Armed Citizens

[The T]

Huntsville, AL -

After casing the location on two previous visits, an armed robber entered the Chazz liquor store in Florence, Ala. and attempted to strong-arm the clerk. An altercation ensued in which the clerk was able to retrieve a gun and fire at the criminal, striking the robber and causing him to flee. In his escape, the criminal only made it to the store parking lot, where he collapsed and died. After an initial investigation, police determined that the robber was on probation for a previous robbery conviction. Chazz manager Terry Rhodes hoped that the incident would deter future robbery attempts, stating, “I know times are hard and everything, but I hope they'll think twice, because this is not something anybody enjoys doing. You don't want to kill anybody, but sometimes you're afraid for your life, you don't know what they're gonna do.” Police do not plan to charge the clerk.




Anniston, AL -

A woman was alone in her home in Piedmont, Ala., when she heard a suspicious noise. After retrieving a handgun, the woman searched the house and noticed that her sliding glass door had been broken and a man with a flashlight was inside the home. The intruder yelled something at the homeowner, who then shot the intruder several times, killing him. Police noted that it is unlikely the homeowner will face any charges, with Calhoun County Sheriff Larry Amerson stating, “She was totally within her rights to defend herself.”




Birmingham, AL -

Career criminal Kevin Duane Dudley entered the Bait Shop in Bessemer, Ala., drew a sawed-off shotgun and demanded money from the owner. While Dudley was holding the owner at gunpoint, two customers walked into the store, distracting Dudley long enough for the store owner to grab his pistol. The owner then fired at Dudley, striking and killing him. After an investigation, it was shown that Dudley had been convicted of robbery in 1996 and spent time in prison. More recently, Dudley had been a suspect in a number of other armed robberies as well as a murder

I love DRT stories as these! [DRT= Dead Right There] phrase courtesy of Neal Boortz

 

[Missourian]

Not too hard

I found about 15 in Missouri.

Fifteen in the last five years.

Out of 3,000,000+ legal gun owners.

Puts a huge hole in the "road rage" argument.

Not really

Doesnt mean that is all there is and doesn't cover those cases where a gun was pulled and no shots were fired

The point is that owning a gun provides certain protections as posted in the OP. It also provides opportunities where a minor conflict can escalate to gunfire because a weapon is present
We are a gun owning society. We have to live with both the plusses and minuses of a second amendment. While the NRA is great at highlighting the positives, they intentionally ignore the minuses

The pros outweigh the cons by several orders of magnitude.

244 total gun homicides for the year in the state of Missouri, most in K.C. and St. Louis.

3,000,000+ legal gun owners and 7,000,000+ legal guns owned in Missouri.

125,000 + CCW permits issued in Missouri.

It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in Missouri are responsible, law abiding citizens.

 

[rightwinger]

I found about 15 in Missouri.

Fifteen in the last five years.

Out of 3,000,000+ legal gun owners.

Puts a huge hole in the "road rage" argument.

Not really

Doesnt mean that is all there is and doesn't cover those cases where a gun was pulled and no shots were fired

The point is that owning a gun provides certain protections as posted in the OP. It also provides opportunities where a minor conflict can escalate to gunfire because a weapon is present
We are a gun owning society. We have to live with both the plusses and minuses of a second amendment. While the NRA is great at highlighting the positives, they intentionally ignore the minuses

The pros outweigh the cons by several orders of magnitude.

240 total gun homicides for the year in the state of Missouri, most in K.C. and St. Louis.

3,000,000+ legal gun owners and 7,000,000+ legal guns owned in Missouri.

125,000 + CCW permits issued in Missouri.

It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in Missouri are responsible, law abiding citizens.

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

 

[westwall]

... On the other hand, I have been in lots of situations where I have gotten into the type of argument with some other person where, if we both had guns, there might well have been shots fired.

If you ever tried to get a concealed carry permit, this quote from you will stop your attempt. Instructors are entitled to deny anyone a permit based on the person's actions and thoughts. My instructor would have denied me mine if I had said something like that.

Also, most who have CCWs know the law and are less likely to get into heated arguments if they are carrying. They try to avoid any kind of trouble. Most don't even stop their vehicles right next to others at a traffic light, they will either stop more in front or more behind.

