No, you’re not allowed to thread-shit. There’s a difference, believe it or not.
If you’re not interested in discussing why gun news is positive in a thread about Positive Gun News, it hardly means that anyone else is thread-shitting.
But, if it’s only about posting anecdotes from some source somewhere, for whatever reason that may be, then no wonder it’s in the Mundane and Pointless forum, instead of one where they and the reasons for judging them Positive or not can be subjected to any sort of scrutiny.
Man threatens three sheriff’s deputies with a hammer. Since he was white, they keep their guns holstered and one of them subdues him by hucking cans of baked beans at him. No shots fired.
That link clearly belongs in the “Positive Can of Baked Beans News of the Day” thread.
In other news, Jack in the Box shooter feared for his safety, says he shot in self defense
DGU with no deaths. Bringing a knife to a gunfight typically goes poorly for the knife wielder, and in this case it certainly seems that the attacker wasn’t acting rationally.
In similar news, a man stops a woman from stabbing his wife by squirting ketchup on the attacker
DKU.
Apparently a food fight; there was also a bowl of sugar involved.
A teen tried to rape his friend’s mother at a sleepover — until she pulled a gun, police say
The part that bothers me though.
While it’s a topic for another thread, is why people have to be persuaded to report assaults. While there may be a rare good reason, I can’t think of any that might qualify.
Also, this is the WaPo, so they have their obligatory bilgewater at the end about how rarely guns are used for defense in spite of the CDC study finding otherwise.
This story actually IS positive, since she didn’t actually kill the kid. Good for her.
Are you saying she did the right thing by *not *calling the cops? If so, please expand upon that thought.
In other news, Ocala Police: Son shot mom’s ex-boyfriend who broke into their home
DGU with no deaths. The guy tried to get in at first, and when he returned the resident was ready to repel him. Even after getting shot and jumping out of a 2nd story window the person did not expire. Shot placement is critical.
In all seriousness, when you post comments like this, you seem almost disappointed that the guy didn’t die. Am I reading it wrong?
Absolutely not. I was expressing dismay that she didn’t immediately report it and that she might not have ever done so without having been persuaded.
And further disappointment that there are far too many victims who also don’t report attacks.
Thanks. Just making sure - it wasn’t quite clear.
It does bring up the point about … *some *gun owners justifying their decisions by claiming the police can’t get there in time. It might be easy to go on to think they’re just useless and there’s no point calling them afterward, either.
The “bilgewater” is a factual cite of a Harvard study, not merely opinion.
Self-victimization surveys are one way of looking at crime, but they’re probably not the most complete, and probably bias towards underreporting.
It’s an example to show that even after being shot, attackers can still present a threat. If a person is able to run, and jump out of a 2nd story window, they can still be a threat. To ensure a threat is stopped, shot placement is critical, as is practice and discipline. It’s more like a PSA.
In other news, Clerk shoots robbery suspect in Pleasant Grove
DGU with no deaths. It doesn’t say whether the robber was armed, but I’d say he picked the wrong place to rob.
Again, in a serious question, you make it sound like the only way to stop a threat is to make sure they are dead. Is that incorrect?
My understanding is that LEOs are trained to fire at the center of a target to neutralize the threat. This technique is highly likely to kill the target, even though death per se is not the objective. There is no such thing as, “Well, I’ll blow his trigger finger off, that will stop the threat.”