BiggerPockets


Sandy Hook

Forum Powered By:

174 posts by 16 users

To participate in forum discussions, create a free account or login.

Bryan Hancock

Real Estate Investor from Round Rock, Texas

Jan 17 '13, 06:11 PM


So what are you FOR then J? I'm too lazy to read all the previous responses again.



Medium_inner10_logo__updated_Bryan Hancock, Inner 10 Capital
E-Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 1-800-577-0401
Website: http://www.inner10capital.com/invest/
Our Recent Austin Business Journal Article - http://tinyurl.com/Inner10Capital


Randy F.

Contractor from Anchorage, Alaska

Jan 17 '13, 09:19 PM


Originally posted by J Scott:
Originally posted by Bryan Hancock:

Any way you slice it criminals don't follow the law and many of them will find ways to find weapons if you "ban" them.

Again, I'm not suggesting we ban guns...

That said, the logic above doesn't resonate with me -- the likelihood of a criminal circumventing a law shouldn't factor into whether it's a law (in my opinion).

As an analogy, pedophiles still rape children despite it being illegal, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be illegal.

But again, that's just a general statement...I'm not for banning guns (but am for banning pedophiles)...

All that said, it wasn't clear what your conclusion was, so it's possible I completely misinterpreted your conclusion and was putting words in your mouth, Bryan...if that's the case, I apologize...

That logic does resonate with me. Your pedophile analogy doesnt hold up because there is no good purpose for pedophilia. And pedophilia does not enjoy Constitutional protection. There are good purposes for guns and our right to bear them is protected. For those reasons, there should be a legitimate, logical reason for any and every regulation, restriction, or outright ban. So far, I have yet to see an argument that passes muster. The reaction to Sandy Hook by the political left is nothing more than what Rahm Emanuel so famously quipped... "you never want a serious crisis to go to waste".



Tim W. Donor

Inspector from Tampa, FL

Jan 18 '13, 01:51 AM


Even if you ban every gun, you think rednecks can't make guns? The sten machine gun was designed for the French resistance to be able to fabricate in bicycle shops with their technology. Imagine what can be done when you add water jet cutting and 3D printing technology to it. Guns are here to stay and that reality cannot be ignored.



Rob K

Real Estate Investor from Michigan

Jan 18 '13, 04:36 AM


Originally posted by Tim W.:
Even if you ban every gun, you think rednecks can't make guns? The sten machine gun was designed for the French resistance to be able to fabricate in bicycle shops with their technology. Imagine what can be done when you add water jet cutting and 3D printing technology to it. Guns are here to stay and that reality cannot be ignored.

I knew a guy that owned a machine shop. He was able to take "The Club" that you out on stearing wheels and make it fire a .410 shotgun shell. He traveled to Canada a lot and was not allowed to take any guns there, so he took the shotgun/club. You couldn't tell it was a gun.

People have made guns out of canes and pens too.

None of these laws that Obama has proposed will solve anything. Crack cocaine has never been legal in America, but you can buy it in any city. These new gun proposals have done nothing except to further arm the public. Any mention of gun control causes sales to skyrocket.

The only way to disarm the public would be through confiscation, which would start a civil war. If Obama was smart, he wouldn't have mentioned the word gun and sales wouldn't be so strong. I've also heard all kinds of statements from people in the last month about how they will not give up there guns and will shoot anyone who tries to take them. If Obama had just kept his mouth shut, this would've all gone away. Instead, we have a bunch of meaningless laws being discussed and guns and ammo are flying off the shelves.

I'm also hearing more about the Oathkeepers. This is probably the best thing to happen to their organization as well.



J Scott Moderator Donor

Real Estate Investor from Ellicott City, Maryland

Jan 18 '13, 05:15 AM
1 vote


Originally posted by Bryan Hancock:
So what are you FOR then J? I'm too lazy to read all the previous responses again.

I believe that everyone has a right to own guns for their own protection within their own home. As long as the gun stays on your own property, you should be allowed to have it without restriction.

