Hemegroup Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I think two conversations need to be had. 'Gun control' aren't bad words, or shouldn't be, nor should the words 'health care'. The majority of accidents involving children and guns actually involve guns which aren't locked. What a better situation we'd have today if the last (sad that I have to use that word) shooter hadn't had access to the weapons. It's my opinion that if I have to pass a test and background check before I can drive a car (which can also kill), then it should be the same for me to own and potentially use a gun. 'Gun' isn't a bad word either. Access to guns by people who aren't mentally stable, those definitely are bad words. I thoroughly agree with the person stating that they wish access to mental health care was as easy as purchasing a firearm. Those systems are oftentimes severely without capacity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted December 17, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 17, 2012 have to agree with all of the above. at my local grocery store you can walk in with cash and walk out 20 min later with a firearm and ammo after a computerized background check....that's a bit too easy I think. I have no problem with firearms ownership but we need to make sure they don't get into the wrong hands and that owners keep them under lock and key to prevent use by others. I don't know what the answer is to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemegroup Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 http://ca.news.yahoo.com/video/shooting-victims-father-speaks-213700966.html Here's a link to a father speaking regarding the recent tragedy, he is a PA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JMPA Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 I think two conversations need to be had. 'Gun control' aren't bad words, or shouldn't be, nor should the words 'health care'. The majority of accidents involving children and guns actually involve guns which aren't locked. What a better situation we'd have today if the last (sad that I have to use that word) shooter hadn't had access to the weapons. It's my opinion that if I have to pass a test and background check before I can drive a car (which can also kill), then it should be the same for me to own and potentially use a gun. 'Gun' isn't a bad word either. Access to guns by people who aren't mentally stable, those definitely are bad words. I thoroughly agree with the person stating that they wish access to mental health care was as easy as purchasing a firearm. Those systems are oftentimes severely without capacity. Non-medical thread. But none the less, imagine if a teacher had a gun and was able to defend the classroom instead of waiting for law enforcement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Non-medical thread.But none the less, imagine if a teacher had a gun and was able to defend the classroom instead of waiting for law enforcement? Seriously?? Your answer is to arm teachers in an elementary school???? Like nothing could go wrong there....How about we do what every other civilized country has done and have some sensible gun laws....Assault rifles like the one used in the massacre in CT have no place outside of the military or law enforcement. I like guns. I own several. But there is a difference between owning guns for self defense and hunting, and owning guns designed for military combat. High capacity mags, assault weapons, etc. They need to go..... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/14/nine-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/ I travel a lot, and I find that most of my friends in other countries think we have the craziest society on the planet. The fact that we tolerate events like this is simply unimaginable to them. If you look at other countries....well... http://chartsbin.com/view/1454 Also, the whole concept of arming civilians to stop criminals or insane people who are armed and shooting is ludicrous. Speaking as a veteran, and someone who saw some combat. UNLIKE the movies, it's hard to get a well trained soldier or law enforcement officer to fire accurately when under fire. A civilian is more likely to shoot other innocent people than they are to shoot the perpetrator. Unless they are within a foot or two of you... These were trained police officers....and still 9 bystanders were wounded.... http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57500279/civilians-hurt-in-nyc-gunfire-highlight-dangers/ I WILL agree, that our mental health care system is in shambles, as a result of budget cuts since the 80's. Anyone who has practiced in the ED and had to "board" a mental health patient knows this. I've admitted patients 2-3 states away as they were the only ones with open beds. I had one patient boarded in the ED for 5 days as we could not find a psych bed for him. We need to invest in this area.....dramatically.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemegroup Posted December 17, 2012 Author Share Posted December 17, 2012 Non-medical thread. What part of gunshot trauma do you not understand? Not to mention psychiatric evaluation including signs in society. Please, try and keep this to a healthy discussion about topics which concern all of us as practitioners. I WILL agree, that our mental health care system is in shambles, as a result of budget cuts since the 80's. Anyone who has practiced in the ED and had to "board" a mental health patient knows this. I've admitted patients 2-3 states away as they were the only ones with open beds. I had one patient boarded in the ED for 5 days as we could not find a psych bed for him. We need to invest in this area.....dramatically.... Thank you for expounding. I've done a lot of traveling in the past 10 years and my opinion is the same. I realize that certain types of individuals make it through the cracks and I know we don't know details. But as an overall topic, I agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 First off... really no such thing as a "assault weapon"... Why... because everything that happened could have occured with 1-2 single action revolvers... