If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WOKV Jacksonville)   Store customer with a concealed weapons permit attempts to stop a robbery. He wounds bystanders and gets into a shootout with police when they think he's the robber. Just kidding. He shot the robber dead and the police thanked him   (wokv.com) divider line 754
    More: Hero, concealed firearm, bystanders, Jacksonville Sheriff's Office, dollar stores, North Side, robbery  
•       •       •

20053 clicks; posted to Main » on 29 Aug 2012 at 5:41 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



754 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-29 12:19:26 PM  

Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...


Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.
 
2012-08-29 12:21:18 PM  

Kit Fister: Silly Jesus: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Silly Jesus: Su-Su-Sudo: PreMortem

violentsalvation: themeaningoflifeisnot: Dd either of the robbers display a firearm? The article doesn't mention anything about that.

So if they didn't, they are proving that a firearm is not needed to commit a violent felony, just as gun rights advocates have been saying all along. It is bad people, not bad guns. Thank you for you contribution and failed attempt at a talking point.

Outstanding, I can satisfy my bloodthirst by waiting in convenience stores in seedy neighborhoods. Just wait for someone to try and rob it with a milk crate. 

I'm just glad we have these fine old people with guns to act as Judge, Jury, and Executioner waiting around. It makes me feel really safe. Actually no it doesn't. I own firearms, but I also live in California where we understand that the second worse thing you can do with a gun is shoot somebody else with it, just behind shooting yourself. Last thing we need is more RoboCop style justice, where people are murdered with impunity for crimes that don't really beg for the death penalty. Screw Florida, and Screw their gun carrying, insane population.

So shooting someone before they get the chance to shoot the clerk that they have the gun pointed at is robocop vigilante justice and is a bad thing?

Only on Fark will you find people who think that the armed robbers got treated too harshly.

The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

Start scrolling down from the top of the thread. Numerous links there to the story where the weapons are indeed mentioned.

Here's one to make it easier.... Link

Derpy derpy doooooooo da.

Shh, he has to try extra hard to cover the trolling that's already been outed and ignored earlier up t ...


Oh, I didn't realize that. I'll be done with him too then. Thanks for the heads up.
 
2012-08-29 12:25:29 PM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...

Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.


Okay, so you're an armchair QB tool...

"The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 19 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner Aundre Campbell fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death becuase it happened while he was committing a crime."
 
2012-08-29 12:29:50 PM  

The Muthaship: Kit Fister: Or, more to the point, maybe if the media and common anti-gun folks didn't highlight and point out the dickless screwups and instead covered fairly the vast majority of firearms owners who aren't dickless screwups, maybe they wouldn't have such a bad name in the first place.

This.

278 CCL holders shot and killed people who were perpetrating crimes which justified the action in 2010 according to FBI statistics. How many did you hear about? I didn't hear about many.


Also not commonly reported were incidents where concealed weapons permit holders shot and nonfatally injured a criminal perpetrator nor incidents where the display of a legally carried firearm ended a criminal threat before any rounds were discharged.
 
2012-08-29 12:30:09 PM  

cassanovascotian: Loaded Six String: Should we find a nice infographic on how many people were killed with knives in each of these countries as well? Violent crime is violent crime regardless of the method. There is a root cause, or indeed many, and guns are not it.

Sure, Let's do that. Comparisons against Europe would involve cultural differences, so that complicates things, but Canada and the US are pretty similar -the only major difference being gun control legislation.... and what's the result?


2.bp.blogspot.com

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x615]

yeah, so ... I'm gonna go ahead and say that guns have a lot to do with it.



That chart is so full of EPIC FAIL that it's hard to believe. According to this chart 19,161 people out of 100,000 people are killed annually

Are you REALLY claiming that 19.161% of the us population is killed every year?!?!?

I can only assume you do not know how to read charts OR qualify your data sources even a little bit.
 
2012-08-29 12:33:57 PM  
Looks like Gramps returned some defective merchandise back to the manufacturer.
 
