An Interesting Twist In The Whole "Gun Control" Issue - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-09-2002, 10:04 PM   #21
Kid A
 
The Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Holy Roman Empire
Posts: 5,271
Local Time: 08:50 PM
call me provincial, but I think you forfeit some of your "rights" when you start threatening people with demands while pointing a shotgun at their head
__________________

The Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-09-2002, 10:36 PM   #22
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 08:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Sparkysgrrrl
What I don't understand is why ppl don't just shoot to injure...
There's no need for a lot of the defensive killings that happen within the police force in the states as well as in domestic situations as well I'm sure.

If you're going to shoot someone, go for their legs or something, no need to shoot them multiple times in the chest area.


Originally posted by paxetaurora
I just find it hard to believe that a shot or two to the ankle or the arm wouldn't have had the effect of preventing the robbery. Were nearly a dozen shots, which ultimately killed the man, truly necessary? I believe in self-defense, but not in manslaughter.

THIS is why (emphasis added):

He fired THREE SHOTS at the gunman. The bullets hit their mark but DIDN'T STOP THE ROBBER, Harper and Burtnett said.

"He ran toward me and I shot him TWICE MORE," Harper said. "[b]After five he fell down. But then he got up again."


Like the Energizer Bunny, this robber kept going and going and going in his attempt to go after the newspaper delivery man.

Angela Harlem:

You are trying to make synonyms out of three words that have three different meanings (murder/killing/manslaughter) and self defense, or defense of a third person, is not the same as murder or manslaughter. The newspaper man should not be charged and/or punished because he did this to stop someone who was acting violently towards the store clerk.

There have been TOO MANY cases here where the clerk gets killed. Lately, they have begun fighting back, and with success.

There is a big problem in the world these days with RESPONSIBILITY. If you go and rob a store or rob a person, and you are wounded in the act, it is NO ONE ELSE'S responsibility or fault. It is my opinion that storeowners, homeowners, individuals, whatever should not be charged for fighting off attackers. Yet society is trying to shift responsibility. When a store owner recently chased after two guys who stole from his store, he found out that the robbers had a gun as they fired at him; well, the store owner had one too, and shot both of the robbers. I'm sorry, but the store owner should not be charged, and the robbers should be put in prison ON TOP OF their injuries.

Another lousy example of the lack of responsibility occurred at a high school in the state's capital of Montgomery recently: a group of students were fighting, and two male teachers told them to stop. They did not stop, and the teachers moved in to break it up, and one of the students began throwing punches at the teachers. The teachers restrained the student and put him on the ground. The student's mom didn't think this was right, so she filed a formal complaint. The teachers were ARRESTED and put in jail! What kind of system is this that we are creating? DON'T CAUSE TROUBLE! DON'T START FIGHTS! DON'T HIT TEACHERS! DON'T ROB THE CONVENIENCE STORE ON 85th STREET! THINK!

~U2Alabama
__________________

U2Bama is offline  
Old 10-09-2002, 11:13 PM   #23
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama

If you go and rob a store or rob a person, and you are *wounded* [emphasis mine] in the act, it is NO ONE ELSE'S responsibility or fault. It is my opinion that storeowners, homeowners, individuals, whatever should not be charged for fighting off attackers. Yet society is trying to shift responsibility.
But you say *wounded*. Naturally, no one would have too much sympathy for a robber who took a bullet to an arm or a leg. But when someone is killed, that's entirely different. They can't do their 10-to-20 (or whatever it is) for armed robbery and try to come out a better citizen. They have lost their chance, a chance which is afforded all but the most heinous murderers in our society.

I'm not saying, necessarily, that the shooter in this case really ought to be locked away for a dozen or so years. His intent was clearly self-defense. But neither should we celebrate his act and make him out to be some sort of folk hero. This reminds me of the scene in The American President when Michael Douglas's character (the President) orders an attack on a building in (Libya? Afghanistan? someplace). Even though they decide to strike at a time when the fewest casualties will be likely to occur, they know that there will probably be some loss of life. One of the President's aides commends him for the action, calling it "very Presidential." The President responds, "You've just seen me do the least Presidential thing I do."


