Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Clackamas Mall Shooter Was Confonted By Concealed Carrier

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
The news is getting too gory. I would prefer a world where we don't need guns to protect innocent lives, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

Maybe we will solve the problem at the root - education.
edit on 16-12-2012 by NarrowGate because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by exponent

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by exponent
 

You don't think that population has anything dto do with that

They're corrected for population, see 'per 100,000'.


or perhaps you guys already giving up your guns

We did, many years ago.


....compair assaults and violent acts. I have done plenty of reasearch, actually wrote a paper about this topic nothing corilates less guns to lower crime rates. Australia had almost all crimes jump 20% and gun violance by 60% when their ban happened.....

Sorry, you demand that I provide sources and then you write this paragraph with no information whatsoever? What's the current state of Australia compared to the USA? How many deaths in general?

If you spent more time researching and less time being sure that America was right, you'd have learned something by now.


would you quit trolling every thread with your statistics when the thread has nothing to do with them? seriously?

also.. www.dailymail.co.uk...

2,034 violent crime incidents per 100,000 people is nothing to be proud of. America has its problems, but the way your country "fixed" yours is not the answer to ours. Get over it, you don't have any influence over what happens here anyway and it doesn't affect you what so ever. Would you feel safer if America banned all guns? Maybe you should put more energy into fixing the problems where you live instead of trying to convince us we don't need guns because you think its fun.

Lets ban all the causes of autism and fix the mental health problems first.
edit on 16-12-2012 by christoph because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by christoph
would you quit trolling every thread with your statistics when the thread has nothing to do with them? seriously?

How exactly can you troll with accurate statistics?


also.. www.dailymail.co.uk...

The Daily Mail is a tabloid, it's well known for lying and manipulating figures. Please don't quote it as an authoritative source or I'll quote WWN to prove you're all reptilians :p

If you want to look up the actual statistics then we're more violent than most of Europe, but murder 1/5th the amount you do with less stabbings, shootings, rapes etc. Please don't quote a single source when you haven't checked things out properly.


Would you feel safer if America banned all guns?

Yes. Everyone would be much happier if you became much less militaristic and invaded fewer countries.


Maybe you should put more energy into fixing the problems where you live instead of trying to convince us we don't need guns because you think its fun.

Lets ban all the causes of autism and fix the mental health problems first.
edit on 16-12-2012 by christoph because: (no reason given)

Mental health is a good place to start. You won't get any argument from me here at all. The US needs improved mental health screening now. Single payer would be a good start so money is no longer an issue. The poor are already more likely to suffer mental health issues, having no access to treatment makes that worse.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

•In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

Oh sorry....Source
edit on 16-12-2012 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


I have done my reasearch as I said I wrote a paper for a course in college (50 pages).



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Armed citizens are not invading other countries gimme a break now you are trolling....



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Word to the wise the exponent account is best ignored it has all the classic signs... Just saying; all are free to do as they please



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by whoshotJR
 


It say after the gunman seen him he retreated, he did not think anymore shots were fired minus the suicide shot.


As reported by the guy looking for his 15 minutes of fame.

It seems like since he is stating the guy killed himself shortly after this, its odd how he was worried he could hit somebody else in his possible crossfire. At that point everyone had ran from the area and the guys gun had already jammed and then been fixed again.

I could be wrong, but to me it just doesnt add up except for some guy to try and make himself sound like a hero.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by exponent
 

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

•In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

Oh sorry....Source
edit on 16-12-2012 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)

You're quoting an editorial by the NCPA as some sort of authority. I don't think you actually understand what 'research' means. Please take the time to actually look up the sources of this information instead of reading a single article and thinking you know:

Murder rates:
Australia: 1 per 100,000
UK: 1.2 per 100,000
US: 4.2 per 100,000

*facepalm*



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by whoshotJR
 


That very well could be as well...I would like to hear the story from the firends perspective or someone else in general. I don't find it hard to believe that there were still people running out, I lived a few miles from there when I was younger this is a huge mall lots of people. (1 million sq. ft I believe)



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Typical...provide facts and they are disregaurded because they do not fit your narative....I am begining to understand why the other guys ignored you.....murder rate includes all murders....not gun alone...Disarming America is an logistical imposibility, I do agree with you that mental health is the place to start though...anyway now I will address the stats issue as a friend with his PhD in Stats explained it to me. Stats are offten skewed to the aggenda of the group releasing them...i.e. pro-gun don't want negative stats and the opposite is also true. So who do we believe pro-gun or anti-gun stats? The answer is neither, both lie to move their aggenda forward. Best of luck to you though, I hope you find a better aggenda to push rather than disarming law abiding citizens to prevent crime...
edit on 16-12-2012 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 





Not sure what reality you live in but it does bear out, according to justice department statistics armed citizens stop more crime then all law enforcement agencies in the country combined!

