Straight Dope Message Board

Straight Dope Message Board (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php)
-   The BBQ Pit (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Stupid Gun news of the day... (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=680617)

Gyrate 09-17-2013 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fear Itself (Post 16673237)
He did have a CCW, so no one can say they are less prone to armed mayhem.

Sure they can. No one can say that no people with CCWs commit armed mayhem, but one example does not in itself disprove "less prone".

Hentor the Barbarian 09-17-2013 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 16673400)
Sure they can. No one can say that no people with CCWs commit armed mayhem, but one example does not in itself disprove "less prone".

True. However, we cannot assume "less prone." Without evidence, we can only assume the null hypothesis - no more or less prone than the larger population.

ElvisL1ves 09-17-2013 10:23 AM

Huh? The evidence is that people who are armed commit more armed mayhem than those who are not. All of it, in fact.

RedFury 09-17-2013 10:50 AM

Aaron Alexis: Navy Yard gunman treated for paranoia and hearing voices in his head

Quote:

UPDATE: U.S. law enforcement officials are telling The Associated Press that the Navy contractor identified as the gunman in the mass shootings at the Washington Navy Yard had been suffering a host of serious mental issues, including paranoia and a sleep disorder. He also had been hearing voices in his head, the officials said.
What the voices in my head tell me: great candidate for owning a gun...

ElvisL1ves 09-17-2013 10:55 AM

But he was a "law-abiding citizen" before yesterday, was he not?

Well, then. Shall Issue.

BrokenBriton 09-17-2013 11:33 AM

Twitter:
Quote:

The Washington shooter "had mental health problems" translation "is not a Muslim"

Damuri Ajashi 09-17-2013 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levdrakon (Post 16670604)
Damuri , you know how we're going to get gun control? We're going to wait for more of the above incident. There will be more. And more. And more. And more.

Nope. You're wrong. Any opportunity we get to institute gun control is going to be taken over by idiots who will just fuck it up for everyone.

Quote:

Then we will pass quick, knee-jerk gun controls and you will lose. This is how you will lose because you vote lock-step against any and all gun regulations. We're going to take the decision-making process out of your hands. We will ignore the NRA's whining. Yes, some of the laws will be quick and knee-jerk and who knows? Maybe even a bit "draconian." Oh well. Don't say I didn't warn you.
Really? How are you going to do that? Any gun control measure you want to pass is going to need 60 senate votes. Can you point to 60 senators that would vote for draconian kneejerk gun control regulations? Can you point to 50?

Quote:

Can you stop mass murders? No. Do you even want to? No. Alrighty then. You aren't going to have much choice in the matter, if you can't play nice. You have only yourself to blame.
How do you think you are going to stop mass murders? Short of amending the constitution and confiscating all the guns (BTW, good luck with that), how would you stop mass murder (lets pretend that guns are the only way you can kill a bunch of people)?

As far as I can tell, your side is the one that isn't getting a seat at the table. You didn't even get a ridiculously mild law to require background checks at gun shows. It was the most meaningless fig leaf of gun control I have ever seen and you couldn't even get that, you were just left standing there with your tits flapping in the wind. Your side could have had something like background checks at guns shows passed in january but you guys had visions of gun ban and magazine caps dancing in your heads and by the time you pulled them out of your collective asses, the train had left the station and you got nothing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 16670640)
Show me a post, not a whole damn thread that you claim says something.

You're telling me you couldn't go down 3 or 4 posts to read people agreeing that the Manchin Toomey might have had a chance before all the idiocy with the AWB?

Quote:

Which you fucking opposed, psychopath. It was stifled by filibuster because of you and other psychopaths like you. No argument or discussion or plea would have worked on you because nothing can.
(A) I didn't oppose the Manchin Toomey bill.

(B) If nothing can ever work, then you might as well pack it up, go home and cry into your pillow.

