Straight Dope Message Board

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

My mother is in her 70s. She has the guts to brave the grocery store unarmed on a weekly basis.

This guy is just one giant fucking pussy.

I've not finished the thread, Sir, but as far as I am concerned, you won it.
101

[Euphonious Polemic]

A 26-year-old Eugene, Oregon man unintentionally shot himself in the thigh with a handgun he was openly carrying in a holster on his leg.
The man was using the bathroom at Indra's Internet Lounge in downtown Eugene when he unintentionally discharged the gun. According to the owner of the cafe, after shooting himself the man crawled out of the bathroom and employees put a tourniquet on his leg to stop the bleeding until medical crews arrived. The owner added that the man was a regular at the cafe and was familiar with guns.
Police noted that in Oregon it is legal for someone to openly carry a holstered gun. Furthermore, someone wishing to openly carry a gun is not required to obtain any sort of carrying permit or undergo any sort of gun safety training.
Police are not releasing the man's name and don't plan on issuing any charges.

I think it's pretty clear here, that if only there had been more guns, this accident would never have happened.

Anyone else want to state the obvious reason why? 102

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

I think it's pretty clear here, that if only there had been more guns, this accident would never have happened.

Anyone else want to state the obvious reason why?

Well, a woman would have just shot the door... 103

[Euphonious Polemic]

Close, but not quite.

You see, if there had been many more guns in Eugene OR, and indeed at the Indra's Internet Lounge, then obviously, the establishment would have been better prepared for customers with guns. This would have entailed gun holders in each bathroom stall, and next to each urinal.

Because guns are still fairly rare in Eugene OR, that means that fine establishments like Indra's Internet Lounge do not have bathroom gun racks. If only there were more guns, we would clearly help eradicate senseless accidents like this one. Please note that this could happen to anyone- there is NO need, I repeat NO NEED for any gun safety courses. This would just lead to a slippery slope of courses, more courses, registration, confiscation and finally Hitler. 104

[elucidator]

Now, that can legitimately be described as a cultural and regional distinction. There have always been places where carrying a hunting rifle openly is no big deal. Which is fine, different strokes. 105

[Euphonious Polemic]

Whatever.

The point is, there is no bad situation that cannot be improved by utilizing the very simple solution of:

More guns. 106

[Ca3799]

http://www.chron.com/news/local_news...ut-4244032.php

Two people shot "in the buttocks" as a strip club? How is that possible? Was the shooter aiming for buttocks or does he just have bad aim? 107

[Ethilrist]

Originally Posted by Ca3799

http://www.chron.com/news/local_news...ut-4244032.php

Two people shot "in the buttocks" as a strip club? How is that possible? Was the shooter aiming for buttocks or does he just have bad aim?

Perhaps lap dances may have been involved? "Is that a gun in your pocket, or are you..." BLAM! 108

[elucidator]

Went off half-cocked, did he? 109

[Kable]

Here's a good one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp5gAY6aIjA 110

[Snowboarder Bo]

Originally Posted by Kable

Here's a good one!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp5gAY6aIjA

How is this "stupid gun news"? 111

[Gyrate]

That actually looks sensible - calling 911 to determine how much force she can use to protect herself. Compared to some of the other stories discussed here, that's positively responsible gun ownership. 112

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

That actually looks sensible - calling 911 to determine how much force she can use to protect herself. Compared to some of the other stories discussed here, that's positively responsible gun ownership.

Yes. 113

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo

How is this "stupid gun news"?

It is stupid to gun fetishists like Kable. 114

[Euphonious Polemic]

She should not have wasted her time calling anyone - just blown the person away. It really does not matter if you're shooting at a potential criminal, vacuum cleaner salesman or person just asking for directions. The point is that you're defending yourself, and as long as you probably won't be convicted, then it is a righteous shoot.

Anyway, if the person she shot was innocent, he would have been OK. The human body has certain mechanisms and a way of rejecting bullets that are not intended for them. 115

[Euphonious Polemic]

But really, the obvious solution to the stupid situation that Kable above posed is....



Can you guess?



More guns. You see if the guy had a gun, he could have returned fire if she had shot at him. Then, whoever was left alive could have been lauded as a hero, since the dead person was obviously a criminal, and deserved to get shot. If he was killed, she was a hero for defending her home from a criminal. If she was killed, then he was a hero for defending himself against a crazy woman with a gun, shooting at anything that moved. Win-Win! 116

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

She should not have wasted her time calling anyone - just blown the person away.