Respect for life, like it or not, has to cut both ways.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 10-09-2002, 11:25 PM   #24
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora

Respect for life, like it or not, has to cut both ways.
Pax, I respect you and your posts. I just find that in this case, I have very little sympathy for someone robbing a store.

It's a simple rule......

You point a gun at people expect them to think you are going to use it.

When you point the gun at people to commit a crime, you are disrespecting life. If I think you are going to use a weapon, I am going to RESPECT life. I am going to respect my life, my wife and childrens' lives, my friends' lives, and my neighbors' lives. The choice is an easy one.


Peace to all.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-09-2002, 11:36 PM   #25
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:50 PM
I know what you mean, dread. And I'm not saying that they were wrong to shoot the robber. It's what I would have done were I in the situation.

What I'm saying is that I don't think we should celebrate the death of the robber. I don't want this guy becoming some sort of vigilante hero. I think it's harmful for society to celebrate violent death. It sets a bad example for the youth and paints a lousy picture of us to the rest of the world.

Yes, people should protect themselves and each other. But we shouldn't pat each other on the back when that push comes to the ultimate shove, either. A life was taken. Don't lose sight of that.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 10-09-2002, 11:40 PM   #26
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
I know what you mean, dread. And I'm not saying that they were wrong to shoot the robber. It's what I would have done were I in the situation.

What I'm saying is that I don't think we should celebrate the death of the robber. I don't want this guy becoming some sort of vigilante hero. I think it's harmful for society to celebrate violent death. It sets a bad example for the youth and paints a lousy picture of us to the rest of the world.

Yes, people should protect themselves and each other. But we shouldn't pat each other on the back when that push comes to the ultimate shove, either. A life was taken. Don't lose sight of that.
That makes sense to me. I think I misunderstood.

As for taking a life.....I can't sleep at night if I keep a kid in for recess. I would probably be in therapy if I had to use lethal force.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 10-10-2002, 12:26 AM   #27
New Yorker
 
brettig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: heehee, ask george
Posts: 3,194
Local Time: 08:50 PM

There have been so many clerk shootings in the states that its been a long-running joke with Apu.

'Ah the kiss of hot lead how I missed you! I mean...I think I'm dying!'

I tend to agree with those who say if you break and enter/home invade/whatever, you forfeit your own rights and should not expect to be treated with much sympathy if your victim is armed. That said, shooting a guy that much does seem a little excessive...
brettig is offline  
Old 10-10-2002, 04:18 AM   #28
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 12:50 PM
Bama/Spiral_Staircase, I do understand the difference between manslaughter and murder. However no matter what the situation, you have people getting shot. In a situation like this, I get concerned that it can be deemed somehow acceptable that someone is shot dead. Of course the circumstances are always important, and many things influence such events, I am not arguing that. I am not saying it was even wrong of the newspaper guy to do what he did-although I dont really agree with it. Self defence or not, I dont see it as ever acceptable to shoot someone. The self defence argument is fine and a good argument, but to me it just doesn't make the whole thing ok. I even admit that I would possibly do it myself given the same circumstances. Would it be ok though? Not really, I would have killed someone. I dont know if that is any clearer. But thats my view.
If guns are banned to the average citizen, you get in the long run, less shootings in self defence and less occurances of such a reaction from people defending themselves and their property as the end result is less gun possession in the hands of criminals as well.
I dont necessarily disagree with the responsibility aspect either. There was a story over here recently in the paper where a publican caught this young man breaking into his pub. The publican beat him. The young guy decided to sue the publican for his injuries to his self. The young man's mother then decided she wanted to sue and lay charges for the emotional distress she was caused by seeing her bloodied and beat up son. He was awarded I believe $50,000 and the mother received $17,000. I was disgusted with that. I strongly believe in the right to defend yourself and your property as you need, and by commiting a break and enter, yes I believe you are lessening your rights to some extent. But life? What property is worth more than someone's life? If your life is threatened by an individual wielding a gun or other weapon, it does change things again and I wouldn't be passing judgement on any individual who does shoot back in defence - like the case of this clerk and the newspaper man. But you aren't really free of culpability surely?
Thou shalt not kill right?
The law even says that one too.

