How would arming the victim have helped here?

Wheatfield · 01-14-2011, 07:54 PM

Just curious.....

http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-child-robbed-at-gunpoint-in-richmond-011111,0,5160281.story

Sparkle · 01-14-2011, 08:07 PM

It could not have, in hindsight. However there was an armed civilian who held him until the police arrived. That man refused to shoot him as he felt it unnecessary. It is legal to carry a firearm in Arizona.

cardinal43 · 01-14-2011, 09:03 PM

Originally posted by Sparkle

It could not have, in hindsight. However there was an armed civilian who held him until the police arrived. That man refused to shoot him as he felt it unnecessary. It is legal to carry a firearm in Arizona.

Wheatfield's link talked about a robbery in Richmond, VA, not the shooting in AZ.

If you are talking about the guy named "Joe?", then he said on TV last night that as he ran out of the drug store, he had his hand on the butt of his pistol, and was thinking about shooting the guy he saw holding the gun, but found out at the last second that the guy holding the gun had already taken it from the shooter. "Joe" said....."I almost shot the wrong guy, and I would have killed him". This is what can happen when people walk around with loaded weapons. Still think it is a good idea?

reeftool · 01-14-2011, 09:22 PM

Originally posted by cardinal43

Wheatfield's link talked about a robbery in Richmond, VA, not the shooting in AZ.

If you are talking about the guy named "Joe?", then he said on TV last night that as he ran out of the drug store, he had his hand on the butt of his pistol, and was thinking about shooting the guy he saw holding the gun, but found out at the last second that the guy holding the gun had already taken it from the shooter. "Joe" said....."I almost shot the wrong guy, and I would have killed him". This is what can happen when people walk around with loaded weapons. Still think it is a good idea?

Actually, it happens on occasion with trained law enforcement people. I'm not anti-gun but the idea of the general public walking around the streets armed is a scary prospect, a very bad idea. The people I know who sound off the loudest on this issue are people I don't believe should allowed to be within a mile of a firearm. Ever.

Nesster · 01-15-2011, 06:06 AM

...I suppose what could help is that every American gets a personal armed body guard...

The argument from yesterday about home invasions being a reason for owning guns for self defense... with correct gun safety, especially in a household with youngsters, is to lock up the gun and keep the ammo separately locked up in a different location... or at the very least, if you have a loaded gun, to have that especially secure.... so yeah, the gang invades your home and you tell them what? Hold on till I get my key to the gun rack and trigger guard, oh wait, and do you mind if I go downstairs for my ammo?

Parallax · 01-15-2011, 06:39 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

...so yeah, the gang invades your home and you tell them what? Hold on till I get my key to the gun rack and trigger guard, oh wait, and do you mind if I go downstairs for my ammo?

I suppose some people might do it that way; but the people who actually know something about guns, shooting sports, etc., would pick one of the numerous safes or cabinets that have cypher or fingerprint locks that can be opened by the owner as quickly as if they weren't locked.

Nesster · 01-15-2011, 06:50 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

I suppose some people might do it that way; but the people who actually know something about guns, shooting sports, etc., would pick one of the numerous safes or cabinets that have cypher or fingerprint locks that can be opened by the owner as quickly as if they weren't locked.

I didn't even know there are such locks! Cool, is that stuff that mainly gun folks know about?

Parallax · 01-15-2011, 07:13 AM

Well, possibly. The only place I see them is in gun shops, or the shooting departments of stores like Bass Pro, or Cabela's. The one with the finger print locks are relatively new, within the last couple of years. The one I have is a common cypher lock and is 20 years old.

Wheatfield · 01-15-2011, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by Nesster

...I suppose what could help is that every American gets a personal armed body guard...

The argument from yesterday about home invasions being a reason for owning guns for self defense... with correct gun safety, especially in a household with youngsters, is to lock up the gun and keep the ammo separately locked up in a different location... or at the very least, if you have a loaded gun, to have that especially secure.... so yeah, the gang invades your home and you tell them what? Hold on till I get my key to the gun rack and trigger guard, oh wait, and do you mind if I go downstairs for my ammo?

Nah, just be a typical Second Amendment rights defender, keep a loaded gun beside you at all times.
When the someone rings your doorbell, put a couple of rounds through it and kill the girl scout who wants to sell you some nice cookies.
No one really likes Girl Scout cookies anyway.

