Off Duty Texas Security Guard Shoots Car Thief

[Lawson]

Nope, most "gun use" (firing a weapon at a target) dosen't end in serious bodily injury to humans, because most "gun use" is target shooting (which is bad for the paper target, but no humans where hurt), followed by hunting (which is bad for the animal, but atleast no humans were hurt). if you want to compare the numbers of times a gun is "used" (fired), to the numbers of times Americans use cars (driving), yep, guns are still safer.....

I guess if you want to include shooting at a target and hunting then we should also include "use of cars" to include washing them, changing the oil, vacuuming out the inside, replacing a tire, etc... something that is virtually impossible to get death statistics on because they are so far and few between; while on the flipside I hear about range accidents all the time that land someone in the hospital or in a pine box.

fear of guns (an inanimate object) is just as silly as fear of cars, which is the point. Either one is deadly if used wrong. It's not the fault of lawful gun owners (the vast majority) that some people (the very small minority) use them wrong, just like it's not my fault as a driver that some numbnuts choose to drink and drive.

I agree with you about the sillyness of the fear of guns. I do not fear them and I was merely pointing out why I feel a lot of people out there do fear them.

You're a gun owner. if the intended use of a gun is to shoot people, why haven't you?

I have not been presented with the need to shoot someone. I hope I never will, but if I ever need to, I will use my gun for its intended purpose... to shoot.

It's [just] a tool. Like any tool it can be misused.

Agreed.

Designed to kill or not, a Ford hitting someone intentially will kill them probably. that is if it dosen't break down before you can hit someone.

That is beside my point... my point is that Ford is not putting out something that is designed to kill. Sure you could be hit by a car and killed, but hell, you could choke on a steak cutlet and die, but that doesnt mean the butcher has cut this piece of meat in such a fashion as he wants you to choke on it. What I am saying, is that people fear the gun for its use, and without beating around the bush, the gun is designed for shooting, and that includes shooting people whether in a justified legal means or not. People dont rise up against cars because the car is not intended to kill.

[Black Caesar]

I guess if you want to include shooting at a target and hunting then we should also include "use of cars" to include washing them, changing the oil, vacuuming out the inside, replacing a tire, etc... something that is virtually impossible to get death statistics on because they are so far and few between; while on the flipside I hear about range accidents all the time that land someone in the hospital or in a pine box.

Range accidents are included in in the firearms death toll (accidental deaths).

Washing a car isn't driving it, just like cleaning a gun isn't firing it. Come on man.

I agree with you about the sillyness of the fear of guns. I do not fear them and I was merely pointing out why I feel a lot of people out there do fear them.

people fear lots of things for stupid reasons, should that affect how we deal with them?

That is beside my point... my point is that Ford is not putting out something that is designed to kill. Sure you could be hit by a car and killed, but hell, you could choke on a steak cutlet and die, but that doesnt mean the butcher has cut this piece of meat in such a fashion as he wants you to choke on it. What I am saying, is that people fear the gun for its use, and without beating around the bush, the gun is designed for shooting, and that includes shooting people whether in a justified legal means or not. People dont rise up against cars because the car is not intended to kill.

like I said, people's irrational fears should not change how we deal with things in reality.

For instance, (and expanding on the irrational fear of guns), people "fear" armed security guards. "Why do guards need guns, they aren't cops" they say. "They could shoot some innocent person" they say.

We know thats hogwash. We know that the vast majority of Armed Guards (like the vast vast VAST majority of both cops and civilian gun owners) never ever kill or wound anyone accidentally or not with their weapons. Should people's irrational, baseless fear mean we stop arming trained and qualified security guards?

Nope.

[FDG06]

Actual stats indicate, more law enforcement officers are actually killed in on duty automotive accidents annually, then are killed by violent actions against them while on duty, such as being shot, stabbed, clubbed, etc.
This is actual NIJ statistical fact for something like the past 20yrs, driven into my head when I went thru EVOC a few years ago.
This, along with deaths of innocent persons/drivers, is what is behind the nation wide movement against hi-speed pursuits in moderatley or highly populated areas. Depts like Seattle PD will no longer authorize pursuits under most circumstances & that trend is spreading, based on these actual stats.
I also feel that this is compounded by officers switching off thier air bags, so they dont deploy in minor bump collisions (ie: motivational stop) or PITT manuevers & cops not wearing thier seat belts during patrols.