All your assumptions about people who carry are only your opinion and not facts. If you knew enough people who carry you will see that they are very polite citizens. They don't let little things get to them enough to 'want' to use a firearm in anger against others.

Your argument only applies to those with a concealed carry permit. It does not apply to the millions of guns legally in the hands of people who may not be as temperate in their demeanor

A minor conflict between two unarmed people can escalate to a fistfight. The same conflict when one or both are armed can get someone killed. An armed person tends to take on an "I ain't going to take no shit attitude"

That is certainly your belief. However, people who get into conflicts such as you describe are predisposed to that behavior in the first place. Either through substance abuse or inability to process their anger in a useful way, I would wager a very large some of money that those people who do engage in violence have a lengthy history of that behavior and the gun is not the "cause" of the violence. They were allready violent and should in all probability have been in jail long before the final outburst.

 

[westwall]

All you need is ______________ DaDaDaDaDa,,,all you need is ________. _____
________ is all ya need.

Ya like this mini ?

The M-60 is a collosal POS. I'll take an MG3.

 

[westwall]

Not too hard

I found about 15 in Missouri.

Fifteen in the last five years.

Out of 3,000,000+ legal gun owners.

Puts a huge hole in the "road rage" argument.

Not really

Doesnt mean that is all there is and doesn't cover those cases where a gun was pulled and no shots were fired

The point is that owning a gun provides certain protections as posted in the OP. It also provides opportunities where a minor conflict can escalate to gunfire because a weapon is present
We are a gun owning society. We have to live with both the plusses and minuses of a second amendment. While the NRA is great at highlighting the positives, they intentionally ignore the minuses

Nor does it cover those cases where a beligerent individual was detered from commiting a crime by an armed citizen who didn't have to pull the trigger. The NRA does in fact highlight the minuses and are strong proponents of harsh punishment for those who criminally misuse guns. You'll have to look to your liberal DA's and like minded people for continuously allowing violent predators to be released from prison. We know that roughly 8% of the criminal population commits around 80% of the violent crime. Lock them up for ever and the vast majority of violent crime go's away.

And as I stated previously, the weapon may have led to a higher level of violence but the people involved were allread predisposed towards violence and in most cases I have read
had long histories of violence and should have been in prison long before the final act.

 

[Missourian]

Not really

Doesnt mean that is all there is and doesn't cover those cases where a gun was pulled and no shots were fired

The point is that owning a gun provides certain protections as posted in the OP. It also provides opportunities where a minor conflict can escalate to gunfire because a weapon is present
We are a gun owning society. We have to live with both the plusses and minuses of a second amendment. While the NRA is great at highlighting the positives, they intentionally ignore the minuses

The pros outweigh the cons by several orders of magnitude.

240 total gun homicides for the year in the state of Missouri, most in K.C. and St. Louis.

3,000,000+ legal gun owners and 7,000,000+ legal guns owned in Missouri.

125,000 + CCW permits issued in Missouri.

It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in Missouri are responsible, law abiding citizens.

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

 

[rightwinger]

The pros outweigh the cons by several orders of magnitude.

240 total gun homicides for the year in the state of Missouri, most in K.C. and St. Louis.

3,000,000+ legal gun owners and 7,000,000+ legal guns owned in Missouri.

125,000 + CCW permits issued in Missouri.

It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in Missouri are responsible, law abiding citizens.

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

 

[Missourian]

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

The majority of Americans will never need their homeowners or life insurance.

Does that mean you should drop yours?

Carrying a firearm on your person is like carrying a spare tire in your car...you never want to have to use it, but you're glad you have it when you need it.

 

[westwall]

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

My, my that's a rather presumptuous statement. Let's look at your state. NJ has a population of around 8.4 million, in 2009 (the most recent year that I can find) there were 229 arrests for murder, 33 for manslaughter, 365 for rape, 4423 for robbery, 8814 for aggravated assault and 6177 for burglery.

So figuring that 60% of the murders and manslaughters are gang or otherwise criminally related, that still leaves around 100 innocent people who were killed, and I doubt that many of the rapes were perpetrated against criminals, so that's 365 women, nor do I think the 4400 people who were robbed were crooks but, we can go back to the 60% rule for the aggravated assualt so that drops it down to 4000 people and finally I doubt once again that the victims of the burglaries were fringe people, so that leaves 15,000 people in your own state who could have either saved their lives, not been raped or robbed or burglarised had they had the means to defend themselves.

