Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumAuthorities: Military service member with concealed carry permit shoots attacker (Chicago)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/chi-military-member-concealed-carry-shoots-attacker-20140706,0,5324984.storyWith 82 shootings and 14 dead in Chicago over the 4th weekend, at least one shooting was done by a concealed carry holder and the Chicago street cops are applauding him for it.
"A Gresham man fired on a group of people leaving a party, only to be shot himself by one of the victims, a military service member with a concealed carry permit, authorities said.
The military member and three others were leaving a party Friday night in the 11700 block of South Union Avenue in West Pullman, Assistant State’s Attorney Mary Hain said during a court hearing Sunday. One of the victims had noticed a cup of liquor on top of her vehicle and asked attendees of a party next door who it belonged to, Hain said.
When she removed it, Denzel A. Mickiel approached her, shouting obscenities and threatening her and her friends, according to Hain and court records. Mickiel, 22, went into the residence, returned with a gun and began firing at the group, she said.
As Mickiel fired at the victims’ vehicle, the military member retrieved his gun and took cover near the vehicle’s front fender, according to Hain. Two unidentified people also shot at the group, she said.
The military service member fired two shots and struck Mickiel twice, she said." <snip>
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
doxydad
(1,363 posts)...aaaaaand there it is.
DonP
(6,185 posts)2 wrongs do not make a right! They're BOTH wrong, neither should have had guns, I guess that's my point, and opinion. Good post, but I'm damn sick of GUNS
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)It would also be nice if the PD got some cooperation to solve these shootings to indeed put these people in jail for a long time. They say they know who is doing the straw purchase sales, that is illegal and needs to be shut down also.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Maybe you'll luck out and Prohibition III will work where the first two didn't!
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)just you wait
doxydad
(1,363 posts)People own guns. Why, I do not know. makes no sense to me, since I do not fear...stuff. If it happens, then it happens. It is what it is. People die every day due to some dumb ass behind the wheel drunk, those who forget to lock the swimming pool gate, the 'home electricians'...etc...etc.
There's a ton of stupid out there. That being said, if you remove GUNS, and armaments of all types out of the picture, it's a better world. Every day some innocent person gets clipped due to the insanity, arrogance and stupidity of Second Amendmenty types. These can 100% be avoided.
How the hell have I lived all these 63 years without guns? For a bout 24 years, i lived in a very rough section of town, where guns were prominent. We were activists, and constantly harassed by drug dealers, etc. Yet, I never had a gun, I never needed a gun. The only time I was broken into, Sal and Freddie got the punks gun FROM him.
Biscuits all around, good boys! Guns are for fearful people.
That would leave me OUT. I know that I'm in the majority, but alas, with the NRA ( gun manufacturers lobby group) and the rabid obsession that 'gunnies' have that I will not see an end to guns in my lifetime. If the Newtown, school and theatre tragedies did not move the needle, nothing will. And there will never be peace. Guess I will never find why people find solace in weapons.
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)People own firearms for a variety of reasons. Some for personal protection; some for hunting wild game; some for sporting purposes (target shooting, skeet, sporting clays, etc) Why is not for me to determin as long as they meet the legal requirements. I don't know any "fearful" people who own guns; the gun owners I know are rational individuals capable of making informed decisions.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)I know quite a few and none of them are "fearful"
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)This happened in the UK --
The brothers were sentenced at the Old Bailey after being convicted of raping and robbing the women in an attack that saw Ali hold a gun to a woman's head while an unidentified suspect raped her.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/lewisham-prostitutes-raped-robbed-by-gun-toting-brothers-ali-basiru-deen-1455936
So much for 100%.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)Oh wait, some asshole cut her down with a sub-machine gun last year while she was leaving a birthday party. Should UK ban private ownership of automatic weapons? Oh wait, they did that in 1937.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2409812/Sabrina-Moss-shot-dead-Kilburn-North-West-London-machine-gun-celebrated-birthday.html
How many of these rampage killers are "second amendmently types"? Zero. They got the guns for that specific purpose, which were often planned months ahead.
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)
DonP
(6,185 posts)You have a very twisted view of things, when you see a law abiding citizen defending their life as a problem and morally equivalent to a drunken thug.
Now, you better get busy with some petitions to repeal that pesky old 2nd amendment.
Or is all your gun control activism online posting only?
