Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7
F3SS

Guns Save Lives (Part 2)

438 posts in this topic

1 minute ago, aztek said:

i expect dems vote no on it as well.

training part does not really worry me, stats show accidents rate  by "trained" police are more common than by citizens.

I disagree with that statement.  If a police officer shoots an innocent or misses and shoots a bystander it is an "accident", if a gang-banger misses and shoots a bystander it is a "gang related shooting". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

41 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

I disagree with that statement.  If a police officer shoots an innocent or misses and shoots a bystander it is an "accident", if a gang-banger misses and shoots a bystander it is a "gang related shooting". 

you really expect gang banger follow any law? or get training even if required???  the bill is for people that allowed to have guns, gang banger usually do not, nor they have it legally.

i really do not give a damn if i get shot by accident by police or a gang. no difference to me whatsoever.

not to mention gang related shooting is really a crime not an accident.

https://the7thpwr.wordpress.com/accidental-police-shootings/

btw, in 2011 591 deaths were due to "accidental discharge" and an additional 248 due to "undetermined intent"[1].  Compare this to 19,990 suicides and 11,068 homicides by firearms in the same year, and we find that the percentage of deaths due to firearms that was either unintentional or indeterminate is very small (2.59%).

also unlike police shootings, that almost always kill a victim, intended or not, shooting by civilians do not end up in deaths  as much, not even close. 

Edited by aztek
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, aztek said:

you really expect gang banger follow any law? or get training even if required???  the bill is for people that allowed to have guns, gang banger usually do not, nor they have it legally.

i really do not give a damn if i get shot by accident by police or a gang. no difference to me whatsoever.

not to mention gang related shooting is really a crime not an accident.

https://the7thpwr.wordpress.com/accidental-police-shootings/

btw, in 2011 591 deaths were due to "accidental discharge" and an additional 248 due to "undetermined intent"[1].  Compare this to 19,990 suicides and 11,068 homicides by firearms in the same year, and we find that the percentage of deaths due to firearms that was either unintentional or indeterminate is very small (2.59%).

also unlike police shootings, that almost always kill a victim, intended or not, shooting by civilians do not end up in deaths  as much, not even close. 

My disagreement is with you saying training doesn't help and then citing police shootings as proof.  My argument is that your police accidental shootings data is skewed.  I would go as far to say that if the gang bangers were properly trained in firearm use, they would be more likely to kill each other instead of the little 2yr olds in strollers that just happened by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

25 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

  My argument is that your police accidental shootings data is skewed. 

unless you can show me how it is skewed, and what  real stats are,  it is not an argument at all.

if nypd was better shot they would not shoot 9 people in the busiest intersection in nyc. (34st shooting)  it nypd had a bit more brain, than  laws protecting them ,they would not even be shooting there.

btw data shows cops are terrible shots. even gangs shoot better. if you think it is skewed, please show me how,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3369394/Moment-cop-shoots-dead-mother-three-toddler-son-misses-family-s-German-Shepherd-dog.html

what would happen to you or me if we did that? we'd be locked up, no doubt, and victim family would win civil suite and take everything we have, guess what happened to the cop? nothing. so based on consequences  who do you think is more likely to care less for where his bullets fly???

Edited by aztek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, aztek said:

unless you can show me how it is skewed, and what  real stats are,  it is not an argument at all.

if nypd was better shot they would not shoot 9 people in the busiest intersection in nyc. (34st shooting)  it nypd had a bit more brain, than  laws protecting them ,they would not even be shooting there.

btw data shows cops are terrible shots. even gangs shoot better. if you think it is skewed, please show me how,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3369394/Moment-cop-shoots-dead-mother-three-toddler-son-misses-family-s-German-Shepherd-dog.html

what would happen to you or me if we did that? we'd be locked up, no doubt, and victim family would win civil suite and take everything we have, guess what happened to the cop? nothing. so based on consequences  who do you think is more likely to care less for where his bullets fly???

