Starbucks caught in Crossfire between Anti/Pro-Gun sides

[melensdad]

Almost there, except for the part where you aren't, and revert to the usual practice of fabricating the truth.

WTF are you talking about now?

[telkanuru]

WTF are you talking about now?

Assuming facts not in evidence, your honor.

[Bayou Bum]

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news...97/detail.html

Just feel like dropping this here, really.

Too bad no one in the bar had a weapon to defend themselves.

[melensdad]

Assuming facts not in evidence, your honor.

Which facts this time?

You wrote:

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news...97/detail.html

Just feel like dropping this here, really.

I replied with this: Because it has nothing to do with legally carrying weapons by people who have been issued state approved licenses? Or just because he had a history of mental illness and was violating the laws?

You then proclaimed:

Almost there, except for the part where you aren't, and revert to the usual practice of fabricating the truth.

So please enlighten us. This is a thread about legally carrying handguns, Yes? And you posted about a guy who illegally shot up a bar with a rifle, Yes? And this guy's lawyer did say he had a history of mental illness as is in the article you linked, Yes?

So what part of this was now fabricated? What facts were not in evidence?

[melensdad]

Too bad no one in the bar had a weapon to defend themselves.

You mean like this case of a person legally carrying a handgun who stopped a mass killing in a Nevada bar?

Three people are dead after a gunfight from a long-running family feud broke out in a crowded bar in Winnemucca early today, according to Winnemucca and Humboldt County authorities.

Winnemucca police said Ernesto Villagomez entered the Player’s Bar and Grill about 2:30 a.m. and began firing a pistol into the bar with a crowd of about 300 people, killing two brothers and wounding two people.

When Villagomez began reloading, a 48-year-old Reno man drew his pistol and killed Villagomez. The Reno man had a Washoe County concealed weapons permit and was detained but not charged.

Humboldt District Attorney Russell Smith said the slaying of Villagomez was justifiable, in self defense and in the defense of others. Police withheld the Reno man’s name.

Sgt. Eric Silva said Villagomez, 30 of Winnemucca, fired a number of shots but from a large-capacity semiautomatic pistol but couldn’t say how many.

Police said Villagomez shot and killed Jose Torres, 20, and his brother Margarito Torres, 19, both of Winnemucca.

Villagomez’s two other victims — a 34-year-old male and 22-year-old woman — did not suffer life-threatening wounds and were listed as stable at Humboldt General Hospital.

[telkanuru]

I replied with this: Because it has nothing to do with legally carrying weapons by people who have been issued state approved licenses? Or just because he had a history of mental illness and was violating the laws?

Well, since you asked so nicely, you assumed that 1) the weapon wasn't being legally carried 2) the owner hadn't been issued a state-approved license, and 3) the man was actually mentally ill. I mean, I understand that in your world, assertion is the same thing as proof, but here in reality, it goes back to you making things up.

Oh, and BB, if people had been carrying, there would be at least 1 death/injury instead of 0. How is that better?

[telkanuru]

You mean like this case of a person legally carrying a handgun who stopped a mass killing in a Nevada bar?

Are you saying that if he hadn't been carrying a concealed weapon, they wouldn't have shot up the bar in the first place?

[melensdad]

Well, since you asked so nicely, you assumed that 1) the weapon wasn't being legally carried 2) the owner hadn't been issued a state-approved license, and 3) the man was actually mentally ill. I mean, I understand that in your world, assertion is the same thing as proof, but here in reality, it goes back to you making things up.

Ok, well since you are ignorant of Mass. reciprocity laws, they do not honor carry from New Hampshire and you also seem to be ignorant of NH law, which does not issue carry licenses at all. The man with the AK was from NH. So that would mean that the weapon 1) was not legally carried, and 2) the man was not issues a state-approved license. As for 3) being mentally ill, the article you posted stated that his own lawyer claimed he has a history of mental illness. Now it is possible he was not mentally ill at the moment he did this act but I suspect that his lawyer will gladly argue that point with you.

Are you saying that if he hadn't been carrying a concealed weapon, they wouldn't have shot up the bar in the first place?

I said no such thing. I simply provided a story that showed that a licensed gun owner, legally carrying, shot a criminal before he could commit mass murder. I don't think the criminal really gave a rat's butt about following any law before he opened fire on the crowd.