But, for those who want to carry a gun in public (thereby potentially infringing on others' right to feel secure), there should be required education and testing. For example, after the movie theater shootings in Colorado, there were lots of people saying, "If everyone in that theater had been carrying a gun, this wouldn't have been so tragic."

That implies to me that there are lots of people (some of whom potentially carry guns) who believe that pulling out a gun in a dark theater and starting to shoot is a smart idea. Those people shouldn't be carrying guns.

Here's an example of what happens when people who carry guns in public get into an high-adrenaline situation:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/25/empire-state-building-shooting-nypd-bullets-shot-all-nine_n_1830007.html

And those were trained cops randomly shooting bystanders! Imagine what untrained citizens with guns might do in a similar situation. I'd rather take my chances with the gunman.

Most importantly, to be effective gun control, anyone caught illegally possessing a gun in public should be dealt with harshly. Instead of throwing minor drug offenders into prison and letting people go for minor weapons offenses, it should be the other way around.

Will this stop the mass shootings? Of course not...that's a societal problem, not a gun problem. But, it will stop much of the random violence purported by those who routinely carry unregistered guns (the first time they get caught with an illegal weapon, they won't have a second chance), and MORE IMPORTANTLY, I can feel safer walking the streets with lots of armed citizens around me, because I know that they've at least had a minimum amount of training to use the weapon they possess.

Now, as I've said before, all of this is likely a moot discussion, as in a few years, there will be technology that will regulate gun use for us. My guess is that we'll have the ability to allow authorities to track stolen weapons and eventually guns will be able to be "keyed" to a user, so that you won't be able to fire the weapon if you're not the rightful owner/registered user.



Medium_lishproplogoJ Scott, Lish Properties, LLC
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.123flip.com
CHECK OUT MY BIGGERPOCKETS BOOKS: http://www.biggerpockets.com/flippingbook


Bryan Hancock

Real Estate Investor from Round Rock, Texas

Jan 18 '13, 06:34 AM


Even if there was all sorts of technology you have TONS of guns made without said technology. You'll also have *criminals* that don't follow the law, import weapons from other countries, make their own guns, etc.

This thread was presumably supposed to be about mass shootings. You have admitted that a "ban" would not prevent such mass shootings so I am not sure that there is much to debate there. I think everyone will have to agree to disagree about the effectiveness of allowing guns on the streets. I for one feel much safer knowing there are potential non-nut-jobs with guns to check the criminals so I'm not sure how this infringes on my right to feel secure. I also wasn't really aware this was a right.



Medium_inner10_logo__updated_Bryan Hancock, Inner 10 Capital
E-Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 1-800-577-0401
Website: http://www.inner10capital.com/invest/
Our Recent Austin Business Journal Article - http://tinyurl.com/Inner10Capital


J Scott Moderator Donor

Real Estate Investor from Ellicott City, Maryland

Jan 18 '13, 09:02 AM
1 vote


Originally posted by Bryan Hancock:
Even if there was all sorts of technology you have TONS of guns made without said technology. You'll also have *criminals* that don't follow the law, import weapons from other countries, make their own guns, etc.

With every law, there are criminals who don't follow the law -- should we do away with all of them? Get rid of speeding laws because it doesn't stop some people from speeding? Get rid of homicide laws because they don't stop people from killing?

I'm sure you see the logical fallacy there, right?


This thread was presumably supposed to be about mass shootings. You have admitted that a "ban" would not prevent such mass shootings so I am not sure that there is much to debate there. I think everyone will have to agree to disagree about the effectiveness of allowing guns on the streets.

Given that of the 100+ mass shootings over the past 10 years, there was not a single instance of the criminal being stopped by a private citizen carrying a legal weapon. So, the theory that private citizens carrying guns will stop mass shootings doesn't hold water either.


I for one feel much safer knowing there are potential non-nut-jobs with guns to check the criminals...

I guess we just disagree about that. I feel perfectly safe in 100% of situations I'm in on a daily basis, even though I know most people around me don't have guns. Knowing people around me have guns would drop that level from 100% to something less.