That's what I am talking about right there.  Both of your examples are not "accidental shootings"  but gets categorized as such in your data.  On the other side, half of the deaths in say Chicago are poor bystanders getting shot, but it all gets categorized as "criminal shootings". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

13 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

That's what I am talking about right there.  Both of your examples are not "accidental shootings"  but gets categorized as such in your data.  On the other side, half of the deaths in say Chicago are poor bystanders getting shot, but it all gets categorized as "criminal shootings". 

they both are accidental. at least that is what judge and investigators ruled. as for Chicago gang related shootings, they really are criminal shootings, not accidental.

accidents- is when you unintentionally hit someone\something while use gun lawfully, self defense, cleaning, storage..etc.

crime is when you use a gun for reasons that are not lawful, like shooting rival gang member, or a drug dealer, especially when done by people prohibited from owning guns, that have illegally acquired guns. that is no accident, no matter how you look at it. 

i do not think it is the stats that are skewed.

in any case i do not worry about untrained owners, if that was your argument.  we are responsible for every bullet we fire,  even if someone else uses our guns,  there are other segment of people with guns who are not, those are the ones i worry, not the first group.,

 

Edited by aztek
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever seen the way the "gang bangers" hold a hand gun. That's the reason they don't hit who they want (I can't say aiming at, because they aren't aiming). It's hard to learn how to shoot a hand gun from watching an action movie.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Why not said:

Have you ever seen the way the "gang bangers" hold a hand gun. That's the reason they don't hit who they want (I can't say aiming at, because they aren't aiming). It's hard to learn how to shoot a hand gun from watching an action movie.

Yep, but it sure does look cool! :rolleyes:

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2016 at 2:12 AM, aztek said:

not sure where to put it, did not want to open new thread just for that.

 New Jersey high school student was suspended and ordered to undergo a psychological exam over a class project that advocated against gun control, according to a report.

Frank Harvey, 17, refused to see the psychiatrist and dropped out of Manville High School Tuesday, the Newark Star-Ledger reported Thursday. Harvey said his teacher now denies assigning him the video project.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/01/report-nj-high-school-suspends-student-over-anti-gun-control-class-project.html

i believe the student.  comply or be suspended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

 Both of your examples are not "accidental shootings"  but gets categorized as such in your data.  

that is an interesting theory, how would you know that? the stats do not really tell you that detail.  i'd think they would fall under police shootings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Son of Charleston church victim struggles with why his father wasn’t armed that fateful day

One of the things about that night that the younger Simmons told the court that he’s had to grapple with was why his father, who had a concealed weapons permit, did not have his gun with him.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/06/son-of-charleston-church-victim-struggles-with-why-his-father-wasnt-armed-that-fateful-day/

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎04 at 10:57 PM, F3SS said:

@thedutchiedutch what about the story in post #385? Don't that make you think how lucky she was to have that gun? 

Oh yes. The gun might have saved her live and a whole lot more. I am happy for her that she was unharmed in the end. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎04 at 11:14 PM, Farmer77 said:

I agree with you wholeheartedly about killing in the defense of property, the problem is at 2am when you hear that glass break you dont know why they're there. Do they just want my flatscreens or did they see my rather hot wife jogging earlier and get some ideas? 

Keep in mind when discussing the 112 guns for every 100 people that , in my experience anyways, gun owners tend to own multiple guns so firearms are less well distributed than the numbers make it sound.  

I dont currently own any guns, they take the fun out of things, but I do stand by the American Principle that an armed populace is more free than an unarmed one. (in theory if not necessarily in practice, yet) 

Hi Farmer. I hear you. If I would hear that glass break at 2am there would be only one thing on my mind and that is to protect my family and home.
Luckily I have a 125lb fearless guard dog that will keep most intruders out.

 

   
 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎05 at 11:46 AM, Gromdor said:

  Yes indeed, you do have the right to kill them in many states.  You don't even need to have a gun, you can legally beat them down with a baseball bat.  Armed or unarmed.  The laws vary of course.  Some require that you kill them inside your house.  Others let you kill them anywhere on your property.  The cops here in Iowa joked that if the corpse falls outside your door,  you have to drag them in.  I wouldn't fear for your life though, just because everyone has guns.  The middle class and wealthy usually live in areas free of incidents like this.

  Using post #385 for example,  the fact that the intruder knew both her and her boyfriend and was demanding the "money" makes me think that they were involved in some shady dealings especially considering the intruders rap sheet.  For the most part, the murders and violence are between gangs and other "undesirables" in very poor neighborhoods.   

