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.

 

Mom shot at strip mall used body to protect son, 2

page: 1
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Yahoo

Fortunately everyone at the mall was armed and shootout ensued and the bad guy...wait a minute...got away. Well thank God no one was killed...hold it... except innocent bystanders in the line of fire. Including this mom who shielded her 2 yr old from these heroic gun owners. She probably didn't realize how safe she actually was as she was dieing on top of her child. Lucky for her everyone was armed to the teeth and not afraid of exercising their 2nd amendment rights. [sarcasm/anger]

This story broke my heart and I thought this side of the gun story should be told. I know some will bring up the school board security cop that stopped a maniac...that's good. However I think this is an example of a "wild west" society that I find pathetic.




Detectives believe at least one gunman entered the Fly Cuts & Styles barber shop just before 1 p.m. and began shooting. At least one person inside the shop returned fire.

Curran said the ensuing gunbattle transitioned into the parking lot. Detectives have recovered bullets from four firearms, including one rifle, he told reporters Wednesday. One handgun was recovered but police aren't sure if it was used in the shooting.




posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:57 PM
link   
Sad story. Hopefully the "good samaritan" is charged with manslaughter. This is a classic example of why people should not take the law into their own hands. Now the pro gun proponents (i'm pro gun to an extent) will suffer a major blow from this story. I'm all about gun ownership and the right to carry in appropriate venues; however, this underlines my belief that any "joe blow" should not have a license to carry...it will, more often than not, lead to this scenario. Trigger happy fools! To the shooter: How you feel now? To the family, sue the shooter into oblivion for wrongful death.

So sad!



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


wow your bias isnt clear at all..........funny you said everyone was armed and made a lot of assumptions posing them as fact........

when the article directly contradicts your claims.......

Next time your going to use a piece to push your agenda, chose a better one. especially since this one seems to be a GANG RELATED gunbattle , instead of your run of the mill everyday people returning fire.....
edit on 15-12-2010 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   
This does make me hate the invention of the gun. The gun is used more often to attack then it is to defend.


2nd amendment FTL.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
This does make me hate the invention of the gun. The gun is used more often to attack then it is to defend.


2nd amendment FTL.


Problem is that the handgun has already been unleashed from "pandora's box". It's too late to put it back in. Now we are faced with dealing with the responsible ownership/use of guns. Which is why the shooter needs to be given the maximum penalty (death isn't out of the question), so as to set an example for other overzealous "hero" licensed concealed carriers.

Teach them not to shoot into a crowd...or else suffer the consequences. That should curb their enthusiasm. Guns should not be taken away, but responsible use should be the prime objective....even at the cost of the self designated "hero".



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


funny you said everyone was armed and made a lot of assumptions posing them as fact........

when the article directly contradicts your claims.......


Does it matter whether everyone was armed or just one individual? The result was the same. Actually, if everyone was armed, then the bloodbath may have been much worse.

Spin that!
edit on 15-12-2010 by Aggie Man because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:17 PM
link   
I understand the Wild Wild West mentality is normal in the west but in Singapore...anyone seen with a gun illegally without an license is an automatic Life time in jail or Death Penalty.

Unless you are a license gun owner (for gun club for sport competition) with strict never to reveal your gun in public "restriction", you cannot own a gun in Singapore.

Most of the crimes here are usually by knifes, chopper, parang (long knife), blade and other hand held objects.

Generally the crimes here are low and most crimes are usually don't end up deadly but if given a choice...I won't want to stay in a location where guns are too common.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


Are you a politician?

The story you linked to in no way supports the sensationalism you spewed but I guess that isn't as important as using a tragedy to further your cause.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Your biased coverage sucks. Get a life, Leo



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:31 PM
link   
You used this tragic story added lies and deceit in order to further your own agenda, disgusting.

Did you even bother to read the story?



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Gang or no gang. Poor and stupid people have "rights" too! My "agenda" is that the gun culture promotes the idea that to be armed is to be safe which is clearly NOT the case. I am curious what part of the story does not support my view?



Although it's likely gang members were involved, authorities do not believe the shooting was directly related to gang activity, Curran said.

"There were undoubtedly people involved that were gang members. But as far as this being a classic gang shooting ... that's not what this was at all," he said.

edit on 15-12-2010 by Leo Strauss because: (no reason given)


Oh and the article clearly states 4 different types of bullets were found including a rifle. So a minimum of 4 guns were fired. I would characterize that as a well armed grouping.
edit on 15-12-2010 by Leo Strauss because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


You know? Your use of this tragedy really chaps my ass.