And these are the ones that arrests were made for, there were many others who weren't able to get even a slight measure of justice.

I am quite sure that you would have a hard time telling them that they are the "fringe" of the population. That has to be one of the most arrogant, ignorant and pompous statements I've read from a supposedly thinking person. Ever.




New Jersey State Police - 2009 Uniform Crime Report

 

[nraforlife]

billings, montana -

...............................

link?

This never happened. I made it up ..................

typical libtard- your response to truth is to make up some shit.

 

[rightwinger]

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

My, my that's a rather presumptuous statement. Let's look at your state. NJ has a population of around 8.4 million, in 2009 (the most recent year that I can find) there were 229 arrests for murder, 33 for manslaughter, 365 for rape, 4423 for robbery, 8814 for aggravated assault and 6177 for burglery.

So figuring that 60% of the murders and manslaughters are gang or otherwise criminally related, that still leaves around 100 innocent people who were killed, and I doubt that many of the rapes were perpetrated against criminals, so that's 365 women, nor do I think the 4400 people who were robbed were crooks but, we can go back to the 60% rule for the aggravated assualt so that drops it down to 4000 people and finally I doubt once again that the victims of the burglaries were fringe people, so that leaves 15,000 people in your own state who could have either saved their lives, not been raped or robbed or burglarised had they had the means to defend themselves.

And these are the ones that arrests were made for, there were many others who weren't able to get even a slight measure of justice.

I am quite sure that you would have a hard time telling them that they are the "fringe" of the population. That has to be one of the most arrogant, ignorant and pompous statements I've read from a supposedly thinking person. Ever.




New Jersey State Police - 2009 Uniform Crime Report

Out of a state of 11 million it proves that most people never need a gun.

Carry good buddy, statistics are not your friend

 

[nraforlife]

.................The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

hmmmmm, much the same could be said of the average cop career........or the average MILITARY career for that matter.

Thing is you may not need the tool often or G_d Willing ever but when you need it you need it-NOW!!!!

I have had to dissuade people with criminal intent 3 times in my life. Never had to discharge. Seeing the business end of the weapon pointed their way was sufficient. police were not involve so like 90% or more of firearm usage for self defense these incidents were never compiled into any official stats.

As to fringe, nah no more that having one's home struck by a tornado is fringe just because the event is relatively rare.

 

[xsited1]

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

Gun owners usually don't need to use their gun because when carrying you don't look like a victim.

 

[rightwinger]

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

Gun owners usually don't need to use their gun because when carrying you don't look like a victim.

What do you look like?

Someone who says "don't fuck with me"???

 

[The T]

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

I thought so too.

So what is your point exactly?

If the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and law abiding, what is your argument?

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

You mean the fringe that actually HAD TO use their RIGHT to protect liberty?

 

[The T]

Not really

Doesnt mean that is all there is and doesn't cover those cases where a gun was pulled and no shots were fired

The point is that owning a gun provides certain protections as posted in the OP. It also provides opportunities where a minor conflict can escalate to gunfire because a weapon is present
We are a gun owning society. We have to live with both the plusses and minuses of a second amendment. While the NRA is great at highlighting the positives, they intentionally ignore the minuses

The pros outweigh the cons by several orders of magnitude.

240 total gun homicides for the year in the state of Missouri, most in K.C. and St. Louis.

3,000,000+ legal gun owners and 7,000,000+ legal guns owned in Missouri.

125,000 + CCW permits issued in Missouri.

It is obvious that the overwhelming majority of gun owners in Missouri are responsible, law abiding citizens.

That's a no brainer and has never been questioned. The vast majority of car owners are never involved in a fatal accident

Love creating them strawmen, don't you?

If you and he only had a brain...

Here's another one to keep you company...

And Finally...

 

[westwall]

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

My, my that's a rather presumptuous statement. Let's look at your state. NJ has a population of around 8.4 million, in 2009 (the most recent year that I can find) there were 229 arrests for murder, 33 for manslaughter, 365 for rape, 4423 for robbery, 8814 for aggravated assault and 6177 for burglery.