Medium_lishproplogoJ Scott, Lish Properties, LLC
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.123flip.com
CHECK OUT MY BIGGERPOCKETS BOOKS: http://www.biggerpockets.com/flippingbook


Randy F.

Contractor from Anchorage, Alaska

Jan 18 '13, 10:36 AM


I took Hunters Safety when I was fourteen. What I learned there was engrained in me and I have never forgotten. Millions of people have taken gun safety courses as kids and I have to believe it has stuck with them as well. Would you tell us that we can only posess our guns on our own property? Should we be required to spend our time and money on some newly required training and testing?

New gun laws and regulations that adversely effect millions of responsible gun owners because of the actions of a few, is simply more unnecessary and ineffectual governmental intrusion into our lives.

Carrying a gun into the Alaskan bush is no guarantee against being mauled by a bear, but the loss of the ability to legally do so would cost lives. The 44 I carry while bow hunting may not stop a charging brown bear but i should be able to legally carry it for the peace of mind it gives me.

In the early eighties my brother and I were rehabbing properties in the inner core of Milwaukee. A large group of black teens routinely threw rocks at us as we entered and left one particular area. I was carrying back then and for the same reason i carry in the bush... Peace of mind that if I was attacked, I at least had the oportunity to protect myself. Whether or not I should have been there in the first place is beside the point. In a free country, we should be able to go anywhere we want, and to feel safe doing so.



J Scott Moderator Donor

Real Estate Investor from Ellicott City, Maryland

Jan 18 '13, 12:19 PM


Originally posted by Randy F.:
I took Hunters Safety when I was fourteen. What I learned there was engrained in me and I have never forgotten.

I took English Lit when I was fourteen. I don't remember a thing.


Millions of people have taken gun safety courses as kids and I have to believe it has stuck with them as well.

Why do you have to believe that? Most 14 year olds took algebra, but 95% of the adults I know aren't very proficient at algebra. If you're proficient at stuff you learned at 14, you're in the minority, not the majority.


Would you tell us that we can only posess our guns on our own property?

It's not up to me. But, if it were, I'd tell you to take another class and a test if you wanted to carry in public. If you're not willing to take a class and a test, it must not be that important to you (at least that's my take).


Should we be required to spend our time and money on some newly required training and testing?

Yes, just like you need to spend your time and money to learn to drive, learn to be a real estate agent, learn to fly an airplane, etc.


New gun laws and regulations that adversely effect millions of responsible gun owners because of the actions of a few, is simply more unnecessary and ineffectual governmental intrusion into our lives.

I don't care if they're responsible gun owners. I want them to be proficient gun owners, and there is no way to know that without proficiency testing. 50,000 guns are stolen every year, and I'd be willing to bet many of them are used to commit crimes. In my opinion, if you let your gun get stolen, you're not a responsible gun owner. That's a lot of not-responsible gun owners out there.


Carrying a gun into the Alaskan bush is no guarantee against being mauled by a bear, but the loss of the ability to legally do so would cost lives. The 44 I carry while bow hunting may not stop a charging brown bear but i should be able to legally carry it for the peace of mind it gives me.

I agree you should be able to carry it. Have I said otherwise? Just like you should be able to jump in your car and drive away if attacked by a bear. But in both situations -- carrying the gun and driving the car -- you should have to be trained and tested.

I don't see you arguing about having to take a test to drive a car. How is that different?


A large group of black teens routinely threw rocks at us as we entered and left one particular area. I was carrying back then and for the same reason i carry in the bush...

You carry in the Bush for the same reason? You get rocks thrown at you by black teens in the Bush?!?! (sorry, couldn't resist :)


Peace of mind that if I was attacked, I at least had the oportunity to protect myself. Whether or not I should have been there in the first place is beside the point. In a free country, we should be able to go anywhere we want, and to feel safe doing so.