I'll leave the gun debate alone, that debate is so long on tooth & will never be resolved. I'm very Pro Gun / Pro Carry rights for any citizen that is lawfully allowed to own/carry such & who has been properly trained..I think we will all agree that the only thing more dangerous to the general public safety, then a criminal with a firearm, is ANY untrained person with one!
Yoda

[S/O245]

Thats true it just depends on how it goes down that day for the person. But i do know most of my instructors many times are more afriad of being stabbed than shot because the knife severs. And if you get a good hit with it you may not even make it to the hosp to begin with. Also they told how a person with a knife may be able to stick you before you even pull your gun. A knife is smaller means they can move alot faster. All weapons can do things to us. Im not saying one or the other is better.

As far as why the are members they know the game plan with the gang banngers which is get the good guy knock him over the head or what ever take his money anything and everything.

The only way to help lower crime and make it even lower than now is keeping repeat offenders in jail. NRA put together a program with NRA members muscle and money behind it. It called for 100 % prosecution of felons, criminals with guns. SOmething an ex president didnt come through with. I think Richmon VA PD took in this program along with other PD's across the nation and the crime rate droped big time even lower.

A black panthers leader was let out of prison and a Clinton Admin appointed prosecutor refused to prosectue this man on several things. This happend alot. He was in an investigation for pulling a stolen gun on a man running. He was in one for pulling a knife. OK 2 weeks go by and an Atland Deputy Sheriff was killed. This black panther was suppose to be in jail at the time. But they refused to prosecute and a deputy got killed. They say at the time NRA called Clinton Admin to speak with them about the incident. They would say anything they didnt care to comment on it. "Repeat Offenders" thats alot of your crime.

Stay Safe

Did you know that many people have survived with multiple stab wounds? What about people with multiple gunshot wounds? We all know that bullets can shatter vital organs like tofu, making it extremely difficult for a surgeon to repair the damage. A knife wound, although fatal at times, is easier to treat in my opinion.





I agree that the criminals would still be armed. It's too late; "the cat is out of the bag" when it comes to gun control. As I stated before, there are millions if not billions of guns out there. Nothing is going to reverse that.



I don't know. I can't understand it. They die by the hundreds with each passing decade.

[Mr. Security]

I don't buy it.

Comparing cars w/ guns in the death of LEO's can only be fair if you are referring to vehicle assaults, which means that the car/truck was used intentionally as a weapon just like a gun. Having reviewed the statistics on ODMP.org, I find that guns kill more officers than cars. It's not even close.

[Black Caesar]

Comparing cars w/ guns in the death of LEO's can only be fair if you are referring to vehicle assaults, which means that the car/truck was used intentionally as a weapon just like a gun. Having reviewed the statistics on ODMP.org, I find that guns kill more officers than cars. It's not even close.

Death is Death. The road is more dangerous to a police officer than all weapons put together. This is fact.

But I'll get back to the point. You said you can't understand why police support gun rights, yet you reject the reasons why we do. There are 800,000+ police officers in this country (and thats not counting reserves). We lose somewhere between 50 to 100 a year, most of them to accidents. Wanting to keep our guns but wanting them made illegal to everyone else would make us Fascists. We are not Fascists.

The Vast Vast majority of LEOs will never get shot. Statitically I'm more likely to die during a traffic stop off my campus than I am to get shot. We;ve never had an officer shot. We've had 3 Injured in Traffic related incidents in the 8 years I've been here. Thats the reality for people in LE, so unlike others in our society, we don't "over-react" when people misuse firearms.

When I was in the academy I was like everyone else, fearful (irrationallly) of guns but dismissive of everything else. Now ,10 years laters (after watching the "21 foot" video and listening to my instructors, and working for a couple different depts.), i'm terrified of knives (more specifically, people with knives lol) and have a healthy but rational respect for guns.

[HotelSecurity]

Wanting to keep our guns but wanting them made illegal to everyone else would make us Fascists. We are not Fascists.
.

With only a very few exceptions only police officers are allowed to have guns in Canada. I don't consider that I'm living in a Fascist regime. What a weird statement

[Black Caesar]

With only a very few exceptions only police officers are allowed to have guns in Canada. I don't consider that I'm living in a Fascist regime. What a weird statement

Canada has a different tradition than America. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is in our constitution. Denying an established right to the people is what fascists do. I'm not Canadian, so I can't comment on Canada.

Oh, and the 2 million registered Canadian gun owners is a rather big exception isn't it? With only 50,000 Canadian cops, citizen gun owners out number police gun carriers 40 to 1.

[Mr. Security]

Death is Death. The road is more dangerous to a police officer than all weapons put together. This is fact.

But I'll get back to the point. You said you can't understand why police support gun rights, yet you reject the reasons why we do. There are 800,000+ police officers in this country (and thats not counting reserves). We lose somewhere between 50 to 100 a year, most of them to accidents. Wanting to keep our guns but wanting them made illegal to everyone else would make us Fascists. We are not Fascists.