Remove the guns and you remove some of the threat.
__________________
<a href=https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 10-10-2002, 04:22 AM   #29
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 12:50 PM
Just one more thought re: the robber being shot 5 times, it may be excessive, but geez, it must have been like something from an Arnie movie. Adrenalin etc and watching this guy just keep on getting up after even the 3rd shot? You wouldn't be thinking too clear. Sounds like panic shooting.
__________________
<a href=https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 10-24-2002, 09:37 PM   #30
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 08:50 PM

I intended to reply to this thread again a couple of weeks ago but I forgot about it and it dropped a few pages. Last night's arrests reminded me of it again.

First of all, Angela Harlem is on to somehing regarding the 5 shots; I have often heard from friends in law enforcement that drunk/stoned/high criminals do have something of an "invincibility" factor; much like how your senses are numbed at the dentist office when having cavities filled (it would hurt like hell if not), people under the influence are similarly numbed and often under delusions of grandeur as well. It is very likely that it REQUIRED 5 shots to put this jackass down; or else he would have continued coming after the newspaper man and the store clerk.

Now, on to what happened last night: we are hearing down here in Alabama that one or both of the suspects in the Maryland/D.C./Virginia shootings robbed a liquor store in Montgomery, Alabama back in September, and in the process killed one clerk and wounded another. Now I realize that we need to be sensitive to the needs, feelings, and safety of violent armed robbers, but I personally almost wish that one of the clerks at the liquor store in Montgomery had been armed and blown these two guys' faces off. If so, it is possible that none of the other shootings would occur.

Obvioulsy, most violent armed robbers are not going to go out on a serial killing spree (as far as we know) after their conquests, but I would wager this: they WILL go and rob/kill/rape again, because they will get away. Why did the convenience store clerk and newspaper delivery man carry weapons? Because they knew that their occupations made them targets of violent armed robbers; they did not WANT to be killed; many convenience store clerks in the Birmingham area have been arming themselves in the last few years because MANY of them are robbed by violent armed robbers, and TOO OFTEN, the clerks are killed JUST SO THAT NO ONE WILL LIVE TO TESTIFY.

Violent criminals think that they can get away with anything. I don't think they should enjoy that comfort.

~U2Alabama
U2Bama is offline  
Old 10-24-2002, 09:48 PM   #31
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 637
Local Time: 01:50 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
Yeah whatever, punished to the full extent of the law.

Tell me why this newspaper guy is not guilty. He shot someone.

QED.
Uh, because it was in self defense.
wolfwill23 is offline  
Old 10-24-2002, 11:22 PM   #32
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:50 PM
Please review previous posts in the thread before posting. Thank you.
__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 10-24-2002, 11:50 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 08:50 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paxetaurora
Please review previous posts in the thread before posting. Thank you.
Who? What happened?
U2Bama is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 12:18 AM   #34
War Child
 
zoomerang II's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: melbourne, terra australis
Posts: 657
Local Time: 12:50 PM
two wrongs dont make a right. If neither of them had a gun noone would have been shot.

(i know this may be ideologically correct rather than practical)

Anyone off the street can just walk in and get a shotgun? my goodness. i think thats the problem.
zoomerang II is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 03:47 AM   #35
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,815
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama
Now, on to what happened last night: we are hearing down here in Alabama that one or both of the suspects in the Maryland/D.C./Virginia shootings robbed a liquor store in Montgomery, Alabama back in September, and in the process killed one clerk and wounded another. Now I realize that we need to be sensitive to the needs, feelings, and safety of violent armed robbers, but I personally almost wish that one of the clerks at the liquor store in Montgomery had been armed and blown these two guys' faces off. If so, it is possible that none of the other shootings would occur.
But then again, if the sniper would not have had the opportunity to buy his weapon in every regular gun store in the country, the shootings maybe also wouldn't have occurred. What I've heard, the weapon used can be bought in any gun store (just like the bullets) and until the fourth or fifth shooting many people (experts) said that almost anyone (without experience) could have fired the shots.
So with gun control those in the liquor store cannot buy weapons so easily, but neither can the sniper.