I support reasonable gun control, you think a total gun ban and confiscation of all guns from law abdiing citizens is reasonable. The rest of us think you're crazy.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fear Itself (Post 16673237)
He did have a CCW, so no one can say they are less prone to armed mayhem.

Yes you can.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian (Post 16673531)
True. However, we cannot assume "less prone." Without evidence, we can only assume the null hypothesis - no more or less prone than the larger population.

Bullshit. I've provided evidence several times on several occassions and your response has been perilously close to saying "well its not in a Harvard study so its worthless as evidence"

So here it is again:

I use homicides because honicide information is generally conisdered to be fairly reliable.

I have data from Florida and Texas

Florida: The Violence Policy Center (a gun grabbing organization) identifies 10 murders by CCW holders in Florida in a 2 year period.

There are 1.3 million CCW holders.

About 1.1 are private citizens the rest are folks like retired cops, security offices, etc.

That a murder rate of under 0.5 (per 100,000/year).

The murder rate in America is 4.8, the murder rate in Florida is about 5.2.

This assumes that the Violence Policy Center identified all the incidences of CCWs arrested for committing murder (and they seem to have made every effort to do so). This also assumes that all CCW murderers got caught but the apprehension rate on murder is consistently high (3.6 of the 4.8 are arrested)http://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/pre...ime-statistics

So while the numbers may not be exact, the numbers indicate a noticable difference between CCWs and the general public.

I wish I had the statistic for exactly how many people were arrested for murder in Florida (that would be a better comaprison) but I think this information is useful as well.

You've seen the texas information before and basically dismissed it because it was raw data presented by a gun nut but I still don't see how raw data becomes inaccurate because of who presents the information.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 16673698)
But he was a "law-abiding citizen" before yesterday, was he not?

What percentage of gun murderers were previously law abiding citizens? How many people do they kill?

How many lives are saved by armed law abiding citizens?

Knorf 09-17-2013 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi (Post 16673924)
What percentage of gun murderers were previously law abiding citizens? How many people do they kill?

Mostly, they kill themselves. What is rarely talked about is the enormously increased likelihood of a successful suicide when guns are available, and the increased likelihood of a suicide attempt occurring in the first place.

Followed by accidental discharge, which obviously can have a negative effect on others living in or present in the household.

Both suicides using a gun and accidental discharge are far more likely to occur than anyone (who isn't a police officer) stopping a crime in progress using a gun.

ETA: I am on the side of the complete removal of guns as being unworkable and insane, but many of the hardcore pro-gun arguments are equally insane, and often invalid to boot.
Bottom line: some reasonable of amount of gun control is obviously necessary.

ElvisL1ves 09-17-2013 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi
You're telling me you couldn't go down 3 or 4 posts to read people agreeing that the Manchin Toomey might have had a chance before all the idiocy with the AWB?

They're all from you.

Aaron Alexis heard voices in his head, too.

ElvisL1ves 09-17-2013 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi (Post 16673924)
(A) I didn't oppose the Manchin Toomey bill.

Was somebody else borrowing your password when you wrote this, just yesterday?[/quote=Damuri Ajashi]We just defeated a bill that instituted background checks at gun shows for fucks sake.[/quote]

Quote:

(B) If nothing can ever work, then you might as well pack it up, go home and cry into your pillow.
Nobody said nothing can ever work. What it takes is to work around people like you, not try to bring you to reason. That doesn't work on you psychopaths.

Quote:

I support reasonable gun control
Except when it actually comes up for a vote.

Quote:

The rest of us think you're crazy.
Still looking for corroboration from anyone besides your voices.

Quote:

What percentage of gun murderers were previously law abiding citizens? How many people do they kill?
More than zero. Balancing that is, well, what?

Quote:

How many lives are saved by armed law abiding citizens?
Yesterday? None.