I believe she did right. She had the police on the way, and was reminded that you can't shoot someone for rattling your doorknob, but you can if he breaks into your home and you are in fear for your life. 117

[elucidator]

Totally obvious. Shoot through the door, you will ruin your door. Even if you have one of those wimpy-ass .32, its still going to leave a mark. 118

[gamerunknown]

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant

I believe she did right. She had the police on the way, and was reminded that you can't shoot someone for rattling your doorknob, but you can if he breaks into your home and you are in fear for your life.

Under the castle doctrine, if they've navigated the moat, they're open game for the turrets.

Originally Posted by Double Foolscap

And having a gun is going to help with the bit I bolded? I suppose if you consider a protracted siege and eventual death by SWAT team a win...

Originally Posted by Biffy the Elephant Shrew

Which is relevant if you know a lot of gun control advocates who are pro-heart disease.

No, of course. I just think that saying "look, be less scared of your fellow citizens and of your government" is a sly elision that ignores the facts to preserve the status quo. 119

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by gamerunknown

Under the castle doctrine, if they've navigated the moat, they're open game for the turrets.

Woooo Hooooo! See? Fire away!

Pizza delivery to wrong house, Mormon, delivering flyers, neighbor telling you your cat is loose?

Who cares? You're in the clear - it's your castle, so fire away!

If they are at all sensible, they will be carrying too. Not your fault if they have a wimpy calibre, or a small clip. 120

[Vinyl Turnip]

A 26-year-old Eugene, Oregon man unintentionally shot himself in the thigh with a handgun he was openly carrying in a holster on his leg.

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I complain that the "good guys vs. bad guys" dichotomy is overly simplistic when applied to gun rights arguments, and doesn't reflect the complex reality. Clearly, this was a good man defending himself against a bad thigh. 121

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

Pizza delivery to wrong house, Mormon, delivering flyers, neighbor telling you your cat is loose?

I've never had a Pizza Guy or Mormon break down my front door.

One must be in fear of one's life inside one's home.
Flyer delivery, now that is another matter. 122

[Euphonious Polemic]

Originally Posted by carnivorousplant

I've never had a Pizza Guy or Mormon break down my front door.

One must be in fear of one's life inside one's home.

What's to stop an armed thug from disguising himself as a pizza guy or Mormon? I mean it's a terrifying and scary world out there - just turn the TV on and you'll see what I mean. It's absolutely terrifying. Paralysing fear. Gut-wrenching, pants filling fear.

So really, it's logical to shoot first, ask questions later. God will sort them out. 123

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

God will sort them out.

But not the court. 124

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

More guns. You see if the guy had a gun, he could have returned fire if she had shot at him. Then, whoever was left alive could have been lauded as a hero, since the dead person was obviously a criminal, and deserved to get shot. If he was killed, she was a hero for defending her home from a criminal. If she was killed, then he was a hero for defending himself against a crazy woman with a gun, shooting at anything that moved. Win-Win!

No, she should have been disarmed! Or how about this stupid gun owner? She had called 911, shouldn't she have just waited for the police to rescue her?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQ...eature=mh_lolz 125

[Zebra]

She should have given the baby the hand gun. It was way to small to handle the 12 gauge. 126

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by Euphonious Polemic

Pizza delivery to wrong house, Mormon, delivering flyers, neighbor telling you your cat is loose?

Who cares? You're in the clear - it's your castle, so fire away!

Man shot dead after pulling into wrong driveway

A group of friends said they were going to pick up a girl who lived in the area to go ice skating around 10 p.m. when their GPS system sent them to the wrong home.

The friends said they pulled into the driveway and saw a man peer out the window. They said they waited in the car for a bit and then the man, Phillip Sailors, 69, came out of the home with a handgun, firing a round into the air.

“The guy came out. He went in again and he came out with a gun in his hand and he shot into the air,” 15-year-old passenger Yeson Jimenez said.

The friends said that's when they tried leaving the house, and said Sailors pointed the gun at the car and shot Rodrigo Diaz, 22, who was driving the car. An arrest warrant said Sailors had a .22-caliber pistol.

The passengers said Sailors never asked what they were doing there.

Sailors' attorney told Thomas that the man believed he and his wife were being attacked.

“He is very distraught over the loss of life from the defense of his home. This incident happened late in the evening hours when he was home with his wife and he assumed it was a home invasion and he maintains his innocence,” the attorney said.

