Gun Rights done right

[rumpshakers]

http://www.blackamericaweb.com/site.aspx/headlines/foiledholdup104

Another notch in the pistol

[Spaceman Spiff]

Wow, I wonder why this wasn't reported in mainstream media outlets?

Good for the owner.

[stevenaa]

Wow, I wonder why this wasn't reported in mainstream media outlets?

Good for the owner.

Mainstream media rarely reports these types of things. You have to look at outlets that support firearms for self defense. However, this was a risky thing to do. If you pull a gun in self defense, it should be with the intention of killing the offender. He really put their lives in danger by giving the gunman a chance to fire his weapon. What if the gun was loaded. He may not have just put it down. It would have been better if he let the guy rob the place, or just shot him.

[PleaseBlitz]

So pulling a gun to prevent a gun crime is a net positive for gun rights?

Ok.

[zoony]

I love the picture just to the right with the "snapshot" of the guy who pulled the gun :laugh:

I don't know about all of you, but when I go to the store for milk, I always wear my black terminator outfit with hood & mask.

[PleaseBlitz]

I love the picture just to the right with the "snapshot" of the guy who pulled the gun :laugh:

I don't know about all of you, but when I go to the store for milk, I always wear my black terminator outfit with hood & mask.

I noticed that too. I was wondering why a ninja needs a gun? Didnt he bring his sword?

[zoony]

I noticed that too. I was wondering why a ninja needs a gun? Didnt he bring his sword?

He is obviously a very poorly trained ninja.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

I'm assuming the armed robber was armed - and therefore able to even attempt to commit armed robbery - with nothing but a banana peel that he was going to throw at the owner's feet.

Yes, what a great victory for gun owners that a guy with a gun attempted to commit robbery.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

Mainstream media rarely reports these types of things. You have to look at outlets that support firearms for self defense.

Yep. Because it doesn't match up with their views on the firearms ownership issue.

However, this was a risky thing to do. If you pull a gun in self defense, it should be with the intention of killing the offender. He really put their lives in danger by giving the gunman a chance to fire his weapon. What if the gun was loaded. He may not have just put it down. It would have been better if he let the guy rob the place, or just shot him.

Yes it was a very risky thing to do. Though probably no less risky than standing there and not doing anything. One must always assume that a firearm is loaded. Especially if it's pointed at you. I'd rather take my chances trying to defend myself than to stand there while a criminal guns me down to ensure I can't identify him in court.

On a tactical level I might have maneuvered somewhat differently but I have to say that this guy did the right thing in my mind. Though I do have to agree that the moment a firearm clears leather you MUST be willing and ready to pull the trigger or it should never be drawn.

[zoony]

Yes, what a great victory for gun owners that a guy with a gun attempted to commit robbery.

So are you willing to bet that the perp obtained his gun thru legal channels?

Go on record if that's what you're saying.

But be careful, it's a trap.

.......

[PleaseBlitz]

So are you willing to bet that the perp obtained his gun thru legal channels?

Go on record if that's what you're saying.

But be careful, it's a trap.

.......

I doubt he's saying that. I think he's saying that it is pretty ridiculous for the gun-rights crowd to be holding this up as a shining example of why guns are awesome.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

So are you willing to bet that the perp obtained his gun thru legal channels?

Go on record if that's what you're saying.

But be careful, it's a trap.

.......

No, I'm willing to bet that if there were no guns in this country, he wouldnt have had a gun.

And don't talk to me about police enforcement having guns because thats not what i'm talking about.

[The_cavalierman]

I am a big believer in gun rights but this story does not help the case.

This was a guy who was lucky that his actions did not get himself or others killed.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

I wonder how many of you commenting on this story are gun owners? How many have carried a firearm in public, or at least physically and mentally trained to do so? Somehow I guess that I'm the only one who can claim the latter.

Part of that training, if it's done properly, is learning to judge the circumstances, take stock of the situation, and then making a judgement about what the best option in a slew of absolutely terrible ones is. It's about judgement. Making a split-second decision based on the available information and what you believe the level of threat is.

This gentlemen did everything as close to perfect as is reasonably possible in my mind. Could it have gone horribly wrong... definitely. Just as it could have if he'd decided that he'd be better off staying out of it.

