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.

 

Armed bystander almost shot hero that disarmed AZ shooter

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by DaMod
 


do you really think that pulling a trigger on a gun is just as easy as making a bomb..?

kx




posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Is doing your dishes in the sink as easy as using a dishwasher?

No, but the same end different means.

Your saying that I should have my guns taken from me because a madman entered a store and did something he would have done anyway? What if the bystander would have had a knife instead of a gun? He would have probably been more apt to use it because it's a knife not a gun... He may well not have hesitated as quickly which may also have gotten innocent people killed..

Your entire argument is relying on the pretext that because guns are easy to use they should be banned... A knife is just as easy to use..

I have a friend that can throw a knife so well.. If he went in there with a kitchen set he would have done just as much damage. (of course he never would but just an example.)

He could have also went in there with gasoline and a match.... Oh man.... I'm sure that would have been even more of a tragedy wouldn't it.
edit on 20-1-2011 by DaMod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by purplemer
 


Is doing your dishes in the sink as easy as using a dishwasher?

No, but the same end different means.

Your saying that I should have my guns taken from me because a madman entered a store and did something he would have done anyway? What if the bystander would have had a knife instead of a gun? He would have probably been more apt to use it because it's a knife not a gun... He may well not have hesitated as quickly which may also have gotten innocent people killed..

Your entire argument is relying on the pretext that because guns are easy to use they should be banned... A knife is just as easy to use..

I have a friend that can throw a knife so well.. If he went in there with a kitchen set he would have done just as much damage. (of course he never would but just an example.)


I dont like guns i see them as objects of violence and violence attacts violence.It is not up to me if your guns get taken away or not. I would much prefer people choose to give up there guns than have forced confiscation. I am not trying to knock you for what you do as a hobby. I can see you enjoy your guns....

I hope one day we the people will live in a world free of them. I know guns kill peeps but it seems many cultures are becoming more violent too, What is making us more violent?



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


Oh believe me, we where just as violent when it was just sticks and stones, swords and shields. People have been violent throughout our history..

Napoleon, Gengis Khan not to mention the Roman Empire.. Native American tribes have been killing each other long before the firearm.

You cannot just say.. "Welp they invented guns, that must be why people are getting so wriled up"


You want to talk about mass deaths? Look at the bow and arrow.. Whew now that's a killer right there!

edit on 20-1-2011 by DaMod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 




Now onto your crime stats... where on earth did you get them from... 300 percent increase.


I actually got the statistics directly from the British Home Office. They are the government organization responsible for reporting the statistics. If you look at their list of "reported violent crimes against the person" the 2009-2010 number is more than three hundred percent higher than 1997. That is the year they pulled the guns out of circulation. You are comparing year to year. I have been stating numbers as an increase compared to the year of removal. That has been very obvious.




crime has been falling in the uk not going up.........


Over the last three reporting cycles crime decreased slightly. However, it is still higher than it was when they pulled hand guns. Compared to all numbers before the banning of handguns violent crime has gone up.

Home Office 2010 statistics




In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002.


Actually the most recent data is from 2007. It shows that 1,675 people between 1 and 18 were killed with firearms. That is not nearly as high as your claims. Your statistics are invalid.

Beyond that it was reported in 1997 that guns were being used 2.5 million times a year defensively. If the ratio of defensive uses and crime statistics have remianed stable guns are used more than 1.25 million times a year in defensive situations. I did have one thing wrong earlier. More than 200 rapes are prevented daily. More than 500 potential murders are also prevented. Sorry but 500 if that many lives are saved every day I am sure morekids are saved than killed.

Targeting Guns, Dr. Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State University, Aldine, 1997


rape is a far lesser crime compared to murder..


It isn't murder if you are defending yourself from rape. It is stopping someone from violating your body, mind and spirit. No one has the right to do that to anybody. My mother worked at a rape crisis center and members of my family are rape survivors. I can tell by your assinine answer that you can not claim the same experience. The destruction that is caused by rape is far more devestating than terminating the life of a predator that would comit such a crime.

Why do you believe criminals have more rights to life and security than law abiding citizens? I usually wouldn't ask that question, but it really fits here.




Youre axiom is incorrect and for this reason. Gun crime and culture and two different things. Your data proves nothing. Can you prove that that violent crime would have fallen if handguns remained in legal circulation...