Now, make no mistake, this guy is going away for a long, long time. But the problem is, the perception by many gun owners is that they are justified any time they are in fear of attack. They will be prosecuted after the fact, but that won't bring back their innocent victims. 127

[Kable]

Hey, let's all make fun of this 72 year old man who thinks he can pay hero with his concealed pistol!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6pY...dd0I_H&index=3 128

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Fear Itself

the perception by many gun owners is that they are justified any time they are in fear of attack.

I hope not. I believe you are correct in that case, however.
Perhaps there should be a license to own firearms involving a test about this sort of thing and an annual background check..
That would close the so called "gun show loophole" and make owners aware of the legislation concerning shooting at someone.
I can shoot an intruder in my house if I am in fear of my life, but I can't (nor would I want to) chase him out into the street and shoot him. 129

[Fear Itself]

Originally Posted by Kable

Hey, let's all make fun of this 72 year old man who thinks he can pay hero with his concealed pistol!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6pY...dd0I_H&index=3

Wow! Once upon a time, a gun worked the way it does on TV and killed the bad guy. Tell us another one, Uncle Kable! 130

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Fear Itself

Wow! Once upon a time, a gun worked the way it does on TV and killed the bad guy. Tell us another one, Uncle Kable!

Pretty cool huh! Here you go.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcLo...pH-4MyqCdd0I_H

Let me know if you want another! 131

[elucidator]

Oh, sure, you liberals are all about the Wal-Mart worker, until one is getting stabbed, then you don't care unless the stabber gets shot by an illegal alien on Medicare! 132

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by elucidator

Oh, sure, you liberals are all about the Wal-Mart worker, until one is getting stabbed, then you don't care unless the stabber gets shot by an illegal alien on Medicare!

It depends if the price of WalMart socks goes up. 133

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I complain that the "good guys vs. bad guys" dichotomy is overly simplistic when applied to gun rights arguments, and doesn't reflect the complex reality. Clearly, this was a good man defending himself against a bad thigh.

No doubt he's overweight and is chipping away at his excess fat one scoop at a time. 134

[Snowboarder Bo]

Originally Posted by Kable

No, she should have been disarmed! Or how about this stupid gun owner? She had called 911, shouldn't she have just waited for the police to rescue her?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NJQ...eature=mh_lolz

Are you just trying to prove that you're the dumbest gun rights proponent on the intarwebz?

Your linked story isn't about a gun owner at all. And you keep posting strawmen like you live in a hayfield.

How do you find your mouth with the food? I mean, your posts are giving the impression that you're a fucking idiot. Do you even understand why you look like an idiot? 135

[Jack Batty]

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

This is exactly what I'm talking about when I complain that the "good guys vs. bad guys" dichotomy is overly simplistic when applied to gun rights arguments, and doesn't reflect the complex reality. Clearly, this was a good man defending himself against a bad thigh.

That's hardly fair. His leg wasn't even armed. 136

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by Jack Batty

That's hardly fair. His leg wasn't even armed.

Yeah, but there's a right to bear arms, not bear legs; so it's just tough luck for any legs that get uppity. 137

[Ca3799]

Military hero, elite navy Seal, author of "American Sniper", shot and killed at gun range: http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/rough...189536271.html 138

[Bill Door]

Originally Posted by Ca3799

Military hero, elite navy Seal, author of "American Sniper", shot and killed at gun range: http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/rough...189536271.html

Probably have to demote him to second deadliest U.S. sniper. 139

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Bill Door

Probably have to demote him to second deadliest U.S. sniper.

That's hilarious! Imagine how funny it would have been if this girl didn't have a gun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPfz..._wgZ6g&index=1 140

[Zakalwe]

Originally Posted by Kable

That's hilarious! Imagine how funny it would have been if this girl didn't have a gun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPfz..._wgZ6g&index=1

Is there any chance you could ever link to something NOT youtube (or video-based)? 141

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

Is there any chance you could ever link to something NOT youtube (or video-based)?

There's always a chance. What do you think of this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=PoDNJQtNVoc

Isn't it great to see a 65 year old woman chase out 5 armed robbers? 142

[Zakalwe]

Originally Posted by Kable

There's always a chance. What do you think of this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=PoDNJQtNVoc

Isn't it great to see a 65 year old woman chase out 5 armed robbers?

I think that as long as you post videos, I'll be ignoring your posts. I'm simply not willing to commit to them that much. See, with an article, I can scan it, get the gist, and decide whether or not to follow up in more detail. Elapsed time 10-15 secs. Maybe 20-25 if the intrawebs are being crawly that day. With video, first there's load time, then I have to watch the video - at its pace. Elapsed time is probably in the minutes range. So I don't bother. Your choice, but since you're the one trying to convince me (and people like me)* of the correctness of your position then it's to your benefit to make your argument in a compelling way. Youtube ain't it for a lot of us.