[PleaseBlitz]

Did MSF just claim to have good judgement? :rubeyes:

[GibbsFactor]

I doubt he's saying that. I think he's saying that it is pretty ridiculous for the gun-rights crowd to be holding this up as a shining example of why guns are awesome.

I don't think that's what they are saying. That's making this a much broader issue then the facts. Guns exist. We aren't getting rid of them.

A citizen carrying a firearm legally was able to thwart a robbery. This means that the ability to carry a firearm saved lives and prevented a robbery.

Now, imagine for a moment if criminals felt more people carried loaded weapons. They just may be more inclined not to rob a store for the sake of self preservation.

With regards to those committing mass-murders, I think it is highly unlikely that the thought of others being armed would dissuade them other then the fact that they might not kill as many people and they may not be able to end it on their terms. If thats more important then just going out with a bang, then it helps. I for one can't get into the mind of those types of people.

But the fact is, a man attempted to use a firearm as a scare tactic with no intention of actually shooting someone in the commission of an illegal act. His plan went south because a citizen prevented him from his scare tactics with real threat. The citizen with the loaded gun prevented the criminal with the unloaded gun from getting away with a crime.

So gun rights were proven effective in this case.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

GibbsFactor, don't bother trying to use logic and reason when it comes to this topic. Those who hate firearms, gun owners, and anything gun related won't listen anyway and those of us who already know the truth aren't the ones you need to talk to.

Nice to see that somebody else around here "gets it" though.

[PleaseBlitz]

I don't think that's what they are saying. That's making this a much broader issue then the facts. Guns exist. We aren't getting rid of them.

A citizen carrying a firearm legally was able to thwart a robbery. This means that the ability to carry a firearm saved lives and prevented a robbery.

He didnt save lives, the robbers gun wasnt loaded. At least read the article before you post, jeez.

Now, imagine for a moment if criminals felt more people carried loaded weapons. They just may be more inclined not to rob a store for the sake of self preservation.

With regards to those committing mass-murders, I think it is highly unlikely that the thought of others being armed would dissuade them other then the fact that they might not kill as many people and they may not be able to end it on their terms. If thats more important then just going out with a bang, then it helps. I for one can't get into the mind of those types of people.

What does that have to do with this? Mass murders? Huh?

But the fact is, a man attempted to use a firearm as a scare tactic with no intention of actually shooting someone in the commission of an illegal act. His plan went south because a citizen prevented him from his scare tactics with real threat. The citizen with the loaded gun prevented the criminal with the unloaded gun from getting away with a crime.

So gun rights were proven effective in this case.

The fact is, one guy with a gun stopped another guy with a gun. Its great that this happened. Guns are awesome.

[The_cavalierman]

I wonder how many of you commenting on this story are gun owners? How many have carried a firearm in public, or at least physically and mentally trained to do so? Somehow I guess that I'm the only one who can claim the latter.

Part of that training, if it's done properly, is learning to judge the circumstances, take stock of the situation, and then making a judgement about what the best option in a slew of absolutely terrible ones is. It's about judgement. Making a split-second decision based on the available information and what you believe the level of threat is.

This gentlemen did everything as close to perfect as is reasonably possible in my mind. Could it have gone horribly wrong... definitely. Just as it could have if he'd decided that he'd be better off staying out of it.

1. Own a gun - Yes

1a. My fiance does as well (love that woman!....and I won't cross her)

2. Carried a gun in public (Infantry and military police) - Yes

3. Trained others in the use of firearms, explosives and self defense with no weapon -Yep

4. Fired weapons in defense of my life and those of my paratroopers - yep

5. Killed someone - Honestly I don't know....Too busy shootin and scootin.

I agree with your point that the absolute best defense is knowing when to fight and when not to and some are trained at length on that. I certainly agree that things worked out pretty well for this guy on this particular event, but anytime a civilian decides to use a firearm it raises the odds that innocent people will get hurt.

I am definitely for the right to bear arms but I also believe in responsible gun ownership and training even for civilians.

[Baculus]

A citizen stopped a crime with his firearm. This isn't the type of event that most media outlets like to report.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

1. Own a gun - Yes

1a. My fiance does as well (love that woman!....and I won't cross her)

2. Carried a gun in public (Infantry and military police) - Yes

3. Trained others in the use of firearms, explosives and self defense with no weapon -Yep

4. Fired weapons in defense of my life and those of my paratroopers - yep

5. Killed someone - Honestly I don't know....Too busy shootin and scootin.

I was thinking more in the civilian setting, cavalierman, but that works too. Thankfully I have yet to need to draw or discharge a firearm in defense, but I've done the soul-searching and training to hopefully ensure that if I were to need to, I would survive the encounter.

