It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Good Guy With Gun Prevents Tragedy

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 05:47 PM
link   
We have all heard stories like this; where someone uses a gun to stop a murder or robbery... We have also heard of those who intervene and save someones life being fired or demonized by a misplaced political agenda... This story has not totally played out as of yet.. What would you have done if confronted by the same situation ? As usual there are conflicting stories about losing his job.. Guess we will have to wait and see.

As far as I am concerned he should be given a pay raise and a ticker tape parade if the article is correct.. You reward good deeds and burn the bastards who do otherwise in my idea of a proper world..


Warren Mayor Jim Fouts gets it. He released a short statement on social media praising the valet. “I would like to commend Didarul Sarder who probably saved a 52 year old woman from being murdered by quick action,” said Fouts Wednesday night. “Outside the GM Tech Center this morning he observed a 52 year old female repeatedly being stabbed with a kitchen knife in her back, neck, and abdomen. His quick action using a licensed hand gun on the attacker undoubtedly saved this woman’s life. Had he not legally exercised his second amendment rights this woman would probably not be with us today. [...] Hero’s should be rewarded not terminated. Didarul is a resident of Warren and a resident that we can all be proud of!”

Alas, if this story catches traction in the national media, Sarder’s woes are likely just beginning. This incident goes against everything liberals want Americans to believe about guns. In fact, it’s the kind of story that could do grave damage to their prevailing arguments. Don’t be surprised if they dig into this poor guy’s closet for anything they can use to taint his heroism.
- See more at: unfilteredpatriot.com...



unfilteredpatriot.com...




posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

That's great good for him, he's a hero



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Always good to politicise a tragedy.

Except when the other side does it, then it's disgusting.




This incident goes against everything liberals want Americans to believe about guns.


Not from what I've heard.

In fact this is the sort of scenario they wish was more common, minus the stabbing part, sadly it is an absolute rarity compared to murder.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Again, the propaganda will paint the assailant as the victim and the person who saved the victim as the assailant.

That's how gun-grabber logic works.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky


Alas, if this story catches traction in the national media…

Don't worry, it won't. Doesn't fit the agenda.

All guns are bad, all of the time.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:13 PM
link   
thats a nice strawman, liberals wanting to take your guns away, liberals hate guns, liberals are conspiring to ban guns. its a catchy meme, too bad its an absolute lie.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

Why would it? people save people without using guns all the time, how many innocent people was in his line of fire?
a 9 mm 120 grain bullet fired out of an average sized handgun at 45 degrees elevation will travel about 2300 meters before falling, i guess the dude had the eyesight of superman. or maybe everyone with a licence to carry automatically achieves marksman skills?



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
Again, the propaganda will paint the assailant as the victim and the ....


They are neither, They were entitled to other peoples property....

That's how it's been going these days.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Curious69

Strawman. He ended the situation simply by producing the weapon. What might have happened had he fired is completely and utterly fantasy. Maybe he would've drilled the assailant in the nose and fired only one shot.

Maybe he would've fired 14 shots and missed with every single one.

We can make up "what ifs" all day long and get nowhere because the bottom line is your basic premise is fatally flawed.

@ OP - plot twist: he has his job back, according to the Washington Post as of two days ago. Additionally, GM itself says they didn't authorize his termination, nor request it. One member of the local management did it on his own.
edit on 16-2-2016 by Shamrock6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Curious69
That's why 45 acp for carry is better.....wont even penetrate the average wall but stops man short.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:32 PM
link   
a reply to: vjr1113

It is? Show me



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: bandersnatch

I carry a kimber .45 with jhp 230 grain...it'll go through a wall



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: bandersnatch

Assuming you hit the intended target.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Curious69

Strawman. He ended the situation simply by producing the weapon. What might have happened had he fired is completely and utterly fantasy. Maybe he would've drilled the assailant in the nose and fired only one shot.

Maybe he would've fired 14 shots and missed with every single one.

We can make up "what ifs" all day long and get nowhere because the bottom line is your basic premise is fatally flawed.

@ OP - plot twist: he has his job back, according to the Washington Post as of two days ago. Additionally, GM itself says they didn't authorize his termination, nor request it. One member of the local management did it on his own.