2012-08-29 12:35:10 PM  

Silly Jesus: Incorrect. If an officer sees someone with a gun pointed at their head they have no obligation to identify themselves and attempt to diffuse the situation. That's considered an imminent threat and immediate action is justified.

My cousin had something like this happen in his town last year. Officer was patrolling on foot in the projects...he heard a commotion in an apartment...turns out it was two guys arguing. The officer rounds the corner and sees through the screen door that one guy has a knife to the throat of the other guy. BAM, he's dead. Shot the guy through the screen door. No need to identify, no need to diffuse. If you are a split second from killing another person, then there is no burden to speak to you.

And I'm not armchair quarterbacking anything. I'm not criticizing any of the actions that the guy took or saying that they could have or should have been done differently.


Definition of armchair quarterback: a person who offers advice or an opinion on something in which they have no expertise or involvement.

This is exactly what you're doing, it doesn't matter if you agree or disagree, you should probably know the definition of a term if you're going to accuse someone else of doing it though.

I'm sorry I hadn't followed any of the other links to see that the men we in fact armed. I had google it and go to the third link to find a story that actually had the facts correct about them being armed.

I guess I just don't look at a story like this and think, "yea, bad guy got killed". I look at a story like this and think, "person got killed, too bad that couldn't have been avoided". I'd rather see education, opportunity, and safety nets in place to keep anyone from feeling like they need to pull a gun on anyone else, you know, like they have in Switzerland. Guess that makes me a troll.
 
2012-08-29 12:37:12 PM  
The last time I checked, the penalty for robbery is not death.
 
2012-08-29 12:38:32 PM  

Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...

Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.

Okay, so you're an armchair QB tool...

"The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 19 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner Aundre Campbell fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death becuase it happened while he was committing a crime."


I'm glad they caught him. Sadly, I don't think the prison system is going to rehabilitate him. It might have actually worked out better for him and the tax payers if he had been shot as well.
 
2012-08-29 12:39:18 PM  

BronyMedic: puffy999: Done, favorited.

I'm serious.

Do you realize how classy awesome it would be to take down a guy with a gun at twenty feet with a broadhead?

If you want to seriously up the ante, put it right between his eyes. That way, when you walk up and jiggle it, hopefully it lands at the right point in the brain that it makes the legs twitch.


You've been favorited again!
 
2012-08-29 12:40:31 PM  

frank249: The last time I checked, the penalty for robbery is not death.


Of what relevance is the typical criminal penalty for robbery to the current discussion?
 
2012-08-29 12:41:18 PM  

Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...

Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.

Okay, so you're an armchair QB tool...

"The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 19 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner Aundre Campbell fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death becuase it happened while he was committing a crime."


What is it with people not knowing the definition of armchair quarterback? Does reading an article make you think you have "expertise or involvement" in the incident? Everyone posting here including yourself is an armchair quarterback.
 
2012-08-29 12:45:41 PM  

frank249: The last time I checked, the penalty for robbery is not death.


And the set is complete....
 
2012-08-29 12:52:42 PM  

push3r: The entire time I was waiting to hear the shot that would end my life.


Maybe I can ease your mind for you. If the guy was using a hunting rifle, then the round would have been super sonic. If you catch it in the dome, you'd never hear the shot.
 
2012-08-29 12:55:22 PM  

quatchi: Article says "armed". I'm just asking "armed with what?"

If it was a a gun I say fire away and hope you get nothing but net.

If it was a knife I'd say give the morons a chance to stop and wait to get arrested.

Shooting a guy with a butter knife without at least giving him the option of standing down when you have a gun out is a pussy move and I simply can't respect it.

No disrespect.


A knife under 10ft away is just as if not more dangerous than a gun. I believe cops are trained to shoot when someone is threatening with a knife at 20ft. Also, if you can help it, you'd rather not let the bad guy know you have a gun until you've already put a hole or two in them. That's a good way to get yourself killed.
 
2012-08-29 12:57:36 PM  

frank249: The last time I checked, the penalty for robbery is not death.


