Good man with a gun saves Arizona Trooper

[Divine Wind]

...No, guns don't jump off a table. However a person with a gun (especially men) feel a lot more empowered with guns. Those who are more of the criminal mind are more likely to use them.

It doesn't matter whether you remove black-on-black gang murders, there are such things in Europe too. But no, I doubt it. But you can go try and figure that out if you wish.

However poverty is a big thing. If you were to deal with poverty, you'd see crime drop.

Correct. Some people, but that's mental illness. Most people it's cultural to either be social or violent.

Nice dodge on the black-on-black murders. Is homicide the #1 killer of black men age 15-34 in Europe too? Specifically black-on-black murder? Again, this is cultural, not genetic. There is no magic wand to fix it, but banning guns across the nation is a misguided, anti-American authoritarian "one-size fits all" "magic wand" solution to a cultural issue.

While there are correlations between poverty and crime, how does banning guns produce jobs? Self-respect? Improved civic works?

 

[frigidweirdo]

...No, guns don't jump off a table. However a person with a gun (especially men) feel a lot more empowered with guns. Those who are more of the criminal mind are more likely to use them.

It doesn't matter whether you remove black-on-black gang murders, there are such things in Europe too. But no, I doubt it. But you can go try and figure that out if you wish.

However poverty is a big thing. If you were to deal with poverty, you'd see crime drop.

Correct. Some people, but that's mental illness. Most people it's cultural to either be social or violent.

Nice dodge on the black-on-black murders. Is homicide the #1 killer of black men age 15-34 in Europe too? Specifically black-on-black murder? Again, this is cultural, not genetic. There is no magic wand to fix it, but banning guns across the nation is a misguided, anti-American authoritarian "one-size fits all" "magic wand" solution to a cultural issue.

While there are correlations between poverty and crime, how does banning guns produce jobs? Self-respect? Improved civic works?

Violence exists within most people. However different circumstances might change this.

It might be cultural that there's lots of black on black crime. But is this about black people or about the situation of people in poverty, especially in inner city areas. The country has created ghettos, sort of like the underneath of the rug where all the problems get swept in the hope that they'll disappear.

No, banning guns does not produce jobs, increase self respect etc. But to quote you "nice dodge".

Switzerland has a higher gun homicide rate than the UK (0.23 for Switzerland and 0.06 for the UK) but a lower murder rate (0.5 for Switzerland and 0.9 for the UK).

Switzerland has a higher GDP than the UK, less poverty, less of those problems, so why does it have a firearms homicide rate that is 4 times higher than the UK's? Well it's simple isn't it? People who want to kill are more likely to have a go with a gun than with a knife. Nearly half their murders are with guns, why? Because they have them.

It doesn't necessarily make people kill, but it makes it easier for those who do want to kill to do so.

Now, what impact does this have on the US? Well it appears to have a large impact. The UK had gangs, the Cray brothers for example. But they didn't have guns and this meant that you didn't have the upping of the stakes in any gang warfare. It didn't resort to shootouts, it might just be a punch up. Therefore the attitude of those people in gangs changed in the US to one where killing was a realistic option.

Do jobs help those kids living in ghettos? Not always because the lure of the gangs is too high.

Yes, I've spoken in the past about how a change in the US might make a massive difference. But it doesn't stop the fact that guns in society do have a negative impact. Yes, there are other factors that can change things. I was looking for articles about poverty and crime and they said when a recession starts crime goes down. Why? You'd think more poverty = more crime. However many people are less likely to spend their money, less likely to go out drinking (less crime) and less likely to be away from home (harder to steal from) and less likely to buy stuff (so you're less likely to profit from crime). It's never black and white, it's never simple to just equate things. Guns aren't the only reason, but reducing the impact of guns would make the job of police officers much safer. This would then mean that the police are less likely to be trigger happy. It's known that put a person's life in danger, and the stress levels are higher, give them a gun and they're more likely to shoot it than if their life isn't in danger.

For the police it's a matter of whether the other guy has a gun or not. They have guns, they can deal with guys with knives a lot more easily, but guns are a problem, hence why the US has a police in the line of duty death rate that is 20 or 30 times higher than the UK.

 

[Divine Wind]

Violence exists within most people. However different circumstances might change this.

It might be cultural that there's lots of black on black crime. But is this about black people or about the situation of people in poverty, especially in inner city areas. The country has created ghettos, sort of like the underneath of the rug where all the problems get swept in the hope that they'll disappear.

No, banning guns does not produce jobs, increase self respect etc. But to quote you "nice dodge".

Switzerland has a higher gun homicide rate than the UK (0.23 for Switzerland and 0.06 for the UK) but a lower murder rate (0.5 for Switzerland and 0.9 for the UK).