I'm guessing that you're not in a militia, so yes, you don't need a gun. I've gotten by 63 years without one...and that's hardly a 'twisted view'. As a lwa abiding citizen, I pay my taxes for said militia to handle these things. Australia had the right idea...get rid of the guns. All of them.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)DonP
(6,185 posts)Let me guess, you missed that whole Heller and McDonald thing too? For the record, Australia now has as many privately owned guns as it did before the confiscation. You dont keep up on current news much, do you?
doxydad
(1,363 posts)I'm getting the last word on this. If you feel the need for guns, you feel that insecure, knock yasself out, get all you can.
I don't care if you want to piss your money away for the sake of living in fear of something that may, may not ever occur..and that's gotta be what it is. Has to be. Why else would you plunk down hard earned money for something that has no use other than to kill? I personally have no fears about some boogie man scenario, i have no need for any guns and every goddamned day when I go online, there's another 'accident' that could have been avoided ...but noooooooo, we have to have guns because...SECOND AMENDMENT!!!!!
In my opinion, and the opinion of millions of other people who do not live in constant agitated fear of ....something... or...nothing...i don't need guns, I sure as hell do not want 'Mr. Gun Owner' to come to my aid if I am ever in a situation with another 'Gun Owner'.
Whining? I think not. This is MY opinion, and as a gun free citizen, I have the right to express why I feel all guns are wrong. They are. If you do not feel the same way, that's fine. Just don't say that I'm not doing anything about it since you don't know me, nor do you know how damned many things I have done to slow the killing in our own streets. I've survived 63 years so far...( don't know how since I do not have any weapons here) and I'm confident that I can get the rest of my life dealt with sans any guns.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Let the one's that pass the required background check and are authorized to own one have the weapon they want to spend their money on. They are legal and it is their right under the constitution. That pesky little piece of parchment.
DonP
(6,185 posts)Trust me, we are really glad you and people like you don't have or want guns.
But I'm willing to bet you have no idea what you're talking about re: current gun laws. Have you ever read or filled out a Fed Form 4473? Ever had a NICS background check performed? Ever actually been to a gun show or in a gun store? But not knowing any facts never slowed down a gun controllers "considered opinion", ignorant though it may be.
I've found that a majority of gun control people seem to have no f'ing idea what laws already exist and think you can just order a gun online or walk in and walk out, no questions asked. That's small "i" ignorance, with thinking no deeper than the last bumper sticker they saw or the last episode of Piers Morgan (Career - RIP).
My insecurity? Thanks for the free analysis "doc". How kind and condescending of you. That's the same spirit that's already PO'd a lot of people in GD and LBN about you and your posts. Nice to see you spread the attitude around evenly.
I've noticed that gun controllers are all amateur Psychiatrists and eager to diagnose online what others think, feel and their motivation. (Except for the control fan we have that is hooked on referencing child porn, he's just creepy, but ...he agrees with you.)
"In my opinion, and the opinion of millions of other people who do not live in constant agitated fear of ....something... or...nothing" and the hell cares?
You haven't had any federal gun control legislation passed in over a decade and the track record in courts isn't looking too good either. Not much reason to bother to take you and your ilk seriously.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)
oneshooter
(8,614 posts)You would not want a person, with a legally owned and permitted firearm, to return fire? And by doing so stop the gunman from shooting at you?
doxydad
(1,363 posts)...then what happens will happen. I do NOT want any...ANY armed citizen coming to my defense.
According to death certificate data, from 2003 to 2007, more than 680 Americans per year were killed unintentionally with firearms. Data from the National Violent Death Reporting System (which has more comprehensive data on each shooting but currently is operating only in 18 states) show that two thirds of the accidental shooting deaths occurred in someone's home, about half of the victims were younger than 25 years, and half of all deaths were other inflicted—the victim was typically shot accidentally by a friend or family member (eg, brother.)[3] It appears that the large majority of accidental shooting deaths in the home are from guns that were kept in the home.
This would include someone coming to my defense. PLEASE do not attempt to save me. You'll probably do more harm than good.
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/753058_2
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)in backyard swimming pools. They should all be banned and FILLED IN!
doxydad
(1,363 posts)
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)No where did he say he was "okay with that"; just a recognition that when conducting a threat assessment swimming pools are more of a threat for accidental death than firearms.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)The other, ...the gun play,... can completely be avoided. Completely. In nations where guns and gun totin' Second Amendmenty types do not rule, you don't see the daily massacre of kids. It does not exist. that was my point.