If you present a threat to another life, death is justified. If they shot an unarmed robber in the back who was running away, you might have a point. In this particular case, your sentiment marks you as a troll or an idiot, or the rare troldiot.
 
2012-08-29 12:58:42 PM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...

Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.

Okay, so you're an armchair QB tool...

"The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 19 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner Aundre Campbell fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death becuase it happened while he was committing a crime."

I'm glad they caught him. Sadly, I don't think the prison system is going to rehabilitate him. It might have actually worked out better for him and the tax payers if he had been shot as well.


I'm not big on the idea of anyone dying. Maybe while he's in prison thinking about the choices he made that put him there and cost the life of his friend that he'll change. Sadly, I doubt that will be the case. Regarding the one that got shot, I can't help but think that he knew when he went in with a gun that it might have been his last time doing so.
 
2012-08-29 01:03:06 PM  

cassanovascotian: Loaded Six String: Should we find a nice infographic on how many people were killed with knives in each of these countries as well? Violent crime is violent crime regardless of the method. There is a root cause, or indeed many, and guns are not it.

Sure, Let's do that. Comparisons against Europe would involve cultural differences, so that complicates things, but Canada and the US are pretty similar -the only major difference being gun control legislation.... and what's the result?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x615]

yeah, so ... I'm gonna go ahead and say that guns have a lot to do with it.


So...are you going to be a big enough man to recant your incredibly bogus chart. By the way, that chart was from 2006. using those stats as typical, the US population should be only 28% of what it was in 2006. No wonder it seems less crowded at the grocery store, everyone murdered everyone else.

More realistic numbers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicid e _rate

The US still has a higher rate than Canada, but neither the magnitude nor ratio are anywhere in the remote vicinity of your numbers. I get it, math is hard.
 
2012-08-29 01:03:52 PM  

squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...

Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.

Okay, so you're an armchair QB tool...

"The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 19 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner Aundre Campbell fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death becuase it happened while he was committing a crime."

What is it with people not knowing the definition of armchair quarterback? Does reading an article make you think you have "expertise or involvement" in the incident? Everyone posting here including yourself is an armchair quarterback.


Actually, no. I never said what anyone should have done, what they did wrong, praised or condemned anyone for their actions regarding the story because I was not there and do not have all the facts. I know: They went in with guns. One was killed by a citizen wwith a legal gun. The cops charged the remaining one with the crime.
Others, including what I have read from your posts, seem to think the law abiding citizen shouldn't have shot him because A, B, and C yet none of them were there, and the Police seem to diagree with that sentiment.
 
2012-08-29 01:05:13 PM  
I hate how these threads are like 500 posts long by the time I notice them. So wth I'm just leaping right in without reading any of it. Totally not trolling ...

Repeal the 2nd amendment. It's obsolete. There were two reasons for it originally, and both of them are based on the assumption of having no standing army. First so citizens can form militias and provide for the common defense. There was no standing army at the time, so outside a declaration of war, the citizens were it. Second, to preserve the people's ability to overthrow a tyrannical government. That was perfectly reasonable in 1791 when the gap between a professional army and an armed citizenry was small. It's no longer a small gap, and it's no longer reasonable. Unless you advocate legalization of military hardware, access to small arms does nothing anymore to protect your right to resist tyranny.

Outlaw private ownership of semi-automatic weapons. Outlaw concealed carry. Eliminating high capacity and fast firing and easily concealed weapons immediately reduces the fatal potential of a given attack. Innocent lives are saved. More guns only cost more innocent lives, and restricts the freedoms of those around you.

The 2nd amendment was never intended to be used for personal protection. More importantly, events like the one in TFA are exceedingly rare, and are vastly surpassed by murders committed by legal firearm owners.
 
2012-08-29 01:07:46 PM  

cassanovascotian: Loaded Six String: Should we find a nice infographic on how many people were killed with knives in each of these countries as well? Violent crime is violent crime regardless of the method. There is a root cause, or indeed many, and guns are not it.

Sure, Let's do that. Comparisons against Europe would involve cultural differences, so that complicates things, but Canada and the US are pretty similar -the only major difference being gun control legislation.... and what's the result?