C ya!

Marty
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 08:02 AM   #36
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 12:50 PM
Can I ask someone what type of guns are exactly freely available over the counter? Bama mentioned rifles in sporting goods stores, but what about handguns? Are there stricter regulations on purchasing those? Just curious.
Popmartijn its a good point you raised. I agree totally in the less guns = less crime theory, but I think its a bit naive I guess, to reduce the issue to that alone.
You have to start with ownership and responsibility, the right to own a gun shouldn't be an option to just any one. I know people aren't born with criminal records, but shouldn't more care be taken with who is issued one and who isn't? Clerks and service station workers for example shouldn't need to own their own guns just to feel safe - homeowners too. Broken record time again, but the justice system. Its too idealistic to think you can get rid of the scumbag factor in those who threaten and steal their way through life. Removing guns is only one possible answer. Crims will just use a knife or baseball bat or lead pipe to get what they want. Free and easy access to guns just seems a bit too easy.
__________________
<a href=https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 09:57 AM   #37
War Child
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 637
Local Time: 01:50 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Popmartijn


But then again, if the sniper would not have had the opportunity to buy his weapon in every regular gun store in the country, the shootings maybe also wouldn't have occurred.
Marty
I do not agree with this. If guns are outlawed, then only the criminals will have them. If a bad guy wants to get his hand on a firearm bad enough, he will.
wolfwill23 is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 10:15 AM   #38
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,737
Local Time: 08:50 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by wolfwill23
I do not agree with this. If guns are outlawed, then only the criminals will have them. If a bad guy wants to get his hand on a firearm bad enough, he will.
But do you just dismiss the fact that in a number of Western countries, guns are not available for wholesale, and the murder rates are way, way lower than in the USA?

To quote from TWW: "If you combine the populations of Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark and Australia, you'll get a population roughly the size of the United States. We had 32,000 gun deaths last year. They had 112. Do you think it's because Americans are more homicidal by nature? Or do you think it's because those guys have gun control laws?"
anitram is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 10:15 AM   #39
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,815
Local Time: 02:50 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by wolfwill23


I do not agree with this. If guns are outlawed, then only the criminals will have them. If a bad guy wants to get his hand on a firearm bad enough, he will.
True.
But if a good guy really wants to have a firearm then he will get one. Still, when it's more difficult to get a gun, then that will deter people from buying them. It will prevent spur of the moment purchases. How easy will it be to get a Bushmaster? It's not your average handgun.

Furthermore, if only the really hard criminals can get their hands on firearms, it will get safer (IMO). It's an awful feeling when someone points a gun at you, but I'd rather choose to get confronted by a hard criminal than some amateur with shaking hands who pulls the trigger the moment you sneeze.

Outlawing guns will not prevent all shootings, but they will reduce the danger.

C ya!

Marty
Popmartijn is offline  
Old 10-25-2002, 11:37 AM   #40
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 41,228
Local Time: 07:50 PM
I'm an advocate of gun control, but the sniper shootings would not have been prevented by any gun control laws. The man was in the military and he was using what can be considered a hunting rifle, and hunting rifles will never be covered under gun control laws. The ammunition can be legislated but this time of the year runs under certain hunting seasons so that would not have even help. This was a result of an angry individual who's problem was never taken care of early on.

Now as far as people saying "if a criminal wants a gun they can get a gun" this is true, but where do you think the majority of blackmarket guns come from? They come from legitamate gun manufacturers. The flow to the black market can be control somewhat, if certain gun control laws go into affect. The thing is if the supply of black market of guns became significanly less the price would sky rocket and your everyday street hustler would not be able to afford guns.
__________________

BVS is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×