Armed OC Citizen Shoots Robber in the Act

[Danno 1,228]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

No MC you are Right, no one here is Choosing to be a victim, even the person who foolishly walks alone at night in the wrong part of town does not "choose" to be a victim.

Some people look at the odds of being a victim, the odds of the kids getting their hands on it and decide, "no, a gun is not a good choice for me".

I can respect that.

In fact when I have kids in the house, mine are stored in a safe place... as I live in a safe area and the odds are greater for an accident.

As with buying insurance we all must weigh our needs and risk and act accordingly.

[Ban Hammer 12,868]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in a high crime area.

[Peikko 1,575]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in a high crime area.

Do you know the crime statistics for the area I live in Charles?

Come to that, do you have a risk assessment for all the areas I have ever lived in in terms of being involved in shooting incidents?

[Marilyn. 340]

I live in somewhat of a high crime area, gangs, drugs etc ... but I am still singing the same tune, I don't and never want to own a gun...

[mawilson 2,133]

I can't comment authoritatively on the qualitative aspects of that, and neither can you.

The numbers don't require and don't support speculation about the competence or otherwise of the victims.

Yet you were doing just that, assuming that there are "1 in 4 odds of having your weapon taken!"

Sure Mark, that's on an equivalent platform with blaming the victims for their own deaths.

You're being extremely dishonest in your interpretation of the stats. You brought up the stats

as a way of demonstrating that guns make you less safe. You counted the total number of deaths

and the total number of deaths involving guns and concluded, "A-ha! 1-in-4 chances of being killed

with your own gun!"

Did you consider the number of times a gun saved a cop's life? How many cops would have died

had they not had a weapon?

It's like saying, "beds are dangerous because there's a 99-in-100 chance of dying in one."

Or "you should stay away from hospitals because they are full of sick people."

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I can't comment authoritatively on the qualitative aspects of that, and neither can you.

The numbers don't require and don't support speculation about the competence or otherwise of the victims.

Yet you were doing just that, assuming that there are "1 in 4 odds of having your weapon taken!"

Sure Mark, that's on an equivalent platform with blaming the victims for their own deaths.

You're being extremely dishonest in your interpretation of the stats. You brought up the stats

as a way of demonstrating that guns make you less safe. You counted the total number of deaths

and the total number of deaths involving guns and concluded, "A-ha! 1-in-4 chances of being killed

with your own gun!"

Did you consider the number of times a gun saved a cop's life? How many cops would have died

had they not had a weapon?

It's like saying, "beds are dangerous because there's a 99-in-100 chance of dying in one."

Or "you should stay away from hospitals because they are full of sick people."

Did you not read where I said that the chances of being killed in the line of duty are extremely low?

That still doesn't change the fact that 10 cases out of the 41 *somehow* (key word) involved the officer's own weapon.

[Ban Hammer 12,868]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in a high crime area.

Do you know the crime statistics for the area I live in Charles?

Come to that, do you have a risk assessment for all the areas I have ever lived in in terms of being involved in shooting incidents?

move to detroit and lemme know how that works out for you.

and marilyn, shall we bring to light the vandalism and fear you've posted about so often?

[Marilyn. 340]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in a high crime area.

Do you know the crime statistics for the area I live in Charles?

Come to that, do you have a risk assessment for all the areas I have ever lived in in terms of being involved in shooting incidents?

move to detroit and lemme know how that works out for you.

and marilyn, shall we bring to light the vandalism and fear you've posted about so often?

yeah go ahead.. never denied the fact that yeah sometimes I feel afraid living here.. a gun wouldn't change that...

still don't want to own a gun... I would feel less safe if we had a gun..

Edited July 19, 2009 by Marilyn.

[Peikko 1,575]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in a high crime area.

Do you know the crime statistics for the area I live in Charles?

Come to that, do you have a risk assessment for all the areas I have ever lived in in terms of being involved in shooting incidents?

move to detroit and lemme know how that works out for you.

and marilyn, shall we bring to light the vandalism and fear you've posted about so often?

That would be a no then would it Charles? Thought so.

[mawilson 2,133]

That would be a no then would it Charles? Thought so.

Why don't you list all the areas you have ever lived in and then we'll talk.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Like "safe" Manhattan.

[Ban Hammer 12,868]

I thought shooting guns in the air was utterly irresponsible gun owner behaviour? What goes up must come down and all that? Perhaps it's a joke?

Not one of us non gun owners has suggested that responsible gun owners should not have guns - what has been objected to is this notion that to not own one, one is necesserily choosing to be a victim. It's not a sensible conclusion. That and the OP's glorification of something that contains no glory and certainly does nothing to suggest that gun ownership is necessary.

you'd be singing a different tune if you were living in a high crime area.

Do you know the crime statistics for the area I live in Charles?

Come to that, do you have a risk assessment for all the areas I have ever lived in in terms of being involved in shooting incidents?

move to detroit and lemme know how that works out for you.

and marilyn, shall we bring to light the vandalism and fear you've posted about so often?

That would be a no then would it Charles? Thought so.

a better question would be how safe you really feel there.

[mawilson 2,133]

Like "safe" Manhattan.

Have to drive through Newark occasionally... could definitely use a CCH permit.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Like "safe" Manhattan.

Have to drive through Newark occasionally... could definitely use a CCH permit.

But if you drive into NJ from Manhattan you can pretty much avoid Newark - there's no need to take surface streets through there.

[luckytxn 2,263]

What a great American this man is. My hats off to him for using his right to bear arms to save some people that can now go home to their family.