Armed bystander stops stabbing outside school

page: 2
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Im crazy for thinking not everyone should be shot?


No one is saying you're crazy, relax.
You are simply using faulty logic.
Annnd, if someone were to say you were crazy it isn't


for thinking not everyone should be shot?


It would be for thinking that a man that was trying to KILL you or your loved ones should not be shot.
Nice try, see what he tried to do there?? Straw man argument much?



That guns should only be a last resort?

I agree.
Pssst, {whispering}
this might be the last resort.


That shoot first ask questions later attitude is why the police in this country are frequently killing innocent people.


If you think that a man that is ACTIVELY STABBING YOU is innocent then you have just taken tis to a whole new level.
I can only handle so much in one day ya know.



But anyway I am concerned for the well being of the criminal yes.


Thank you for admitting it.
annnnd outing youself.



You never know what is going on with someone or what drove them to commit whatever crime.


Nor do I care......WHEN YOU ARE ACTIVELY STABBING ME!!!!!!!!



I would also be concerned for the wel being of the victim which you ignored.


The victim is precisely the person NOT being ignored!!!!!
She is the reason for all of this!!!!
I have to believe you are just putting me on at this point.
There is NO WAY you are serious.
Nice try guys, you can come out now!!



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 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Screwed
 


Well this post isnt completely biased.....the OP has a damn gun tattooed on his arm.

Wow one person (a coward mind you) stopped a potential stabbing because he had a gun......but without guns most are slack-jawed, whiny nobodies who wouldnt say boo to a goose.

I was all for you "people" having guns but then I realized something.....they are like trophies for you. You were originally given the right to have guns for the use against a tyrannical government....but do you use them for that purpose????NO you are all to cowardly and pathetic.

But you do know how to massacre innocent civilians in the streets.


Why couldn't this guy stop the potential stabbing WITHOUT a gun? then when having stopped this stabbing showed himself to be a real man and said he actually has a gun but used his damn head instead.

The average gun carrying American (beside armed forces personnel active or retired) should not be allowed a gun because they and a cheeseburger have the same intellectual reasoning skill sets.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Six6Six
reply to post by Screwed
 


Well this post isnt completely biased.....the OP has a damn gun tattooed on his arm.


It's a Black Belt which I earned with much blood sweat and tears. buuuut, nice try chief.


without guns most are slack-jawed, whiny nobodies who wouldnt say boo to a goose.


You've got me pegged.




posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Lol how is my logic faulty? Non lethal force is just as effective as lethal force. The only difference between the two is the amount of damage they cause. The bystander in this situation did not use the gun as a last resort. He tried nothing else to diffuse the situation or to stop the criminal. He saw what was happening and his first instinct was to pull his gun. It is sad that you do not care what is going on with the criminal though. Having that mindset could lead to killing people who are suffering from something that affects their judgement. Not everyone the police shoot are criminals therefore they would be innocent lol. Also innocent people are sometimes shot when people are attempting to shoot criminals.

You can play the but they are hurting my family card all you want. It doesnt justify using lethal force.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Reply to post by JIMC5499
 


Im all for people who have had proper training having guns. Not just in shooting but in judging situations and realizing when its time to use a gun.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by EvilSadamClone
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.



I gotta give you props for this position, it is a rare day when anyone in an interwebz forum can declare opposition to an issue and in the same breathe defend others' rights to embrace said issue! You must be one of them "critical thinkers" or somethin...




posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 

He tried nothing else to diffuse the situation or to stop the criminal. He saw what was happening and his first instinct was to pull his gun. It is sad that you do not care what is going on with the criminal though. Having that mindset could lead to killing people who are suffering from something that affects their judgement...

...You can play the but they are hurting my family card all you want. It doesnt justify using lethal force.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



So just for grins, please analyze this picture: (sorry can't post it here, a little too graphic for the mods I'm afraid)

...no wait, open a reply window here, THEN open this pic and within a second or two, flip back to ATS and begin typing your response.as fast as possible

hiphop247.blogetery.com...

So you have about 1 second before the guys moves in to stab the victim on the ground again. You have a gun on your hip. How do you IMMEDIATELY stop the victim from sustaining any more injuries, without the gun?

Imagine the assailant is mentally ill or on drugs. Heck, he might just be jacked up on adrenaline. He won't respond to your voice. What do you do then, other than threaten or use lethal force?

According to your POV, the victim should suffer more, up to and including death before the attacker should be shot and possibly killed?

Because the gun-holder doesn't understand what the attacker is going through?

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



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 07:47 PM
link   
Reply to post by blamethegreys
 


If you have to respond quickly in a situation like that non lethal force is still effective lol. It takes the same amount of time to pull out and shoot a taser as it does to pull out and shoot a gun.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
You will note that the anti gun people on this thread have not posted there country or state on there profile.