So figuring that 60% of the murders and manslaughters are gang or otherwise criminally related, that still leaves around 100 innocent people who were killed, and I doubt that many of the rapes were perpetrated against criminals, so that's 365 women, nor do I think the 4400 people who were robbed were crooks but, we can go back to the 60% rule for the aggravated assualt so that drops it down to 4000 people and finally I doubt once again that the victims of the burglaries were fringe people, so that leaves 15,000 people in your own state who could have either saved their lives, not been raped or robbed or burglarised had they had the means to defend themselves.

And these are the ones that arrests were made for, there were many others who weren't able to get even a slight measure of justice.

I am quite sure that you would have a hard time telling them that they are the "fringe" of the population. That has to be one of the most arrogant, ignorant and pompous statements I've read from a supposedly thinking person. Ever.




New Jersey State Police - 2009 Uniform Crime Report

Out of a state of 11 million it proves that most people never need a gun.

Carry good buddy, statistics are not your friend

But those that needed it....REALLY needed it and lo and behold the majority were not "fringe" people. What exactly do you mean by fringe people anyway?

Does this woman count as one of the "fringe people" who use guns because they are somehow neanderthals who havn't progressed to your enlightened state?



Police in Trenton, NJ have arrested a man who raped a woman behind a van in broad daylight.

According to authorities Johnathan Worley beat and raped a woman in broad-daylight in Chambersburg last Tuesday (August 17).

In the surveillance video, you see Worley grab the woman as she walks down the sidewalk and force her behind a van before raping her.

After the attack, police state that Worley then attempted to rob the woman before running off and leaving the her behind the van.

The woman notified police after retrieving her cell phone that had fallen under the parked van during the attack. Officers searched the area, but did not find a suspect.

“Anyone who violates the rights of a human being, to commit such a horrendous crime is a person who has definitely shown he has no care or respect for human life,” Sgt. Pedro Medina said. “I hope the public knows that staying silent is not the responsible thing to do.”

The victim after being treated for her injuries at a local hospital and released later returned to the scene to help detectives with their investigation.

Worley was arrested on August 22 and currently being held on $250,000 bail.

Man Rapes Woman In Broad Daylight [Video] « Hip-Hop Wired: Keeping You Informed With The Latest on Hip-Hop Culture, Rappers, Hip Hop News, Rap and Entertainment News, Black Politics, Video Vixens, Music Reviews and Urban Lifestyle…

 

[xsited1]

The point is that the overwhelming majority of gun owners never use them to stop a crime or use them in a violent encounter

Most Americans never need a gun. It is the fringe of the population that use their gun in either case

Gun owners usually don't need to use their gun because when carrying you don't look like a victim.

What do you look like?

Someone who says "don't fuck with me"???

You don't have to say a word.

I wish this was taught more. Just search 'How not to be a victim'. Here's a link:

Violent Crime Prevention, How Not to be a Victim, Chris McGoey, security consultant

 

[Wingsofwind]

... On the other hand, I have been in lots of situations where I have gotten into the type of argument with some other person where, if we both had guns, there might well have been shots fired.

If you ever tried to get a concealed carry permit, this quote from you will stop your attempt. Instructors are entitled to deny anyone a permit based on the person's actions and thoughts. My instructor would have denied me mine if I had said something like that.

Also, most who have CCWs know the law and are less likely to get into heated arguments if they are carrying. They try to avoid any kind of trouble. Most don't even stop their vehicles right next to others at a traffic light, they will either stop more in front or more behind.

All your assumptions about people who carry are only your opinion and not facts. If you knew enough people who carry you will see that they are very polite citizens. They don't let little things get to them enough to 'want' to use a firearm in anger against others.

Your argument only applies to those with a concealed carry permit. It does not apply to the millions of guns legally in the hands of people who may not be as temperate in their demeanor

A minor conflict between two unarmed people can escalate to a fistfight. The same conflict when one or both are armed can get someone killed. An armed person tends to take on an "I ain't going to take no shit attitude"

Not everyone who keeps a firearm in their home or a vehicle has CCW permits. But yet, we do not have 'millions' of gun fights where law abiding citizens use them in arguments. Most gun fights include criminals.

And BTW, I am armed and I do not have an 'I ain't going to take no shit' attitude. Everyone I know seems to like my attitude and enjoy my company. No one I know who are armed (not only CCW permit holders) has that attitude either (and I know a LOT). In fact, all of the people I know that are armed have a very laid back attitude and are VERY respectful to others.