KSYR
Topic Author
Posts: 562
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 12:45 pm

Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:32 pm

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/10/colorado.shootings/index.html

Yes, I'm aware that the gun-control debate has been beaten to death here in non-av. However, I am interested in what people think of this development. To me it appears as if this courageous civilian woman saved large number of lives, only because she was (legally?) armed at the church.

I am also left wondering what kind of church uses armed security guards?!? I guess this particular congregation saw a need, but still very unusual.
 
NeilYYZ
Posts: 2443
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 12:55 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:41 pm



Quoting KSYR (Thread starter):
However, I am interested in what people think of this development.

I think that the people are lucky she was there. She saw a threat, she took it out. Good for her!

Quoting KSYR (Thread starter):
I am also left wondering what kind of church uses armed security guards?!? I guess this particular congregation saw a need, but still very unusual.

Not the type of place that you'd expect it, but no doubt a good thing she was there! I personally would have no problem if the church I went to had some armed guards, I don't really think that it's needed at the church I go to, but then again, I'm sure these people didn't believe they needed it either.
It may be too early to drink scotch... But it is NEVER too early to think about it...
 
miamiair
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:42 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:42 pm

That is the power of having an armed CWP. She used her weapon and prevented a tragedy from becoming a possible massacre.

Interesting note, the mall at Omaha was designated a gun free zone, whereby a law abiding citizen with a CWP would not be able to carry a weapon. It is a possibility that that tragedy could have been stopped before it got to magnitude it did. Gun free zones of this type don't help anyone except criminals.
Molon Labe - Proud member of SMASH
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:46 pm

Remember the thread last week where the possibility of armed civilians terminating a threat was brought up and some people insisted that it would just lead to more dead people because of the all out guns blazing firefight that would result?

Guess that's not quite so accurate after all.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
ANCFlyer
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:49 pm



Quoting MDorBust (Reply 3):
Remember the thread last week where the possibility of armed civilians terminating a threat was brought up and some people insisted that it would just lead to more dead people because of the all out guns blazing firefight that would result?

 yes 

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 3):
Guess that's not quite so accurate after all.

 checkmark 

An armed society is a polite society . . .

Or at least, a protected society.
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
express1
Posts: 847
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 2:08 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:55 pm

The Pastor of our church in Islington North London have a son-inlaw and daughter at the YWAM camp and they were there when the shooting took place, they are safe,but it was a worry for all back at church in London

dave
David.S cavanagh since 1961,if you can do better,then show me.
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:09 pm

Attention all A.net anti-gun "nuts":

Told ya so.

Signed,
Me.

This is how it can work if you'll untighten your sphincter a couple of notches and allow law-abiding citizens to protect themselves, and possibly others as was the case this time.

Behold, fair-use excerpt:

"A New Life parishioner acting as a security guard shot and killed a gunman who entered the church Sunday afternoon after he had gotten no more than 50 feet inside the building, Boyd said."

"Boyd said the female security guard was a hero in preventing further bloodshed, rushing to confront the gunman just inside the church.

"She probably saved over a hundred lives," Boyd said of the guard, whom he said is not a law enforcement officer and used her personal weapon."

""Hundreds of lives were saved yesterday because of the plan that was put in place," said Boyd, who put the number of people on the church campus at the time as 7,000."


Thank God. Literally.
 
NWADC9
Posts: 3938
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 12:33 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:13 pm

Kudos to the woman! And to all your whackjobs who think we should outlaw guns, yet more proof guns actually SAVE lives from those with bad intentions and a weapon to carry it out.
Flying an aeroplane with only a single propeller to keep you in the air. Can you imagine that? -Capt. Picard
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:21 pm

I hope that she is not negatively impacted by this event.

I further don't expect alot of press coverage on this.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:23 pm



Quoting MDorBust (Reply 3):
Remember the thread last week where the possibility of armed civilians terminating a threat was brought up and some people insisted that it would just lead to more dead people because of the all out guns blazing firefight that would result?

Guess that's not quite so accurate after all.

In this case, did the presence of an armed civilian help save lives? Yes. Does that mean that in general the benefit of being able to better confront dangerous assailants outweighs the risk of having more firearms in circulation, each with the potential (however slight) to be accidentally or purposely misused? Not necessarily. One incident proves nothing, no matter which side you're arguing for.