Hentor the Barbarian 09-17-2013 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi (Post 16673924)
Bullshit. I've provided evidence several times on several occassions and your response has been perilously close to saying "well its not in a Harvard study so its worthless as evidence"

You've linked several times to one analysis by some guy in Texas. The fact that you can mischaracterize my response so badly (as you do here and again below) illustrates how fundamentally unable you are in understanding it.
Quote:

So here it is again:

I use homicides because honicide information is generally conisdered to be fairly reliable.

I have data from Florida and Texas

Florida: The Violence Policy Center (a gun grabbing organization) identifies 10 murders by CCW holders in Florida in a 2 year period.
You have a bad habit of misrepresenting what other people or organizations say. Since you do not link to the Violence Policy Center, we cannot check whether what you say is accurate. My strong suspicion is that while the VPC may have identified 10 murders in Florida by CCW holders, they never said anything remotely suggesting that this was ALL of the murders in Florida by CCW holders.

In fact, here is specifically what they have to say on the issue:

http://www.vpc.org/press/1211ccw2.htm

Quote:

These killings, however, represent only the tip of the iceberg as most state systems release little data about crimes--including homicide--committed by concealed carry permit holders. The primary source for Concealed Carry Killers is published news reports. The Violence Policy Center believes that comprehensive data on crimes committed by persons with concealed carry permit holders should be collected through the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting system recognizing that people have the right to know the extent of the public safety threat posed by private guns carried in public places.
So, cite for us where VPC concluded there were ONLY 10 murders by CCW people in Florida. If you cannot, your conscience should compel you to explicitly retract this argument. I firmly suspect you will not, both because you are too stupid to recognize why what I just said is a problem for your argument, and because you lack any sort of integrity whatsoever.

Quote:

You've seen the texas information before and basically dismissed it because it was raw data presented by a gun nut but I still don't see how raw data becomes inaccurate because of who presents the information.
There are lots of problems with that "analysis", none of which involve ad hominem argument on my part. I'll make this as simple as I can. Using that report that you've cited several times, tell me what the number of CCW carriers is in Texas in any given year. Tell me what the total population of Texas is.

Basic information is missing from that presentation, making it extremely suspect. If the guy can't even provide the numerators to the reader, he's failed at the most primary step.

levdrakon 09-17-2013 04:49 PM

Crazed hunter gun nutter in Austria kills cops, paramedics, holed up in his house possibly with his children.

sinjin 09-17-2013 06:23 PM

And once again we bring you back to "Stupid Gun News of the Day" with the ever popular: "Let's play the gun game! Fun for boys and girls of all ages."

http://gawker.com/caretaker-shoots-k...yin-1332905960

Basically the babysitter/boyfriend routinely plays the game where the three year old points his finger and goes "bang, bang" at the b/b. Then the b/b points his real gun at the kid and pulls the trigger. Jocularity all around. Except, oops, I forgot I loaded the gun.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Hentor the Barbarian 09-17-2013 06:42 PM

19 Gun Fails (video):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2490579.html

Zeriel 09-17-2013 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 16672973)
So you also agree the "good guy with a gun" stuff is crap. Great.

It's certainly crap in a great many scenarios. The thing about defensive gun use, IMHO, is that it takes a very specific kind of training that is not particularly common except among security guards and protective detail types--the ability to see the signs that someone is about to attack and being able to prepare to deal with it.

Quote:

Actually firing is the very last step in the situation, though. Stopping the armed person starts well before that.
Certainly true.

Quote:

How do you plan to explain that to your colleagues on the Freedom! Second Amendment! Shall-issue! side? That demonstrated poor judgment (and in whose opinion?) trumps all of that?

You're for that, great. You know the mentality opposing it, great. How does that mentality get overcome?
...
How do we stop your colleagues from spouting it? How does that mentality get overcome?
If you actually want my honest opinion? It comes down to fear--specifically, the NRA/LaPierre/TeaParty-stoked fear that violent criminals are everywhere, and that any attempt to restrain gun ownership whatsoever is a prelude to a confiscation/ban. The best way I can see forward is a meeting of the minds with the middle-ground gun owners of all major stripes (self-defense die-hards, hunters/sportsmen, and recreational shooters) and crafting gun law with the mentality that getting the support of that class of folks requires taking their concerns about confiscatory policy into account.