I agree completely. You have a right to go wherever you want and you have a right to protect yourself. I believe I have a right to know that if you're around me, you're well trained with your deadly weapon. If I found out you were driving your car untrained and without a license (that you needed to pass a test to get), I'd be concerned about that as well.

What's the difference?



Medium_lishproplogoJ Scott, Lish Properties, LLC
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.123flip.com
CHECK OUT MY BIGGERPOCKETS BOOKS: http://www.biggerpockets.com/flippingbook


Steve Babiak

Real Estate Investor from Audubon, Pennsylvania

Jan 18 '13, 12:30 PM


Originally posted by J Scott:
... for those who want to carry a gun in public (thereby potentially infringing on others' right to feel secure), there should be required education and testing.
...

Here's an example of what happens when people who carry guns in public get into an high-adrenaline situation:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/25/empire-state-building-shooting-nypd-bullets-shot-all-nine_n_1830007.html

And those were trained cops randomly shooting bystanders!

...

The example in the second part of that quote does not seem to support the statement made in the first part of the quote ...



Steve Babiak, Redeeming Properties, LLC
Telephone: 6109082183
...


Will Barnard Moderator Donor

Real Estate Investor from Santa Clarita, California

Jan 18 '13, 01:24 PM


One of many reasons why I try and stay clear of political debates and discussions, 5 page threads of back and forth and really about personal opinions and beliefs.
With all this effort and time, any number of RE deals could have been started or made! :)

I say this completely out of sarcasm but I think that the gun manufacturers sent a nice fat check to the politicians and media to start spilling out all this crap about the need for gun control and removal of assault rifles from our society. Why? Just look at their sales over the past month! They are making millions!!! And all based on some perceived fear of new restrictions that will likely not happen.

People are like sheep, they just follow the crowd, perfect example is our RE bubble that ended up bursting.

I believe in the right to bear arms as such a right was passed down to me a few hundred years ago and I don't see that right going away. In fact, it has gone all the way to the highest authority (the Supreme Court) and removing the right was already ruled unconstitutional.

Just because some crazy moron shot up a bunch of innocent civilians, the talk of the town is gun control. I am also a believer in the fact that guns do not kill people, people kill people and if not a gun, then with a knife, a fork, a spoon, or whatever they can get their hands on will do, sometimes the hands themselves.

That all said, I also agree with J Scott in that gun education and proper training for anyone who wants to utilize their right to bear arms should be a bit more stringent. After all, you need a license to drive and drivers training, along with periodic tests and I see nothing wrong with that. Will that stop people from killing others in their car or with their guns? Of course not, but it certainly does not hurt and it still allows for the rights to stay in place.


Edited Jan 18 2013, 13:32 by Will Barnard


Medium_be_logoWill Barnard, Barnard Enterprises, Inc.
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.barnardenterprises.com
http://www.InvestorExperts.com


James Vermillion Donor

Real Estate Investor from Lexington, Kentucky

Jan 18 '13, 01:31 PM


Originally posted by J Scott:

You carry in the Bush for the same reason? You get rocks thrown at you by black teens in the Bush?!?! (sorry, couldn't resist :)

I was laughing about the same thing when I read that...well played. Also, not sure the race of the people throwing rocks was important. That is my contribution to this thread..carry on!



Medium_kvJames Vermillion, K&V Investing
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.kandvinvesting.com
Invested in the Bluegrass!


Bryan Hancock

Real Estate Investor from Round Rock, Texas

Jan 18 '13, 05:59 PM


Originally posted by J Scott:
With every law, there are criminals who don't follow the law -- should we do away with all of them? Get rid of speeding laws because it doesn't stop some people from speeding? Get rid of homicide laws because they don't stop people from killing?

I'm sure you see the logical fallacy there, right?


No fallacy....If I speed to combat the other people speeding it doesn't make me safer.

The parallels you try to draw above don't hold water. The way to combat people with guns is good people with guns. What other recourse would anyone have against the criminals with guns?