England and Australia banned handguns and confiscated them. Their crime rates went up. Brazil changed their laws and made it so that only police officers can buy guns. Their violent crime rate went up. America has been steadily relaxing gun laws and our crime rate has been falling for more than a decade.

Plus studies done in America have found that 60% of felons will avoid a target they know is armed. The same study showed that 40% admit that they avoid targets they think will be armed.

Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, James Wright and Peter
Rossi, Aldine, 1986

Gee our crime rate goes down while it comes up in countries that ban guns. Plus criminals tell us that they avoid armed targets. Then we hve evidence that guns prevent hundreds of thousands of crimes a year if not millions. I think it is safe to say the evidence definitely points to banning guns having the opposite effect of what is inteded.

Don't take my word for it though.
“ Nor is there a relationship between the severity of controls imposed in various countries or the mass of bureaucracy involved with many control systems with the apparent ease of access to firearms by criminals and terrorists.”

Minutes of Evidence, Colin Greenwood, Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs, January 29,
2003.

According to the 2004 Uniform Crime Report state that disallow concealed carry have a violent crime rate 11% higher than the national average.

Nina Butts of Texans Against Gun Violence has admitted that Concealed Carry is not a problem in the Dallas Morning News back in 2000. She admitted that concealed carry had not led to the "wild west" shoot outs that anti-gun advocates had predicted.

In over 80% of gun defenses a concealable weapon is used and more than a quarter of these defenses happen away from home.

Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws:
Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement, Lott John R., Landes William M.; University of
Chicago – covers years 1977 to 1995

Seems to me like a preponderance of evidence in favor of allowing the general population to have guns.

If you want to talk about culture though I will give you this much. Even if you eradicated all of the gun related homicide in America the murder rate would still be three times that of Japan and aproximately double that of England. Americans are a violent bunch.



edit on 20-1-2011 by MikeNice81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by CX
 


No the fact that he had a gun meant an innocent nearly died.

kx


I don't know what is more disappointing, the fact that someone actually posted this or the fact that others saw fit to reward their effort with recognition. I feel for people who actually feel this way.

I wonder how many innocents around the world were saved that day because "someone" had a "gun"...



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Asktheanimals
 

And if the tackler almost got there a bit sooner he might have shot thebad guy sometime after he made his murderous intentions clear preventing the shootings or at least
minimizing the loss loss of life.
"almost[/i] ..." works both ways...



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:38 PM
link   


Well this is another death knell for the pro gun movement. This guy could have shot the guy that disarmed Jared Loughner
"I carry a gun so I was -- I felt like I was a little bit more prepared to do some good and then maybe somebody else would had been," Joe Zamudio told MSNBC's Ed Schultz Monday.
so for all you peeps out there saying that guns are a good thing and keep us safe. Bare this im mind, guns make it too easy to kill people.
The shooter was disarmed without the use of a wepon and the guy the disarmed him was nearly shot but a good citizen legaly carrying his wepon.
Guns do not make peace. They make war zones...

kx

www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


AS usual, your full of crap with half of a story.

FROM THE MANS MOUTH, he stated that he COULD HAVE used his weapon but was PREVENTED BY SAFETY ISSUES!

He knew he would have tagged some one and wasnt sure who the shooter was.

THAT is why you go to class.

jeez. progressives make me


If your gonna run your head, make your facts straight and dont puke up garbage from idiots like Ed!

Go to the 3min mark!


Ed Schultz is a POS and I'm ashamed that he has German blood!:
edit on 20/1/11 by felonius because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer


Well this is another death knell for the pro gun movement. This guy could have shot the guy that disarmed Jared Loughner
"I carry a gun so I was -- I felt like I was a little bit more prepared to do some good and then maybe somebody else would had been," Joe Zamudio told MSNBC's Ed Schultz Monday.
so for all you peeps out there saying that guns are a good thing and keep us safe. Bare this im mind, guns make it too easy to kill people.
The shooter was disarmed without the use of a wepon and the guy the disarmed him was nearly shot but a good citizen legaly carrying his wepon.
Guns do not make peace. They make war zones...

kx

www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)
Guns are tools used for war.People make war



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by purplemer
 


Is doing your dishes in the sink as easy as using a dishwasher?