It wouldn't even take much: Toomey-Manchin's bill, by including language specifically prohibiting gun registries, was running at 65% public support according to Gallup. The idea of a renewed "assault weapon ban" hits 50-50 at best. Given that ~20% of the electorate on either side of any issue is crazy hyperpartisan, a 15-point margin of approval is significant.

At that point it's just a question of convincing your Congresscritter to actually listen to the people instead of the lobbyists, but if I could solve THAT one we'd be landing on Mars by now.

levdrakon 09-18-2013 10:51 AM

Starbucks to gun nutters: keep your guns out of our stores!

Hentor the Barbarian 09-18-2013 11:19 AM

Damuri Ajashi, have you got that cite yet that confirms the Violence Policy Center said there were 10 and only 10 murders committed by CCW people in Florida?

Again, their stated position, as I quoted above, is that their figures represent only a minority of cases. So I eagerly await your citation to the contrary.

Lumpy 09-18-2013 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levdrakon (Post 16676942)
Starbucks to gun nutters: keep your guns out of our stores!

Note that it's a request, specifically not a ban. They simply wanted to remain neutral but weren't allowed to, as much by the "gun banners" as the "gun nutters".

steronz 09-18-2013 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumpy (Post 16677259)
Note that it's a request, specifically not a ban. They simply wanted to remain neutral but weren't allowed to, as much by the "gun banners" as the "gun nutters".

"Gun nutters" were holding open-carry meetings at Starbucks locations along a "guns-n-coffee" theme.

"Gun banners" were not holding any kind of meetings at Starbucks.

How do you think both sides are equal in this?

levdrakon 09-18-2013 01:33 PM

And customers and potential customers were intimidated and frightened by people openly carrying murder weapons.

"So, would you like to try our alfalfa sprout nut bar along with your ven... GET DOWN. BLAM BLAM BLAM! Sorry ma'am didn't mean to make your child cry and wet itself; I thought I saw a Mexican."

BrokenBriton 09-18-2013 02:02 PM

This piece in the NewYorker seems a mature look at the status quo:

Quote:

No Time to Despair About Gun Control
Jared Diamond’s book “Collapse” is a fine study of why societies persist in obviously irrational, sometimes suicidal, behavior, even when the reality of just how suicidal it is stares them in the face. Why do they continue to deforest in the face of floods, refuse to eat fish even at the price of starvation? Most of the time, he points out, the simple sunk cost of the irrationality helps it persist: we have always believed this, and to un-believe it is to lose our faith in ourselves. Yet sometimes things change.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blog...edium=facebook

Martin Hyde 09-18-2013 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steronz (Post 16677500)
"Gun nutters" were holding open-carry meetings at Starbucks locations along a "guns-n-coffee" theme.

"Gun banners" were not holding any kind of meetings at Starbucks.

How do you think both sides are equal in this?

I think Starbucks kind of got unfairly pulled into the whole gun debate. To me it's very obvious they adopted the same stance that say, McDonald's has because they are a large national corporation that operate in places with extremely liberal residents and extremely conservative residents. So just like another omnipresent chain (McDonald's) they took the closest thing to neutral that they could: they don't encourage guns in their store, and they deferred to local laws. Deferring to local laws is a pretty neutral thing, it's not embracing guns or rejecting them, it's just saying "the law is what it is and we choose to make no further policies on the matter."

For some reason, despite other large, visible chains like McDonald's having 100% the same position, the pro-gun crowd really started doing a lot of stuff at Starbucks and emphasizing Starbucks' position. This lead to one of the Mother's Against Guns groups to boycott Starbucks every Saturday and to start a petition drive aimed at getting Starbucks to ban guns in its stores (in response to the Saturday boycotts the pro-gun groups made that day "Starbucks Appreciation Day" to try and drive more business to the stores in areas where this was happening.) So really through no outright political statement or position Starbucks ended up in the middle of this thing. Which got them exactly what they were trying to avoid, potentially alienating customers on both sides.