I've got an idea for you and those of your ilk. Why not develop some kind of arm band or something else that identifies you as someone who regardless of the situation you are in, want no help from a citizen carrying a weapon? You tell me the design you like and I'll make it happen. Sounds like an interesting business opportunity although there's no way in hell you'd wear one since you know it would let every criminal know that you're unarmed, refuse help from those who are so have decided you'll be a sitting duck for the criminals.

Sad thing is, I'd risk my life to help you not knowing you. Pop that happy little arm band or whatever you decide and I'll know that you've decided that you don't want my assistance. We all know when seconds count, cops are minutes away. You'd be doing myself and others like me a favor since we would realize risking ourselves to protect you would be against your wishes.

You game? Give me the design and I'll begin working on it.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:05 PM
link   
That's a great line...

You know? Your use of this tragedy really chaps my ass

Even if the story is 100% accurate as reported in the OP, I can't see how blaming the guns makes any sense. By the way, if the wild west shoot 'em up cowboys citizens that may or may not have shot anybody probably SAVED SOMEONE'S LIFE!! I mean...the guy did pull out a gun at a store whatdyathink he's gonna pay for sh*t with it or is he gonna shoot somebody
:



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


wow your bias isnt clear at all..........funny you said everyone was armed and made a lot of assumptions posing them as fact........

when the article directly contradicts your claims.......

Next time your going to use a piece to push your agenda, chose a better one. especially since this one seems to be a GANG RELATED gunbattle , instead of your run of the mill everyday people returning fire.....
edit on 15-12-2010 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)


Hmmm, thats funny.

Kind of like those threads that bash police when people dont know the real story?




I should say I wasnt rolling my eyes at you either, although it appeared that way. Im sick of people twisting the real story to push forward their agenda

edit on 15/12/2010 by OzWeatherman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:14 PM
link   
[sarcasm] You are absolutely right. [/sarcasm] I am glad you were able to find one of these ultra-rare incidents to make your point; Not to mention, they state in the source how they believe this was a gang-related incident. While I am of the belief that any American citizen who has not committed a felony should be able to carry, concealed or otherwise, you wanna bet that all the weapons carried in this incident were being carried concealed illegally?

How about you do yourself and everyone else a favor and research how many criminals and crimes are prevented by lawful gun ownership and use, and then come back to make you case how this incident is the end-all proof on the evilness of guns and non-military/law enforcement ownership of guns.
edit on 15-12-2010 by Wolf321 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 


Wonderful yanking upon heart strings, with all the right amount of spin, all to suit an agenda.

I've got some news for though... If every single gun on the planet were to just evaporate - and the knowledge of how to make them along with them - then we'd be reading threads like this from people who wanted to revoke our right to bear sticks and stones.

The problem is not weapons. The problem is people. And you can't outlaw, ban, or legislate away stupidity.

~Heff



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by Leo Strauss
 

The problem is not weapons. The problem is people. And you can't outlaw, ban, or legislate away stupidity.

~Heff


That's right...but you can arm yourself against stupidity!



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:32 PM
link   
One question: How many of those people who were carrying guns had a Concealed Carry license? But I have a feeling answering that simple question might topple the bias of the OP.

www.examiner.com...



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:39 PM
link   
You "gunnies" should thank me for throwing you a little red meat! Did somebody stick a "bullseye" on my back? (grasping tie like Rodney Dangerfield)

This is not a black and white issue for me. Gun and violence porn bombard our children. Music and popular culture glorify the power of violence. Seems out of whack to me...and a little crazy to be honest. I have lived comfortably around guns my whole life and have never felt a need to carry one.


SM2

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 10:56 PM
link   
umm, so you are jumping to conclusions i see. No where in this article does it state that a licensed gun owner or concealed carry permit holder was even involved in the shooting much less responsible for the deaths or injuries. They do state however they believe that it was a gang related incident. So,it would be more logical to come to the conclusion that some stupid gang bangers went to shoot up some other stupid gang bangers. So maybe your anger would be better directed at the gang bangers breaking the law instead of the law abiding citizens excercising thier natural right to self defense? Just an idea, food for thought. I know, you cant possibly blame the gang bangers, because that wouldnt be PC, wouldnt play into the whole "white guilt" and all that jazz about how inner city gang bangers have to do these things to survive, because whitey is holding them down. I call shennigans.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join