[Inquartata]

Maybe we could ask Sarah Brady for a rebuttal...

[telkanuru]

Ok, well since you are ignorant of Mass. reciprocity laws, they do not honor carry from New Hampshire and you also seem to be ignorant of NH law, which does not issue carry licenses at all. The man with the AK was from NH. So that would mean that the weapon 1) was not legally carried, and 2) the man was not issues a state-approved license. As for 3) being mentally ill, the article you posted stated that his own lawyer claimed he has a history of mental illness. Now it is possible he was not mentally ill at the moment he did this act but I suspect that his lawyer will gladly argue that point with you.

Despite the fact that his lawyer will argue with me, as he is paid to do, the mental illness is not yet proven, and therefore not fact. Nor are your assumptions that he did not have MA approval.

I said no such thing. I simply provided a story that showed that a licensed gun owner, legally carrying, shot a criminal before he could commit mass murder. I don't think the criminal really gave a rat's butt about following any law before he opened fire on the crowd.

So you're saying that in this situation, even an openly carried gun wouldn't have been a deterrent?

[melensdad]

Maybe we could ask Sarah Brady for a rebuttal...

See the post above this one but below yours, clearly she did rebut, she just doesn't post under her own name but clearly is just a logical.

[telkanuru]

See the post above this one but below yours, clearly she did rebut, she just doesn't post under her own name but clearly is just a logical.

Whoops! Look who needs to catch up again!

[Bayou Bum]

Well, since you asked so nicely, you assumed that 1) the weapon wasn't being legally carried 2) the owner hadn't been issued a state-approved license, and 3) the man was actually mentally ill. I mean, I understand that in your world, assertion is the same thing as proof, but here in reality, it goes back to you making things up.

Oh, and BB, if people had been carrying, there would be at least 1 death/injury instead of 0. How is that better?

He wouldn't ever do it again!

If you keep looking into the sources of the data quoted on death rates by firearms in the US, you will find some interesting information from the original source. Such as, over half of the deaths by guns were due to suicide:
Death rates per 100,000 (source: National Vital Statistics Report; April 17, 2009)
All deaths by Firearms: 10.2
Intentional: 4.3
Suicide: 5.6
Accidental: .2

For the suicides, I wonder if they would they have found another way to kill themselves if they weren't allowed a gun? The notes for deaths by firearms included those killed by terrorist and in war. If we could just get the terrorist to stop using guns …

Other interesting statistics: Death rates per 100,000

Motor vehicle accidents: 14.5 (should we outlaw automobiles?)
Poison: 12.5
Drugs: 12.8
Suicide: 11.2
Firearms: 10.2
Alcohol: 7.4 (ban all alcohol?)
Falling: 7.2
Suffocation: 4.7

All of this will probably be considered small in relation to the deaths caused by Obamacare though!

As for accidental firearm (.2) related: the rate is higher for a bicycle accident (.3) and six times higher for accidental drowning (1.2) and eight times for pedestrian accidents (1.7).

I can't wait until they start including deaths by cell phone/texting while driving. Should we outlaw everything that can cause death?

[Philistine]

Despite the fact that his lawyer will argue with me, as he is paid to do, the mental illness is not yet proven, and therefore not fact. {snip}

I don't know... leaving, getting a gun, coming back and randomly shooting up a bar when you've been denied a drink seems to be a pretty clear indication of mental illness.... Pretty much, by definition, it's not something a mentally healthy person would do.

My first thought when I saw the quote that his lawyer was arguing that his client had a history of mental illness was, "ya think?"

--Philistine

[Bayou Bum]

So you're saying that in this situation, even an openly carried gun wouldn't have been a deterrent?

It might have been, but we don't know. Stop being a troll.

[Inquartata]

Deterrence is overrated. Incapacitation for the win.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!


Yet another gun control thread...

I do not think that anything that I can say on the topic of the desirability of various gun-control measures would change anyone´s opinions, so I will save myself of the effort.

That said, I followed a link describing a case where one man shot and killed several cops in a coffee-place. The linked article, and the other articles in that paper, showed pictures of the coffins of the policemen. A Google pics search shows that that is the norm in USA newspapers.