I think the letter released today was their best, latch ditch hope to get the "gun rhetoric" out of Starbucks so they can keep selling overpriced coffee which is what they're in the business of doing. If it doesn't work I think they'll probably institute an outright ban, because if they have to pick which side to piss off the pro-gun side probably is the easier given the personal politics of the CEO and etc.

The only reason I can fathom Starbucks got so much attention from the pro-gun crowd initially could be that it's a Seattle headquartered company, which is a definitively lefty area, and they sell highly marked up coffee and coffee-drinks which is seen as a more lefty/liberal version of a product basically all Americans consume. The pro-gun types targeting McDonald's I guess didn't make as much sense, because McDonald's isn't at all associated with either side of the political spectrum but is instead more seen as a lowest common denominator food dispenser.

jasg 09-19-2013 01:21 PM

How about a Gunfight at the car wash?

Two fewer CCW fans in Michigan...

Lumpy 09-19-2013 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levdrakon (Post 16677517)
And customers and potential customers were intimidated and frightened by people openly carrying murder weapons.

I'm intimidated and frightened by young African-American males*, statistically the group most likely to commit assault, robbery and murder. I think they should be banned from Starbucks. Unless you have some idea that profiling is wrong.

*Yes, I'm snarking.

Lumpy 09-19-2013 01:51 PM

The article says nothing about his predilection for firearms, only that he has a powerful hunting rifle. You know, like the ordinary 30.06 bolt-action rifles you can buy in any outdoors store? And for that matter the naval yard shooter who went in with a shotgun. A shotgun, not an evil Killomatic 5000 assault weapon, not even a concealed handgun. You want to make it illegal to own hunting weapons without a license?

Hentor the Barbarian 09-19-2013 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasg (Post 16680841)
How about a Gunfight at the car wash?

Two fewer CCW fans in Michigan...

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is another bad guy with a gun? Or is that two good guys with guns?

An armed society is a polite society?

Which one should have been permitted to stand his ground?


In seriousness, this kind of thing is my point about this stuff. My position is that the problem with guns is not guns, it's the intersection between guns and people. Sure, some people should categorically not be allowed access to firearms. However, everyone varies so much over the course of a day or a few days, let alone a lifetime, such that there will be occasions for everyone where for at least some period of time they are vulnerable to being unsafe with a firearm.

It's just blinkered ignorance that pretends if we increase the number of people with firearms we will reduce the damages associated with firearms incidents. People are too fallible to pretend otherwise.

Lumpy 09-19-2013 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasg (Post 16680841)
How about a Gunfight at the car wash?

Two fewer CCW fans in Michigan...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian (Post 16681002)
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is another bad guy with a gun? Or is that two good guys with guns?

An armed society is a polite society?

Which one should have been permitted to stand his ground?


In seriousness, this kind of thing is my point about this stuff. My position is that the problem with guns is not guns, it's the intersection between guns and people. Sure, some people should categorically not be allowed access to firearms. However, everyone varies so much over the course of a day or a few days, let alone a lifetime, such that there will be occasions for everyone where for at least some period of time they are vulnerable to being unsafe with a firearm.

It's just blinkered ignorance that pretends if we increase the number of people with firearms we will reduce the damages associated with firearms incidents. People are too fallible to pretend otherwise.

Since there's no report of bystanders being hurt, I'll chalk this incident up to pure Darwinian selection. Two people too stupid or hotheaded to realize that a gun isn't for teaching some jerkass a lesson. If carry was ubiquitous, I'd say after a century or so a culture of restraint and responsibility would prevail, and those that couldn't or wouldn't learn it would self-cull.