I agree with your point that the absolute best defense is knowing when to fight and when not to and some are trained at length on that. I certainly agree that things worked out pretty well for this guy on this particular event, but anytime a civilian decides to use a firearm it raises the odds that innocent people will get hurt.

You're absolutely correct that whenever a civilian decides to use a firearm there is a chance that somebody will get hurt or killed. However, I for one would prefer to take my chances attempting to defend myself than to rest my hope for survival on the charity and good nature of an armed criminal.

I am definitely for the right to bear arms but I also believe in responsible gun ownership and training even for civilians.

Nice to hear that, cavalierman.

[The_cavalierman]

I was thinking more in the civilian setting, cavalierman, but that works too. Thankfully I have yet to need to draw or discharge a firearm in defense, but I've done the soul-searching and training to hopefully ensure that if I were to need to, I would survive the encounter.

It's all the same MSF. As a military policeman I saw more gun related military post crimes here in the states than I did overseas and during various military operations. I have trained with weapons for pretty much all of my life and I still would not be confident in a situation like that. Every situation is unique and your training only goes so far.

My goal is not only to survive the encounter but to have the offender (if possible) along with innocent civilians survive.

You're absolutely correct that whenever a civilian decides to use a firearm there is a chance that somebody will get hurt or killed. However, I for one would prefer to take my chances attempting to defend myself than to rest my hope for survival on the charity and good nature of an armed criminal.

I certainly agree that having a weapon in a situation like that gives you more options but it does not guarantee a result. In some cases you might be able to de-escalate the level of force with words and by cooperating. My point is the weapon is not always the best answer.

Nice to hear that, cavalierman.

Hey, Even liberals like guns and know the difference between responsible gun ownership and people who should never be allowed near guns. I would like to see more (free) training available to gun owners..

[4skins23]

Gotta say, I am a gun owner, and have taken a class to educate myself with pistols.Also been a member of a shooting club. Sounds like this owner did the right thing.

You can't start shooting things up if someone pulls out a gun and threatens you. If cops had been there they don't just walk in and start shootin' the place up, they tell the robber to put his weapon down. Definitely a judgement call.

Yes civilians could get shot, but thats the chance you take going out in public. Just like driving a car, you could get into an accident. Bottomline? If Police were there I don't think they would have handled it much differently. AND they ARE trained.

[Mass_SkinsFan]

It's all the same MSF. As a military policeman I saw more gun related military post crimes here in the states than I did overseas and during various military operations. I have trained with weapons for pretty much all of my life and I still would not be confident in a situation like that. Every situation is unique and your training only goes so far.

Yes every situation IS unique, but the more and better your training and practice is, and the more you've taken the time to think through the potential encounters, the more likely you are to survive and potentially thrive in that situation we all hope never happens.

My goal is not only to survive the encounter but to have the offender (if possible) along with innocent civilians survive.

I agree, the goal is to never fire the gun. However you need to be ready and willing to pull the trigger is that gun clears leather. All too often people think that the presence of the gun will save them and never prepare themselves for having to pull the trigger, so they hesitate.

I will tell you with complete and total honesty that I could put a bullet into another human being, if necessary, without a moment's hesitation.

I certainly agree that having a weapon in a situation like that gives you more options but it does not guarantee a result. In some cases you might be able to de-escalate the level of force with words and by cooperating. My point is the weapon is not always the best answer.

There are no guarantees in life. I never plan on being able to talk my way out of something. I HOPE that I might be able to, but I'm going to prepare for the worst case. That's why I have the OC Spray, Knife, and gun on me most of the time that I'm outside my apartment.

Hey, Even liberals like guns and know the difference between responsible gun ownership and people who should never be allowed near guns. I would like to see more (free) training available to gun owners..

I'd suggest that the number of true Liberals who believe there's ANY sort of legitimate or responsible gun ownership is pretty small. At least in this area of the country. I'd really like to see more gun owners make it a priority to get the training. You tend to get what you pay for and most of the free training I've had over time wasn't worth what I paid for it.