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x615]

yeah, so ... I'm gonna go ahead and say that guns have a lot to do with it.


http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/03/us-vs-canada-homici d e-edition.html

So, your own source, when adjusting the rates for population and demographic found that the murder rate was 1.94 per 100K for Canada, and 2.87 per 100K in the US for the population segment most closely resembling the Canadian demographic. So, at best, the guns account for a little less than 1 extra murder per 100K. Not really a strong enough statistical difference to base your conclusions on.
 
2012-08-29 01:07:51 PM  

BronyMedic: puffy999: Done, favorited.

I'm serious.

Do you realize how classy awesome it would be to take down a guy with a gun at twenty feet with a broadhead?

If you want to seriously up the ante, put it right between his eyes. That way, when you walk up and jiggle it, hopefully it lands at the right point in the brain that it makes the legs twitch.


LOL
 
2012-08-29 01:10:53 PM  
I check the story in the morning to see the update and the robbers were armed.
 
2012-08-29 01:11:56 PM  

MycroftHolmes: So, your own source, when adjusting the rates for population and demographic found that the murder rate was 1.94 per 100K for Canada, and 2.87 per 100K in the US for the population segment most closely resembling the Canadian demographic. So, at best, the guns account for a little less than 1 extra murder per 100K. Not really a strong enough statistical difference to base your conclusions on.


Since we're comparing with Canada, we should get to eliminate all black on black murders. I wonder if that would have any effect?
 
2012-08-29 01:16:01 PM  

Wrathskellar: The 2nd amendment was never intended to be used for personal protection. More importantly, events like the one in TFA are exceedingly rare, and are vastly surpassed by murders committed by legal firearm owners.


Nicly made up fact there. Citation please? Even the Clinton administration, while pushing hard for gun bans, finally admitted that firearms were used between 2 and 3 million times per year preventing or stopping crime. That's way more than the 80-90 million law abiding gun owners all going around murdering eath other now isn't it?
 
2012-08-29 01:18:05 PM  
Kit Fister Plus the psychological damage from having to shoot the guy, and dealing with the family/friends and their issues with his taking a life, plus possibly losing his job due to time spent in court.

I couldn't agree more. It is not something to be taken lightly, by any means. In TN anyway, there are only two justified reasons to fire: reasonable fear of safety or loss of life to 1) yourself or 2) another. Stopping a crime in progress doesn't count, unless it meets that standard. I'm very OK with that.

We won't get that from the article, I'm afraid. I'll take it on faith that the cops saw the situation for what it was & that Bubba did what he should: preserved the scene, cooperated fully with the cops, made it known that he was the victim, etc.

My wife is a very good shot & knows how to handle her pistol safely, but doubts that she could kill another human. I told her to leave it in the safe unless she is completely ready to deal with the issue.
 
2012-08-29 01:19:49 PM  

Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: Farkage: squirrelflavoredyogurt: The only problem with your argument is that the story make absolutely no mention of the robbers being armed. So I guess only on Fark will you find people who jump to wild farking conclusions because of their opinions...oh wait, no, you find arseholes like that everywhere. Nevermind.

There were many links posted above that gave more information, such as the fact they came in with HANDGUNS. I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead...

Nope, but he sure as hell shouldn't have been content killing only one of them. Why hell didn't he chase down the escaping robber and shoot him in the back? Clearly that would have been the only real solution to the problem. There is an armed felon on the streets now because of him.

Yep, I'll play the derp game too if you want.

Okay, so you're an armchair QB tool...

"The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office says a customer at the store on Dunn Avenue shot 19 year-old Rakeem Odoms three times when Odoms refused to hand over his gun.

Odom's partner Aundre Campbell fled the scene and has since been caught by police.

He faces a felony murder charge for Odom's death becuase it happened while he was committing a crime."

What is it with people not knowing the definition of armchair quarterback? Does reading an article make you think you have "expertise or involvement" in the incident? Everyone posting here including yourself is an armchair quarterback.