Parallax · 01-15-2011, 10:21 AM

You know, wheatfield, some peoples' ideas and misconceptions scare me a whole lot more than the threat of any overt violence does.

shooz · 01-15-2011, 11:02 AM

Except for the misconceptions of the NRA?

Most gun owners can't afford such locks, so they do keep their guns pretty handy.
Perhaps the NRA could help fund such locks for those that can't afford them.

Most gun nutters are truly deluded

Tom S. · 01-15-2011, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Nah, just be a typical Second Amendment rights defender, keep a loaded gun beside you at all times.
When the someone rings your doorbell, put a couple of rounds through it and kill the girl scout who wants to sell you some nice cookies.
No one really likes Girl Scout cookies anyway.

If someone I don't know knocks on my door (night or day), I am either armed or have one close by. Paranoid? Perhaps in your eyes. If I never need that weapon, I will be happy - in fact joyful. If on the other hand, I did need it and didn't have it, and something happened to my family, I would be forever remorseful. If someone is breaking down your door at night, which number will do the most good in shortest amount of time: 911 or .357? Some response times on 911 calls in the US run into the hours, not minutes or seconds. Speaking of police, the U.S. Supreme court has issued a ruling that police are not responsible for providing protection to every individual citizen, only the populace as a whole.

Getting back to my 'paranoid' statement, you should be aware that over the course of the past 10 to 20 years, two important changes have taken place: Nations like Canada and England have steadily decreased the amount of legally owned firearms in the hands of their citizens, while those in the US have increased. Violent crime on the other hand has continued to rise in Canada and England while it has decreased in the US. Add this to the fact that both Canada and England have more police per capita than the US, and it's a bit puzzling for anti gunners to make the connection, but it's obvious that having more police is not making you safer, but having more firearms is. During the past 20 years in which violent crime rates have fallen in the US, several states enacted "shall issue" laws, which in essence say that anyone who has not committed a felony or is adjudged mentally incompetent shall be issued a license to allow them to carry a concealed weapon. In every one of those states, the left predicted a return to the old west with shoot-outs at the OK corral happening every Saturday night. Instead, the opposite has happened: crime rates in every state to enact such legislation has decreased.

While I know I can never sway you from being anti gun, I hope I can open your eyes to why pro gun people feel the way they do. I also hope that neither you nor anyone you love is ever put into a situation where a firearm could have saved yours or their life.

I'll end by saying this: when one anti gunner asked a pro-gunner why he felt he needed to carry a firearm with him all the time, the pro-gunner replied 'because policemen are too heavy".

raz-0 · 01-15-2011, 01:20 PM

Originally posted by shooz

Except for the misconceptions of the NRA?

Most gun owners can't afford such locks, so they do keep their guns pretty handy.
Perhaps the NRA could help fund such locks for those that can't afford them.

Most gun nutters are truly deluded

The cost of a fingerprint lock-box is about $200. A keypad one about $100. Most guns run about $500 and betweeh $15-20 for a box of ammo.

How do you imagine people who can afford guns can't afford a lock box?

Someone is deluded.

shooz · 01-15-2011, 01:34 PM

Oh, really?
Then why is it that the gun nutters aren't demanding as a point of law?
Along with biometric triggers it could go a long ways.

raz-0 · 01-15-2011, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by shooz

Oh, really?
Then why is it that the gun nutters aren't demanding as a point of law?
Along with biometric triggers it could go a long ways.

Biometric triggers? You really have NO idea about the engineering of a firearm, or the use thereof.

And why would I demand specific technology for storage? A firearm under my direct control is not a danger to someone. Locked in a safe with a combination lock, in a storage box with a key lock, who cares?

A determined individual will gain access to any of these things with time and tools. Locks keep honest people honest. Occasionally they delay the ignorant.

In the end, laws are obeyed by the law abiding. Those who wish to break the law will do so.

