Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store

page: 2
91
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Good man,

I wouldn't mind to see more threads about the GOOD things people with guns do.

Thousands of people's lives are saved by guns each year and many crimes are prevented.




posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Screwed

Neither of you are really addressing the issue a hand though, now are you?




Of course I am.

I'm getting down to the nuts and bolts of it...this story is old and is only being posted as a pro-gun story to show how amazing and necessary guns are.

You may not like it, but that's what I did






How do you feel about what this man did?
Do you think it was

A. A good thing he had his gun

or

B. A bad thing he had his gun.




I think it was actually neither, It was irrelevant.

All it takes is a couple of people to grab the guy and disarm him... how many people do you think his "stabbing spree" would have killed compared to say, a gun?

Yeah...





Now, before you answer a question with a question let me warn you, I will not be derailed.
That is a common tactic used by people of your mentality and I won't allow it.



My mentality?

Not sure what you mean but your mentality is clearly petty, judgemental and moronic.





So, will you kindly provide a DIRECT answer to my question?
(probably not because your ego won't allow it)



My ego?

Who are you?

Why are you talking like you've read my autobiography?

Seriously....

WTF are you on?



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup

A. A good thing he had his gun

or

B. A bad thing he had his gun.





I think it was actually neither, It was irrelevant.


So then, following your 'logic' are you prepared to say that this man having a gun "was not" a good thing?
Are you then saying that this man having his gun did nothing to prevent more people from getting hurt?

Let me ask the question a little more clearly for you.
This is going to be really easy.
(btw, I am only asking this in order to show people how people like you think and the tactics you guys use in order to avoid having to directly answer a direct yes or no question, I don't ACTUALLY expect the answer)

Do you think that this man and his gun were a factor in the reason the knife weilding maniac stopped his attack thus preventing more injury?

A. Yes I do.

or

B. No I don't.

really easy.




All it takes is a couple of people to grab the guy and disarm him...


No one there seemed to have gotten that memo cuz', well.....It didn't happen now did it?




Now, before you answer a question with a question let me warn you, I will not be derailed.
That is a common tactic used by people of your mentality and I won't allow it.



My mentality?

Not sure what you mean but your mentality is clearly petty, judgemental and moronic.





So, will you kindly provide a DIRECT answer to my question?
(probably not because your ego won't allow it)




My ego?

Who are you?

Why are you talking like you've read my autobiography?

Seriously....

WTF are you on?


Notice how you still never really answered my question?

See, the more you press the issue with people like this and demand simple answers to VERY simple and direct personal questions the more angry and agitated their tone becomes.

The reason is this.

If they answer

YES, I do think him having that gun WAS indeed a good thing because he was able to stop the attack without ANYONE getting hurt.

Well, then that kinda DESTROYS their argument AGAINST guns now doesn't it?

But, if they answer

NO, I DON'T think that him having that gun was a good thing,

well, then you just sound like an idiot.

So, you force them to choose between sounding like a hypocrite or an idiot.

Neither one are really desireable choices to be sure.
So, they ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS try to find option "C" usually by answering your question with yet another question.

So sad.
edit on 27-7-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
I think it was actually neither, It was irrelevant.

All it takes is a couple of people to grab the guy and disarm him...
Or just one with a gun. You want to go first and grab the knife wielding maniac? The average grocery shopper isn't a courageous hero trained in disarming armed attackers.

Originally posted by blupblup
how many people do you think his "stabbing spree" would have killed compared to say, a gun?
That depends on a whole bunch of variables, but the recent shooting spree in Colorado only killed 12 of a total of what, 70 wounded individuals?

Yeah, this is a pro gun thread about a story that isn't new and I like it. S&F.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
as a neutral, i believe that the issue should not be whether people have the right to bear arms, as this thread shows guns can be used for good in the right hands but i do think that the selling of guns needs to be more regulated in an attempt to ensure that guns can only be sold to the right individuals like the man that this thread is about who undoubtedly saved innocent lives
edit on 27-7-2012 by OAC92 because: my bad english



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Screwed
 




Well of course this man pointing his gun at the attacker stopped the attacker.
That is stated in the story?

As to your "They didn't get the memo" comment.... He stabbed one person and then had a gun pointed at him and then dropped his knife, how do you not know that around the next corner, some biker wasn't waiting to jaw the guy?

Of course the way it played out and in this instance, a man with a gun stopped more people being hurt.
That is a fact and that is for sure.

That is not the only way this could have gone and nor was it the only outcome.... we will never know

Anyway, this 3 month old story is fascinating and all that, but it's just more pro gun bull**** as I said.

None of your arguments, posturing or playing to the crowd will change that.


You can try and make me an enemy and everything you hate about anti-gun people but you have no clue.



EDIT: Also your quotes are all messed up and you're making it look like my quotes are in boxes, and it's actually yours.... there are two in there.



edit on 27/7/12 by blupblup because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sek82


Originally posted by blupblup
how many people do you think his "stabbing spree" would have killed compared to say, a gun?


That depends on a whole bunch of variables, but the recent shooting spree in Colorado only killed 12 of a total of what, 70 wounded individuals?

Yeah, this is a pro gun thread about a story that isn't new and I like it. S&F.




So exactly.... One person stabbed with knife.... 70+ shot with gun and 12 killed.

That is my point

Nobody with a knife could get even close to that number.... they would be stopped.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by blupblup
reply to post by Screwed
 




Well of course this man pointing his gun at the attacker stopped the attacker.


a man with a gun stopped more people being hurt.
That is a fact and that is for sure.



Excellent,
now then

Do you see this as a

A. Good thing that...

a man with a gun stopped more people being hurt.


or

B. A bad thing that...

a man with a gun stopped more people being hurt.