I would think that it were better if news stories involving gruesome death were illustrated with those who died at the scene, as a form of shock treatment. No cloths over the bodies, old pics from graduation/job/passport, just unadulterated death in all its shocking gruesomeness. The present whitewashing does not seem to work, and if lives are spared by just one person stopping himself before going off the deep end, then it is not for vain.

As a futher aside I not that there are several issues which draw a lot of anger in US. politics, but practically no one ever changes their mind, and and any kind of middle ground is either seen as caving in or is practically impossible. Examples include, but are not limited to: gun control, abortion, and gay marriage.

I suspect that the lives of individual citizens (but quite possibly not the country) would be better if people would self-segregate to states where their opinions on those matters would be more in tune with the new state than it was with their previous state. It would be nice if people could accept other people with differing political opinions, but I strongly doubt that that is the case in the long run. While I despair for basic civility, I at least hope that the fallback goal of at least not tearing each other´s throats out can be achieved in the long run. Czechoslovakia ended better than Yugoslavia.

Yes, I tend not to believe in the notion of human goodness as a default assumption. Feel free to sue me.


Peter Gustafsson

[Inquartata]

I would think that it were better if news stories involving gruesome death were illustrated with those who died at the scene, as a form of shock treatment. No cloths over the bodies, old pics from graduation/job/passport, just unadulterated death in all its shocking gruesomeness.

I have to wonder, though, if this would not just be desensitizing, as the ubiquitous depictions of sex and violence in the media are said to be...and thus might make matters worse.

[PeterGustafsson]

Hi!

I have to wonder, though, if this would not just be desensitizing, as the ubiquitous depictions of sex and violence in the media are said to be...and thus might make matters worse.

Fair point, and it is entirely possible that you are right. If that would be the case, there would be a simple remedy: revert to the present state.

All explanations and causations are not sorted out to everyone´s satisfaction, but one fact remains: USA has one of the highest rates of firearm murder per year and person. From:

I snip the following statistics:
# 8 United States: 0.0279271 per 1,000 people
# 20 Canada: 0.00502972 per 1,000 people
# 26 Ireland: 0.00298805 per 1,000 people
# 27 Australia: 0.00293678 per 1,000 people
# 31 New Zealand: 0.00173482 per 1,000 people
# 32 United Kingdom: 0.00102579 per 1,000 people

Of the 7 countries in front of USA, 5 are 3rd-world places and 2 (Mexico, Belarus) are at least partly so. I only included English-speaking countries, in an effort to limit the effect of varying cultural factors. Even so, USA clocks in at a murder rate 5.5 times higher than its neighbor and probably most similar country.

Someone has said that (more or less, I do not have the citation before me) idiocy is the stubbornness in doing whatever what is doing, despite the fact the previous results are bad.

I think that the USA murder rate is just one of these bad results, and that something should be done. Furthermore, I wanted to suggest something that ha not been suggested lots of times before, and stated as completely unacceptable by its opponents.

As an aside, I think that your depiction as media being filled with ubiquitous depictions of sex and violence is quite a bit overstated. Yes, one can find just about anything on the web, but those things are found by media consumers who actively are trying find them. Ordinary print media rarely have pictures of human fornication in graphic detail, unless that is what the paper is specializing in. Those who buy those papers are in search of such images, and are therefore not surprised by them.

No so if my suggestion of gruesome pics splashed over the front of general-interest. They would be subjected to people who did not seek them out, and the shock effect should be for that reason greater. If one would make a XXX-rated movie of Michael Moore and Janet Reno doing the horizontal tango, and show that at random times on network TV, then I think that it would be quite effective as an anti-AIDS public message.


Have a nice time!

Peter Gustafsson

[Bayou Bum]

“We should not blame a gun itself for any crime or any acts of violence, any more than we can blame a pen for misspelling a word.”

While the US may have higher murder rates than other countries, it is not due to gun ownership. We have a culture different from other countries. While I agree that we should do what we can to reduce crimes, outlawing guns only creates more criminals and creates a black market for guns. Just look at the war on drugs to see what would happen with a war on guns. If you want to reduce crime, try legalizing drug use. After all, shouldn't you be allowed to smoke a joint while in bed with your gay marriage partner while cleaning your gun?

We also have the highest motor vehicle death rate in the world. Should we outlaw driving for the same reason?

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/he...vehicle-deaths