That said, that church community got very, very lucky that the situation was resolved before more lives were lost, and the presence of the armed civilian contributed to that resolution.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
aloges
Posts: 14842
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:25 pm

When you've all come down off your high pro-gun anti-regulation horses, would anyone care to notice this is one event where an armed voluntary security guard (hence probably trained better than average) prevented further tragedy? I applaud her for that and will gladly agree that it was her using her legal firearm that saved a lot of lives. But gleeful "told you so"s are akin to dancing on the graves of other victims of random shootings that were killed by weapons just as legal.

Am I OK with armed security guards protecting risk (see quote below) areas? Certainly! Will I agree that every gun in every John Doe's bedside cabinet makes the world a safer place? Not any more than before this event.

Quote:
The pastor also said New Life had taken extra precautions Sunday after hearing of the attack in Arvada, Colorado, early Sunday morning, in which a gunman killed two people after he was refused lodging at Youth With a Mission live-in Christian missionary center.

"Hundreds of lives were saved yesterday because of the plan that was put in place,"

The armed guard was part of a PLAN, and that plan saved lives. It wasn't Jane Doe standing around idly deciding to pull the trigger - but granted, it wasn't a trained LEO either.
Don't cry because it's over, smile because it happened.
 
airfoilsguy
Posts: 3485
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 7:28 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:28 pm

This women is a power hungry vigilante and should be prosecuted.

Signed
A-net anti gun crowd.

Quoting Miamiair (Reply 2):
Gun free zones of this type don't help anyone except criminals.

Wrong, everyone knows that if you pass a law against it everyone will obey the law and the problem will go away.


Signed
Anti gun crowd who live in fantasy land.
It's not a near miss it's a near hit!!
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:28 pm

This story is simply another out of countless stories every year about law-abiding armed citizens saving lives and preventing death. I'm under the impression had the Omaha shooting not occurred so recently, we would not be seeing such wide coverage of these shootings as we have, because of that very reason.

Here's a great article about the media coverage of the Omaha shooting and how they purposely ignored the failure of their ban on guns:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315563,00.html

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
An armed society is a polite society . . .

Or at least, a protected society.

 checkmark 

And the sooner people grow brains and understand this, the better. Banning guns does NOT make it more difficult to obtain them illegally, it ONLY TAKES AWAY THE RIGHTS OF LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.

Gun control advocates - you all KNOW that had this armed civilian not been guarding that church, many more people would be dead, more lives ruined, and more families destroyed.

This last year alone we've seen so many perfect examples of the utter failure of gun-free zones to make people safer, and we still have a large number of f*cking morons who want to initiate gun control.

I would like to ask anyone who supports gun control how can they rationalize the fact that they want to deprive people of one of the most basic human rights: to protect oneself from harm by another.

I'll give you a small hint: YOU CAN'T.




-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4044
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:30 pm



Quoting NeilYYZ (Reply 10):
People just don't want to get whacked in a mall.

Then if you are afraid the only way that will happen is by carrying your own gun and the mall (a private business, as you may recall) does not allow you to carry one your choice is simple.
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
SBBRTech
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 2:32 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:33 pm

Wow, chicks with guns, that's a must!
But....weren't the guns used by the wacko also legal?
"I'm beginning to get the hang of this flying business" - C3PO
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:33 pm



Quoting Aloges (Reply 12):
When youve all come down off your high pro-gun anti-regulation horses, would anyone care to notice this is one event where an armed voluntary security guard (hence probably trained better than average) prevented further tragedy?

Two things:

1. There are MILLIONS of document events of armed civilians saving their own lives and the lives of others, this is one of MILLIONS.

2. I happen to be an armed security officer just like the person in this story and guess what - we are still armed civilians, we are not law enforcement officers, and we are hardly trained. Anybody who's fired a few bullets through a handgun at a target is as trained as an armed security officer in this state.





-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:35 pm



Quoting SBBRTech (Reply 14):
But....weren't the guns used by the wacko also legal?

Whether or not they are able to be owned legally by law-abiding citizens is irrelevant - this person was not law-abiding, and in most of these situations the gun was purchased illegally.

Yes........gun control.........tell would-be murderers that it's illegal for them to hold a gun.......yeah, that helps.




-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:36 pm



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 13):
Then if you are afraid the only way that will happen is by carrying your own gun and the mall (a private business, as you may recall) does not allow you to carry one your choice is simple.