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second.... "sensible Gun Laws" are also Silly as all hell... People intent upon murdering other people aren't usually "Law" abiding...!!!!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While I agree that mental healthcare should be much more accessible... the 'there are too many guns'... or 'guns are too accesssible' is pure Nonsense... This argument is typically hampered by inacccurate hyperbole and fear mongering. Fact is.... here In WA state... NO ONE walks out "20 min later with a firearm and ammo" unless they ALREADY have a concealed weapons permit... which means that the National crime background check has already been done. And... even with the CCW... they still have to "run the quick check for any flags" and fill out the paperwork... so "20 min later with a firearm and ammo" is still NOT likely. I have a CCW and rare am I allowed to leave the store with a firearm the day I picked it out... and I have over 20 of them. While I agree that firearm owners need to be much more responsible with them and try harder to keep them out of the hands of those with ill will... I must say that on the 2 non-military, stateside occasions that I needed a firearm... if it had been LOCKED away.... I would not have been here posting today. Thing is... making NEW/MORE laws that impead firearm ownership and/or possession ONLY obstructs law abiding citizens from protecting themselves from criminals. Because by definition... CRIMINALS will not abide by those laws. A great example of this is Chicago and British Columbia. Both these places make private firearm ownership rare for the average law abiding citizen... and both these places have Law enforcement officers complaining about how many guns non- law abiding citizens (called CRIMINALS) have and how they are basically outgunned. These are palces where the criminals can randomely pick pretty much ANYONE they want and put a victim tag on them because they KNOW and are assured that pretty much anyone they pick will 99.9999% be unarmed and that "when seconds count... the police are but minutes away"...!!!! The other silly part about this is that "guns are bad" until someone with a gun (often a cop) rescues a "gun-hater"... but the "hater" never stops to think that if THEY had the gun from the onset... they could have saved themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator rev ronin Posted December 17, 2012 Administrator Share Posted December 17, 2012 How about we talk about the vanity of fame that drives mentally ill people to attempt to make names for themselves by killing notable or numerous people? In the 30+ years since Hinckley's attempt on Reagan's life... and while we've come a long way in terms of an instant check system, it's still 1) not populated by enough *mental health* records, 2) failed attempts by prohibited individuals to buy guns still don't trigger much, if anything, in the way of police response. But what we HAVE had is an explosion of reality shows which depict people to act stupidly and dangerously in the name of fame, media-made "celebrities" that have essentially no talent other than being celebrities, and more and more focus on the individuals who kill many others--Harris and Kleibold are still household names. We live in a culture where getting 15 minutes of fame seems to be their own reward, and people who have lost all sense of proportion or reality still strive to gain their fame through becoming enshrined in infamy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justeco Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 @Contrarian How can you square the idea of firearms as 'protection' when people are far more likely to injure themselves or a loved one than defend against a 'bad guy'. John Lott's "More Guns" shtick has long been debunked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 First off... really no such thing as a "assault weapon"...Why... because everything that happened could have occured with 1-2 single action revolvers... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Second.... "sensible Gun Laws" are also Silly as all hell... People intent upon murdering other people aren't usually "Law" abiding...!!!!! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While I agree that mental healthcare should be much more accessible... the 'there are too many guns'... or 'guns are too accesssible' is pure Nonsense... This argument is typically hampered by inacccurate hyperbole and fear mongering. Fact is.... here In WA state... NO ONE walks out "20 min later with a firearm and ammo" unless they ALREADY have a concealed weapons permit... which means that the National crime background check has already been done. And... even with the CCW... they still have to "run the quick check for any flags" and fill out the paperwork... so "20 min later with a firearm and ammo" is still NOT likely. I have a CCW and rare am I allowed to leave the store with a firearm the day I picked it out... and I have over 20 of them. While I agree that firearm owners need to be much more responsible with them and try harder to keep them out of the hands of those with ill will... I must say that on the 2 non-military, stateside occasions that I needed a firearm... if it had been LOCKED away.... I would not have been here posting today. Thing is... making NEW/MORE laws that impead firearm ownership and/or possession ONLY obstructs law abiding citizens from