Originally posted by J Scott:

Given that of the 100+ mass shootings over the past 10 years, there was not a single instance of the criminal being stopped by a private citizen carrying a legal weapon. So, the theory that private citizens carrying guns will stop mass shootings doesn't hold water either.

The good guys with the guns eventually showed up and the killer generally either killed themselves or was killed.

I haven't heard of a single mass killing in Williamson County in Texas. Ya know why? Because a LARGE percentage of the population around here would be within a few minutes of these nut-jobs to take them out. I'm sure there are other reasons (like being lucky), but I can guarantee you this is a deterrent in Texas.

It would be interesting to see the distribution of these mass shootings and how it overlays with the percentage of folks with concealed handgun permits.

Originally posted by J Scott:

I guess we just disagree about that. I feel perfectly safe in 100% of situations I'm in on a daily basis, even though I know most people around me don't have guns. Knowing people around me have guns would drop that level from 100% to something less.

Fair enough....hard to argue with how you feel. Your feelings should not impact my ability to protect myself or my family though. I'm not sure what the polls say, but my suspicion is that most folks would agree with me on this. It could be something very simple like:

If a nut-job comes at you or your family with a gun would you feel safer if you:

a. Had a gun to protect yourself

or

b. Had your kung fun belt and/or Matrix bullet-dodging exercise that morning

I suspect 99.99 percent of the folks would choose option a. I could certainly be wrong about that, but I know a would be my choice.



Medium_inner10_logo__updated_Bryan Hancock, Inner 10 Capital
E-Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 1-800-577-0401
Website: http://www.inner10capital.com/invest/
Our Recent Austin Business Journal Article - http://tinyurl.com/Inner10Capital


Randy F.

Contractor from Anchorage, Alaska

Jan 19 '13, 01:07 AM


Originally posted by James Vermillion:
Originally posted by J Scott:

You carry in the Bush for the same reason? You get rocks thrown at you by black teens in the Bush?!?! (sorry, couldn't resist :)

I was laughing about the same thing when I read that...well played. Also, not sure the race of the people throwing rocks was important. That is my contribution to this thread..carry on!

Youre absolutely correct. I should not have mentioned that they were black kids. I mean its obvious.... Ive have NEVER heard nor seen white kids throwing rocks at honkies in Milwaukees core!



J Scott Moderator Donor

Real Estate Investor from Ellicott City, Maryland

Jan 19 '13, 04:12 AM


Originally posted by Bryan Hancock:

The parallels you try to draw above don't hold water. The way to combat people with guns is good people with guns. What other recourse would anyone have against the criminals with guns?

I've never suggested that those well-trained in firearms shouldn't be allowed to carry guns. And I've never suggested that cops shouldn't be allowed to carry guns (especially given that cops are the "good guys" you speak of nearly 100% of the time).


I haven't heard of a single mass killing in Williamson County in Texas. Ya know why? Because a LARGE percentage of the population around here would be within a few minutes of these nut-jobs to take them out.

So, if I can name a county that has a low percentage of gun carriers and a low crime rate, can I rightfully imply that there is a causal effect between a small number of guns and low crime? Would that be enough evidence to support my argument that lack of guns deters crime?

If not, why are you employing the same lack of rigor in your logic and expecting it to be meaningful?


I'm sure there are other reasons (like being lucky), but I can guarantee you this is a deterrent in Texas.

Really...you can guarantee it? Many studies indicate you're incorrect...do you have data they don't have?


If a nut-job comes at you or your family with a gun would you feel safer if you:

a. Had a gun to protect yourself

or

b. Had your kung fun belt and/or Matrix bullet-dodging exercise that morning

I suspect 99.99 percent of the folks would choose option a. I could certainly be wrong about that, but I know a would be my choice.


Come on, Bryan...I know you realize the logical fallacy employed there...

Your hypothetical starts with a very low percentage likelihood event and then draws broad conclusions.

Let me do the same thing:

If a nut-job is holding you at gunpoint while he's riding on a unicycle, would you feel safer if:

a. There was an earthquake

or

b. If there was no earthquake

I suspect 99.99 percent of folks would choose option a.