No, but the same end different means.

Your saying that I should have my guns taken from me because a madman entered a store and did something he would have done anyway? What if the bystander would have had a knife instead of a gun? He would have probably been more apt to use it because it's a knife not a gun... He may well not have hesitated as quickly which may also have gotten innocent people killed..

Your entire argument is relying on the pretext that because guns are easy to use they should be banned... A knife is just as easy to use..

I have a friend that can throw a knife so well.. If he went in there with a kitchen set he would have done just as much damage. (of course he never would but just an example.)


I dont like guns i see them as objects of violence and violence attacts violence.It is not up to me if your guns get taken away or not. I would much prefer people choose to give up there guns than have forced confiscation. I am not trying to knock you for what you do as a hobby. I can see you enjoy your guns....

I hope one day we the people will live in a world free of them. I know guns kill peeps but it seems many cultures are becoming more violent too, What is making us more violent?


God I hope you never make it to a medical board position.

All men will be eunocs because you think that their "member" is a tool of violence!



posted on Jan, 20 2011 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by Patrioitinsheepclothing
 


bud it just dont work its messed up logic.. pro gun peeps say we need guns to defend and they keep the peace... using that logic we should arm every country with nuclear wepons so they can all defend themselves and keep the peace...


"I'm guessing you weren't around from the late 50'sthrough today; when we had a national policy of Mutually Assured Destruction" with the soviets and the U.S.navy and USAF Strategic air command stood eyeball to eyeball with the soviets 365 24/7 originally flying loaded bombers in airborne alert; then transitioning to standing ground alert

It worked for decades.. It was hairy at times and we"almost" came to blows a few times. but it works..


Originally posted by purplemer
I wonder how long it would take to have a nuclear war if we done that...
its a flawed argument..

people that carry guns are more likely to be in violent conflict that is a fact


itsnot a "fact" just because you say so, there are thousands of evil vile guns on tables at a gunshow. ever been a shooting at one? I don't think so.

Added: People who carry have no need to prove their manhood by shooting someone over an insult.
The only time a gun should leave the holster is to defend life.Law abiding responsible folks know that.

Originally posted by purplemer
Get rid of the guns......['/quote]

kx
edit on 20-1-2011 by purplemer because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-1-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 02:45 AM
link   
to be honest i conceal a firearm on me everyday. But i am not trigger happy I would use my firearm against any enemy no hesitation needed, It's times like these I'm happy im "strapped". I know people will say "#" cause I'm a new poster, I've actually been on this site for years, yet I've actually made an account few days ago.
edit on 21-1-2011 by Mystery613 because: new stuff



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


so you think that arming every country with nuclear wepons is a good thing for keeping the peace then?

kx



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mystery613
to be honest i conceal a firearm on me everyday. But i am not trigger happy I would use my firearm against any enemy no hesitation needed, It's times like these I'm happy im "strapped". I know people will say "#" cause I'm a new poster, I've actually been on this site for years, yet I've actually made an account few days ago.
edit on 21-1-2011 by Mystery613 because: new stuff


Welcome to ats
:-)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Yes ,my friend it is a fact.... eat it and weep....

In a first-of its-kind study, epidemiologists at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine found that, on average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. The study estimated that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.

scienceblogs.com...

kx


edit on 21-1-2011 by purplemer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
reply to post by felonius
 


There are lots of secondary risks ascotiated with the medical proffesion. ALthough they try they dont always make you better. Infact they can kill you too....have you got a point you are trying to make?



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by 46ACE
 

No it does not...you are 4.5 times more likely to be shot if you carry a gun...

kx



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by zombiesC4
 





Guns are tools used for war.People make war


yes and people are a tool used in war too... What is your point here exactly...

kx



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Randall07
 


Because criminals would still carry weapons.



posted on Jan, 21 2011 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by WWJFKD
 





I don't know what is more disappointing, the fact that someone actually posted this or the fact that others saw fit to reward their effort with recognition. I feel for people who actually feel this way. I wonder how many innocents around the world were saved that day because "someone" had a "gun"..


you are 4.5 time more likely to be shot if you have a gun... I feel for people that actualy feel like you...i really do. People reward because they agree with what I am saying.....It is a two sided coin...

kx



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join