Switzerland has a higher GDP than the UK, less poverty, less of those problems, so why does it have a firearms homicide rate that is 4 times higher than the UK's? Well it's simple isn't it? People who want to kill are more likely to have a go with a gun than with a knife. Nearly half their murders are with guns, why? Because they have them.

It doesn't necessarily make people kill, but it makes it easier for those who do want to kill to do so.

Now, what impact does this have on the US? Well it appears to have a large impact. The UK had gangs, the Cray brothers for example. But they didn't have guns and this meant that you didn't have the upping of the stakes in any gang warfare. It didn't resort to shootouts, it might just be a punch up. Therefore the attitude of those people in gangs changed in the US to one where killing was a realistic option.

Do jobs help those kids living in ghettos? Not always because the lure of the gangs is too high.

Yes, I've spoken in the past about how a change in the US might make a massive difference. But it doesn't stop the fact that guns in society do have a negative impact. Yes, there are other factors that can change things. I was looking for articles about poverty and crime and they said when a recession starts crime goes down. Why? You'd think more poverty = more crime. However many people are less likely to spend their money, less likely to go out drinking (less crime) and less likely to be away from home (harder to steal from) and less likely to buy stuff (so you're less likely to profit from crime). It's never black and white, it's never simple to just equate things. Guns aren't the only reason, but reducing the impact of guns would make the job of police officers much safer. This would then mean that the police are less likely to be trigger happy. It's known that put a person's life in danger, and the stress levels are higher, give them a gun and they're more likely to shoot it than if their life isn't in danger.

For the police it's a matter of whether the other guy has a gun or not. They have guns, they can deal with guys with knives a lot more easily, but guns are a problem, hence why the US has a police in the line of duty death rate that is 20 or 30 times higher than the UK.

Of course violence exists within most people. Fight or flight. It's part of our genetics of survival. However, most people don't exhibit it as shown by the fact our population is growing, our crime rates are going down and millions of gun owners never shoot anyone.

While the violence among black gang-bangers is the driving force of gun-violence in America, solving the problem isn't easy. You are correct that there are historical racial and economic reasons "ghettos" exist but fixing them is not simply a matter of "reparations", throwing a ton of cash at it or other quick fixes since cultural problems run deep into the collective psyche of any large group of people.

Still, the LW meme to ban shit as a solution to cultural problems, be it sex, soda pop or guns, is antithetical to American ideals. It's the same meme as "We had to destroy the village in order to save it".

 

[2aguy]

...No, guns don't jump off a table. However a person with a gun (especially men) feel a lot more empowered with guns. Those who are more of the criminal mind are more likely to use them.

It doesn't matter whether you remove black-on-black gang murders, there are such things in Europe too. But no, I doubt it. But you can go try and figure that out if you wish.

However poverty is a big thing. If you were to deal with poverty, you'd see crime drop.

Correct. Some people, but that's mental illness. Most people it's cultural to either be social or violent.

Nice dodge on the black-on-black murders. Is homicide the #1 killer of black men age 15-34 in Europe too? Specifically black-on-black murder? Again, this is cultural, not genetic. There is no magic wand to fix it, but banning guns across the nation is a misguided, anti-American authoritarian "one-size fits all" "magic wand" solution to a cultural issue.

While there are correlations between poverty and crime, how does banning guns produce jobs? Self-respect? Improved civic works?

Violence exists within most people. However different circumstances might change this.

It might be cultural that there's lots of black on black crime. But is this about black people or about the situation of people in poverty, especially in inner city areas. The country has created ghettos, sort of like the underneath of the rug where all the problems get swept in the hope that they'll disappear.

No, banning guns does not produce jobs, increase self respect etc. But to quote you "nice dodge".

Switzerland has a higher gun homicide rate than the UK (0.23 for Switzerland and 0.06 for the UK) but a lower murder rate (0.5 for Switzerland and 0.9 for the UK).

Switzerland has a higher GDP than the UK, less poverty, less of those problems, so why does it have a firearms homicide rate that is 4 times higher than the UK's? Well it's simple isn't it? People who want to kill are more likely to have a go with a gun than with a knife. Nearly half their murders are with guns, why? Because they have them.

It doesn't necessarily make people kill, but it makes it easier for those who do want to kill to do so.

Now, what impact does this have on the US? Well it appears to have a large impact. The UK had gangs, the Cray brothers for example. But they didn't have guns and this meant that you didn't have the upping of the stakes in any gang warfare. It didn't resort to shootouts, it might just be a punch up. Therefore the attitude of those people in gangs changed in the US to one where killing was a realistic option.

Do jobs help those kids living in ghettos? Not always because the lure of the gangs is too high.

