9 potential mass shooting stopped by citizens

[spartan max2]

9 examples of citizens owning private firearms who stopped potential mass shootings

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/10-potential-mass-shootings-that-were-stopped-by-someone-wit

The stories you will never hear on the new

[questionmark]

Nice, but there were 17 that nobody stopped:

[Sweetpumper]

Nice, but there were 17 that nobody stopped:

Probably because nobody was armed.

[CRYSiiSx2]

9 examples of citizens owning private firearms who stopped potential mass shootings

http://www.buzzfeed....-by-someone-wit

The stories you will never hear on the new

Awesome find, I'm sharing this.

[Kowalski]

Nice, but there were 17 that nobody stopped:

Because nobody had a gun....

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun....

[spartan max2]

That graph is including the most recent one. At the navy yard shooting which is one of the most gun restricted areas.

Not knowing the other details of this graph I can only speculate.

But im sure most of this happens in gun free areas. Just like Sandyhook and newtown

Plus I noticed D.C is at the top of the list. Place with the most gun control.

Edited September 18, 2013 by spartan max2

[CRYSiiSx2]

That graph is including the most recent one. At the navy yard shooting which is one of the most gun restricted areas.

Not knowing the other details of this graph I can only speculate.

But im sure most of this happens in gun free areas. Just like Sandyhook and newtown

Plus I noticed D.C is at the top of the list. Place with the most gun control.

I don't live a big city or anything, but even if someone were to walk into Walmart by Ferris State here and start shooting, they would be dropped pretty quick. Seems like everyone around my area carries or has one in the car. Chicago or D.C. on the other hand...

Edited September 18, 2013 by CRYSiiSx2

[Sweetpumper]

Weird, how that works, huh?

[Keel M.]

We will always ignore the real problem, but that's nothing new. We've swept it under the rug for this long, let's just keep sweeping, eh? It's what we're best at.

[Kowalski]

I posted this before, but think I should post it again....

Suzanna Gratia Hupp explains meaning of 2nd Amendment!

Link: http://m.youtube.com...h?v=FZwwQuS5j7Q

Hupp and her parents were having lunch at the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen in 1991 when the Luby's massacre commenced. The gunman shot 50 people and killed 23, including both of Hupp's parents. Hupp later expressed regret about deciding to remove her gun from her purse and lock it in her car lest she risk possibly running afoul of the state's concealed weapons laws; during the shootings, she reached for her weapon but then remembered that it was "a hundred feet away in my car."^[4] Her father, Al Gratia, tried to rush the gunman and was shot in the chest. Hupp escaped through a broken window and believed that her mother, Ursula Gratia, was behind her. Actually however, her mother went to her mortally-wounded husband's aid and was then shot in the head.

As a survivor of the Luby's massacre, Hupp testified across the country in support of concealed-handgun laws. She said that if there had been a second chance to prevent the slaughter, she would have violated the Texas law and carried the handgun inside her purse into the restaurant.^[5] She testified across the country in support of concealed handgun laws, and was elected to the Texas House of Representatives in 1996.^[6] The concealed-weapons bill was signed by then-Governor George W. Bush.^[7]

Link: http://en.wikipedia....ki/Suzanna_Hupp

Edited September 18, 2013 by Burt Gummer

[spartan max2]

We will always ignore the real problem, but that's nothing new. We've swept it under the rug for this long, let's just keep sweeping, eh? It's what we're best at.

Im curious what do you think the real problem is?

I always look at is as people will kill people no matter what you do

Most violence happens in poverty areas, when you have nonething to loose you do stuff like that. So I would count that as the main problem.

Edited September 18, 2013 by spartan max2

[questionmark]

Im curious what do you think the real problem is?

I always look at is as people will kill people no matter what you do

Most violence happens in poverty areas, when you have nonething to loose you do stuff like that. So I would count that as the main problem.

The real problem is that people with a obvious brain damage get to keep and or buy guns or have easy access to them because a relative/friend does nothing to safeguard his armory against theft.

Edited September 18, 2013 by questionmark

[Agent0range]

Nice find....you will always have those that like to be balanced on the fence...never contributing...never really disputing anything...they feel their power by being the opposing voice....let it go...it's a good find. They need to find a side and stick to it....if you are a democrap,....just be a farging democrap...e repug...just do it....this back and forth...i can always oppose you is starting to get old....ok...that's a lie...the I can always oppose is retarded and needs to find a life and a direction....it is worthless as it now presents itself....

I am a fan of personal liberty, freedom and responsibility....these clowns will never take a stand...might hurt their likes....which they apparently live for

I think this post is absolutely wrong. You don't have to pick a side and stick to it. I don't let democrats or republicans tell me how to think, I am quite capable making my own decisions on issues. Also, posting on an internet forum is not "taking a stand".

Picking a side and sticking to it is exactly why our government is such a mess.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Agent0range

[supervike]

Probably because nobody was armed.

Somebody WAS armed, thus all the shooting parts.

