Armed bystander stops stabbing outside school

page: 1
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+10 more 
posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   


The attack happened around 10:00 a.m. Tuesday outside the Bonham Academy on St. Mary's Street. Teresa Barron, 38, had just dropped off her child at the school when the child's father showed up, and the two got into an argument. The child's father, 38-year-old Roberto Barron allegedly then stabbed the woman several times in the upper body and neck area.

Police say a bystander who happened to be a concealed handgun license holder pulled his weapon and ordered Barron to drop the knife. Barron surrendered and was taken into custody by the bystander and a school district officer.



Well, chalk another one up for the good guys.
If the gun grabbers had their way this woman would be

A. Alive
or
B. dead.

Any takers?

Or as "seeker1963 says below,
The right thing to do would have been for that man to holster his weapon and call 911 and let the
REAL heros handle it. They would surely have gotten there within 5 or ten minutes.
Pleanty of time to put up some crime scene tape and get witness statements as well as draw one of those really cool chalk outlines.

I wonder if this woman is happy that this man was armed and exercising his second ammendment right.
I also wonder what her stance on gun control was BEFORE the attack.
If she were staunchly against the second ammendment and did not support the people's right to own and carry firearms do you think she would have shouted out her stance on this issue to the would be hero whilst being stabbed?

" NO STOP!!!! I DO NOT SUPPORT YOUR RIGHT TO OWN AND CARRY FIREARMS SO IN ORDER TO AVOID BEING A HYPOCRITE I AM GOING TO KINDLY ASK YOU TO HOLSTER YOUR WEAPON AND LET ME DIE!!!"


Things that make you go Hmmm.


link


edit on 30-8-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-8-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I'm against firearm control period.

I'm also against over regulation as a means of keeping the firearms out of people's reach.

I am not pro-gun, however, I am very pro civil rights, and unlike some people, don't pick and choose to get rid of the ones i don't like. A right is a right and succeeds all else. I wish more politicians would learn that.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
As a gun owner I say this is another good example that if more people were armed the people with violent intents would think twice.

It keeps reminding me of a 60 minutes segment I watched a long time ago about gun control. They interview high offense violators in some hell hole prison. The murders responses when asked about gun control on average were something like this -"Hell yes I want gun control. I like it when nobody is armed. i purposely would choose areas to attack people where I knew they had little to no weapons around so they would be helpless."

Anyway, score another one for responsible gun owners.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Screwed
 


Me thinks the progressive gun grabbers would have preferred her to call 911 while being stabbed and waited for men WITH guns to hopefully show up and save her..............................



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Hmmmm....im pretty sure a taser would have been just as effective in this situation. The gun didnt stop anything, the threat of using the gun stopped the criminal. But anyway, gun control is not about taking anybodys weapons. Its about having better regulation surrounding their purchase.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
I wouldn't have asked him to drop the knife. In that situation you are there to defend, not, apprehend. How do you render aid to the woman if you have to keep her attacker under control?



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Hmmmm....im pretty sure a taser would have been just as effective in this situation. The gun didnt stop anything, the threat of using the gun stopped the criminal. But anyway, gun control is not about taking anybodys weapons. Its about having better regulation surrounding their purchase.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 




I will fully support your theory if you answer me ONE DIRECT question.
ONE DIRECT answer to one DIRECT question.


IF it were you or a loved one being stabbed, would you rather your/their would be hero have a

A. Stunn Gun.
or
B. A REAL gun.

Two choices.
Pick one.
Don't cop out and answer a question with another question as so many people do on this subject.
Don't cop out by giving me some alternate scenario like " I would've just round housed the knife outta his hand cuz you don't wanna mess with me. I'm a black belt a KaraTAYYY.
B.S.
Just answer the question as it is presented to you.
edit on 30-8-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Having been zapped by stun guns (they don't work as advertised) I would much rather have my hero save me with a no nonsense handgun.

A guy with a stun gun could easily keep trying to zap the guy with the knife and not have any real effect on the guy. I know if my adrenalin is up, I would be only moderately effected by a stun gun. Tasers a different story. But if you shoot the guy with the knife with a taser while he's standing that close to the victim you have a very good chance the leads will go one into the guy with the knife and the other into the poor victim. Or the leads just won't make a good contact and the toy will still be useless.