Yes, I've spoken in the past about how a change in the US might make a massive difference. But it doesn't stop the fact that guns in society do have a negative impact. Yes, there are other factors that can change things. I was looking for articles about poverty and crime and they said when a recession starts crime goes down. Why? You'd think more poverty = more crime. However many people are less likely to spend their money, less likely to go out drinking (less crime) and less likely to be away from home (harder to steal from) and less likely to buy stuff (so you're less likely to profit from crime). It's never black and white, it's never simple to just equate things. Guns aren't the only reason, but reducing the impact of guns would make the job of police officers much safer. This would then mean that the police are less likely to be trigger happy. It's known that put a person's life in danger, and the stress levels are higher, give them a gun and they're more likely to shoot it than if their life isn't in danger.

For the police it's a matter of whether the other guy has a gun or not. They have guns, they can deal with guys with knives a lot more easily, but guns are a problem, hence why the US has a police in the line of duty death rate that is 20 or 30 times higher than the UK.

Don't buy what frigid is selling......There are European countries with no where near the level of gun ownership of Switzerland that have higher gun murder rates than Switzerland.....and France, which bans almost every type of gun for it's citizens, isn't far away from Switzerland's gun murder rate.....he cherry picked two countries and compared them,

Visualizing gun deaths - Comparing the U.S. to rest of the world

 

[2aguy]

How do you explain Belgium vs. Switzerland......that is why you can't trust partial comparisons and expect an anti gunner to show the truth.....

World firearms murders and ownership

Taking into account homicide is not just murder.......but with that in mind.....

Guns per 100 people....

Belgium 17.2
Switzerland 45.7

# of homicides by gun.....

Belgium 70
Switzerland 57

According to Frigid....this is not possible....

====================

 

[MikeK]

The way the Muslim invasion is taking form it won't be long before the aggressive "refugees" will acquire weapons. Then the civil police will be vastly outnumbered, rendered virtually useless -- and unable to defend even themselves.

What is the very root of the problem? Let an ordinary citizen blow away one of these Muslim jihadists and the cops will be on him like a pack of dogs.

 

[MikeK]

Passing driver kills man attacking Arizona trooper on road

Wow. Good thing Arizona has common sense gun freedom....this had been New York or California or Illinois we would have another dead cop.

Odium,

Re: your signature reference to Dylan Roof: If Roof had walked into a Black neighborhood with an automatic under his shirt and waited for some bad-ass nigga gangstas to menace him and blew them away I would have no problem with that "hero" banner. But what Roof did was essentially cowardly and wrong. The Blacks he murdered were relatively peaceful and they represented no threat to anyone.

I am no race-pandering hypocrite, but what Roof did was senseless and plainly shameful.

 

[LuckyDuck]

good news story

another average person

makes the tax payer relief shot

and also saves an officer ta boot

such a better story to read this morning then how the

fuck the police democrats on the hill are fighting tooth and nail

to keep their "cops as pigs" painting on the wall

(they even called the police to help them) --LOL imagine that

In areas where law enforcement is vilified, there should be no response to 911 calls for police help.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Violence exists within most people. However different circumstances might change this.

It might be cultural that there's lots of black on black crime. But is this about black people or about the situation of people in poverty, especially in inner city areas. The country has created ghettos, sort of like the underneath of the rug where all the problems get swept in the hope that they'll disappear.

No, banning guns does not produce jobs, increase self respect etc. But to quote you "nice dodge".

Switzerland has a higher gun homicide rate than the UK (0.23 for Switzerland and 0.06 for the UK) but a lower murder rate (0.5 for Switzerland and 0.9 for the UK).

Switzerland has a higher GDP than the UK, less poverty, less of those problems, so why does it have a firearms homicide rate that is 4 times higher than the UK's? Well it's simple isn't it? People who want to kill are more likely to have a go with a gun than with a knife. Nearly half their murders are with guns, why? Because they have them.

It doesn't necessarily make people kill, but it makes it easier for those who do want to kill to do so.

Now, what impact does this have on the US? Well it appears to have a large impact. The UK had gangs, the Cray brothers for example. But they didn't have guns and this meant that you didn't have the upping of the stakes in any gang warfare. It didn't resort to shootouts, it might just be a punch up. Therefore the attitude of those people in gangs changed in the US to one where killing was a realistic option.

Do jobs help those kids living in ghettos? Not always because the lure of the gangs is too high.