Actually, no. I never said what anyone should have done, what they did wrong, praised or condemned anyone for their actions regarding the story because I was not there and do not have all the facts. I know: They went in with guns. One was killed by a citizen wwith a legal gun. The cops charged the remaining one with the crime.
Others, including what I have read from your posts, seem to think the law abiding citizen shouldn't have shot him because A, B, and C yet none of them were the ...


"I guess they should have just bought them ice cream instead..."

Actually yes, the definition says "advice" or "opinion" you have clearly offered your opinion several times, as for the advice, it could be argued either way. Offering your opinion without expertise or involvement meets the definition of armchair quarterback. Rationalize it all you want, but welcome to the club.
 
2012-08-29 01:26:16 PM  

Wrathskellar: Totally not trolling ...


For what reason are you lying?
 
2012-08-29 01:30:37 PM  
From the state that brought you George Zimmerman, here's the counter example.

Though I don't defend the actions of the two perpetrators, what I do lament is that the "rule of law" no longer rules in this country. Individual citizens can now be judge, jury, and executioner, and we're OK with that.
 
2012-08-29 01:31:46 PM  

HiFiGuy: From the state that brought you George Zimmerman, here's the counter example.

Though I don't defend the actions of the two perpetrators, what I do lament is that the "rule of law" no longer rules in this country. Individual citizens can now be judge, jury, and executioner, and we're OK with that.


Are you saying, then, that citizens who are threatened by violent criminals should provide no resistance and no defense, and instead allow themselves to be victimized so that the perpetrators may be subject to due process?
 
2012-08-29 01:34:52 PM  

HiFiGuy: From the state that brought you George Zimmerman, here's the counter example.

Though I don't defend the actions of the two perpetrators, what I do lament is that the "rule of law" no longer rules in this country. Individual citizens can now be judge, jury, and executioner, and we're OK with that.


What he did was perfectly legal....that is the rule of law.....
 
2012-08-29 01:35:23 PM  

Kit Fister:
I personally have nothing against the idea that if you're going to carry a gun, concealed or openly, it is wise to seek out some training. After all, the thing i've learned in my own personal pursuit of understanding the ways of self defense, is that the law and these situations are rarely simple, and no amount of training is going to prepare you for the moment you have to employ deadly force. However, what training does do is give ...


EVERY CCW I know, myself included, have sought out additional training. Just about every one of us has received more training, a higher standard of training, and spend far more hours at the range than 99% of the cops out there. I don't know where people can honestly say they feel safer with only cops having guns when most of them only pull their sidearms out once a year and shoot at a target 20 feet away, as opposed to a CCW out here that is at the range weekly (at least), and regularly attends classes that involve much more than shooting at a static paper target for a score. How many cops practice shooting weak hand? Gee, I'm required to shoot weak hand whenever I recertify for my permit.
 
2012-08-29 01:35:38 PM  

Farkage: Even the Clinton administration, while pushing hard for gun bans, finally admitted that firearms were used between 2 and 3 million times per year preventing or stopping crime.


Citation please? And I really mean that. I would really like to see that.
 
2012-08-29 01:38:44 PM  

HiFiGuy: Though I don't defend the actions of the two perpetrators, what I do lament is that the "rule of law" no longer rules in this country. Individual citizens can now be judge, jury, and executioner, and we're OK with that


The error in your logic is that he was not shooting to stop the crime (larceny) but rather to defend himself and/or others. This wasn't punishment, it was defense.
 
2012-08-29 01:40:50 PM  

push3r: I would be much happier to see all the effort and money spent on lobbying for tighter gun control laws for legal owners funneled into programs addressing poverty, drug abuse, and the other societal issues that ultimately result in illegal gun use. I would also really love to go to the moon and back on a flying unicorn. Both scenarios are equally likely.


Duh! You'd need a pegasus to fly you somewhere. Unicorns don't fly.

ponyvillegazette.com 

/politicians have no sense of normal life in the world they've created
 
2012-08-29 01:41:20 PM  

Wrathskellar: I hate how these threads are like 500 posts long by the time I notice them. So wth I'm just leaping right in without reading any of it. Totally not trolling ...