ETA: or as one person put it, "Stupidity should hurt".

Hentor the Barbarian 09-19-2013 02:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumpy (Post 16681027)
Since there's no report of bystanders being hurt, I'll chalk this incident up to pure Darwinian selection. Two people too stupid or hotheaded to realize that a gun isn't for teaching some jerkass a lesson. If carry was ubiquitous, I'd say after a century or so a culture of restraint and responsibility would prevail, and those that couldn't or wouldn't learn it would self-cull.

ETA: or as one person put it, "Stupidity should hurt".

If we get rid of all the people who are at some point in time too angry, too depressed, too distracted, too anxious, or too cognitively impaired to be safe with a gun, the human race will be ended.

It is short.sighted hubris to think that you belong in a fundamentally different category from these two guys.

silenus 09-19-2013 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian (Post 16681132)
If we get rid of all the people who are at some point in time too angry, too depressed, too distracted, too anxious, or too cognitively impaired to be safe with a gun, the human race will be ended.

Therefore, the only solution is to limit the access to guns. The survival of the human race demands it! (according to you). :p

Better reword that argument if you want it to fly, Orville.

ElvisL1ves 09-19-2013 03:25 PM

What do you propose instead? That only the armed are fit to survive?

Or we can follow the proven examples of pretty much every other civilized nation in the world.

Hentor the Barbarian 09-19-2013 03:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silenus (Post 16681217)
Therefore, the only solution is to limit the access to guns. The survival of the human race demands it! (according to you). :p

Better reword that argument if you want it to fly, Orville.

Not sure what I need to reword, and your restatement is not accurate.

What you quoted from me was in response to the idea that in a generation or so we would cull the genetic pool so as to be rid of people who might be at some point be "stupid" with a gun. I'm saying if you did cull such people, there would essentially be nobody left.

levdrakon 09-19-2013 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumpy (Post 16680922)
I'm intimidated and frightened by young African-American males*, statistically the group most likely to commit assault, robbery and murder. I think they should be banned from Starbucks. Unless you have some idea that profiling is wrong.

*Yes, I'm snarking.

Isn't it more like, "no shirt, no shoes, no service?"

Fear Itself 09-19-2013 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumpy (Post 16681027)
Two people too stupid or hotheaded to realize that a gun isn't for teaching some jerkass a lesson.

And yet the CCW permitting process was unable to ferret that out before they terminated each other. Anything we can do about that?

Hentor the Barbarian 09-19-2013 05:04 PM

Our tendency to focus on deaths in mass shootings has obscured the scope of the problem.

When considering incidents that involve four or more people getting shot (including the shooter himself) as mass shootings, we have had 250 mass shootings this year.

250 this year - that is essentially one mass shooting every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3935978.html

We have a fucking problem in this country.

Zeriel 09-19-2013 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian (Post 16681505)
Our tendency to focus on deaths in mass shootings has obscured the scope of the problem.

When considering incidents that involve four or more people getting shot (including the shooter himself) as mass shootings, we have had 250 mass shootings this year.

250 this year - that is essentially one mass shooting every day.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_3935978.html

We have a fucking problem in this country.

Honest question--how does that compare with the worldwide stats? Everything I can find focuses on the US rate only.

steronz 09-20-2013 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumpy (Post 16681027)
Since there's no report of bystanders being hurt, I'll chalk this incident up to pure Darwinian selection. Two people too stupid or hotheaded to realize that a gun isn't for teaching some jerkass a lesson. If carry was ubiquitous, I'd say after a century or so a culture of restraint and responsibility would prevail, and those that couldn't or wouldn't learn it would self-cull.

ETA: or as one person put it, "Stupidity should hurt".

That may be entirely unfair to one of the victims. Imagine you're being harassed on the road in a "road rage" incident, and you pull into a car wash, either your intended destination or an attempt to exit the situation. The crazy SOB follows you, continues to argue with you, and pulls a gun. This is the exact moment where self defense advocates say that there needs to be a good guy with a gun, right? Except guns aren't magic, and defensive gun use is messy, so you end up returning fire only moderately successfully, and end up bleeding out in the process.