* Please note that I have posted neither for nor agin the OP, I am the "undecided", the "needs convincing". I am your audience since you guys sure aren't going to change each other's minds. 143

[carnivorousplant]

Originally Posted by Kable

Isn't it great to see a 65 year old woman chase out 5 armed robbers?

Cool.

144

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

I think that as long as you post videos, I'll be ignoring your posts. I'm simply not willing to commit to them that much. See, with an article, I can scan it, get the gist, and decide whether or not to follow up in more detail. Elapsed time 10-15 secs. Maybe 20-25 if the intrawebs are being crawly that day. With video, first there's load time, then I have to watch the video - at its pace. Elapsed time is probably in the minutes range. So I don't bother. Your choice, but since you're the one trying to convince me (and people like me)* of the correctness of your position then it's to your benefit to make your argument in a compelling way. Youtube ain't it for a lot of us.

* Please note that I have posted neither for nor agin the OP, I am the "undecided", the "needs convincing". I am your audience since you guys sure aren't going to change each other's minds.

I apologize, I took you as one of the anti-gunners who only focus on the bad and ignore the good that guns are used for, and I am perhaps a bit oversensitive given the already poisoned title of this thread. As for reading, I've been talking about these articles in some other posts of mine which I think are well done.

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/t...about-violence

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/t...dle-of-the-gun

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/faq-on-violence

Going forward though my counter-offensive plan is to post a good news story for every bad news story I see, and I think with the videos are harder for people to just explain away than are statistics that on this subject nobody seems to trust and don't seem to sway anyone. With a video or 911 transcript my hope is that seeing/hearing is believing. 145

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Originally Posted by Kable

I apologize, I took you as one of the anti-gunners who only focus on the bad and ignore the good that guns are used for, and I am perhaps a bit oversensitive given the already poisoned title of this thread. As for reading, I've been talking about these articles in some other posts of mine which I think are well done.

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/t...about-violence

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/t...dle-of-the-gun

http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/faq-on-violence

Going forward though my counter-offensive plan is to post a good news story for every bad news story I see, and I think with the videos are harder for people to just explain away than are statistics that on this subject nobody seems to trust and don't seem to sway anyone. With a video or 911 transcript my hope is that seeing/hearing is believing.

It would be more impressive if you weren't repeating incidents already.

Plus you're not achieving anywhere close to a 1:1 ratio, even with the fact that you're going back in time to contrast with contemporary reports. 146

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian

It would be more impressive if you weren't repeating incidents already.

Which one did I repeat? 147

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Snowboarder Bo

Are you just trying to prove that you're the dumbest gun rights proponent on the intarwebz?

Your linked story isn't about a gun owner at all. And you keep posting strawmen like you live in a hayfield.

How do you find your mouth with the food? I mean, your posts are giving the impression that you're a fucking idiot. Do you even understand why you look like an idiot?

Sorry I missed your comment earlier. The victim used shotgun to save herself from a man who raped her once, and broke into her house apparently attempting to do it again. Are you suggesting it does not count because she borrowed the shotgun from a neighbor and wasn't a "gun owner" herself? Is that your objection? Really? 148

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by Kable

Sorry I missed your comment earlier. The victim used shotgun to save herself from a man who raped her once, and broke into her house apparently attempting to do it again. Are you suggesting it does not count because she borrowed the shotgun from a neighbor and wasn't a "gun owner" herself? Is that your objection? Really?

Not many people want to outlaw shotguns. So I don't see how that's in the least bit relevant. 149

[Kable]

Originally Posted by Lobohan

Not many people want to outlaw shotguns. So I don't see how that's in the least bit relevant.

Actually I think a number of people on the gun-control side want exactly that. Here's a recent admission posted on this very forum just yesterday.

Originally Posted by Zoe

If some of us had our druthers, all guns would be banned.

It seems pretty clear to me that they know they can't get what they want now so they are going for a little at a time. I think the preferred term for that is incrementalism, and I do think incrementalism is their best shot towards their ultimate goal. A number of gun rights advocates know this and that's why they oppose it.

Also if you look up the proposals of the 1994 assault weapon ban, you will see that some shotguns, very suitable for home defense, were in fact banned. I forget though, did that have a measurable effect on crime? 150