Do you have a spare tire in your car?
Do you have a smoke detector?
Do you have a first-aid kit?
Does your community have a fire station?
Have you ever taken a condom along with you on a date?
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:02 pm



Quoting NWA742 (Reply 12):
Gun control advocates - you all KNOW that had this armed civilian not been guarding that church, many more people would be dead, more lives ruined, and more families destroyed.

Yes, and I don't think any of us gun-control advocates would argue that point.

Here's what the issue boils down to. There are proper ways to use firearms (such as this case here), and improper ways to use firearms. The gun itself has little to nothing to do with which way it is used (ignoring fully automatic and other "overkill" weapons); instead, it largely depends on the gun owner. Most legal gun owners will use their firearms properly almost all the time. However, for every gun out there, there is a chance (however small) that it will be used improperly. This improper usage may be intentional or accidental, but it is always a potential risk, because gun owners are human, and hence imperfect. Gun control laws (should) work in two ways. First, they try to restrict the sale of guns to those who are more likely to use them improperly (criminals, the mentally deficient, people who don't know how to use them properly, minors, etc.) Second, they try to reduce the number of guns in overall circulation, since if a gun is not in circulation, it obviously can't be used improperly.

Will someone who is intent on acquiring a gun to use in a crime be prevented from doing so by these laws? In most cases, no. But not all gun violence is perpetrated by people who have this intent. There are plenty of incidents where it is the immediate access to guns that contributes to tragedy: crimes of passion, suicides, gun accidents, misuse of firearms by children, etc. Gun control laws are meant to cut down on these sort of incidents, where there is no premeditated intent to use firearms.

Does this mean that total elimination of guns is the answer? No. As I stated, gun control laws are not well equipped to deal with individuals who have a premeditated intent to use firearms improperly, and so individuals have the right to carry a firearm, should they so choose, to protect themselves against this threat. But a smart gun control policy will weigh these benefits against the risks discussed above and come to some middle ground. We should be able to have a reasoned debate over where this middle ground lies without resorting to name-calling or extremism.

Although I do agree with Miamiair that having a gun-free zone without also having a way to check people for guns is downright silly. I could see it working if you set it up like the drug-free zones around schools; don't prohibit them, but have an increased mandatory sentence if they are used in a crime within a particular area. But just saying "don't bring your guns in" isn't going to stop anyone.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:11 pm



Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 18):
for every gun out there, there is a chance (however small) that it will be used improperly. This improper usage may be intentional or accidental, but it is always a potential risk, because gun owners are human, and hence imperfect.

For every car out there, there is a chance (however small) that it will be used improperly. This improper usage may be intentional or accidental, but it is always a potential risk, because car owners are human, and hence imperfect.

Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 18):
But not all gun violence is perpetrated by people who have this intent. There are plenty of incidents where it is the immediate access to guns that contributes to tragedy: crimes of passion, suicides, gun accidents, misuse of firearms by children, etc.

But not all car accidents are perpetrated by people who have this intent. There are plenty of incidents where it is the immediate access to cars that contributes to tragedy: road rage, suicides, drunk driving, misuse of automobiles by children, etc.
 
CaptOveur
Posts: 6064
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 3:13 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:18 pm



Quoting KSYR (Thread starter):
I am also left wondering what kind of church uses armed security guards?!

Most of the big churches around here use off duty police to direct traffic on Sundays, or when they have a large event during the week. They are in uniform and carrying their weapons.
Things were better when it was two guys in a dorm room.
 
Yellowstone
Posts: 2821
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:32 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:21 pm



Quoting Queso (Reply 19):
For every car out there, there is a chance (however small) that it will be used improperly. This improper usage may be intentional or accidental, but it is always a potential risk, because car owners are human, and hence imperfect.



Quoting Queso (Reply 19):
But not all car accidents are perpetrated by people who have this intent. There are plenty of incidents where it is the immediate access to cars that contributes to tragedy: road rage, suicides, drunk driving, misuse of automobiles by children, etc.

Yes, and that's why we have laws controlling access to cars. But drawing this parallel does not negate my argument. The primary purpose of cars is to provide transportation, and as a society we have decided that the benefits this provides are significantly exceeded by the accompanying risk of car accidents. Guns are in a rather odd position in this respect, though. Their functionality is exactly the same whether they are used properly or improperly; the only question is at whom that functionality is targeted. The current societal consensus is that the risk-benefit balance for guns lies more toward the risk than it does in the case of cars, which makes sense to me seeing as how guns are expressly designed to wound and kill when used properly. As a result, guns ought to be more controlled than cars are.
Hydrogen is an odorless, colorless gas which, given enough time, turns into people.
 
