws to get the long guns they needed in order to take those guys down. Ever since, California has now armed their police with ranch rifles, etc. so this wouldn't happen again.

I'm not advocating a citizen go all 'batman' and engage, but this statement is not exactly accurate. Had the police had access to a true 'high powered' rifle initially, the death count would have likely been much lower than 19, and hopefully closer to 2... the 2 bad guys only.

Scott in Houston wrote:
I'm not advocating a citizen go all 'batman' and engage, but this statement is not exactly accurate. Had the police had access to a true 'high powered' rifle initially, the death count would have likely been much lower than 19, and hopefully closer to 2... the 2 bad guys only.

The 2 bad guys were the only ones that died during the shootout; but I agree with your statement.

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:

Scott in Houston wrote:
I'm not advocating a citizen go all 'batman' and engage, but this statement is not exactly accurate. Had the police had access to a true 'high powered' rifle initially, the death count would have likely been much lower than 19, and hopefully closer to 2... the 2 bad guys only.

The 2 bad guys were the only ones that died during the shootout; but I agree with your statement.

I thought so, but didn't want to argue with the premise that 19 people died. I didn't re-check my facts first, so thanks for adding that.

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Maybe something like this.

Where would you buy something like this?

Scott in Houston wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote: Bad example. Pure speculation to say what "could have happened". Besides, those guys were shot with everything from high powered rifles to handguns and kept right on going. An armed citizen trying to play batman would have simply increased the innocent killed count to 19.

FYI, I'm very familiar with the N. Hollywood story. Those guys were not engaged by long guns (or 'high powered rifles') until the police raided a local gun store, and their SWAT showed up. All the police had initially were shotguns and handguns.
The police had to break local gun laws to get the long guns they needed in order to take those guys down. Ever since, California has now armed their police with ranch rifles, etc. so this wouldn't happen again.

I'm not advocating a citizen go all 'batman' and engage, but this statement is not exactly accurate. Had the police had access to a true 'high powered' rifle initially, the death count would have likely been much lower than 19, and hopefully closer to 2... the 2 bad guys only.

You are correct in that the police had to invade a sporting goods store, but after they did, the bad guys still had to be brought down with shots in areas that were not protected by armor. No doubt about it... the police should have had better firepower from the get go. Who can tell what would have happened if a citizen had a rifle in the trunk of a car? That is the part that is pure speculation. The action was moving pretty quick and the bad guys would have been firing back. Everyone was hitting the deck. Joe Citizen could just as easily been blasted as he/she went for the trunk of the car.

F4injected wrote:

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Maybe something like this.

Where would you buy something like this?

http://www.uscav.com/productinfo.aspx?p ... &TabID=548" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

03Lightningrocks wrote:

F4injected wrote:

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Maybe something like this.

Where would you buy something like this?

http://www.uscav.com/productinfo.aspx?p ... &TabID=548" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:

F4injected wrote:

Carry-a-Kimber wrote:Maybe something like this.

Where would you buy something like this?

http://www.uscav.com/productinfo.aspx?p ... &TabID=548" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks! Do you know anyone who actually has one installed?

F4injected wrote: Thanks! Do you know anyone who actually has one installed?

Page 1, post 7 of this thread.

The bickering and derogatory, inflammatory remarks from one supposed 2nd amendment supporter to others that clearly are . simply amazes me here in this forum.