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)when you tried to imply the other poster was "okay" with accidental deaths caused by firearms.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)4300 children die from alcohol poisoning annually. That's equivalent to more than 4 Sandy Hooks a week.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Ban the guns and the backyard swimming pools? Fine by me. That's a trade-off worth taking.
But I imagine the gun-folks would reneg and proclaim they were simply being hyperbolic.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Like to throw in anything else while you're at it? Video games in which the protagonist uses guns, bombs, other military gear?
I'd STILL take that deal to get guns out of this country.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)actually achieving the stated objective would be another matter entirely.
beevul
(12,194 posts)If there was ever any question why some of us argue this issue so vehemently on the pro-gun side, this post should remove all lack of understanding. You're agreeing to get rid of pools is the context, and then adds this:
" Ok. Like to throw in anything else while you're at it? Video games in which the protagonist uses guns, bombs, other military gear?
I'd STILL take that deal to get guns out of this country."
People who believe as you do, Sir, created people like me, and created organizations of people like me made up of individuals from all across the political spectrum. You or someone else may at this point wish to point out that gun rights support comes more from the right than the left, but don't bother. It doesn't invalidate what I said.
I hope everyone notes this.
Just curious. You made pretty clear the areas you'd place on the alter, and the degree to which you'd sacrifice them to get your way.
So whats next for you?
What other deals do you have in mind, in which you sacrifice a bunch of things we like, in order to get rid of something else we like, because you don't like what we like?
Please, continue.
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)I go looking for some Super Mutants or Ghouls to "take out". Wait, you mean that the game isn't real???? 
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)The prior poster (presumably pro-gun) wanted to ban backyard swimming pools. And the other usual pro-gun 'blame everything else' arguments is 'violent video games'.
You tell me what you want gotten rid of to get rid of guns. Unless it's something that's required for life itself, I'll probably agree.
But, as usual, the reality is that you wouldn't get rid of ANYTHING else you don't like if it means losing your guns.
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)that if one wants to ban something to prevent accidental childhood deaths the proper starting point would be those items that are linked to the most accidental childhood deaths. I personally don't prefer "banning" anything; the appropriate response is to hold people accountable for their actions.
IronGate
(2,186 posts)Only one was wrong, the thug that first opened fire, the other gentleman was legal in that he had a CHL, which means he went through a background check, took the CCW course, proved his proficiency with his firearm.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Keep adding up the wrongs, hoping for a right. Very sad.
blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Do you think 2 guys taking guns to a party is a good thing? Guns and booze don't mix too well. Cops who applaud shootings, no matter how justified the shooting may be, are assholes, but I do not see anywhere in the article that the cops applauded the shooting. So, whoever said they "applauded" this shooting is probably making shit up to justify assholes carrying guns to 4th of July parties.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)those who carry 'if they really need it for self-defense' or some words to that effect. Would not this situation fit into that category?
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)If you consider attending a party an extreme situation, then you may want to reconsider what kind of parties you go to. All it takes is one party goer with a gun to cause havoc and in this case we had two. Consider the outcome had neither been carrying. Two wrongs do not make a right.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)not carrying his weapon. Only the military guy who returned fire was carrying his weapon. You fail at reading comprehension.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Both ended up shooting each other. What's your point?
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)The guy was not carrying. The military man was. He likely saved injury or death to himself and others because he was carrying. You certainly cannot oppose that, can you? Should they all have died?
Your response that neither one should have been armed doesn't work BECAUSE THEY WERE ARMED.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)Did you miss that part? Once it leaves your home or vehicle you are carrying, and unless you are going hunting or to the range, then you are carrying in public. I have no objection to someone who carries in the wilderness, but I consider it generally unwise in an urban environment.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)gun from their house? I agree he is an asshole. If the military guy was not legally carrying he and his friend could have been seriously injured or dead and you seem to have preferred that he did not have the ability to defend himself and others. Unbelievable.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)The part where I think taking the gun from the house to the street falls under the category of carrying? What would you call it?
Did I say anything about people not defending themselves or having the abolity to do so? No!
So, what do you find so unbelievable?
I wasn't there and, I assume, neither were you. So, we have little knowledge of what went down exactly. Personally, I tend to avoid altercations. I find that to be the best form of self defense, YMMV.