SBBRTech
Posts: 403
Joined: Sat Jul 28, 2007 2:32 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:31 pm



Quoting NWA742 (Reply 16):
Yes........gun control.........tell would-be murderers that it's illegal for them to hold a gun.......yeah, that helps.

NW i really don't have a strong position either pro or against guns. They exist and will exist for who knows how long, and all laws, controls, x-rays, whatever is there to deal with it won't make a difference if one goes to the dark side of weaponry....only another weapon will, and that I have to agree with.

Out here I've been witness to a few episodes where the sudden appearence of a gun made all the difference - both for the "good" guy and for the "bad" guy. Also during my tour as a bank manager I found myself in situations where I wished I had some firepower other than my salesman pitch...fortunately I never had to crawl under the table thanks for our underpaid security guys!

So for me it all depends on the person caring the piece. That woman deserves recognition. I hope they don't fry her for shooting that bastard.
"I'm beginning to get the hang of this flying business" - C3PO
 
D L X
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:43 pm

ANOTHER gun control thread. Like moths to a flame, this topic...

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 3):
Remember the thread last week where the possibility of armed civilians terminating a threat was brought up and some people insisted that it would just lead to more dead people because of the all out guns blazing firefight that would result?

Guess that's not quite so accurate after all.

*sigh*

You really like using one sample to "prove" a large point, don't you?

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
An armed society is a polite society . . .

I would say that Japan is much more polite than America.

Quoting KSYR (Thread starter):
To me it appears as if this courageous civilian woman saved large number of lives

Not exactly a "civilian" is she? She was a hired security guard. She did her job, and apparently did it well. But this isn't your average girl down the street who happens to have a concealed weap license.

Quoting Queso (Reply 17):
Do you have a spare tire in your car?
Do you have a smoke detector?
Do you have a first-aid kit?
Does your community have a fire station?
Have you ever taken a condom along with you on a date?

None of those things CAUSE damage, queso.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:50 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
You really like using one sample to "prove" a large point, don't you?

If only it were just one sample. Too bad for you it's not. Feel free to carry on in delusion though.

Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
I would say that Japan is much more polite than America.

Now that is funny. The most xenophobic and racist nation on the planet. Yeah, Japan appears polite on the surface. Public face and private face. The real Japan isn't what Japan wants to show the world.

Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
Not exactly a "civilian" is she? She was a hired security guard.

Actually yes, she was a civilian.

She wasn't a licensed, uniformed or contracted Security Officer. The church set up it's own voluntary security squad that consisted of church parishiners. The "security team" in this instance was nothing more than armed citizens camping out at their church.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
scrubbsywg
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:35 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:57 pm

yeah, from what i have read, the only reason that the church set up this security team was because of the earlier shooting at the mission near denver. I dont know what to think, this church must have had some divine intervention to think, 'hey someone got shot earlier at an unrelated religious facility, lets have our armed parishioner volunteer to be our security for the day'. Wow, kudos to that church for being proactive.
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:57 pm



Quoting Yellowstone (Reply 21):
Yes, and that's why we have laws controlling access to cars.

But they don't much come into play when someone becomes hell bent on robbing a bank or stealing a car and taking the police on a chase that ends up killing a family, no?

Case in point - gun control laws would not prevent or deter a would-be shooter from his/her actions any more than a lack of a driver's license would prevent some asshole who wants steal a car and go for a joy ride. Another common fallacy is that gun control would make access to guns more difficult - not going to happen. In fact, they'd be much easier to buy illegally, as gun control would result in the largest black market of illegal goods in this country. Hell you think drugs are big, wait until you see guns in the event of gun control.

Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
You really like using one sample to "prove" a large point, don't you?

One example is all it takes to realize the major fallacies of the pro gun control argument.

Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
Not exactly a "civilian" is she? She was a hired security guard.

Security officers are civilians.

Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
But this isn't your average girl down the street who happens to have a concealed weap license.

You don't know that. I suggest you read the following:

Quoting NWA742 (Reply 15):
I happen to be an armed security officer just like the person in this story and guess what - we are still armed civilians, we are not law enforcement officers, and we are hardly trained. Anybody who's fired a few bullets through a handgun at a target is as trained as an armed security officer in this state.

I'm willing to bet that it's the same in CO.