I wouldn't have much confidence with a stun gun in my hand if the other guy had a knife. I would think to my self. Crap I'm going to get cut if I go anywhere near that guy. Knives vs stun gun the knife will will every time.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   
The aim of an armed populace should be that of bringing the person to justice safely but the problem is where you have firearms you dont generally have chance to question the corpse with 20 bullet holes in it but if it stops someone doing something nasty then its a good thing in my book



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:11 PM
link   
Reply to post by Screwed
 


I would rather my 'hero' have a stun gun. My main reason for this is if the attacker does not stop the hero will probably have to shoot. That shot could be fatal to me or the attacker. I think if non lethal force can be used it should.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:16 PM
link   
that woman was lucky it was the right person who was in possession of the gun.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 


I would rather my 'hero' have a stun gun. My main reason for this is if the attacker does not stop the hero will probably have to shoot. That shot could be fatal to me or the attacker. I think if non lethal force can be used it should.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Did I just hear you say that you would be concerned for the health and well being of a man who is stabbing you or your loved ones to death?!?!?!


That is what you just said isn't it.
More or less you know, not word for word.
I am just trying to make sure I am not misunderstanding you.




See, as happens alot of the time, my questions directed at "YOU" in this case, were not to try and get you to see the irrationality of your thinking but rather to expose you to others so that they may know what kind of mentality we are dealing with here.

You represent and are speaking for alot of people given the stance you are taking.
It is this mindset that you carry which is what the rest of us 2nd ammendment weirdos are up against.
We second ammendment nuts need to know this mentality is out there because it is scary as hell and you aren't the only one with it.

Mission accomplished.
Thank you for outing yourself.
Some people make my self professed job so easy.

Edit to add:
I DO give you mega props for providing a DIRECT answer to my DIRECT question
You are the first one ever to do so. This is kinda special to me. Kinda like prom night all over again.
edit on 30-8-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:21 PM
link   
yeah... you guys would rather a stun gun


www.youtube.com...



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by acmpnsfal
 


The gun did not stop anything?

Tell you what, if you are ever in this situation, that is, trying to stop a stabbing or any other crime, put your finger out like you are mimicking a gun, then, let me know how that works for you.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by artnut
 


Another fine point which I overlooked.
This further goes to show just how irrational this mindset is.
There is no real logic being employed here.
Only knee jerk, not very well thought out resonses which are being used to uphold an already deeply held belief as well as an irrational fear.

It is important to know these people not only exist but the WAY they think and the particular brand of "Logic" (if you can call it that) that they use.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxatoria
The aim of an armed populace should be that of bringing the person to justice safely


Wrong. The "aim" is to defend yourself and or someone else. Period. If you pull your weapon and the attacker runs away, you do NOT pursue the attacker. That's what cops get paid to do. If you do that and you kill him YOU are going to jail.
edit on 30-8-2012 by JIMC5499 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Hmmmm....im pretty sure a taser would have been just as effective in this situation. The gun didnt stop anything, the threat of using the gun stopped the criminal. But anyway, gun control is not about taking anybodys weapons. Its about having better regulation surrounding their purchase.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



it's a moot point anyway since most states have a ban on carrying stun guns for the public and you're only allowed enough pepper spray to slow down a cockroach.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Im crazy for thinking not everyone should be shot? That guns should only be a last resort? That shoot first ask questions later attitude is why the police in this country are frequently killing innocent people. But anyway I am concerned for the well being of the criminal yes. You never know what is going on with someone or what drove them to commit whatever crime. I would also be concerned for the wel being of the victim which you ignored. And again, nobody is trying to take your guns away lol. They want better regulations.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Reply to post by LittleBlackEagle
 


Isnt that crazy? Lol. Pretty much anyone can carry a gun but tasers are illegal. Smh.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Im crazy for thinking not everyone should be shot? That guns should only be a last resort?


I'm speaking here from the training that I have had. If you feel that the situation is severe enough for you to pull your weapon, then it is the last resort. If you pull it you should be shooting. I have carried concealed for over 25 years and have worked as an armed guard for about 10 years. I have pulled my weapon once and I fired. My first shot missed and the person I shot at fled. I didn't fire a second shot. Several times, I have just moved my jacket enough to let someone see that I was armed and it was enough to defuse the situation.





new topics




 
28
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join