[Arbenol]

I always look at is as people will kill people no matter what you do

True. But you must also consider that there is a huge difference in homicide rates between similar nations. Saying 'people are gonna kill, whatcha gonna do?' ignores that fact that Americans kill each other in much higher numbers than other similar countries. Gun control debates are a smokescreen to this issue. Guns are already everywhere in American society so you've got the situation where the only way for decent people to be able to ensure their own safety is to be armed themselves.

We could have a debate about how the US got into that situation in the first place. But that wouldn't be helpful either. The question is: what can you do about it? Accepting the status quo seem to be a cop out.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

I think you'd reduce a lot of shootings if you had strict laws about how guns should be secured in the homes.

Australia has strict gun ownership laws as well as strict gun security laws, however I've been to rural areas where you can buy ammunition from the 7/11 but everyone who has a gun still takes their responsibility as a gun owner seriously, gun cabinets, locked up ammunition etc.

Maybe in a country were it's a right to carry a gun and not a choice you have to justify to the police once a year (and to prove your capability with that weapon as well) you should emphasis that rights come with responsibilities more strongly. Right to own a gun - responsibility to securely store it.

[Leonardo]

True. But you must also consider that there is a huge difference in homicide rates between similar nations. Saying 'people are gonna kill, whatcha gonna do?' ignores that fact that Americans kill each other in much higher numbers than other similar countries. Gun control debates are a smokescreen to this issue. Guns are already everywhere in American society so you've got the situation where the only way for decent people to be able to ensure their own safety is to be armed themselves.

We could have a debate about how the US got into that situation in the first place. But that wouldn't be helpful either. The question is: what can you do about it? Accepting the status quo seem to be a cop out.

Or, America could take the long-term view and try to reduce the homicide rate to something comparable to other developed nations by engaging in a dedicated, tough, nation-wide gun-control program. In the short-term, things either won't change or might get a little worse. Long-term, things will improve. The only reason gun-control fails at present, is because that control is restricted in area.

Of course, the gun manufacturers will try to ensure such a sea-change in American attitudes to guns never happens. Money is more important than people.

[spartan max2]

I agree mentally ill people should not be allowed to have weapons. and that is already illegal.

Edited September 19, 2013 by spartan max2

[spartan max2]

There has never been anything that shows gun control lowers violence, maybe gun violence but the violence itself doesn't go down. Because the violence does not go down then people should be allowed to defend themselves.

The national average is ten minutes for the cops to show up, and that's if you get to the phone. Lets say you somehow keep all guns off the street, so they use a knife instead. If they are bigger then me how to I defend myself? or if there are more of them then me? People don't always have time to wait for the cops.

Edited September 19, 2013 by spartan max2

[ninjadude]

9 examples of citizens owning private firearms who stopped potential mass shootings

Sorry but no. These were ALREADY mass shootings that someone eventually stopped. Not really the same thing now is it?

[Bavarian Raven]

Not really the same thing now is it?

Yes it is. MORE people would have died had not someone stopped them. But I guess you rather innocent people die; afterall we've seen your attitude in other posts on this forum.

[Yamato]

Do you guys know how many Americans are on anti-depressants? How are we going to legislate "mentally ill"? What's the operative definition of that? If there's a political dog in the fight, our politicians will make up new definitions for any word or phrase that meets their agendas, we've seen enough of that in recent years to know better.

No, we shouldn't trust another Yes-man at the bureau who dresses really well to draw another federal line for us in another quest to be reasonable enough to win our vote.

[questionmark]

Do you guys know how many Americans are on anti-depressants? How are we going to legislate "mentally ill"? What's the operative definition of that? If there's a political dog in the fight, our politicians will make up new definitions for any word or phrase that meets their agendas, we've seen enough of that in recent years to know better.

No, we shouldn't trust another Yes-man at the bureau who dresses really well to draw another federal line for us in another quest to be reasonable enough to win our vote.

You don't have to define mentally ill, all you have to do is take those who do to their medication, general tendency to manic actions and lack of mental stability could be a danger having weapons (or operation a vehicle or other potentially dangerous device, for the case) and don't let them handle any of those if not under control. It is really simple.

[spartan max2]

Sorry but no. These were ALREADY mass shootings that someone eventually stopped. Not really the same thing now is it?

It means a lot to the people that didn't die because the maniac was stopped sooner. Every life saved is important.

But gun control people look at every shooting and think that if their was mass gun control that these killing would magically of not happened.

The first story in the story of nine the killer is going on a killing spree with a knife.

FBI statistics, show murders with hammers are higher then murders with rifles

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/01/03/FBI-More-People-Killed-With-Hammers-and-Clubs-Each-Year-Than-With-Rifles

So I guess if we ban hammers then those deaths wouldn't happen either.

[Leonardo]

There has never been anything that shows gun control lowers violence,

Is the point of gun control to reduce violence, or reducing deaths-by-firearm (and the overall homicide rate)?

I believe it to be the latter, and your argument about "reducing violence" is often brought up as a strawman.

Edited September 19, 2013 by Leonardo