protecting themselves from criminals. Because by definition... CRIMINALS will not abide by those laws. A great example of this is Chicago and British Columbia. Both these places make private firearm ownership rare for the average law abiding citizen... and both these places have Law enforcement officers complaining about how many guns non- law abiding citizens (called CRIMINALS) have and how they are basically outgunned. These are palces where the criminals can randomely pick pretty much ANYONE they want and put a victim tag on them because they KNOW and are assured that pretty much anyone they pick will 99.9999% be unarmed and that "when seconds count... the police are but minutes away"...!!!! The other silly part about this is that "guns are bad" until someone with a gun (often a cop) rescues a "gun-hater"... but the "hater" never stops to think that if THEY had the gun from the onset... they could have saved themselves. BS...he fired over a hundred rounds....had hundreds of rounds in 30 round magazines and used an AR-15 .223 caliber rifle....by one report, he shot each child approximately 11 times. THOSE guns have no place in society. None. They need to be banned. Will that stop all bad things from happening? Of course not...but if he had been limited to a handgun with a standard clip....perhaps more could have escaped....perhaps not. But those guns have no purpose outside of killing. Not hunting...not target....nothing besides killing another human being. If you read the one link above....you'll see that the majority of guns used in these attacks were purchased LEGALLY....Changing the laws could reduce the number of these. It's amazing that other countries, most of them far more culturally advanced than our own, with strict gun laws don't have the number and severity of incidents that we have....sure they have them too...but much more rare... I'd also like to see JHP and armor piercing rounds banned too. They have no use outside of combat. As far as arming a teacher....well, I would never allow my 6 year old daughter to attend a school where the teachers were armed. That's not the right solution.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator EMEDPA Posted December 17, 2012 Moderator Share Posted December 17, 2012 Fact is.... here In WA state... NO ONE walks out "20 min later with a firearm and ammo" unless they ALREADY have a concealed weapons permit... which means that the National crime background check has already been done. . was speaking of oregon. several fred meyers (think target) now carry firearms. one of the nurses I work with just bought a glock over his lunch hr start to finish, seriously. they took his info, he went shopping for other things, and by the time he was ready to check out he was cleared to purchase it and walk out of the store with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Hmmmm...... [h=1]In America Today, a Gun Saved a Life[/h] By: Gerard Valentino Statistics tell us that today, somewhere in America, a gun saved someones life. The person alive because they chose to own a gun, and use it for self-defense might be a teacher, or a factory worker, or a computer programmer. Unlike the main stream media portrayal of gun owners, they are not all toothless, hillbilly vigilante wannabes. So a son, father, wife, daughter or mother might be going home to an average American family because a gun was used to ward of a violent attacker. Instead of being free to attack again, the criminal in question is also going somewhere, to jail, or the morgue. But, if you believe the anti-gun crowd, guns are a blight on society and an evil that needs to be eradicated. Try telling that to a woman that woke up to the proverbial "thump in the night" and the only thing standing between her and a violent criminal is a .45 caliber handgun, or 12 gauge shotgun. The same holds true for a man that is attacked by a hammer wielding crack addict after getting cash from the local ATM. To believe in gun control, you have to believe that society is better off if the woman doesn't have a gun to defend herself and the violent criminal is free to act without fear. Gun control advocates also have to believe that society wins if the crack addict gets the man's hard earned cash after beating him to death, instead of getting three .40 caliber bullets to the chest, which is what such a criminal truly deserves. When all the spin and media created fluff is cleared away, the gun issue comes down to whether society benefits if the woman attacked in her home, or the man withdrawing money from his bank account are left to become a victim, or empowered to become a survivor. At that point, anyone looking at the gun issue logically has their answer because guns are used far more often to save innocent people each year than die in accidents, or through malicious gun related acts. But, the gun control movement combined with a complicit main stream media has taken logic out of the gun debate. Even my own sister, who is an intelligent woman, can't get past the emotional aversion to keeping a gun at home for self defense. Her viewpoint is a byproduct of growing up in suburban Chicago and living with the constant media message that a gun in the home is a guarantee of a dead child. Someday, she might be home alone when a home invader enters and not have the means to fight back. If that happens, who is to blame? The truth is that she is to blame for not looking past the rhetoric and seeing that a gun is much more likely to save her life, and her children, than hurt them. But, the anti-gun establishment media and the anti-gun leadership bear a great deal of responsibility for using false statistics, outright lies and emotional blackmail to push their immoral agenda. There is no doubt that any political agenda that demands law abiding citizens go