You sure you are talking about human beings right ? We have the same policies for rats in my home country. You can legally beat them, kill them, armed or unarmed inside or outside of your house or anywhere on your property. They are a pest.   

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎2017‎-‎01‎-‎05 at 11:47 AM, aztek said:

because you do not  live where we do. everything you know, or think may work in your country, but not here. lets learn to separate your reality and other realities you can not understand

‘He’s busting into my window right now,’ a woman told a dispatcher. She was later found dead.

 

Very sad story. Not to be ignorant but what's your point ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two thieves try to steal truck from armed 73-year-old and instantly regret it

Carlos Garcia Jan 9, 2017 7:25 pm

 

A 73-year-old was accosted in his own garage by two armed robbers who were trying to steal his truck, but he made them instantly regret it after they discovered he was armed too.

According to St. Louis Police Captain Mary Warmicke, the man was working in his garage when the two thieves walked in.

Two armed intruders came in, announced a robbery, they wanted to take his truck. They pulled their weapons on him. He was armed himself. And protected himself. He did fire on the two suspects, who succombed to their injuries and remain here on the scene. The homicide unit is investigating the incident, and we have no other suspects that we’re looking for at this time.

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/01/09/two-thieves-try-to-steal-truck-from-armed-73-year-old-and-instantly-regret-it/

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

2. Post content In the interests of keeping the forum as safe and family-friendly as possible please remember the following:

  • 2a. Offensive content: Do not post or link to content that is excessively violent, sexually explicit, depicts images of death, gore, pertains to graphic cases of violent or sexual crimes committed against children or that is of an otherwise offensive nature.
Edited by Kismit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sweetpumper said:

On January 12, an armed citizen stopped and killed a man who was beating an Arizona State Trooper on the side of I-10.

http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2017/01/12/armed-citizen-intervenes-kills-suspect-beating-az-state-trooper-on-roadside/

I just was reading this story and thought how beneficial it is that private citizens can own weapons. Otherwise that officer would be dead, and more then likely that assailant would have gotten away to kill another day.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sweetpumper said:

On January 12, an armed citizen stopped and killed a man who was beating an Arizona State Trooper on the side of I-10.

http://www.breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/2017/01/12/armed-citizen-intervenes-kills-suspect-beating-az-state-trooper-on-roadside/

Was logging on to post this... good shooting. 

Luckily, this happened on the Arizona side of the border... we might have had one less trooper if not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Gun lobbyists are backing new legislation to make silencers easier to buy.
 
(RT.com)- Contrary to expectations the bill, which has the backing of Donald Trump, Jr, wouldn’t be fought as a Second Amendment issue but one of public safety.

The bill, Hearing Protection Act, HR 367 argues that silencers safeguard the eardrums of the nation’s 55 million gun owners. It would remove restrictions on the purchase of silencers for firearms under the National Firearms Act, and eliminate a $200 tax, lengthy paperwork and a nine-month approval process.

https://www.rt.com/usa/373261-federal-bill-remove-restrictions-silencers/

Edited by Saru
Fixed link
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

PHOENIX (AP) — The man who shot and severely beat an Arizona state trooper last week was a former member of the Mexican federal police who was in the country illegally, authorities said.

He had rolled his car on Interstate 10 before he inexplicably attacked the officer who had stopped to help.

Leonard Pennelas-Escobar opened fire on Trooper Edward Andersson early Thursday after the officer had stopped on the interstate and set up flares in a bid to get motorists to slow down. Pennelas-Escobar said something unrecognizable in Spanish before shooting the trooper, and then he started landing blows with his fists and beating the trooper's head on the ground, Department of Public Safety Director Frank Milstead said Monday.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/authorities-trooper-shot-driver-caused-rollover-225458260.html

Edited by aztek
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably Mr Escobar believed the Liberal Media news hype and thought that all US Police officers just shoot illegal immigrants out of hand, or some such. Stupid fear mongering media outlets.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

9 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Probably Mr Escobar believed the Liberal Media news hype and thought that all US Police officers just shoot illegal immigrants out of hand, or some such. Stupid fear mongering media outlets.

Which liberal media outlets claim,"that all US police officers just shoot illegal immigrants out of hand, or some such?"

Sources please unless this is a lie? Then OK, got it.

Edited by Avatar Samantha Ai

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 7

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.