-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
N74JW
Posts: 514
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 12:31 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:02 pm



Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 4):
An armed society is a polite society . . .

Come say that on 73rd & Girard. You need a gun there, only because everyone else has one...
rm -r *
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7876
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:03 pm

This has been said many times over and over in other threads, but I'll say it again.

Police is not security. They are law enforcement - they enforce laws, the way they "protect" you is by enforcing laws and letting people know they'll be in a lot of trouble if they break them. They prevent anarchy, they prevent people from ignoring the laws. They are the means to make the laws work and there is no law providing "security" just defyning what is wrong and what you shouldn't do. And they are not instantaneous protection, it takes time for them to get from one place to another.

If you want to ban handguns, provide me with PERSONAL security - wherever I want it, whenever I want it, for as long as I want it. In fact, that's not enough either, because no one will go as far in protecting my own life as I will - a hired gun certainly wouldn't. Not worth the money and not worth his career.

It's absolutely ridiculous to let private and law-abiding citizens only defend themselves with their fists when criminals can easily get a hold of a gun.

[Edited 2007-12-10 13:07:29]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
IADCA
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:05 pm

There's essentially only two choices here if you want to maintain even the present level of public safety (and this is greatly simplified, but forgive me for the simplicity here, I just want to get people thinking). These scenarios assume that what gun-control advocates really want is control of all guns, not just the assault weapons ban or somesuch. With those disclaimers in mind:

First, you allow this woman to use force in what I think everyone would agree is a valid defense of self/others manner. For her to be able to do that, her gun needs to be legal. Her gun needs to be legal essentially because it is so easy to get an illegal gun that most criminals can get their hands on them anyway. Remember that there is already a large number of illegal guns on American streets, and merely banning them and preventing any new ones from entering (if that were even possibly) would not get these off the streets. Where gun control could have benefits is in preventing gun accidents, where legal guns owned by law abiding people accidentally hurt people. However, that is not the case here. This is about stopping an intentional actor who would have a gun were they legal or not.

The other choice is to not allow this woman to have a gun, and then to try to prevent her and the others from being shot by stopping the other guy from having a gun (or some other means, which I'll discuss later). That essentially entails getting all illegal guns off the streets and preventing any new ones from coming. That would entail massive Constitutional violations and a virtual police state. I'll take the legal guns option, even if it does lead to a few tragic accidents. We simply can't do what it would need to implement full gun control without sacrificing the Constitution. I'll take the legal guns option.

Now, of course there are other means to prevent the initial shooter here from shooting even once he had the illegal gun, but those means, such as simple quick-response police protection, wouldn't be changed by gun control.

I know people like to compare the US to Europe and say that if they do gun control, that means we can too. Unfortunately, it just doesn't work that way. The societies are much different. First, guns have been part of American culture since before the Revolution; people don't want to give up rights they already have unless there's an ironclad guarantee of benefit. And unfortunately, we seem to have comparatively large subset of criminals who like the types of crimes that lead to violence. Remember, a great number of shootings are NOT the crazy guy who shoots people at churches, but rather something more like the Sean Taylor case. Since crimes such as home invasions are more prevalent in the US and we can't get the guns that go with them off the streets, then we've forced ourselves as a society into allowing people to own guns for self-defense.

As a final point, people often speak of the potential for vigilantism. IMO, the best way to limit vigilantism is through carefully-defined justification doctrines and rigid adherence to them, not by banning guns.
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Crew
Posts: 11182
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:12 pm

Speaking of guns, I need to donate $100 to my local sheriff soon before my class expires in February.
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:17 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 23):
Quoting Queso (Reply 17):
Do you have a spare tire in your car?
Do you have a smoke detector?
Do you have a first-aid kit?
Does your community have a fire station?
Have you ever taken a condom along with you on a date?

None of those things CAUSE damage, queso.

Wow, D L X, I must commend you on your ever-increasing powers of observation. Well done! However, in order to show that you fully comprehend what the term "common sense" means, you'll need to acknowledge that these items are useful to prepare oneself for unexpected events. As someone who carries a handgun, I hope I'll never have to use it, just like my automobile insurance. But, like my automobile insurance, I have it with me just in case an unexpected event happens.

By the way, do you think a fire extinguisher upside the head would CAUSE damage?

Quoting SBBRTech (Reply 22):
I hope they don't fry her for shooting that bastard.