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)that involved gunplay. The only three altercations while I was in high school and college were quick and painless (for me).
I am not a person who looks for trouble.
You equating 'carrying' by someone who illegally uses a firearm (and not concealed but retrieved from a dwelling) to someone with a CCW is ridiculous at best and disingenuois at worst.
What would I call it? I would call it illegal use of a firearm?
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)I didn't "equate" anything. I didn't say the guy who shot the asshole was also an asshole. I don't see them as the same. Their only similarity, as far as I know, is that they both had guns and used them to shoot each other.
Bad situations often get worse when firearms are added to the equation. Just sayin'
Jenoch
(7,720 posts)from severe injuries and possible death.
Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)All we know is it was used to shoot another guy who had already shot people. That makes it the second gun in a gunfight. You probably think the cops were applauding too, like the OP says.
Duckhunter935
(16,974 posts)Of course you will not see that posted by the ones on the anti-gun side. Use of a firearm in self defense is not possible to them.
dogman
(6,073 posts)numbers to contemplate
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)It's actually a far better ratio of 'good' gun use than we normally see. (If you exclude use by actual trained law enforcement, which doesn't matter as much in 'gun control' issues, since disarming police is almost never mentioned.)
DonP
(6,185 posts)Remember, CCW here is only legal since early March.
dogman
(6,073 posts)Every time I see the "no guns allowed" sign on entryways of places that a sign should not be needed if gun owners were actually responsible people. The insanity increases exponentially.
DonP
(6,185 posts)First they demanded that signs be allowed to ban concealed carriers, then when the signs went up, they started whining about how the signs they demanded remind them of guns and they're scared by the signs.
But I teach all my CCW classes to abide by the law and not to patronize a store with a sign and let all the other gun owners know to stay out and boycott them. That's why we have a web site just to keep track of businesses that don't want our money.
But there are only 2 million of us in Illinois so they probably don't care. But you should "feel" safe knowing that only the criminals will be carrying in places with those signs.
But I'm not sure how actually obeying the rules people like you wanted makes us irresponsible.
dogman
(6,073 posts)The fact someone would feel the necessity to carry into a public place shows a level of paranoia that convinces me they have already failed the mental stability test. I'm sure most businesses would prefer to serve the general public rather than unstable people with weapons. Life has risks, there is no real need to amplify those risks due to fear of the unknown.
DonP
(6,185 posts)The number of businesses that post signs was low to begin with in Illinois and is already dropping, just like it has in every other state that passed concealed carry; Ohio, Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan etc. When they realize none of your paranoid fears are actually coming to pass, shooting over parking spaces, blood running in the streets etc.
Perk up, it's concealed carry, so you'll never know if the woman behind you in Starbucks is packing or not, or if the guy waiting in the check out line in front of you at Mariano's has a 1911 under his shirt.
And you can always just go to shops with the "No Guns" signs up and ride the El or a CTA bus. That way you know that there are no legal concealed carry holders there, just the usual criminals with guns.
Even Jewel food stores took down their signs after they got a lot of pushback from gun owners. The fact that crime is at a 40+ year low, including crime with guns, doesn't offer your irrational fears much in the way of support.
It's a "paranoia" you are just going to have to learn to live with, since it's the law in all 50 states now.
But cheer up, you can fantasize about how gun control is going to make a big comeback .... any day now. It's only been 20years since any new Federal gun control was passed.
dogman
(6,073 posts)The issuance of CCW permits is gun control. Beyond that, I have no illusions that a large number of mentally unstable people will have guns. The facts are that more innocent people will die as the number of guns increases. I don't change my behavior because some one may be carrying a weapon. My point is that the fact places need to put up signs to remind supposedly responsible people to be responsible is worth noting. The majority of people lead long lives without the need to defend themselves from imaginary attackers. I have a number of guns, but don't require a CCW because if I find the need to use one, that is my license. The amount of money involved in guns prevents Federal laws, not the number of gun owners.
DonP
(6,185 posts)Of course they do, they're called criminals where I live.
People like you, that foolishly admit to illegally carrying a gun without a permit are the problem.
So when is the violent crime rate going to start going up with all these guns out there? The sales boom is almost 10 years old now and crime continues to drop.
Sorry, but the more guns = more crime meme, is proving to be a myth that no one on the control side can support with anything like factual data.