If that happens, you OK with people saying you got what you deserved?

Anti-gun people have argued that adding guns to the mix, even in self defense like this situation possibly was, can escalate bad situations into potentially deadly ones. If only one of these guys had been armed, they both might be alive. If neither had been armed, we wouldn't be talking about them.

Gyrate 09-20-2013 06:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steronz (Post 16682605)
That may be entirely unfair to one of the victims. Imagine you're being harassed on the road in a "road rage" incident, and you pull into a car wash, either your intended destination or an attempt to exit the situation. The crazy SOB follows you, continues to argue with you, and pulls a gun. This is the exact moment where self defense advocates say that there needs to be a good guy with a gun, right? Except guns aren't magic, and defensive gun use is messy, so you end up returning fire only moderately successfully, and end up bleeding out in the process.

I concur. The non-crazy guy attempted to get away, and stepped away from the car where his family was. As near as I can tell from the various version of the story I've read, he did what he was supposed to do here.
Quote:

Anti-gun people have argued that adding guns to the mix, even in self defense like this situation possibly was, can escalate bad situations into potentially deadly ones. If only one of these guys had been armed, they both might be alive. If neither had been armed, we wouldn't be talking about them.
Exactly. In much the same way that the fact that Britain has more assaults but the US has more homicides suggests that there may be a reason why altercations in the US tend to result in death more often.

Hentor the Barbarian 09-20-2013 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 16682617)
I concur. The non-crazy guy attempted to get away, and stepped away from the car where his family was. As near as I can tell from the various version of the story I've read, he did what he was supposed to do here.

Not sure that getting out of your car to confront someone during a road rage incident is what you should do. I wonder if he felt empowered to do so by the fact that he was armed.

Gyrate 09-20-2013 07:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian (Post 16682660)
Not sure that getting out of your car to confront someone during a road rage incident is what you should do. I wonder if he felt empowered to do so by the fact that he was armed.

Hard to say. OTOH, if you feel that a gun battle is likely the least you can do is to stand away from any innocent bystanders.

Hentor the Barbarian 09-20-2013 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 16682755)
Hard to say. OTOH, if you feel that a gun battle is likely the least you can do is to stand away from any innocent bystanders.

Well, I just did a spin of the matter on the internets. Recommendations for how to deal with someone else instigating a road rage incident included disengaging, taking four right hand turns and driving to a police station. Not a single one of them suggested pulling off into a parking lot and getting into a fracas.

ElvisL1ves 09-20-2013 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 16682755)
Hard to say.

No, it ain't. Try again.
Quote:

OTOH, if you feel that a gun battle is likely the least you can do is to stand away from any innocent bystanders.
Are you likely to think of that if you're in a rage?

BigAppleBucky 09-20-2013 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jasg (Post 16680841)
How about a Gunfight at the car wash?

Two fewer CCW fans in Michigan...

A win-win situation. Happy they canceled each other out without any innocents being hurt.

Quote:

IONIA, MI - Two men died Wednesday, Sept. 18, in a shootout that stemmed from a road rage confrontation, Ionia police said.

Ionia Department of Public Safety officers were dispatched to Wonder Wand Car Wash in the 400 block of South Steele Street shortly before 7 p.m. on reports of shots fired. Police arrived to find two men with gunshot wounds.

Initial investigation shows the Ionia men, ages 43 and 56, pulled into the car wash parking lot after a road rage incident. They exited their vehicles and eventually drew handguns and exchanged fire, police said. It wasn't clear what the two men were arguing about.

Life EMS transported the men to Sparrow Ionia Hospital, where they were pronounced dead.

Police said both men, whose identities have not been released, held permits to carry concealed weapons.