01-14-2011, 07:54 PM	#1
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	How would arming the victim have helped here? Just curious..... http://www.wtvr.com/news/wtvr-child-robbed-at-gunpoint-in-richmond-011111,0,5160281.story

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
When has a political opinion ever helped you?	RioRico	General Talk	6	03-30-2010 10:14 PM
For everyone who helped me	rmtagg	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	03-23-2008 10:36 PM
Early LBA Victim - need help choosing a zoom :)	USCdeacon	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	03-24-2007 04:12 AM

01-14-2011, 08:07 PM	#2
Sparkle Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,521	It could not have, in hindsight. However there was an armed civilian who held him until the police arrived. That man refused to shoot him as he felt it unnecessary. It is legal to carry a firearm in Arizona.

01-14-2011, 09:03 PM	#3
cardinal43 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,412	Originally posted by Sparkle It could not have, in hindsight. However there was an armed civilian who held him until the police arrived. That man refused to shoot him as he felt it unnecessary. It is legal to carry a firearm in Arizona. Wheatfield's link talked about a robbery in Richmond, VA, not the shooting in AZ. If you are talking about the guy named "Joe?", then he said on TV last night that as he ran out of the drug store, he had his hand on the butt of his pistol, and was thinking about shooting the guy he saw holding the gun, but found out at the last second that the guy holding the gun had already taken it from the shooter. "Joe" said....."I almost shot the wrong guy, and I would have killed him". This is what can happen when people walk around with loaded weapons. Still think it is a good idea?

01-14-2011, 09:22 PM	#4
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,553	Originally posted by cardinal43 Wheatfield's link talked about a robbery in Richmond, VA, not the shooting in AZ. If you are talking about the guy named "Joe?", then he said on TV last night that as he ran out of the drug store, he had his hand on the butt of his pistol, and was thinking about shooting the guy he saw holding the gun, but found out at the last second that the guy holding the gun had already taken it from the shooter. "Joe" said....."I almost shot the wrong guy, and I would have killed him". This is what can happen when people walk around with loaded weapons. Still think it is a good idea? Actually, it happens on occasion with trained law enforcement people. I'm not anti-gun but the idea of the general public walking around the streets armed is a scary prospect, a very bad idea. The people I know who sound off the loudest on this issue are people I don't believe should allowed to be within a mile of a firearm. Ever.

01-15-2011, 06:06 AM	#5
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	...I suppose what could help is that every American gets a personal armed body guard... The argument from yesterday about home invasions being a reason for owning guns for self defense... with correct gun safety, especially in a household with youngsters, is to lock up the gun and keep the ammo separately locked up in a different location... or at the very least, if you have a loaded gun, to have that especially secure.... so yeah, the gang invades your home and you tell them what? Hold on till I get my key to the gun rack and trigger guard, oh wait, and do you mind if I go downstairs for my ammo?

01-15-2011, 06:39 AM	#6
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Nesster ...so yeah, the gang invades your home and you tell them what? Hold on till I get my key to the gun rack and trigger guard, oh wait, and do you mind if I go downstairs for my ammo? I suppose some people might do it that way; but the people who actually know something about guns, shooting sports, etc., would pick one of the numerous safes or cabinets that have cypher or fingerprint locks that can be opened by the owner as quickly as if they weren't locked.

01-15-2011, 06:50 AM	#7
Nesster Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: NJ USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 13,072	Originally posted by Parallax I suppose some people might do it that way; but the people who actually know something about guns, shooting sports, etc., would pick one of the numerous safes or cabinets that have cypher or fingerprint locks that can be opened by the owner as quickly as if they weren't locked. I didn't even know there are such locks! Cool, is that stuff that mainly gun folks know about?

01-15-2011, 07:13 AM	#8
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Well, possibly. The only place I see them is in gun shops, or the shooting departments of stores like Bass Pro, or Cabela's. The one with the finger print locks are relatively new, within the last couple of years. The one I have is a common cypher lock and is 20 years old.

01-15-2011, 10:04 AM	#9
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981 Original Poster	Originally posted by Nesster ...I suppose what could help is that every American gets a personal armed body guard... The argument from yesterday about home invasions being a reason for owning guns for self defense... with correct gun safety, especially in a household with youngsters, is to lock up the gun and keep the ammo separately locked up in a different location... or at the very least, if you have a loaded gun, to have that especially secure.... so yeah, the gang invades your home and you tell them what? Hold on till I get my key to the gun rack and trigger guard, oh wait, and do you mind if I go downstairs for my ammo? Nah, just be a typical Second Amendment rights defender, keep a loaded gun beside you at all times. When the someone rings your doorbell, put a couple of rounds through it and kill the girl scout who wants to sell you some nice cookies. No one really likes Girl Scout cookies anyway.