unarmed while criminals remain armed to the teeth is inherently immoral. Especially when there is overwhelming evidence that gun control doesn't work. During the fight to end the total gun bans in Chicago and Washington D.C. the anti-gun leadership and establishment media predicted gun related mayhem if law abiding citizens were allowed to own guns for self defense. Where is all the media coverage now that the murder and violent crime rate in Chicago and Washington D.C. has dropped since the gun bans ended? The lack of truthful reporting on the issue is proof, yet again, that there is bias in how the establishment media covers the gun issue. A bias that continues to sensationalize every gun crime, or gun accident while largely ignoring when guns are used in self defense. There is a chance the woman who fought off the home invader lived in Chicago and was victimized prior to the gun ban being struck down. Since the only item added to the equation was the law abiding citizen's gun, it clearly shows how gun bans benefit violent criminals. Nobody would send an honest, law abiding person into a situation that guarantees they will become a victim of violent crime. But, by taking away the right to bear arms, the anti-gun community is coming awfully close to doing just that. Criminals prey on the weak, and weak willed. So when the anti-gun community disarms honest people they are helping common thugs become better at their cowardly job. Empowering criminals is the end result of gun control schemes and the anti-gun movement still pushes their agenda. The fact that they know the truth and cling to the thought of disarming honest people defies logic, and puts their morality in question. The word immoral is defined as an action that conflicts with broadly held societal principles -clearly the act of disarming the law abiding while doing nothing to disarm criminals meets that standard. Sadly, the enemies of gun rights could care less. (Gerard Valentino is a co-founder of the Buckeye Firearms Association, BuckeyeFirearms.org, and his book The Valentino Chronicles is available in the Buckeye Firearms Association store.) 20 Yrs ago (March 2002), While home on leave from the Army... 8 gangbangers followed me into a store and attempted to Rob, Assualt me... They ASSumed that I was unarmed and would be a easy victim... It was later found that "pick a vic" was their favorite Friday night pass time after a few drinks as evidenced by the 20 roberies, assaults and 3 murders outside that particular store over the preceding 15 months.. By the end of THAT night... me and 6 of them were shot, hospitalized and 2 of them died. This was BEFORE I attended PA school. Being "unlawfully" armed but adequately trained actually saved my life that night... After recovering from my wounds... I decided to NEVER live anywhere that would impead MY ability to protect me or my loved ones. I refuse to find myself cowering in a corner, or under a exam table somewhere "praying" that the psychotic murderer doesn't find me or someone I care about and have their way with them. Especially since I've spent considerable time ARMED "In harm's way" protecting the lives of others (Iraqis, Afghanis, Bosnians/Darfurians) ... that I really didn't care much about... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 BS...he fired over a hundred rounds....had hundreds of rounds in 30 round magazines and used an AR-15 .223 caliber rifle....by one report, he shot each child approximately 11 times. THOSE guns have no place in society. None. They need to be banned. Will that stop all bad things from happening? Of course not...but if he had been limited to a handgun with a standard clip....perhaps more could have escaped....perhaps not. But those guns have no purpose outside of killing. Not hunting...not target....nothing besides killing another human being. If you read the one link above....you'll see that the majority of guns used in these attacks were purchased LEGALLY....Changing the laws could reduce the number of these. It's amazing that other countries, most of them far more culturally advanced than our own, with strict gun laws don't have the number and severity of incidents that we have....sure they have them too...but much more rare... I'd also like to see JHP and armor piercing rounds banned too. They have no use outside of combat. As far as arming a teacher....well, I would never allow my 6 year old daughter to attend a school where the teachers were armed. That's not the right solution.... Ummm... Handguns don't have "Clips"... Which goes to show how much you think you know versus the reality "Mr. I've been in combat"... Also... with your extensive experience wih gun "clips"... apparently you haven't seen how rapidly "magazine" changes can be performed... so limiting "magazine capacity" wouldn't really change much for a determined murderous criminal. GUNS don't kill people... determined criminals kill people with Guns, Knives, Hammers, Cars, Explosives, etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator rev ronin Posted December 17, 2012 Administrator Share Posted December 17, 2012 I would never allow my 6 year old daughter to attend a school where the teachers were armed. That's not the right solution.... You don't have a choice unless you homeschool. Schools are defense-free zones by law, where unless a police officer happens to be on campus, you're pretty much guaranteed that the only person with one or more guns at the school will be a criminal. That is, unless you live in a state like WA where a parent with a lawfully-carried firearm can leave it locked in the car during his or her visit to the school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrator rev ronin Posted December 17, 2012 Administrator Share Posted December 17, 2012 @Contrarian How can you square