Complete tard almost gets half a dozen people killed

BamaBoyBeRolling

BamaBoyBeRolling

Well-Known Member
I am a avid gun rights promoter. I have a mini arsenal and believe there should be gun training and education in our schools so some dumbass doesn't do something like this when there is other lifes at stake for a stupid action as such.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
lawlrus said:
But you don't have the innate human right to put others at additional risk because you have chosen to "defend yourself." You don't know how the situation will play out and in most scenarios like this, the situation is only escalated with the addition of "good samaritans" who start shooting, which only leads to more loss of life.
Click to expand...
Which is why the guy shot the robber (who was the aggressor here by the way). This situation is never a good situation. The guy defended himself. He did not commit a crime. He did not know if he was about to be murdered. People frequently are murdered in such situations.

It was unquestionably a high risk situation - but your beef is with the robbers waving their guns in the first place. He acted reasonably - even if his reasonable is a different standard than yours the law does not care and it should not care.

I'd probably shoot him if I were armed personally. I just know myself. My instincts are never to run. Very much the opposite. Some people react differently. You cannot possibly suggest though, with any kind of reasonableness, that this guy should be put in jail. Sorry - that won't fly and it should never fly. The action he took wound up with a pretty good outcome overall so it's hard to criticize 'might have beens'.

This kind of situation is always going to be really risky though. No matter what action he takes. You cannot know what will happen.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
lawlrus said:
And that's where we differ in general worldviews, I suppose, because what you just said tells me that you are the type to pick and choose which freedoms you would like to exercise while disregarding the same liberties (not to mention the physical safety and mental well-being) of others around you. People like you are just as scary to me as the criminal.
Click to expand...
How is someone else pointing a gun at him and trying to defend himself turn into he somehow infringing on someones rights? That's some serious mental gymnastics to arrive at that conclusion. The person putting everyone at risk by pointing a gun at otherwise good people.... this is the person threatening the rights (and lives) of everyone in the room. The person defending themselves is not the problem.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
ChesusRice said:
The customer did a good job, but in NO way was this a defensive shoot.
Click to expand...
Padawanbater2 said:
Picking up a weapon and ensuring a higher probability that you and/or others are killed in the process doesn't seem all that smart of a plan to me, considering less than 1 out of every 10 armed robberies result in murder

But then again, I know you're not much of a numbers kind of guy
Click to expand...
1/25 is still pretty bad odds.
 
OGEvilgenius

OGEvilgenius

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
So I've chewed on this for a bit. Its kind of funny to reply to my own post but I don't want our 2nd amendment defenders to get the wrong idea. I was a bit taken aback by @doublejj 's Ramboesque description of using bystanders as shields in his scenario of what he would do in a similar situation. I have a lot of respect for JJ and I don't think he said this casually. I'm also convinced that if a person straps a gun on, they are or have contemplated killing another person. So, that's the nub of all this. From what you guys say, if anybody feels threatened by another person, they have the right to shoot them. Florida has this law and its been used to defend exactly this action.

At a much lower level, I've been advocating the simple idea that owning a gun, for the average person, does not make them safer. Its clear that many gun owners think this is wildly ridiculous but study after study bears this truth out. As @budlover13 said we have a people problem, not a gun problem in response to my pointing out that the accidental gun injuries and death often occurs at home and is due to mishandling of firearms. I think he's right. Leaving guns at home in safe storage is anathema to some.

I don't own a gun. My dad did and he taught me how to shoot. I'm not afraid of one, I just don't think the risk is worth it. Statistics are on my side. Another statistic that gun owners might not like is that they are a shrinking minority. Gun ownership is around 32% in the US and dropping.

So, here we have a video posted by @Padawanbater2 showing a successful self defense that also could have gone very bad in an instant. Our resident population of gun owners love it. Paddy and I see how close it was to disaster and think that the risk wasn't worth the action. This is our opinion. However, I understand the reasoning behind the gun owner taking this act, I didn't at first but I do now.

From all this discussion, and thanks for having it with me, I'm also forming the opinion that the 2nd amendment is becoming a dinosaur. Guns on the streets don't make people safer. Gun owners won't lock them up. Gun owners won't accept the idea of safety certifications. And finally, developed countries like ours, think Canada, Sweden, Norway, Great Britain, France, Germany, all of which don't allow that hunk of iron to be freely waggled about on a belt or in your pants don't have the same level of gun violence that we do.

I suggest that those that want to maintain the 2nd amendment think carefully about protecting that right through education, training and situation awareness classes. Because you guys have lost me. I no longer support this right.
Click to expand...
The second amendment is to protect you from government. Protections from your fellow citizens are secondary. Your position is historically among the most dangerous to take. You will never create a perfect society. And most gun studies I've read are usually highly flawed (on both sides) due to the sociological nature of them.
 
CrocodileStunter

CrocodileStunter

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
more often than islamic terrorism.
Click to expand...
naww you need to link the article where toddlers were responsible for an event bigger than 9-11. You're just using the libvestite stat where 9-11 is excluded. Just like the libvestites decided that if they exclude 9-11 they can paint christian terrorism as the "real" threat. I still have yet to hear about christians hijacked 3 airplanes and ran them into 2 buildings. killing thousands and destabilizing our economy. Toddlers more dangerous than Muslim terrorists. gtfo
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
OGEvilgenius said:
The second amendment is to protect you from government. Protections from your fellow citizens are secondary. Your position is historically among the most dangerous to take. You will never create a perfect society. And most gun studies I've read are usually highly flawed (on both sides) due to the sociological nature of them.
Click to expand...
I get that you want to keep gun laws as is or reduce the laws on the books. Otherwise of your argument is flawed or fringe looney tunes.

Gun owners are the only ones that can improve statistics of gun deaths in the home and accidents or bad decisions outside of it. Work with other gun owners to get the US in to line with other developed countries and I'll change my opinion.

Gun owners, for the most part, are less safe to themselves, their loved ones and people around them with their gun that without it. And I'm not talking about suicide. For every 1 time a firearm is used to defend or protect, 5 people are accidentally injured or killed by a gun in the home. Without addressing this, the average gun owner is more "dangerous" to themselves, their loved ones and the 2nd amendment.
 
BamaBoyBeRolling

BamaBoyBeRolling

Well-Known Member
This problem is very simple take our guns we will start a civil war and kill those without guns attempting to take them via proxy through people with guns. Then finally we will be able to use that 2nd amendment against this tyrannical government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top