Good Guy With a Gun

So rare occasion happened, and federal fuckup wants to pretend this is a regular occurrence.

Maybe when you can get an omnibus thread over a couple of pages with many examples you can pretend this is anything but luck.

I personally have 2 armed robberies and 2 instances of real firearm shootings threatening businesses while I was working there, and none of them were ended by a good guy with a gun. Call me when you get more than my life experience of idiots and bad guys with a gun.

Vengeance porn for the plebes.
Poor vs poor.
Let me know when a billionaire who uses slave labor eats a bullet.
Or a Catholic kid diddler.
Not gonna hold by breath on that.

Obviously the whole idea the store owner was ever in some danger is full of shit. The whole example goes to show he never needed a gun because those were not killers to begin with. If those guys were actually there to shoot the old man he would be very very dead. 4 on 1 and they have assault rifles while you have a pistol?

They never even needed to give him a shot. The guys got what they deserved for not shooting first. Obviously they were not there to kill anyone because if they were that would be a completely different video.

Then all the fucking dumb ass trumpistas are pumping his old ass up like he is a bad ass. This is why those wastes of flesh think they could actually win an armed conflict with their guns. None of them get a robber is much different than a killer or soldier coming at you. Killers and soldiers shoot first. They don't give you a chance and run away when you wing the guy in front.

And serial killers use promises of modeling work.

This is still very much a fairy tale of the Disney variety and a statistical anomaly.

Glad the owner wasn't hurt and that nobody died, though.

I am not overly mad the guy shot someone, but no one thinks this shit through. It is just a little bit of money. Those guys came in expecting to push over the store and get a couple of dollars. So when the gun came out they panicked and ran because they were not actually mentally prepared to go into a shoot out. They were physically prepared with the guns, but they did not plan on ever using them.

From a logical perspective, if you were expecting an armed clerk you would have been prepared to shoot back. The more of this shit that happens, the more the criminal element prepares to shoot first. If those criminals came in there prepared to shoot the news article would have been about a dumb old fuck who got blasted for a couple of dollars in a register. The wild west yields the wild west. Even shooting back does not guarantee people run away. If those guys all had assault rifles they could have gotten angry or scared and just hosed down the store with bullets. He is lucky they ran away.

The other option is they push over the store, get a couple of dollars, and get caught later because of evidence. The odd part of reality in this situation is the escalation of violence is only going to make these things into a shootout. Who wants to be a clerk fighting over 100 dollars in the register for your boss? Because of this old guntard the next clerk, because there will always be robbers, is going to get shot first and not given a chance to just live because your boss' money is not worth your life. Hell, even as owner of a business the money from a night was never worth my life.

y'know... if it weren't for the probability of an armed owner, the would be thieves wouldn't arm up hoping to out gun them.
more over, they wouldn't have access to the means for an armed robbery in the first place. Sure, they might try to find something else to steal, but they'd have to be more clever and sneaky... Like, nobody intentionally breaks into an occupied house if all they want is to swipe stuff.

it's almost like people are only part of the problem...

This is going to be one of those needle in a haystack threads right?

Talk about victim blaming.

na, just observing cause and effect. although there is something to be said about escalating a couple hundred bucks into a lethal confrontation.
nobody breaking in to a house wants to run into the victim, let alone hurt them
robbing a store, they accept they have to intimidate the victim, but still just want to take the money and run.

but when the expectation is to run into a harder target, well, the need to prepare overwhelming force/firepower is inherent. At a certain point, confrontation becomes an acceptable risk.

“Never happens”

The 'Good Guys With Guns' Keep Failing to Stop Mass Shootings

Uvalde, Buffalo Shootings Expose the Myth of the ‘Good Guy With a Gun’

Who Stops a ‘Bad Guy With a Gun’?

/thread

It happens. If you're not willing to look every one of those victims in the eye and tell them they should not have been able to defend themselves/be defended by others, you need to sit down and shut the fuck up.

speaking of a hardened target getting hit harder

7:05

twice in 20 years at nearly 200 school shootings.

how about you and Wayne LaPierre look'em in those cold dead eyes and tell'em how important your 2A "freedoms" are preserving/protecting their life?

or are you suggesting that we should be arming students as well?

The 'Good Guys With Guns' Keep Failing to Stop Mass Shootings

Uvalde, Buffalo Shootings Expose the Myth of the ‘Good Guy With a Gun’

Who Stops a ‘Bad Guy With a Gun’?

/thread

Nope. You don't get to dictate my choices. I don't have to accept school shootings to insist on the right to equip for self-defense.

oh fuck off with that. nobody is dictating anything you poor oppressed man baby.
students' right to a safe environment trumps your pretentions to "self defense".

hell, the same applies for kids who might be in your home if you're too incompetent to safely store/kid proof the place.

school shootings are an inevitable by product of your (enumerated) "right", so wash your fuckin' hands.