the idea of firearms as 'protection' when people are far more likely to injure themselves or a loved one than defend against a 'bad guy'. John Lott's "More Guns" shtick has long been debunked. Really? By whom? How come you can name the landmark study, but not the alleged debunking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 was speaking of oregon. several fred meyers (think target) now carry firearms. one of the nurses I work with just bought a glock over his lunch hr start to finish, seriously. they took his info, he went shopping for other things, and by the time he was ready to check out he was cleared to purchase it and walk out of the store with it. Again.... They abide by the minimum 3-7 day waiting period for MOST. If someone walks out with a gun that day... it means that he/she was likely pre-screened by having a concealed weapons permit (CCW)... which also means that he had ALREADY submitted fingerprints, and background check previous to his "Fred Myers" shopping spree. It just doesn't happen sooner than that because of federal and state laws... and "Fred Myers" isn't going to jepordize their business to sell a gun quicker... The "Gun Show" loopholes are a completely different story... but I've yet to see a tragedy like CT happen with guns obtained from that source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303909 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Threads like this will just go beyond the issue into the larger problem with America--division. Everyone has drawn their line in the sand: red state/blue state, gun control/no gun control, rich/poor, class warfare + on + on. The unwillingness to cooperate, collaborate or compromise is a top-to-bottom fiasco of this country and is the true reason the world looks at us like we're "crazy". We are. We are the absurd logical conclusion of complete atomization and individualization whereby no social institutions or any common ideals have any meaning for anyone. I expect it to only get worse because the profits to be made on keeping all of us chewing at one another's tails like pigs in a factory farm are legendary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 @Contrarian How can you square the idea of firearms as 'protection' when people are far more likely to injure themselves or a loved one than defend against a 'bad guy'... Because LOTS of folks are stabbed across the USA daily and "people are far more likely to injure themselves" with knives... "assault knives " or otherwise but we don't ban them. And... because I actually protected myself from MURDER with a handgun/gun... on 2-10 occasions... Some CONUS some OCONUS and see the utility of being able to own a firearm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justeco Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Because I actually protected myself from MURDER with a handgun/gun... on 2. Your experience, if true, is anomalous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justeco Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Really? By whom? How come you can name the landmark study, but not the alleged debunking? More Guns, Less Crime Fails Again: The Latest Evidence from 1977 – 2006 Read it if you like, though I doubt it could change your mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
physasst Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Ummm... Handguns don't have "Clips"...Which goes to show how much you think you know versus the reality "Mr. I've been in combat"... GUNS don't kill people... determined criminals kill people with Guns, Knives, Hammers, Cars, Explosives, etc... Clips, Magazines....Mags....we used the terms all interchangeably in the Navy. A gun was just a tool man. Nothing more. I remember there was a technical difference between the two that the gun nuts would talk about, but I don't remember what it was. I'm not an expert on guns....never have claimed to be. I have a Browning Hi-Power 9mm that I bought while in the Navy in a Cabela's biolock gun safe. I also have a .30-06 bolt action, and a .22 caliber rifle that were given to me by a relative. That's it. I don't have a CCW and have never felt the need to have it, although I did toy around with the idea at one time.. I rarely shoot the rifles and have even thought about selling them. I don't hate guns, but I think we should have a lot fewer of them around....and I think that we should re-enact the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Your experience, if true, is anomalous. Nope... Do a simple google search to see hundreds to thousands of similar experiences. I'll simply ignore the "if true" remark... [TABLE=class: posts-container-table] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Detroit, Michigan: Pizza delivery man fights back after being ambushed[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Monday, February 21, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]WXYZ: A pizza delivery driver with a concealed carry permit used his gun to defend himself after three men tried to rob him.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Belgrade, Nebraska: Shooting called self-defense[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Friday, February 18, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]Omaha World Herald: A man fired in self-defense after another man he met at a bar attempted to break into his house following an altercation.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Wauconda, Illinois: Pharmacist shoots robbery suspect[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Thursday, February 17, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]Chicago Tribune: A man armed with a knife demanded drugs from two employees at a Wauconda drug store. After refusing to surrender, the pharmacist fired a shot, sending the intruder to the hospital.