By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - BREAKING NEWS: “Game Over” For Game Stop Gunmen

OmegaRed421 on 30 May 2014
Xenostar said:

Shoot him in the leg?

 

Depending on the situation doing that could mean he can sue you because of it. When you feel you have to defend yourself you have to do it in fear of your life which means trying to take theirs first. It's messed up I know but go for the kill or they can sue you for it you may even be able to be charged with something because they could say you must not have been in fear of your life to shoot them in the leg.



Make it So.

Around the Network
Fusioncode on 30 May 2014

Fox news is going to have a field day with this.



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

KingdomHeartsFan on 30 May 2014

Ill never understand American gun laws.  



ymeegod on 30 May 2014

Actually robbers have killed for a lot less than a few video games, and I much rather have someone stop them otherwise like most people stated it could have been worse.

For example, that Aurora movie shooting, tons of people saw this guy carrying guns and yet all they did was call the police--12 died. If someone had a gun they could have stopped it, maybe.

The marine wasn't running around with his gun looking for trouble--fact was he didn't even have it on him, he had to retrieve it from his car/truck.

No, if someone is dumb enough to rob an GS with a gun then that person is dumb enough to endanger bystanders just to get away IMO.
---------------------------------------------------




Machiavellian on 30 May 2014
Mmmfishtacos said:
Machiavellian said:
BMaker11 said:
Machiavellian said:
BMaker11 said:
huiii said:
Mmmfishtacos said:
Its pretty sad to see people defending thives and armed robbers. Is this really what america has become?


So you say if i see someone hitt someone i should just whipe out my gun (if i had one) and shoot them dead, cause if i didn't i'd be deffending battery?

Do you know what the "armed" in "armed robbery" means? I swear, you guys' analogies are piss poor. "Oh...guess if I see someone get punched, I should whip out my gun." "Oh, if I see someone jaywalk, I should whip out my gun".

Do you guys not understand that ARMED ROBBERY is USING A WEAPON to COMMIT A CRIME?! Pointing a gun in someone's face and screaming "give me everything you've got or I'll shoot" is very different from hitting someone or parking illegaly. Lives are in serious danger in the former, not the latter

I will say that because of concealed gun rights, even mild brawls can end up lethal because on person has a gun.  Giving common people the ability to carry and use a gun prompt a lot of situations like Zimmerman where the person can proclaim they are being harmed, pull out a gun and kill someone.  Noticed I am only talking about concealed.  Carrying a gun or owning a gun I have no problems but people having them concealed means that situations that would normally not happen because the other person knows you are armed never happens.

Liability is a cost for freedom. You're right, you can conceal carry and then escalate a situation. But at the same time, there's people like this

here concealed carry helped. Had he not had that, the robbery would have continued and people could have been killed. If he open carried, the robber would have went after him first.

 

Actually i see that situation different.  The person robbing the store is looking for his money then go.  The situation turned deadly when the concealed carry guy decided to become the Hero.  Because of such carry concealed laws, a thief with a gun is more likly to kill for the slightest incident that could appear where someone is carrying then not.  The landscape for the robbery totally changes and if such people leave to steal again, now they are more aggressive.  Thiefs watching on TV are now more aggressive.  People with guns that are concealed become more agressive and look for any provacation.

If the person had the gun unconcealed then the robber has 2 options.  Either go and find an easier target or get into a deadly gun battle.  The thing is most people that rob is not looking to actually use their gun.  Its like the bully in school.  They bully people who do not defend themselves because its easy.  This is no different from a thief, they are looking for a quick get in and out money grab not a shootout for their lives.

Sorry the situation be came deadly when the robber pulled the gun. You can't spin that. 

But only shots were fired when the Hero decided to jump in.  The Hero did not think that his actions could endanger others because if he did he would have waited.  Instead he decides to shot when multiple people could have got hurt during the cross fire.



Around the Network
SvennoJ on 30 May 2014
Mmmfishtacos said:
Machiavellian said:

Actually i see that situation different.  The person robbing the store is looking for his money then go.  The situation turned deadly when the concealed carry guy decided to become the Hero.  Because of such carry concealed laws, a thief with a gun is more likly to kill for the slightest incident that could appear where someone is carrying then not.  The landscape for the robbery totally changes and if such people leave to steal again, now they are more aggressive.  Thiefs watching on TV are now more aggressive.  People with guns that are concealed become more agressive and look for any provacation.

If the person had the gun unconcealed then the robber has 2 options.  Either go and find an easier target or get into a deadly gun battle.  The thing is most people that rob is not looking to actually use their gun.  Its like the bully in school.  They bully people who do not defend themselves because its easy.  This is no different from a thief, they are looking for a quick get in and out money grab not a shootout for their lives.

Sorry the situation be came deadly when the robber pulled the gun. You can't spin that. 

Nope, the situation became deadly when there was opposition. It's not called robbery gone bad for nothing. Or maybe robberies are different in the US, and they always end with the thiefs shooting everyone while leaving one witness to tell the tale. The love for escalation is grounded deeply in American culture. No talking down or calming the situation, no taking details and pursue later when tensions are lower, nope just go at it and show who is boss.

The people in the game store are lucky the gunman in the store didn't do anything stupid like taking a hostage.
The neighbor of the 28 year-old CHL Holder said, “This is our neighborhood and I just want to say thank you. My kids go in that game stop, and it could’ve been anyone’s child.” What you thank him for drawing a gun and turning it into a shoot out instead of a simple get in/out robbery?


Check from 2:30 for the sensible thing to do.



Kasz216 on 30 May 2014

Here's the thing. People are coming up with a bunch of hypotheticals about the ills of concealed carry.

Why?

Those hypothetical never or at the very least hardly ever happen.

Otherwise people would have a whole list of stuff like that.




bigtakilla on 30 May 2014
spurgeonryan said:
Callum_Alexander said:

My morals are absolute, if somebody decides to make an attempt on my life I will defend myself by non-lethal means, I will NOT however, EVER, take a life. If I did so I would be no better than the person attempting to take my own.


FALSE.

If someone had you at gunpoint, you are just going to try to talk your way out? Even if lets say you get his gun and he refuses to back down.

What are the basis of your morals?

No, he's going to fist fight the gunmen, lol.



NobleTeam360 on 30 May 2014
Xenostar said:
spurgeonryan said:
Xenostar said:


How about not screaming, quielty walking back into quiznos and calling the police, while taking the license plate number through the window. 

 

You can defend taking a life over video games all you want tho. You will never convince me its right. Suppose we should just be tankfully the histerical gun owner is a good shot and he didnt shoot an innocent person in the shopping area.


When they escape and kill someone else. That blood is on your hands.


It really isnt.

 

Edit:

By that logic we should kill every american that owns a gun, because if they kill somone, the blood is on your hands. No one can be held accountable for the action of others.

And yet people want to try and ban guns for everyone just because a few crazy people decide to shoot up a mall or school.



-CraZed- on 30 May 2014
Xenostar said:
Better hope no one ever sees his concealed weapon, screams for there life and shoots him.