Does that mean people like earthquakes because earthquakes make people feel safer?


Edited Jan 19 2013, 04:21 by J Scott


Medium_lishproplogoJ Scott, Lish Properties, LLC
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.123flip.com
CHECK OUT MY BIGGERPOCKETS BOOKS: http://www.biggerpockets.com/flippingbook


Tim W. Donor

Inspector from Tampa, FL

Jan 19 '13, 04:20 AM


Originally posted by Will Barnard:
One of many reasons why I try and stay clear of political debates and discussions, 5 page threads of back and forth and really about personal opinions and beliefs.
With all this effort and time, any number of RE deals could have been started or made! :)

I contend that my posting in such threads is evidence of how much time real estate investing has made for me. :-)



Bryan Hancock

Real Estate Investor from Round Rock, Texas

Jan 19 '13, 06:57 AM


Originally posted by J Scott:

I've never suggested that those well-trained in firearms shouldn't be allowed to carry guns. And I've never suggested that cops shouldn't be allowed to carry guns (especially given that cops are the "good guys" you speak of nearly 100% of the time).

Fair enough. The good guys are in limited supply though and I would prefer having other non-badged good guys to help out while they're out doing the important


So, if I can name a county that has a low percentage of gun carriers and a low crime rate, can I rightfully imply that there is a causal effect between a small number of guns and low crime? Would that be enough evidence to support my argument that lack of guns deters crime?

Nope....it wouldn't. As I suggested above; an overlay of the concealed carry permits with the incidence of whatever are characterized as "mass killings" would be something helpful to see though. You'd then need to parse the data to see HOW MANY were killed in the mass killings and probably do other scrubbing too.

I supplied a whole study on this earlier and we could probably debate this endlessly. One thing that is hard to debate is that I consider myself a good guy and I want to protect myself against bad guys. I don't think there is anything wrong with fighting vigorously for my right to defend myself against bad guys. In a cozy little world the bad guys would only attack me in my house. In the real world they can attack me anywhere and thus the means of protection should be available to me anywhere.


If not, why are you employing the same lack of rigor in your logic and expecting it to be meaningful?

It is not any less rigorous than anything you have stated. Absent objective data from non-biased sources it is difficult to have rigor in anything.


Really...you can guarantee it? Many studies indicate you're incorrect...do you have data they don't have?

Yup....I can. Which studies are you referring to? How were they performed and by whom?

I don't need 1020340349 studies to logically conclude that if you're a bad guy and plan to do bad things then you're much more worried about doing said bad things when the old dude at the next counter may put a bullet in your head.

The rest of this thread is about feelings and I have to run to a birthday party for my daughter. It is certainly entertaining though and I appreciate the fact that reasonable people can disagree on things without name calling. Fortunately the trolls that have magically come back to BP after years of exit have not managed to derail things yet.



Medium_inner10_logo__updated_Bryan Hancock, Inner 10 Capital
E-Mail: [email protected]
Telephone: 1-800-577-0401
Website: http://www.inner10capital.com/invest/
Our Recent Austin Business Journal Article - http://tinyurl.com/Inner10Capital


J Scott Moderator Donor

Real Estate Investor from Ellicott City, Maryland

Jan 19 '13, 07:48 AM


@Bryan Hancock -

First, Bryan, I highly respect your opinion (along with most of the posters in this thread), and despite all the back and forth, my personal belief is that the issue of gun violence and legislation is one that is so complex that no amount of available data can really help us draw any reliable conclusions.

In other words, your arguments are as good as mine, mine are as good as the next guy's, etc. We can all find studies and data to support our opinions, because most of those who are funding the studies and data have an agenda and will skew the reports how they want. So, arguing facts is useless, as we can all seemingly support our facts.

In fact, if most people on this thread were arguing for regulation, I'm pretty positive I'd be arguing the other direction, just for the fun of it, and to prove that there's no "right" answer based on the available data.