It's ok really.
You can say it.
It'll feel good, I promise.
Please for the love of GOD don't answer this question with yet another question.
You're doing so good.

I'll ask you another question that you'll most likely refuse to answer.

If your son, daughter, or wife were there and about to be attacked by this maniac would you be

A. Greatful to this man for bringing his gun and stopping this maniac with it that day

B. Pissed off at this man for bringing his gun and stopping this maniac with it that day.



Anyway, this 3 month old story


I've noticed that for whatever reason, you like to keep mentioning the age of the story.
Why is that do you think?
edit on 27-7-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-7-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)
edit on 27-7-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


I don't know if you are being sarcastic or not..
He didn't have to fire the gun though, if you read the article.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by GrOuNd_ZeRo
 


The only reason you saw this one is because the guy managed to stab someone. It doesn't matter if someone stops a crime and saves a hundred lives, if there is no blood the news doesn't bother reporting it.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
But I'm sure hit like 30 innocent people and other gun nuts started firing in random directions when they heard his shots and every child within 50 miles was immediately sent to an eternity of suffering in the ninth circle of hell.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



I'm mostly liberal but anti gun control and I starred your comment.

excellent.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I think the problem is here, people are arguing that someone intent on killing can use any weapon other than a gun to go killing with, which it true of course, and that a suitable trained person with a gun proves to be no threat and in some circumstances they can be useful to have around, such as in this situation, which is also true.

However the real problem with guns is when someone does decide to go on a killing spree, once they start to use guns it becomes a whole lot worse. If Anders Behring Breivik had not had any access to guns, would his rampage of been so bad? Would so many have died? Could Holmes have killed and wounded so many if he had only used knives? And this is the argument for gun control, and their argument is correct, if no guns were available less people would be murdered. Not all murders would end of course, but there would be less. And remember both Holmes and Breivik bought their weapons legally.

There is a problem with guns on the street, and most of them are illegal guns, but there are so many of them because guns are so easily bought and so readily available, if guns were illegal completely then far less would get through to the black market, and it would be safer for everyone.

The one point that goes in favour of gun ownership for me is, if you ban them you automatically presume everyone is a killer, that they cannot be trusted and already guilty of some precrime. There is no easy answer to this, but both sides need to accept that the other has valid arguments, the situation in America is a mess really with so many guns being freely available.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by PrinceDreamer
 


Everything you have said is correct and would be hard to argue with.
I agree.
You lay out nothing but facts and I like that.

So,
the bottom line is what does the constitution say?

and we all know the answer to that already don't we?
So....why the debate???
It is written right there in balck and white and it isn't going to change without ALOT of bloodshed
due to the shear number of people who are not going to be willing to give up their constitutional RIGHT
without a fight.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 05:40 PM
link   
Great Thread OP! Very timely and it's nice to see some balance among a chorus of anti-gun talk lately.

It's interesting to note that a guy with a knife is stopped by a guy with a gun. The one not being talked about by anyone for how absurd it would be of course, only stopped by what so many would see outlawed if they could.

This isn't rare or even unusual though, despite how the suggestion has already been implied. It's a regular occurance around the nation and plenty of examples. Here is just one website that dedicates itself to tracking nothing but Self defense shoots and the legitimate use of weapons by lawful citizens. It's one of many...but it's one I have in my news section.

There are countless anti-defense sites, so few that show the good side of it. Sharing one only seemed right.

Guns Save Lives

Agreed or not on policy, the fact good citizens use firearms for legitimate and life saving self defense shootings can't be denied and it does happen on a regular basis.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
what ever happened to the term hero.

he should be on cnn being lauded as a hero. the president should be inviting him to the whitehouse because he saved lives, put his life in danger and he did it without firing a shot.

and the guy should be thankful he wasn't a cop. because they would have opened fire.

its seems there is an agenda against responsible gun ownership and concerted effort to portray someone owning a gun as nut ready to overthrow the government or as the enemy.

when in fact they may save your life one day.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
But I'm sure hit like 30 innocent people and other gun nuts started firing in random directions when they heard his shots and every child within 50 miles was immediately sent to an eternity of suffering in the ninth circle of hell.

But it didn't happen that other people got shot. The criminal got stopped by a responsible gun owner..
This happens almost every day but the media won't report it because people like you won't read or believe it.

I just read that guns are successfully used 25 times for personal protection for every time a gun is used in a crime. You won't hear that either and I would suspect you wouldn't believe it also.

By the way, did this bozo have a permit for that knife?



edit on 27-7-2012 by Nite_wing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
This was from April, but I agree with Alex Jones on this. If someone is stabbing people randomly and I have a gun, they are dead, they don't get a warning. People are too unpredictable.
edit on 7/27/2012 by ararisq because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by BASSPLYR
 


Yup. I am a firm believer that gun control means aiming before you pull the trigger.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Screwed

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie
to bad there wasn't some manly man there, who has a " imposing figure" who could have gave him a "whoppin. that he deserved before he went to jail.

but we have to settle for, justice in the courts. and no deaths.


lol, nice one.
That is destined to become an insider joke.
You should at least provide a link so people know what in the hell you're talking about.




Yeah, Where was the Canadian Superman when they needed him?
Although anti gun folks will find a way to make this a bad situation, where they should have tried to talk him out of harming anyone, I'm glad the guy was carrying. The right tool, in the right hands, at the right time.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 07:21 PM
link   
This event should have gotten any airtime when it actually occurred.The knife wielder could have hurt/killed others if it hadn't been for the gun owner.Just a reminder that guns were not allowed in the movie theatre where the shootings took place.





new topics

top topics



 
91
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join