They won't. Colorado has some very good common-sense gun laws on the books and was one of the first "castle doctrine" states- which, by the way, covers this event very nicely, thank you! Congratulations to the citizens of Colorado for saving the lives of countless people in this event because you have passed common-sense gun laws! Well done!
 
D L X
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:21 pm



Quoting MDorBust (Reply 24):
If only it were just one sample. Too bad for you it's not. Feel free to carry on in delusion though.

And where are your other examples? Surely, you have *thousands* to show that you're not just going by statistically insignificant anecdotes.
I'm just going by what YOU said and say in your posts. You do think that one example means that the gun-control lobby must be wrong. Too bad for you, it's not. Feel free to carry on in delusion though.  Yeah sure (See how that line doesn't actually get you anywhere?)

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 24):
Now that is funny. The most xenophobic and racist nation on the planet.

Tangent!
I'm not going to argue on a gun control thread about whether Japan is xenophobic and racist, but it has little to do with ANC's ill-advised comment that an armed society is a polite society.

By the way, did you get moderator permission before you went and bashed a country?

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 24):
Actually yes, she was a civilian.

Not what I was saying. I said she wasn't a "civilian" girl down the street type. She was doing her job, a job she likely had training to do.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 24):
She wasn't a licensed, uniformed or contracted Security Officer.

Where did you read that?

Quoting NWA742 (Reply 26):
I happen to be an armed security officer just like the person in this story and guess what - we are still armed civilians, we are not law enforcement officers, and we are hardly trained.

Then you sir have no business being an armed security officer if you are hardly trained. None.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:35 pm

Quoting D L X (Reply 32):
And where are your other examples?

There were plenty in the other thread. You just can't see the forest for the trees.

Quoting D L X (Reply 32):
Tangent!

A tangent you introduced. Funny that, de-crying your own tanget.

Quoting D L X (Reply 32):
She was doing her job, a job she likely had training to do.

Again, she's not a full fledged security officer. She was a volunteer for an ad-hoc home grown security team. Do you really think the church was able to find a licensed company, contract with them, devolpe a post procedure, train officers to the post and deploy them in less than twelve hours? Yeah right.

Quoting D L X (Reply 32):
Where did you read that?

Read any news story on the event.

"A New Life parishioner acting as a security guard shot and killed the gunman after he had gotten no more than 50 feet inside the building, Boyd said." -CNN

"The gunman was killed by an armed security volunteer at the church before police arrived, authorities said. " - Fox

Quoting D L X (Reply 32):
Then you sir have no business being an armed security officer if you are hardly trained. None.

Perhaps that's something you should take up with the state, not the professional doing the job.

[Edited 2007-12-10 13:36:54]
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
Pyrex
Posts: 4044
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:24 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:44 pm



Quoting Queso (Reply 17):
Do you have a spare tire in your car?
Do you have a smoke detector?
Do you have a first-aid kit?
Does your community have a fire station?
Have you ever taken a condom along with you on a date?

I am not even going to go into details like the probability of an event happening that requires the use of one of those being infinitely higher than the probability I will actually have to use a gun for self-defense but what does that have to do with the practice of a private business restricting control to guns into their property? Do you believe every student should be allowed to carry a gun in high-school to prevent things like Columbine? Or every passenger allowed to carry a weapon aboard a plane to prevent things like 9/11?

Quoting NWA742 (Reply 26):
Case in point - gun control laws would not prevent or deter a would-be shooter from his/her actions any more than a lack of a driver's license would prevent some asshole who wants steal a car and go for a joy ride. Another common fallacy is that gun control would make access to guns more difficult - not going to happen. In fact, they'd be much easier to buy illegally, as gun control would result in the largest black market of illegal goods in this country. Hell you think drugs are big, wait until you see guns in the event of gun control.

So your point is that people who want to use and have access to a weapon should not need to be licensed to do so in any way? Then why the hell should I need a driver's license to drive a car?
Read this very carefully, I shall write this only once!
 
NoUFO
Posts: 7397
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 7:40 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:05 pm



Quoting NWA742 (Reply 12):
Banning guns does NOT make it more difficult to obtain them illegally, it ONLY TAKES AWAY THE RIGHTS OF LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.

Did the gunmen own his gun illegally?
I support the right to arm bears
 
IADCA
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:14 pm



Quoting Queso (Reply 31):
They won't. Colorado has some very good common-sense gun laws on the books and was one of the first "castle doctrine" states- which, by the way, covers this event very nicely, thank you! Congratulations to the citizens of Colorado for saving the lives of countless people in this event because you have passed common-sense gun laws! Well done!