Are we being trolled by posters from other countries like the UK where guns are banned.
I for one dismiss all anti gun postings where the people refuse to identify there location as trolls from other anti gun countries.
edit on 30-8-2012 by ANNED because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   
Reply to post by ANNED
 


What anti gun people? Lol. Nobody in this thread said all guns should be taken away...just regulated. Thats not anti gun thats anti stupidity.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Lol how is my logic faulty? Non lethal force is just as effective as lethal force.



Pretty much says it all right there doesn't it?
BTW, you should let all Police Officers know this little tidbit.
All this time they've been lugging around loaded guns for nothing when all they ever need was a tazer.
Come on man, you are killing me.
I don't even want to tear down your thinking errors anymore.
It is like taking candy from a baby........at gunpoint.




He tried nothing else to diffuse the situation or to stop the criminal.

You're right.
He should have at least tried to talk to the guy to find out what was bothering him.
Maybe even a little couples counceling right there on the spot.
"excuse me sir, can you please stop stabbing that woman, I'd like to talk to you for a minute."
You really are priceless.
I don't know if you are serious or if you're just F****ing with me but either way, I like you.




You can play the but they are hurting my family card all you want. It doesnt justify using lethal force.


First of all you are using a technique called minimization.
It was very subtle but I caught it.
Let me show the rest of the class what you just did.

You very cleverly substituted the word "KILLING" with the word "Hurting"
Not so bad when you look at it like that hu?
He was only "Hurting" my family.
Everyone hurts the ones they love don't they??
We all get hurt everyday in one way or another don't we?
Hell, just this morning I hurt my big toe when I stubbed it on the door.
We've all "Hurt" someone at some point our lives haven't we?

However,
I have never had someone KILL me before
Have you ever KILLED anyone? lol, just kidding I already know the answer.
More than likely most people haven't.

So, when you use a word like "Hurt" it is familiar to all of us and we are comfortable with it.
KILLING is a little different though isn't it?
You've never been KILLED before have you?

So, let's take your statement and be a little more intellectually honest shall we?

Ahemmm,




You can play the but they are KILLING my family card all you want. It doesnt justify using lethal force.


To which I say.........nothing at all.
You are doing a better job than I could ever do at exposing yourself.



With all that being said,
there are no hard feelings. Try not to let it ruin your day.
I DO respect the fact that you are at least consistant in your stance.
You are the first person I have ever had this debate with that was willing to put their ignorance
TOTALLY out there for all the world to see.
That takes courage and I respect you for that, and I am not being a smart ass either.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Ummmm couple things lol. A lot of police officers are being taught to use tasers instead of guns if they can. Tasers were not always as a efficient as they have become today, which is why police officers did not use them for a long time. But of course you see no value in attempting to communicate with the offender or trying to physically stop them without using a gun. That would be too much work, you want the easy way out.

Also this thread is about an attack. If you are being attacked someone is hurting you not killing you. Killing is the more dramatic way to put it to get an emotional response. But even if a criminal did kill your family member though you cannot just go kill them lol, unless it was happening while you were there and they came after you. We dont punish murderers by killing them. Thats not how the world works.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 



Also this thread is about an attack. If you are being attacked someone is hurting you not killing you. Killing is the more dramatic way to put it to get an emotional response. But even if a criminal did kill your family member though you cannot just go kill them lol, unless it was happening while you were there and they came after you. We dont punish murderers by killing them. Thats not how the world works.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



That's like saying shooting someone is "just an attack" and not killing someone. You can shoot a person in the head, and it's possible they will live. So, in your opinion shooting someone in the head is just some silly little attack that doesn't warrant anything other than words, or maybe a big scary taser. Same exact effin thing. Being on the receiving end of a knife attack is a DEADLY SITUATION. ANY action taken against another person that has a likely outcome being severe injury or death instantly makes it OK to shoot them, that's the most basic concept at play here.

When a person threatens someone's life, they have given up the right to keep their own. PERIOD

As far as tasers vs guns, it's not about the east way out. It's about the MOST EFFECTIVE way to STOP SOMEONE FROM KILLING YOU/SOMEONE ELSE. I don't know how many times people have to say this before you and your kind will understand it. You threaten my life, or someone else, you'll have bullets in you if I'm around. I don't care if you didn't have a snack this morning so your grumpy, threats get met with deadly force so they will STOP in the quickest possible time.

You also evidently don't know how a taser even works. You have to CONTINUOUSLY pump juice into the person to keep them incapacitated. Tasers don't carry enough energy to do this. Once your battery runs out, you are helpless, as the man picks the knife back up, and now instead of only killing the woman, he kills YOU to. IMHO the only people that carry tasers instead of firearms are complete and total idiots. See how long a taser blast stays in your system compared to a piece of lead. Hint: the bullet is the gift that keeps on giving.