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Boston, Massachusetts: Store Clerk Shoots Man In Botched Robbery[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Thursday, February 17, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]The Boston Channel: An armed robber was shot by an armed clerk in Boston. **Note** Due to the increase in effort and labor to paraphrase every article brought on by the Righthaven lawsuits, The Armed Citizen is going to be moving more towards link-only, with maybe a sentence describing the nature of the crime. The [...][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Ex-Temple Law student not guilty in shooting[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Wednesday, February 16, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]Ex-Temple Law student not guilty in shooting This is an update to a defensive gun use story posted on the archives before Righthaven forced us to remove them.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Armed Pastor Holds Thieves for Police[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Wednesday, February 16, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]KRIS TV An armed pastor confronted two juveniles attempting to steal from a church remodeling project. The teens first pleaded, then threatened, the pastor, who held the men for police.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Sacramento, California: Would-be robbers flee after market employee fires gun in air[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Friday, February 11, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]Sacramento Bee: Four men in ski masks and armed with a pistol tried to hold up a Sacramento Market. The owner denied the robbers by firing a shot in the air, prompting their quick retreat. Thanks to Eddie for the tip![/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Hazleton, Pennsylvania: Home invasion intruder killed[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Thursday, February 10, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]The Standard Speaker: A female homeowner shot one of several intruders breaking into her home in Pennsylvania. The woman was wounded but is expected to recover; one intruder was killed, the others retreated.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: bottom-border][TABLE=class: post-table] [TR] [TD=class: title-cell]Indianapolis, Indiana: Man fatally shot during car break-in[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: date-cell]on Tuesday, February 8, 2011[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD=class: excerpt-cell]Indianapolis Star: An armed homeless man confronted two citizens and tried to break into their car. The owners were present, but rather than complying with the gunman’s demands, they drew weapons of their own, shooting the would-be robber. Neither armed citizen has been charged. Thanks to Earl for the tip![/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
303909 Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Furthermore, regarding the actual title of the thread, I fear that this kid likely had plentiful access to mental health care as America currently defines it. He was the son of an executive and former stock broker and appeared to have a "charmed life" from a strictly materialistic standpoint. A psychiatrist is likely somewhere in the mix. It's not out yet and may never be known but I'd put money on his toxicology coming back positive for psychotropics of some stripe. Then, the old questions resume reagarding the "activating" effects of SSRI's/SNRI's/amphetamine derivatives/etc. that are commonly prescribed to adolescents/young adults Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justeco Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Nope...Do a simple google search to see hundreds to thousands of similar experiences. I'll simply ignore the "if true" remark... Are we going to include the thousands of people who commit suicide, are murdered, or die by accident in this calculation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Your experience, if true, is anomalous. Hmmmm................ Marvin Wolfgang, the late Director of the Sellin Center for Studies in Criminology and Criminal Law at the University of Pennsylvania, considered by many to be the foremost criminologist in the country, wrote in The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, Northwestern University School of Law, Volume 86, Number 1, Fall, 1995: "I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. If I were Mustapha Mond of Brave New World, I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police ... What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. ["," by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz, published in that same issue of The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology] The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. ...I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research. Can it be true that about two million instances occur each year in which a gun was used as a defensive measure against crime? It is hard to believe. Yet, it is hard to challenge the data collected. We do not have contrary evidence. The National Crime Victim Survey does not directly contravene this latest survey, nor do the Mauser and Hart Studies. ... the methodological soundness of the current Kleck and Gertz study is clear. I cannot further debate it. ... The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well." So this data has been peer-reviewed by a top criminologist in this country who was prejudiced in advance against its results, and even he found the scientific evidence overwhelmingly convincing. http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.