While I have an opinion on the issue, I'm the first to admit that if I were to make the rules, all the rules I could make might be useless to help the problem (and I think most of us are in that situation -- I don't think anyone has a silver bullet (pun intended :) to solve the problem).

I certainly don't think knee-jerk regulation by the current administration is a good thing and the fact that they're using Sandy Hook as a political tool is horrible. Rarely does a knee-jerk reaction by politicians solve any real problem. I'm sure that's something most of us can agree on.

Originally posted by Bryan Hancock:

I supplied a whole study on this earlier...

Yup, just keep in mind that, according to the study you posted, when the Soviet Union started banning firearms, gun-related homicide dropped to near zero.

Here is a quote from the first two pages of the study you posted:

"Since well before [1965], the Soviet Union possessed extremely stringent gun controls that were effectuated by a police state apparatus providing stringent enforcement. So successful was that regime that few Russian civilians now have firearms and very few murders involve them."

The report did indicate that removing guns didn't reduce homicides overall, even if it did reduce gun-related death. I think that's a tremendously interesting study, and just goes to prove that the issue is deeper rooted in our society than just in our gun laws.


Fortunately the trolls that have magically come back to BP after years of exit have not managed to derail things yet.

On that we COMPLETELY agree... :)



Medium_lishproplogoJ Scott, Lish Properties, LLC
E-Mail: [email protected]
Website: http://www.123flip.com
CHECK OUT MY BIGGERPOCKETS BOOKS: http://www.biggerpockets.com/flippingbook


Rob K

Real Estate Investor from Michigan

Jan 19 '13, 08:43 AM


Originally posted by J Scott:
I feel perfectly safe in 100% of situations I'm in on a daily basis, even though I know most people around me don't have guns. Knowing people around me have guns would drop that level from 100% to something less.

I think you would be very suprised (shocked!) at how many people around you are carrying guns. Georgia is a fairly gun friendly state. Unless you're frisking all of the people that work on your houses, I'm willing to bet that some of them carry guns on your property and you just don't know.

I have dealt with the same plumber for 15 years. I never knew he carried a gun until recently. He told me he was going to the war zone and was glad he had his gun with him. The furnace guy that I use, and the three that I used in the past, all carry as well.

A lot of contractors that work for themselves carry guns. It's one of those things that people don't talk about unless they know that you're on board.



Michael Lauther

Residential Landlord from Hampton Bays, New York

Jan 19 '13, 08:55 AM


@J Scott and others, I want to thank you all for the civilized discussion about guns in our society. I tend to agree with and appreciate J's thoughtful and relentless replies. I have been assaulted by a host of hateful, illogical and outright crazy messages regarding this issue on otter sites as well as from good friends who hold some bizarre reasons for owning military style weapons. It seems that these talking points are relatively uniform, they need weapons to oppose our own government , to fight the UN takeover?, Even government officials are talking about disobeying or not enforcing any laws that they deem unconstitutional.

I usually dont waste my time trying to indulge in conversation with irrational people. I am ussualy content to let the politics play out. If the economy takes a dive because our elected officials are not up to the task than so be it , but if we continue to promote a society where guns proliferate and we allow mentally deranged individuals to go untreated than how free are we really?


Edited Jan 19 2013, 09:04 by Michael Lauther


(Don't Want to See This? Log in or Create a Free BiggerPockets.com Account!)

Ubg-book

Get the Free eBook from BiggerPockets

Get The Ultimate Beginner's Guide to Real Estate Investing for FREE - read by more than 100,000 people - AND get exclusive real estate investing tips, tricks, and techniques delivered straight to your inbox twice weekly!

  • Actionable Advice for Getting Started,
  • Discover the 10 Most Lucrative Real Estate Niches,
  • Learn how to get started with or without money,
  • Explore Real-Life Strategies for Building Wealth,
  • And a LOT more!

Sign up below to download the eBook for FREE today!

We hate spam just as much as you


To post a reply or start a new discussion, create a free account or login.

Manage Keyword Alerts

View All Forums