01-15-2011, 10:21 AM	#10
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	You know, wheatfield, some peoples' ideas and misconceptions scare me a whole lot more than the threat of any overt violence does.

01-15-2011, 11:02 AM	#11
shooz Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Detroit Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,491	Except for the misconceptions of the NRA? Most gun owners can't afford such locks, so they do keep their guns pretty handy. Perhaps the NRA could help fund such locks for those that can't afford them. Most gun nutters are truly deluded

01-15-2011, 12:56 PM	#12
Tom S. Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 4,317	Originally posted by Wheatfield Nah, just be a typical Second Amendment rights defender, keep a loaded gun beside you at all times. When the someone rings your doorbell, put a couple of rounds through it and kill the girl scout who wants to sell you some nice cookies. No one really likes Girl Scout cookies anyway. If someone I don't know knocks on my door (night or day), I am either armed or have one close by. Paranoid? Perhaps in your eyes. If I never need that weapon, I will be happy - in fact joyful. If on the other hand, I did need it and didn't have it, and something happened to my family, I would be forever remorseful. If someone is breaking down your door at night, which number will do the most good in shortest amount of time: 911 or .357? Some response times on 911 calls in the US run into the hours, not minutes or seconds. Speaking of police, the U.S. Supreme court has issued a ruling that police are not responsible for providing protection to every individual citizen, only the populace as a whole. Getting back to my 'paranoid' statement, you should be aware that over the course of the past 10 to 20 years, two important changes have taken place: Nations like Canada and England have steadily decreased the amount of legally owned firearms in the hands of their citizens, while those in the US have increased. Violent crime on the other hand has continued to rise in Canada and England while it has decreased in the US. Add this to the fact that both Canada and England have more police per capita than the US, and it's a bit puzzling for anti gunners to make the connection, but it's obvious that having more police is not making you safer, but having more firearms is. During the past 20 years in which violent crime rates have fallen in the US, several states enacted "shall issue" laws, which in essence say that anyone who has not committed a felony or is adjudged mentally incompetent shall be issued a license to allow them to carry a concealed weapon. In every one of those states, the left predicted a return to the old west with shoot-outs at the OK corral happening every Saturday night. Instead, the opposite has happened: crime rates in every state to enact such legislation has decreased. While I know I can never sway you from being anti gun, I hope I can open your eyes to why pro gun people feel the way they do. I also hope that neither you nor anyone you love is ever put into a situation where a firearm could have saved yours or their life. I'll end by saying this: when one anti gunner asked a pro-gunner why he felt he needed to carry a firearm with him all the time, the pro-gunner replied 'because policemen are too heavy".

01-15-2011, 01:20 PM	#13
raz-0 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Central NJ Posts: 470	Originally posted by shooz Except for the misconceptions of the NRA? Most gun owners can't afford such locks, so they do keep their guns pretty handy. Perhaps the NRA could help fund such locks for those that can't afford them. Most gun nutters are truly deluded The cost of a fingerprint lock-box is about $200. A keypad one about $100. Most guns run about $500 and betweeh $15-20 for a box of ammo. How do you imagine people who can afford guns can't afford a lock box? Someone is deluded.

01-15-2011, 01:34 PM	#14
shooz Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Detroit Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,491	Oh, really? Then why is it that the gun nutters aren't demanding as a point of law? Along with biometric triggers it could go a long ways.

01-15-2011, 02:13 PM	#15
raz-0 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Central NJ Posts: 470	Originally posted by shooz Oh, really? Then why is it that the gun nutters aren't demanding as a point of law? Along with biometric triggers it could go a long ways. Biometric triggers? You really have NO idea about the engineering of a firearm, or the use thereof. And why would I demand specific technology for storage? A firearm under my direct control is not a danger to someone. Locked in a safe with a combination lock, in a storage box with a key lock, who cares? A determined individual will gain access to any of these things with time and tools. Locks keep honest people honest. Occasionally they delay the ignorant. In the end, laws are obeyed by the law abiding. Those who wish to break the law will do so.