Yeah lets not take what ifs into concideration when it comes to use deadly weapons! very sound reasoning if you are a gun nut, for everyone else its pretty much all about what if.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
Again, the propaganda will paint the assailant as the victim and the person who saved the victim as the assailant.

That's how gun-grabber logic works.



So before any of that has happened you presume to predict what the evil "gun grabbers" will say?
Can you be any more of a hypocrite?

As far as I can tell there isn't actually any f'ing "gun grabbing" going on, unless you consider stopping criminals and the mentally unstable from buying weapons to potentially murder people.

But let me guess, you still claim to be one of the "good guys", even though you want to preach for the right of anyone to have a weapon unchecked and unrestricted?

smdh



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Curious69

Ok, here's a "what if". "What if" the guy had not drawn his weapon? "What if" he just stood by, called 911 and let events unfold till the cops got there [ with guns ] to stop it?
More than likely, the lady would be dead and the criminal fled the scene. Obviously, you have never been in a situation where the instinct to protect someone took over. Or you were too worried about your own safety to step up.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: Curious69

Ok, here's a "what if". "What if" the guy had not drawn his weapon? "What if" he just stood by, called 911 and let events unfold till the cops got there [ with guns ] to stop it?
More than likely, the lady would be dead and the criminal fled the scene. Obviously, you have never been in a situation where the instinct to protect someone took over. Or you were too worried about your own safety to step up.


Sure i accept your what if's if you accept mine, pretty simple.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Curious69

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Curious69

Strawman. He ended the situation simply by producing the weapon. What might have happened had he fired is completely and utterly fantasy. Maybe he would've drilled the assailant in the nose and fired only one shot.

Maybe he would've fired 14 shots and missed with every single one.

We can make up "what ifs" all day long and get nowhere because the bottom line is your basic premise is fatally flawed.

@ OP - plot twist: he has his job back, according to the Washington Post as of two days ago. Additionally, GM itself says they didn't authorize his termination, nor request it. One member of the local management did it on his own.



Yeah lets not take what ifs into concideration when it comes to use deadly weapons! very sound reasoning if you are a gun nut, for everyone else its pretty much all about what if.


Gun nut? Now now, let's not resort to name calling just because our attempt at banging the fear drum isn't going well. Just because I don't pee my pants when I see a gun doesn't make me a gun nut.

What if the overwhelming majority of gun owners are responsible and know to handle handle their firearms? What if the overwhelming majority of gun owners view them as tools, not toys?

Actually, never mind. You're too busy wailing about fantasies to discuss facts and reality.



posted on Feb, 16 2016 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Curious69

Strawman. He ended the situation simply by producing the weapon. What might have happened had he fired is completely and utterly fantasy. Maybe he would've drilled the assailant in the nose and fired only one shot.

Maybe he would've fired 14 shots and missed with every single one.

We can make up "what ifs" all day long and get nowhere because the bottom line is your basic premise is fatally flawed.

@ OP - plot twist: he has his job back, according to the Washington Post as of two days ago. Additionally, GM itself says they didn't authorize his termination, nor request it. One member of the local management did it on his own.


Thank you for doing a follow up and posting the info..



posted on Feb, 17 2016 @ 02:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Always good to politicise a tragedy.

Except when the other side does it, then it's disgusting.




This incident goes against everything liberals want Americans to believe about guns.


Not from what I've heard.

In fact this is the sort of scenario they wish was more common, minus the stabbing part, sadly it is an absolute rarity compared to murder.


No it isn't.

Justifiable Homicide by carriers is rare. But the use of guns in defensive situations by citizens is actually extremely common. Most of the time the mere presence of firearm in the would be victims hands is enough to deter the crime. Justifiable homicides are the low end of the very broad use of firearms in self defense.

The study that is often referred when that notion is thrown about makes no mention of self defense use of firearms outside of justifiable homicides, meaning that they didn't count any defensive gun use that didn't result in the death of a criminal. Read the Violence Policy Center breakdown of their data and what data they collected VPC Statistical Justifiable Homicides.

Killing isn't the intent of self defense, or even the use of deadly justifiable force. The goal is to get the threat to stop. In most cases the presentation of a firearm is enough. Other times shots are fired and the suspect is struck, ending the fight, but not killed.

There are several websites that compile entire databases of DGUs. Thousands of stories. That's only what gets reported to the media.


edit on 17 2 16 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join