Yes, I've spoken in the past about how a change in the US might make a massive difference. But it doesn't stop the fact that guns in society do have a negative impact. Yes, there are other factors that can change things. I was looking for articles about poverty and crime and they said when a recession starts crime goes down. Why? You'd think more poverty = more crime. However many people are less likely to spend their money, less likely to go out drinking (less crime) and less likely to be away from home (harder to steal from) and less likely to buy stuff (so you're less likely to profit from crime). It's never black and white, it's never simple to just equate things. Guns aren't the only reason, but reducing the impact of guns would make the job of police officers much safer. This would then mean that the police are less likely to be trigger happy. It's known that put a person's life in danger, and the stress levels are higher, give them a gun and they're more likely to shoot it than if their life isn't in danger.

For the police it's a matter of whether the other guy has a gun or not. They have guns, they can deal with guys with knives a lot more easily, but guns are a problem, hence why the US has a police in the line of duty death rate that is 20 or 30 times higher than the UK.

Of course violence exists within most people. Fight or flight. It's part of our genetics of survival. However, most people don't exhibit it as shown by the fact our population is growing, our crime rates are going down and millions of gun owners never shoot anyone.

While the violence among black gang-bangers is the driving force of gun-violence in America, solving the problem isn't easy. You are correct that there are historical racial and economic reasons "ghettos" exist but fixing them is not simply a matter of "reparations", throwing a ton of cash at it or other quick fixes since cultural problems run deep into the collective psyche of any large group of people.

Still, the LW meme to ban shit as a solution to cultural problems, be it sex, soda pop or guns, is antithetical to American ideals. It's the same meme as "We had to destroy the village in order to save it".

Yes, just banning shit won't work. But then both sides are playing this game of simple solutions for complex problems. Only when they see something they want at threat will they be willing to present an argument that things are more complex than it seems, and not because they care that it's complex, just that they want to keep whatever it is they want to keep.

The problem in the US is that partisan politics is destroying the country. Unless the way people vote changes, nothing will change, and the US will continue its downward slide.

 

[westwall]

An Arizona State Trooper responded to a traffic accident and was shot by a suspect then, while down, was beaten by the suspect. The trooper called for help. A passing motorist stopped, retrieved his gun and, after severals warnings to stop beating the Trooper, shot the suspect dead.


Motorist with gun kills man beating Arizona state trooper - CNN.com
An Arizona trooper who had been shot and was being beaten by a man with a pistol was saved Thursday by a motorist who killed his attacker, authorities said.

The man who came upon the scene warned the suspect to stop striking the officer, but the man continued, said Capt. Damon Cecil, a spokesman for the Arizona Department of Public Safety, said.
The good Samaritan got a gun from his car and shot the suspect, who died at the scene.
The trooper, a 27-year veteran, was shot in the chest and shoulder. He is in serious and stable condition, Cecil said.

Col. Frank Milstead @frank_milstead
Thanks for the thoughts and prayers this morning for our Trooper that was shot. Looks like he will be okay after some recovery @Arizona_DPS
8:26 AM - 12 Jan 2017

Col. Frank Milstead, director of the public safety department, said he would like to thank the man who stepped in. "I don't know that my trooper would be alive today without his assistance," he said, according to CNN affiliate KNXV.

Unusual circumstances
Public safety spokesman Bart Graves said the incident began with the trooper responding to report of shots fired from the median of an unlit, rural section of Interstate 10 near Tonopah. The officer came across a vehicle that had rolled over and got out to investigate. While the trooper was setting flares, the suspect shot him.
It was not clear where the suspect was when the officer pulled up.
Milstead said at some point the suspect started beating the trooper, who was unable to use his right arm to defend himself. That's when the motorist pulled up and opened fire on the suspect.
"It's fairly rare" that citizens who come to the aid of law enforcement officers use deadly force, Cecil said.
Another motorist who stopped used the trooper's portable radio to call in the shooting.
The conversation between that driver and the dispatcher was very businesslike, Cecil said.
"Hello. Officer down, officer down outside Tonopah. Come in, please," the man says, according to audio archived on Broadcastify, which streams radio communications between emergency responders. "He's in real bad shape. Please send air support, helicopter, please."
He tells the dispatcher there are two other people who are down in an "unknown condition."
Cecil praised the motorists who stopped to help, saying, "They were calm, determined."
A woman who was ejected from the vehicle died at a hospital, authorities said.
Authorities didn't release the names of the people involved in the incident, which occurred after 4 a.m. near mile marker 89, west of Tonopah. That city is about 50 miles west of Phoenix.

What do you want to bet that he's all in favor of having an armed populace now.

 

[jon_berzerk]

good news story

another average person

makes the tax payer relief shot

and also saves an officer ta boot

such a better story to read this morning then how the

fuck the police democrats on the hill are fighting tooth and nail

to keep their "cops as pigs" painting on the wall

(they even called the police to help them) --LOL imagine that

In areas where law enforcement is vilified, there should be no response to 911 calls for police help.

the stats may be saying that is what is happening already