If the expectation is to run into a harder target, they don't need to prepare overwhelming force, they need to not fucking break into a house. FF's right, this is victim blaming. Burglars have agency. They can and should choose not to burgle.

No, it fucking doesn't. That's just you projecting your limited thinking.

I have shot zero children. My hands are clean. I am not responsible for the actions of others.

The 'Good Guys With Guns' Keep Failing to Stop Mass Shootings

Uvalde, Buffalo Shootings Expose the Myth of the ‘Good Guy With a Gun’

Who Stops a ‘Bad Guy With a Gun’?

/thread

trying to figure out what I'm blaming the victims for here? or the burglars for that matter?

all I've done is point out that in the same way that water is wet, burglary is a crime involving stealth while a burglar is going to prepare for what he's likely to come up against.

I've never crashed driving 100mph in school zones. don't you dare tell me I can't!

You aren't exactly seen as capable of taking responsiblity for much, so your denial here isn't all that meaningful. You are part of the problem though... "self defense"... seriously? a lot of home invasions in your 'hood?

We all know UA is far more likely to shoot @Jenee than any thief.

Don't get mad at me, it is just statistically far more likely since most guntards shoot their friends and family far more than they ever shoot a criminal.

No one is a burglar by nature. You're blaming the victim for their increased probability of getting shot because they were trying to dissuade someone who should choose not to do an illegal, unethical thing from doing it, by making it a difficult, personally risky, illegal, unethical thing, and not the robber for not being dissuaded. "Burglars will be burglars" is no better than "boys will be boys".

What you are trying to express is a world where stealing does not happen. That is not someplace that exists. It is not burglars will be burglars, it is that some people are going to steal shit, and intimidation is a way to do it. You cannot get to the fantasy world where that is not the case, so your argument is crap in the reality we exist in.

If your argument relies on a world where stealing does not happen for some reason, it is a shit argument. Stealing shit is a law of nature. The more powerful animal sometimes gets to just wade in and take things because all the little guys know they cannot beat them.

What imaginary universe does your argument have to exist in to be true? Think your shit through a little better next time. I think you might have the ability to do so.

yet inevitably, there will be and always have been thieves like that. They're kind of an inevitable byproduct of wealth/resource inequity.

and again, I'm not "blaming" either the burglar or the victim. I'm observing the conditions that will (at best) turn a minor theft incident into a multiple homicide.

Curious... I wonder who gets shot more with guns in homes? Criminals or curious children?

That said, any other issue that arises from having unsecured firearms in the house, like an accidental death, or yet another bunch of stolen guns in the black market, are entirely the liability of the owner.

I'd be curious as to the B&E rate while the home is occupied in his region-and exploring factors of why it is.
I'd also be interested in knowing how often they turn lethal?

It is just part of nature to steal. That does not make it moral or ethical, but nature often is not moral or ethical. What should be as per @Order2Chaos or anyone else's ideas of the universe is not what is. creatures are going to want something that another creature has. One of the options for getting it is to intimidate or overpower the possessor to get it. That does not go away because we create a social contract that says that is immoral and wrong. You just simply cannot take that option out of the equation, therefor it will be tried by some creatures.

The very idea that someone is not a burglar by nature is completely misconstruing the point as we all have the options of being a burglar by nature of our reality where that is an option. Some people will chose that. It is inevitable. The very idea that you can somehow exclude that option from the system is absurd, and that is where @Order2Chaos is completely wrong when they state no one is a burglar by nature when we are all capable by nature of being burglars.

yup.. ignoring the extortive nature of existing under capitalism which itself creates scarcity for many (if not most), the problem is part of nature-and not just human. Hell, jsut watching my cats when I feed them canned food bears this out.

As some of y'all know, I work in harm reduction. This means I give drug users clean needles, crack pipes, health and sanitary gear, etc., while the place I work at has a supervised consumption site. The trade off is that there's a lot less excrement and dead junkies which trickles down to lowered local crimes they tend to commit, like vandalism or minor theft. Also helps prevent the spread of disease.. not just AIDS or Hep C, but also preventing abcesses that'd lead to amputations. The problem isn't going to go away, only mutate (they're not only tolerant of fentanyl now, but it also comes in different colours).

So look at the reality. Nobody is going to break into your home looking for a fight when they want to be in and out in under two minutes (presuming you're there). Plenty will watch the place till you've packed up for a weekend away and steal all the expensive guns you didn't bring to Six Flags (why you go to an amusement park strapped other than because of all the others CCWing is beyond me, but...). Bottom line though, gun ownership has been shown for decades to cause more trouble than it prevents.