My feeling are relevant because it's now the law. Kind of like the people that don't like the ACA, tough shit, it's now the law.
I do not illegally carry a gun. I don't carry a gun outside of my property. If I felt the need to, I would, because as I stated, it would be for real, not my paranoia run away with me. Unfortunately criminals are not the only mentally unstable people with guns, check out suicides and domestic violence as examples. Violence begets violence is a fact.
DonP
(6,185 posts)"I have a number of guns, but don't require a CCW because if I find the need to use one, that is my license."
Hmmm, sounds like you'll carry, if you feel it's needed, to me?
But anyone else that feels the same way must be paranoid?
Well, keep hoping. Maybe violent crime will start to rise again and your predictions will come true. In the meantime, all the concealed carriers and new gun sales non-withstanding, violent crime including suicides and domestic violence, keeps going down, according to those wingnuts at the FBI under Eric Holder, it's lower now than anytime since the early 1960's.
Please don't be upset by it, but you're safer on the street now than at any time in the past 40+ years.
dogman
(6,073 posts)CCW is not required for that, it's for people with a serious need to carry. The rest are simply compensators. They have surrendered to fear and of course, hype. That's where the money is, gun farming is now a bigger business in Illinois.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)It hasn't been seen here in a while, but you're far from the first to use it
as the dates on these blasts from the past demonstrate:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x361725#367600
Response to Original message
60. How about..
Not sure if this one counts as a separate one, but the..
MGAFYGAE -- "MY guns are fine, YOUR guns are evil."
Black powder guns, revolvers, traditionally stocked shotguns, deer rifles, even 1911's- "But I {or Dad, or Granddad, or Uncle Duke} had / have one of those, so they're perfectly fine. The rest of your guns? Ban 'em."
friendly_iconoclast Thu Jan-27-11 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. That's a good one. A variant is the "Uncle Ruckus"
Claiming to be a gun owner and/or very familiar with guns, and yet continually putting down other gun owners
dogman
(6,073 posts)Cousin Silly assumes from a short exchange about the Gun Industrial Complex that there is a continual putting down of gun owners. I take weapons seriously and am not thrilled that there are so many mentally unstable individuals accessing them. The obsession with carrying a weapon for people living a normal life is a strong sign of instability IMO. The OP cites crime decreasing yet people feel a greater need for carrying a weapon than before. IMO this is played on by the Gun Industrial Complex to cash in.
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)Especially while you purport to diagnose psychiatric problems in people
you do not know and have never met? You're also not the first self-proclaimed
telepsychologist to post here. Such claims are best discussed in...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1231
...and not here. Of course, you could just admit that you don't really
know how to read others' thoughts...
friendly_iconoclast
(15,333 posts)There's even some claims of remote viewing in there...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x482303
dogman
(6,073 posts)It is hardly the point of my posting, it was in response to an accusation by some one who knows very little about me. I clearly stated it was my OPINION, hardly a diagnosis. This is an online forum, nothing can be certain. I don't know if you might be NRA shills. Seems plausible when one person is a CCW instructor, likely profiting from the paranoia. He calls me egotistical while feeling his need for a gun and the gun culture outweighs any other consideration, and admits his need to control others to the point that he instructs his students where to shop. I don't have to read his thoughts, I read his writing.
DonP
(6,185 posts)Good bye
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)dogman
(6,073 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)blueridge3210
(1,401 posts)Glad the intended victim was able to defend himself and his friends.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)deliberately seeks out mayhem (not even violent robbery for material gain), so that he/she may be measured for having a peculiar power; the violence is the thing. This time it came his way.
doxydad
(1,363 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)home invaders; their motivations, expectations and tactics. While most "cased" the intended victim's residence to assure no one was at home, 20% actually preferred someone was at home because they desired confrontation. Earlier this yr., a security video was posted on DU showing 4 punks breaking into a Detroiter's house. She let rip with an AR, and they fled outside. But as 3 took off, a fourth stopped, then turned back toward the house with his gun, you know, for a little more. Some more rounds and he finally fled.
The fourth: HyperPunk. Don't want that shit on the streets.
ileus
(15,396 posts)Starboard Tack
(11,181 posts)I couldn't find that in the article. I never heard of cops applauding shootings, even in Chicago.
spin
(17,493 posts)It might be mentioned on Fox News.