While common-sense gun laws are commendable, the castle doctrine isn't needed at all in this case. This is covered by any standard defense-of-others statute.

Second, the present writing of the Colorado castle doctrine (CRSA 18-1-704.5) doesn't cover vehicles or places of business, as castle doctrines do in some states. It expressly limits the presumption of justification in use of deadly physical force to the occupants of a "dwelling." A church doesn't seem to be a dwelling as contemplated by the statute, as it explicitly refers to "homes."

Interestingly, a bill was introduced this spring in the Colorado legislature to expand the doctrine to cover places of business and vehicles (07-1011). The House removed the vehicles provision, and the Senate killed it entirely.

http://www.leg.state.co.us/Clics/Cli...7251007B67DF?Open&file=1011_01.pdf
http://ppfc.org/nl200703.pdf
 
D L X
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:20 pm



Quoting Queso (Reply 31):
you'll need to acknowledge that these items are useful to prepare oneself for unexpected events. As someone who carries a handgun, I hope I'll never have to use it, just like my automobile insurance. But, like my automobile insurance, I have it with me just in case an unexpected event happens.

Apparently my comment flew right over your head. Those things you listed are not controversial because while they protect, they cannot cause damage. Guns, obviously cause damage. To put it simply, your analogy doesn't work. If guns only hurt bad people, then maybe I'd agree with you. But since you can't guarantee that guns in good people's hands won't harm other good people, I can't agree with you.

Quoting Queso (Reply 31):
By the way, do you think a fire extinguisher upside the head would CAUSE damage?

Are you threatening me? Mods, take note.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 33):
There were plenty in the other thread.

List some.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 33):
A tangent you introduced.

No, the point just flew over your head. ANC says armed societies are polite societies. I point out that Japan is a polite society without guns. Therefore, you don't need guns to have polite society. YOU went on a tangent about how the Japanese are racists.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 33):
Again, she's not a full fledged security officer.

How do you know? Where does the article say that?

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 33):
She was a volunteer for an ad-hoc home grown security team.

The CNN article did not say that. I see that you have provided another source (without a link) to support you.

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 33):
Perhaps that's something you should take up with the state, not the professional doing the job.

I am perfectly within my rights to criticize a self-proclaimed gun-wielding security officer that admits he is not trained to wield his gun.

Don't you think?
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Crew
Posts: 11182
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:27 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 37):

Are you threatening me? Mods, take note.

He was showing you that a fire extinguisher very easily can cause damage.

Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
How do you know? Where does the article say that?

Since you seem unable to find it, let me post it (again):

A New Life parishioner acting as a security guard shot and killed the gunman after he had gotten no more than 50 feet inside the building, Boyd said.

14th paragraph in the original article.

Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
I am perfectly within my rights to criticize a self-proclaimed gun-wielding security officer that admits he is not trained to wield his gun.

Don't you think?

Chances are he isn't made to practice by his state or employer, but for his own sake chooses to do so.
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
D L X
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:31 pm



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 34):
Do you believe every student should be allowed to carry a gun in high-school to prevent things like Columbine?

Yes. He does. See Student Group Wants More Guns On Campus (by Canuckpaxguy Nov 21 2007 in Non Aviation)
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:33 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
List some.

VT
Columbine
the Omaha Mall
The Salt Lake Mall
The Amish School house
SuccessTech Academy in Clevland
Delaware State University

Hey... isn't this list developing just like the one in the other thread?

Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
I am perfectly within my rights to criticize a self-proclaimed gun-wielding security officer that admits he is not trained to wield his gun.

Don't you think?

No. I don't think you criticizing him for the states training program is legitimate at all.

Being a level IV officer in the state of Texas, I am very familiar with the level III training. And he's right, it's almost non-existant. That's not his fault. It's the states training program.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
D L X
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:34 pm



Quoting KaiGywer (Reply 38):
Since you seem unable to find it, let me post it (again):

That does not mean she is not a trained security guard. I agree that she might not be, but all the article says is that she volunteered.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:35 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
Quoting Pyrex (Reply 34):
Do you believe every student should be allowed to carry a gun in high-school to prevent things like Columbine?

Yes. He does. See Student Group Wants More Guns On Campus (by Canuckpaxguy Nov 21 2007 in Non Aviation)

You can of course quote where anybody claimed that high-school students should be able to carrry firearms?