The Vast Vast majority of LEOs will never get shot. Statitically I'm more likely to die during a traffic stop off my campus than I am to get shot. We;ve never had an officer shot. We've had 3 Injured in Traffic related incidents in the 8 years I've been here. Thats the reality for people in LE, so unlike others in our society, we don't "over-react" when people misuse firearms.

When I was in the academy I was like everyone else, fearful (irrationallly) of guns but dismissive of everything else. Now ,10 years laters (after watching the "21 foot" video and listening to my instructors, and working for a couple different depts.), i'm terrified of knives (more specifically, people with knives lol) and have a healthy but rational respect for guns.

Not so. Although I didn't comment on that part of your post, it does make sense, more so than other explanations. I just rejected your analogy.

[Mr. Security]

Canada has a different tradition than America. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is in our constitution. Denying an established right to the people is what fascists do. I'm not Canadian, so I can't comment on Canada.

Oh, and the 2 million registered Canadian gun owners is a rather big exception isn't it? With only 50,000 Canadian cops, citizen gun owners out number police gun carriers 40 to 1.

And yet, their murder rate is lower - go figure...

[HotelSecurity]

I risk being shot here (And I might have even asked this in the past) but here goes. It's your country & you don't have to jusify it to an outsider but I am always confused with this CONSTITUTION & RIGHT TO BARE ARMS. I can respect that your founding fathers were intellegent men & designed the constitution to reflect the times they were in, their past experience with Britian etc & their view of the future. Things change. 25 years ago it was predicted by intellegent men that we would all have our own helicopters to replace cars. It didn't happen. I have a hard time grasping why the constitution, written by men, not Gods, is so holy. It can & has been ammended has it not? I hope I haven't come across sounding like I should mind my own business, I'm just very curious every time I hear it brought up that the Right to Bare Arms is in the constitution.

[Mr. Security]

Hotel Security

Yes it's been amended, but rarely. The reason that most people give for not amending it unless absolutely necessary, is because it could lead to thinking that other parts should be changed, thereby subjecting it to manipulation by individuals who may have a personal agenda.

Changing law(s) will not solve the gun problem here. There are plenty of laws that are already on the books regarding gun ownership. The problem is the breakdown of moral fabric in society. No man/men are capable of reversing this trend because man is not capable of governing himself w/o Divine rulership. (Yeah I know, don't go there, but it's true). The USA has experienced more problems with materialism, greed, and so forth than some other countries, but they are quickly catching up. Since guns are readily available to a more violent society, we have more crime than you do. This is just my opinion. Many won't agree w/ it, but that's one of the rights afforded under the constitution.

[HotelSecurity]

It's not the CRIMES like hold-ups, murder of a cheating spouce etc etc that bothers me about the gun laws you guys have. It's the cases where people, because they are so available, get their hands on them & use them. Eg the school shootings.

[Mr. Security]

I risk being shot here (And I might have even asked this in the past) but here goes. It's your country & you don't have to jusify it to an outsider but I am always confused with this CONSTITUTION & RIGHT TO BARE ARMS. I can respect that your founding fathers were intellegent men & designed the constitution to reflect the times they were in, their past experience with Britian etc & their view of the future. Things change. 25 years ago it was predicted by intellegent men that we would all have our own helicopters to replace cars. It didn't happen. I have a hard time grasping why the constitution, written by men, not Gods, is so holy. It can & has been ammended has it not? I hope I haven't come across sounding like I should mind my own business, I'm just very curious every time I hear it brought up that the Right to Bare Arms is in the constitution.

PS: You're scheduled to be shot at sunrise. Hope for a cloudy day.

[Black Caesar]

It's not the CRIMES like hold-ups, murder of a cheating spouce etc etc that bothers me about the gun laws you guys have. It's the cases where people, because they are so available, get their hands on them & use them. Eg the school shootings.

Like I said before, Rights cost.

We could turn the United States into a place as safe as Soviet Russia if we got rid of our consttitutional rights. We cold take away protections against (for example) self-incrimination, cruel and unusual punishment and Illegal search and seisure. We could eliminate the right to a speedy trail, and the right to keep and bear arms. And then get rid of that pesky free speech because it incites "improper thoughts".

We'd be safe, and we might as well be dead lol.

We know that our right to keep and bear arms costs us in soe ways. We know that the myriad protections provided in the constitution allow for crime (by preventing the government from having the ability to take the absolute measures needed to prevent crime).

And we keep paying the price because the alternative isn't something we want to contemplate.

Like I said, I'm not Canadian. If Canadian's are fine with certain limits to their own freedoms, thats cool. As Americans, we wouldn't be fine with it. that's why we created a new country rather than stay bound to the same crown you guys still are.

In short, "to each his own".