ElvisL1ves 09-20-2013 01:27 PM

No innocents hurt? Really? Do you know for a fact that neither of them had any family or friends, or anyone else who might have depended on them or cared about them and will miss them somehow? There are damn few such individuals.

Ca3799 09-21-2013 04:08 AM

"A Wisconsin man is facing charges for allegedly telling his 6-year-old son, who had at least 3 years of firearms training, to lie after shooting his 4-year-old sister in the face with a shotgun. " http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/1...ister-in-face/

It is so strange to me how guns keep turning good guys in to bad guys. It's like magic or something.

BigAppleBucky 09-21-2013 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 16683784)
No innocents hurt? Really? Do you know for a fact that neither of them had any family or friends, or anyone else who might have depended on them or cared about them and will miss them somehow? There are damn few such individuals.

If you really dug into that I suspect you might find an abused spouse, roommate, or co-workers / employees.

Anyone so lacking self control as to get into a deadly road rage incident, probably had a fierce temper around the house and at work as well.

ElvisL1ves 09-21-2013 10:55 AM

None of that now. Law-abiding citizens, remember?

Ca3799 09-21-2013 09:04 PM

I can't recall if we covered the Gilberton, Pennsylvania Police Chief Mark Kessler.

Make that former Gilberton, Pennsylvania Police Chief Mark Kessler.

Here is his July video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QQW0RswpQ4

And the "apology" tour: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQakPtOQCJo where he says "Fuucck You, " and 'get some more... you bunch of f'ing *&%$ suckers, you libtard crybaby pu**ies,' etc.

Welp, the town council let him go saying he acted inappropriately, including shooting a likenesses of a couple of council members and misusing town property- the guns in the video.

But, never fear! He's a "good guy" and so are a his supporters who attended the town council meeting where Kessler's fate was decided. Armed, of course. I'm sure they were not trying to intimidate any council members.

Zeriel 09-22-2013 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ca3799 (Post 16685366)
"A Wisconsin man is facing charges for allegedly telling his 6-year-old son, who had at least 3 years of firearms training, to lie after shooting his 4-year-old sister in the face with a shotgun. " http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/1...ister-in-face/

Father should be in jail for whatever the local equivalent of second-degree murder is. His gun, his responsibilty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ca3799 (Post 16686772)
I can't recall if we covered the Gilberton, Pennsylvania Police Chief Mark Kessler.

Make that former Gilberton, Pennsylvania Police Chief Mark Kessler.

Here is his July video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_QQW0RswpQ4

And the "apology" tour: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQakPtOQCJo where he says "Fuucck You, " and 'get some more... you bunch of f'ing *&%$ suckers, you libtard crybaby pu**ies,' etc.

Welp, the town council let him go saying he acted inappropriately, including shooting a likenesses of a couple of council members and misusing town property- the guns in the video.

And Kessler should be in jail as well for, among other things, terroristic threats.


Quote:

It is so strange to me how guns keep turning good guys in to bad guys. It's like magic or something.

But, never fear! He's a "good guy" and so are a his supporters who attended the town council meeting where Kessler's fate was decided. Armed, of course. I'm sure they were not trying to intimidate any council members.
Y'know, I've been a gun owner and recreational shooter for fifteen years, and I can't say that's been even a strong minority viewpoint in any group of shooters I've associated with. Do you happen to have any polling data, or are we back to the problem of getting lawmakers to listen to the citizens instead of the NRA (representing, at most, 7% of the nation's firearms owners)?

Zeriel 09-22-2013 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves (Post 16683784)
No innocents hurt? Really? Do you know for a fact that neither of them had any family or friends, or anyone else who might have depended on them or cared about them and will miss them somehow? There are damn few such individuals.

Y'know, as much as I disagree with your positions, thanks for saying this so I didn't have to.

BrokenBriton 09-23-2013 10:09 AM

Jesus, what's happening in Nairobi, Kenya - it's turing into a US city as we speak.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.