Right?
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
D L X
Posts: 11654
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:38 pm



Quoting MDorBust (Reply 40):
VT
Columbine
the Omaha Mall
The Salt Lake Mall
The Amish School house
SuccessTech Academy in Clevland
Delaware State University

I think you've misunderstood me. Where are your thousands of examples of concealed carriers stopping gunmen? (The topic of this thread.)

Quoting MDorBust (Reply 40):
No. I don't think you criticizing him for the states training program is legitimate at all.

Well, it is, and it is within my rights. No one who isn't trained to use a gun should be an armed security guard, and it's crazy to think otherwise. Even if the state doesn't care, HE should care that he is not trained.
 
IADCA
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:24 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:42 pm



Quoting KSYR (Thread starter):
I am also left wondering what kind of church uses armed security guards?!? I guess this particular congregation saw a need, but still very unusual.

The kind of place that was in the spotlight after its former pastor, Ted Haggard, got caught...well, no need to go onto another issue of exactly what he was doing. But in any case, apparently they thought they needed protection either because of this or because the place has fourteen thousand members.
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:43 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Where are your thousands of examples of concealed carriers stopping gunmen? (The topic of this thread.)

Okay, then there are millions (not thousands) of those.

http://www.vcdl.org/new/kleck.htm

Yay, it's the Kleck study again. Perhaps this time you'll read it.

I seem to remember also pointing out two prominent school shooting events to you in the recent past that were stopped because gun owners were present.

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Well, it is

Ah yes, now we are into the "because I say so" portion.

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Even if the state doesn't care, HE should care that he is not trained.

He's more trained then you are.

He had to pass a shooting skills certification. What else do you want?
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:45 pm



Quoting IADCA (Reply 44):
But in any case, apparently they thought they needed protection either because of this or because the place has fourteen thousand members.

They formed their impromptu security pose after another church related shooting only twelve hours prior. It turns out it was a good idea.



PS: Most major churches in the D/FW area have armed security contracted. There are some expensive things in big churces that they don't like being stolen.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
miamiair
Posts: 4249
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2004 9:42 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:48 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
Are you threatening me? Mods, take note.

Take note? You are getting ridiculous. But then again, I didn't expect anything less from you. You seem to come to these threads like a moth to a flame, like a bull to a red cape, like flies to a fresh pile of, you know what I mean, you can figure it out. These are all similies.

Finally there is a vindication that a tragedy can be averted and all the anti's gush over themselves as to why it isn't the case. Thank God I don't live in Japan, or Europe or anywhere else for that matter. I can defend my life because the police sure aren't everywhere to do it.
Molon Labe - Proud member of SMASH
 
User avatar
KaiGywer
Crew
Posts: 11182
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:59 am

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 10:49 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Even if the state doesn't care, HE should care that he is not trained.

How do you know he isn't on the range every day training with his own money? Just because the state doesn't make him, doesn't mean he doesn't practice on his own in order to be as proficient as possible.
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, an
 
Queso
Posts: 3109
Joined: Sat Jul 08, 2006 12:28 pm

RE: Armed Female Kills Gunman Intent On Rampage

Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:00 pm



Quoting Pyrex (Reply 34):
Do you believe every student should be allowed to carry a gun in high-school to prevent things like Columbine?

High school? No. But I do believe that teachers and staff who are properly trained and licensed should be able to carry a handgun in high schools. And I believe college students who are properly trained and licensed should too.

Quoting D L X (Reply 39):
Yes. He does. See Student Group Wants More Guns On Campus

Dee Ell Ex, would you really like me answering questions aimed at you on your behalf? I didn't think so. How about acting civilized for once and letting me answer for myself.

Your answer is A LIE. Show me a quote from the thread you linked to where I said HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS should be allowed to carry guns in school. Mods, take note that D L X is misrepresenting my position.

Quoting Pyrex (Reply 34):
Or every passenger allowed to carry a weapon aboard a plane to prevent things like 9/11?

Controlled environment, completely different situation. However (before Dee Ell Ex answers for me), I believe those who are properly trained and licenced should be able to carry a weapon aboard aircraft.

Quoting D L X (Reply 37):
Are you threatening me? Mods, take note.

Yes, please do take note to D L X's overreaction to a non-threat I didn't make.

Edited for spelling!

[Edited 2007-12-10 15:23:54]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JJJ and 14 guests