0
MDMA

Legal gun owner kills policeman

Recommended Posts

Quote

>I never new guns had decision making power?

They're just tools. In this case, the lack of this specific tool did not doom the unarmed cops - and having that tool did not save the life of the armed cop who was killed.



I don’t think blame can be given to an object thats all.
I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
in this case, the gunman was a legal gun owner, he had been drinking and went home to have a domestic argument with his partner. he had a gun at home.

the argument caused the neighbours to call the police, the usual unarmed police turned up and he didn't kill them, he only decided to use his gun when faced with an armed policeman. he shot the policeman dead and then killed himself

from this i'd say a few things....

1. he hadn't intended to kill anybody initially
2. when faced with an armed policeman, he decided to kill by using his gun
3. he wouldn't, and didn't, kill untill a gun came in to the senario (the armed policeman)
4. he wouldn't have killed anybody unless he had had the gun
5. the policeman would still be alive today if the guy hadn't been legally able to own a gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

A .222 calibre rifle, commonly used in pest control, was recovered from the scene.



uhh..... used for pest control?!? :S


That did seem a bit off to me but I guessed they meant a 22 ??

The only 222 I know of is the 222 Swift. That is a high speed round for sure


Or .222 Remington, which is a legal approximation for .223 Remington/5.56x45 NATO in countries which limit private ownership of guns in military calibers.


Thanks, I do not know a hell of a lot about different calibers...
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

A .222 calibre rifle, commonly used in pest control, was recovered from the scene.



uhh..... used for pest control?!? :S


Yes pest control.

Small projectile large cartridge. Popular for lamping foxes with some in rural UK. A very effective tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

in this case, the gunman was a legal gun owner, he had been drinking and went home to have a domestic argument with his partner. he had a gun at home.

the argument caused the neighbours to call the police, the usual unarmed police turned up and he didn't kill them, he only decided to use his gun when faced with an armed policeman. he shot the policeman dead and then killed himself

from this i'd say a few things....

1. he hadn't intended to kill anybody initially
2. when faced with an armed policeman, he decided to kill by using his gun
3. he wouldn't, and didn't, kill untill a gun came in to the senario (the armed policeman)
4. he wouldn't have killed anybody unless he had had the gun
5. the policeman would still be alive today if the guy hadn't been legally able to own a gun



And what's to say he wouldn't have used a butcher* butter knife or a cricket bat - you can't say he wouldn't have killed if only he didn't have a gun.

* - sorry, forgot y'all aren't allowed those anymore, either...
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


And what's to say he wouldn't have used a butcher* butter knife or a cricket bat - you can't say he wouldn't have killed if only he didn't have a gun.



Perhaps he means you should be required to drown foxes and other pests with water pistols.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

in this case, the gunman was a legal gun owner, he had been drinking and went home to have a domestic argument with his partner. he had a gun at home.

the argument caused the neighbours to call the police, the usual unarmed police turned up and he didn't kill them, he only decided to use his gun when faced with an armed policeman. he shot the policeman dead and then killed himself

from this i'd say a few things....

1. he hadn't intended to kill anybody initially
2. when faced with an armed policeman, he decided to kill by using his gun
3. he wouldn't, and didn't, kill untill a gun came in to the senario (the armed policeman)
4. he wouldn't have killed anybody unless he had had the gun
5. the policeman would still be alive today if the guy hadn't been legally able to own a gun



And what's to say he wouldn't have used a butcher* butter knife or a cricket bat - you can't say he wouldn't have killed if only he didn't have a gun.

* - sorry, forgot y'all aren't allowed those anymore, either...



that seems to be the standard defence from the pro-gun crowd... "but they might still have killed anyway, even if they hadn't had a gun"

how many people on here think he would have killed the armed policeman even if he didn't have a gun? keep in mind he would be unarmed, facing an armed policeman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


how many people on here think he would have killed the armed policeman even if he didn't have a gun? keep in mind he would be unarmed, facing an armed policeman



Since by armed you mean in posession of a gun, the policeman would not have been armed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the pro-gun crowd would like you to believe that every innocent person killed by a gun would have been killed anyway, they just happened to have been killed by gun by their killer, and that their killer would have used another methos anyway if he hadn't had a gun

they simply will not admit people die due to guns, those people were going to die and just happened to have met their death by gun..... they will not admit that somebody would not have killed if they didn't have a gun, they will not admit gun deaths are carried out by people taking the opportunity to kill by the fact they have a gun, and wouldn;t kill if they didn't have the gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/6632017.stm

and people say gun controls are not needed :( this policeman would still be alive if that gun hadn't been around



How many policemen would still be alive if cars hadn't been around?

Lots of innocent people were killed around the world yesterday, and I don't see this one being particularly more objectionable than the others. A single head-shot is much better than many others experienced.

Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


how many people on here think he would have killed the armed policeman even if he didn't have a gun? keep in mind he would be unarmed, facing an armed policeman



Since by armed you mean in posession of a gun, the policeman would not have been armed.



no, sorry.... i mean if the policeman had been armed and the killer was unarmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

timothy Mcveigh didn't use a gun, Ted Bundy didn't use a gun...you know everyone is pretty much allowed to own or carry a gun in Az. .......which is good cuz if you go to shoot someone ya never know who is gonna shoot back



so? :S what's that got to do with this policeman being shot dead ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the pro-gun crowd would like you to believe that every innocent person killed by a gun would have been killed anyway, they just happened to have been killed by gun by their killer, and that their killer would have used another methos anyway if he hadn't had a gun

they simply will not admit people die due to guns, those people were going to die and just happened to have met their death by gun..... they will not admit that somebody would not have killed if they didn't have a gun, they will not admit gun deaths are carried out by people taking the opportunity to kill by the fact they have a gun, and wouldn;t kill if they didn't have the gun



1. Outlawing something does not make it go away. If it did, Prohibition would have been a resounding success, and drugs (other than alcohol and tobacco) would have vanished 100 years ago.

2. Guns are the great equalizer. Choose any two people at random and pair them in hand-to-hand combat, and you can make a pretty good prediction of the winner based on age/sex/size/condition. Give them both guns and those predictions will be about 50:50 regardless of other factors.

3. Outlawing guns would, by definition, mean that only criminals would own guns, (regardless of the prior record of the people now classified as "criminal").

4. If a crazy person with a gun walks into a roomful of unarmed people, he is effectively Superman, due to the power of his gun. If he walks into a room with armed people, he is outnumbered by people with the same power. His power is now less than the combined power of his intended victims.

Now please explain to me how making a population helpless, makes them safer.
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
people die...it happens...most of the time its a drag. funny thing about cops tho...they're the only people I know who run TOWARDS gunfire. do you really think that by taking guns away that the bad guys won't figure out a different way to kill folks.....that is the point I was making. you make it sound like this was a spurof the moment thing....dude as obviously waaay jacked up in the head PRIOR to gettin his gun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


how many people on here think he would have killed the armed policeman even if he didn't have a gun? keep in mind he would be unarmed, facing an armed policeman



Since by armed you mean in posession of a gun, the policeman would not have been armed.



no, sorry.... i mean if the policeman had been armed and the killer was unarmed



no sorry...... this was in Britain, so you need to define armed.
Your post CLEARLY implied armed with guns. Nothing else is realistic w.r.t. disarming the civilian in his own home. Are you suggesting British police be armed with guns now or that all sharp or heavy objects be banned from homes?

You can play fantasy confrontation all you like but at the end of the day you're either proposing some remedy or saying something very silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never understand this argument. It takes alot more effort and will to kill someone using some other implement other than a gun. You can shoot a gun at someone metres away. You can shoot a faceless silhouete of a target. You cant stab someone or beat them without being up close and personal and even then it would be with resistance. Even if someone was to attempt to hack a policeman with a machete hes got all sorts of options. The best option being to run away, run them over, spray with pepper spray or if no alternative, baton/fight them. Even in that final instance it isnt definately going to kill them. A gun certainly changes the odds severely.

He may have tried to kill the officer if he didnt have a gun using other means but I doubt he would have, as he was a coward, hence killing himself too. Guns are weapons of faggot criminals (illegal) and opportunist (legal). For that reason they are bad news but I'm not saying we should remove them and I have no belief in any neccesity to routinely arm police officers either. No matter what you have in place tragedies will happen.

Thankfully they are rare and I believe we have the balance about right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
at the risk of sounding self contradicting...I agree with most of what you said...however someone bent on killing will kill. it is just a matter of time...I own a gun I don't intend on shooting a police officer. I have never been so drunk or so angry with the system that I would ever use a gun against a police officer. should I not own my gun ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
wow talk about havin ammo for YOUR arguement.. go to bonfire & read bout zhills incident...if John would have had a gun who knows how many people woulda been killed.....or if everyone else had a gun ...mebbe John woulda been stopped ///interesting quandry we have here huh ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe you should still own your gun. If you were at any point to suffer any kind of mental illness, convicted of a violent offence or found to be member of some extremist party then you should lose that privelage and have your weapons confiscated. Other than that, fill your boots

The problem isn't so severe that we need to be routinely armed in this country. Its actually very safe in respect of gun crime and for what little we have we have an adequate response already in place.

At the same time police officers, and the general public for that matter, need to be aware that there are bad people out there who would like to do harm to them. I think most do. Its not the sort of profession where you dont appreciate risk as you spend most of your career in confrontation.

I don't feel there is any solution to this as there isn't really a problem that can be addressed. Shit happens, has happened and will continue to happen forever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Now please explain to me how making a population helpless, makes them safer.

This incident is an example of how the unarmed people were, in fact, safer.



Only because the guy decided to NOT use the rifle on THEM...not BECAUSE they were unarmed...
Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0