And I don't know where you're from, but here we do in fact punish murderers with death. The same is true many, many other places. Many places also punish people with death for less severe offenses as well.

You proven, without a doubt, that you literally have NO Idea whatsoever how the world REALLY works.
edit on 30-8-2012 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Also this thread is about an attack. If you are being attacked someone is hurting you not killing you. Killing is the more dramatic way to put it to get an emotional response. But even if a criminal did kill your family member though you cannot just go kill them lol, unless it was happening while you were there and they came after you. We dont punish murderers by killing them. Thats not how the world works.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Uhhhhhh....wait what? Let's take a page from Screwed and more correctly phrase that second sentence.


If you are being attacked WITH A KNIFE someone is hurting you not killing you.


OICwatUdidthar. The knife, of it's own accord plunged into the flesh of the estranged wife. So it's the knife that kills, not the attacker.
Or maybe it's the victim's fault? The attack just hurt her, it was her heart pumped the blood out the holes?

And also...

We dont punish murderers by killing them. Thats not how the world works.


In the whole of human history, up until very recently, your statement is dead-ass wrong. It is still wrong in many, many places on Earth. Places with lower murder per capita, I might add. This short lived social experiment in the 1rst world we are living in isn't proving that the 'compassionate' methods are any more effective. Quite the opposite.



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
Reply to post by Screwed
 


Ummmm couple things lol. A lot of police officers are being taught to use tasers instead of guns if they can. Tasers were not always as a efficient as they have become today, which is why police officers did not use them for a long time. But of course you see no value in attempting to communicate with the offender or trying to physically stop them without using a gun. That would be too much work, you want the easy way out.

Also this thread is about an attack. If you are being attacked someone is hurting you not killing you. Killing is the more dramatic way to put it to get an emotional response. But even if a criminal did kill your family member though you cannot just go kill them lol, unless it was happening while you were there and they came after you. We dont punish murderers by killing them. Thats not how the world works.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



Police officers are being trained to use Tasers if THEY CAN. Not exclusively, just if the situation warrants it. I doubt anyone who has just been served with divorce papers and a protective order, and is now in front of their child's school stabbing the mother of his children, is REALLY in the mood to stop HURTING this woman to listen to someone telling them to stop. I also know from personal experience you do not try to intervene when someone has a weapon and is HURTING another.

Do you know if his intent is to HURT or kill? You must assume the worst, and act accordingly. As for your statement " We dont punish murderers by killing them. Thats not how the world works.", we do here in Texas. Since this happened in Texas, the man was well within his rights to use equal or greater force to help stop this knife wielding maniac from continuing his attack on an innocent third party. Sorry, but you have your belief's and nothing anyone says will change that. Just send a link to the news story when YOU physically intervene in a knife attack, if you are still alive!



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I am honestly glad this discussion has taken place and I really do give mega props to acmpnsfal
for being consistant and having the courage to answer the questions I put forth.
I have asked the same or similar A or B questions in every discussion I have ever had on this topic and he/she is the first one to ever actually answer a direct question with a direct answer.

The reason this is so important is because when you break it down to asking ONE direct question it forces them to either

A. Be a hypocrite and admit that they would want their would be hero to have a gun

or

B. Be an idiot for not caring enough about their own life nor their families lives to put aside their hatred for guns just long enough to survive a certain death situation.


Either way, they come out losing.
Choose which one you want to be.A hypocrite or an idiot.

Not very pleasant choices to be sure.
It took alot of courage to choose option B.
Just so you know, Option A would have make you look just as bad.
edit on 30-8-2012 by Screwed because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2012 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Managed to stop a possible murder in progress and didn't have to fire his weapon, is that right? Sounds like a good ending to me. Those CCW courses aren't for nothing.



posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Another win for the good guys! I love to read reports like this. Appreciate the thread and link OP.



posted on Aug, 31 2012 @ 05:39 AM
link   
Ok everybody, since we don't know what the attacker is going through, and he could be on drugs ( still his fault ) or mentally ill, i would like to know if any of you guys EVER totally just snapped and lost your mind and started viciously attacking somebody only seeing the color red..Would you not want to stop yourself from harming somebody who is innocent? ( not like your thinking clearly anyway in a red rage ) or would you rather wake up in a police room with bruises and such realizing you just murdered an innocent individual?

If i ever start randomly mauling people in public i would hope i would be shot and put down no matter how it was done ASAP before anybody was seriously hurt or even killed.

If somebody is stabbing someone else in public, the said attacker has escalated the situation where lethal force is a justified means of stopping the said individual. It is almost a signed waiver of consent to have harm done to you or to lose your freedom when you begin harming another individual needlessly and not out of defense of oneself.





top topics
 
28
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join