There is the rub, law enforcement doesn't stop crime!
They just come in and clean up afterwards. Even their title lays out the fact they enforce laws, usually after a crime is committed. Of course armed citizens prevent crimes, no criminal is looking to get hurt or killed. I think people are too hung up on the idea the underdog is gonna win it, whether in living life or in how they view authority even.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


This happened in 2005 - An apparent domestic dispute turned deadly Thursday evening inside a Wal-Mart in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Police said a customer spotted a man attacking a female employee and shot him dead.

The woman was taken to a hospital for multiple stab wounds. The man who was shot was pronounced dead at the scene.

Police said it appears to be a justified shooting. They said witnesses back up the shooter's story that the man was stabbing the woman, and he intervened.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by ParanoidAmerican
reply to post by exponent
 

Typical...provide facts and they are disregaurded because they do not fit your narative....I am begining to understand why the other guys ignored you

You provided an editorial linked through a right wing policy think tank. If you think they're remotely facts then you have no idea how to determine truth.


.....murder rate includes all murders....not gun alone

You really don't want me to show gun murder statistics. Like I've said before, the UK had 18 of those last year I believe. 18 in a country of 60 million.


I do agree with you that mental health is the place to start though...anyway now I will address the stats issue as a friend with his PhD in Stats explained it to me. Stats are offten skewed to the aggenda of the group releasing them...i.e. pro-gun don't want negative stats and the opposite is also true. So who do we believe pro-gun or anti-gun stats? The answer is neither, both lie to move their aggenda forward.

Right which is why the statistics I linked you come from neither group, that's why I complained when you linked me to a right wing think tank and called it 'facts'.


Best of luck to you though, I hope you find a better aggenda to push rather than disarming law abiding citizens to prevent crime...
edit on 16-12-2012 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)

This agenda has worked well for most of the rest of the world. It's only Americans who think that they are exceptional and somehow the huge rate of gun murders doesn't really matter. Please take your time to go through these statistics and you will see that while it isn't a silver bullet, reducing gun availability does indeed help prevent horrific spree killings and similar.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by 00001
reply to post by exponent
 

Police said it appears to be a justified shooting. They said witnesses back up the shooter's story that the man was stabbing the woman, and he intervened.

No doubt that concealed carry has helped many people. However the fact you are the most armed country in the world reflects very poorly on your stats. For every person saved by a responsible gun owner, how many are shot in trivial disputes, how many are killed by spree killers? This single incident killed more people than we shoot in a whole year. More than our police have shot in several years.

I'm not saying guns are worthless, I'm saying guns are dangerous.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


I don't think it has worked so well, sure your gun violance went down a little maybe stats argue for both sides on this. Every other type of crime went up.



posted on Dec, 16 2012 @ 06:04 PM
link   
I find this guy to present most things in a fair light...
www.youtube.com...

Another good video imo...
www.youtube.com...
edit on 16-12-2012 by ParanoidAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 08:52 AM
link   
Why this thread isn't getting more attention I don't know. The article said it all, a good man with a gun stopped a bad man with a gun.

He was there when the police couldn't be. He was properly trained. HE SAVED LIVES because he was legally armed.

This was the intent of the Founding Fathers. When those paid to protect are unable to answer the call there are men, and women, who answer it for them.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by PrplHrt
 


Well whether or not he actually saved lives here we could debate. What you can not debate is that he made a good decision to not shoot.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 09:08 AM
link   
reply to post by NarrowGate
 

The presence of another armed individual in the scenario was a deterrent. Yes, he properly chose not to shoot.

Arguing the minutiae is simply trolling. Look at the big picture.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join