Repeal the 2nd amendment. It's obsolete. There were two reasons for it originally, and both of them are based on the assumption of having no standing army. First so citizens can form militias and provide for the common defense. There was no standing army at the time, so outside a declaration of war, the citizens were it. Second, to preserve the people's ability to overthrow a tyrannical government. That was perfectly reasonable in 1791 when the gap between a professional army and an armed citizenry was small. It's no longer a small gap, and it's no longer reasonable. Unless you advocate legalization of military hardware, access to small arms does nothing anymore to protect your right to resist tyranny.

Outlaw private ownership of semi-automatic weapons. Outlaw concealed carry. Eliminating high capacity and fast firing and easily concealed weapons immediately reduces the fatal potential of a given attack. Innocent lives are saved. More guns only cost more innocent lives, and restricts the freedoms of those around you.

The 2nd amendment was never intended to be used for personal protection. More importantly, events like the one in TFA are exceedingly rare, and are vastly surpassed by murders committed by legal firearm owners.


Do you know how I know you never read the Federalist Papers?
The ones who established the Constitution actually did believe in standing armies. Hamilton pointed out that Native Americans, or the French could declare war on America, and we wouldn't be able to do anything about it because we didn't know we needed the army assembled in advance. The militias they talk about are probably state militias set up to protect against pirates, and frontier towns. All of them were rolled into the national reserve in the 1970's. But SCOTUS says it applies to the individual, whatever you may think. Plus, in the absence of state militias, were out on our own for forming them anyways.

Curious about this. What other rights are obsolete? Can we ban drinking again? Maybe women shouldn't vote. How about the whole freedom of speech thing? It causes a bunch of problems, huh? You authoritarians would just love to limit what everyone else could do anyways.

And you say that the gap between a militia and a professional army is too great to be bridged. Notwithstanding all the countries where guys with rifles have overthrown repressive regimes, if you're right, banning guns would be a moot point because its pointless according to your own logic.

Outlawing every semi-auto would make only bolt actions, and shotguns legal. Revolvers, self-loading rifles, and pistols would all be illegal under your proposed nonsense. You're just scared of guns. Too frightened to even learn a little about them.

I don't know if your last paragraph is a troll or not, but legitimate use of guns far outnumbers illegal use of them.
 
2012-08-29 01:42:48 PM  

jafiwam: give me doughnuts: Mija: A man is dead over a little money and I bet the killer calls himself a Christian. As a responsible gun owner and a Christian I would not kill someone over money or property. Thou shalt not kill is not an option, it's a commandment. A gun is to protect your life. Nothing short of that is acceptable.

So if you, as an armed citizen, saw another person being assaulted with a deadly weapon, being raped or beaten, being threatend with a deadly weapon, you would do nothing to prevent that person's imminent demise?

Your callousness and/or cowardice is disgusting.

That's always something that's a judgement call weighing the risks of each situation, and the risks weighting completely personal to the individual.

Your lack of intelligence is disgusting.


Another coward.
 
2012-08-29 01:43:50 PM  

Kit Fister: Loaded Six String: Whole Wheat: Loaded Six String: Whole Wheat: Loaded Six String: Su-Su-Sudo: Yeah, sorry, I didnt see the other link where it said they had guns. Who robs a dollar store, with guns?

Someone dumb, desperate, failed by society, or all three unfortunately.

For some reason, I think that if the starving waif, left behind by society as he was, had chosen to steal groceries from Kroger instead of getting all gangsta, people wouldn't have gotten all shooty. But let's blame society.

Society isn't to blame, his actions were his. The reasons driving him to this action however, can and should be determined to see if further crime can be reduced by addressing them. It is possible to study the reasons why someone does something without claiming they are an excuse for those actions.

Dammitsomuch. You just got greened. Don't get me wrong, I am pretty liberal in my thinking. I think that money is much better spent on education, prevention, and rehabilitation, than it is on incarceration and punishment. But at the moment someone is held at gunpoint, that really doesn't matter anymore.

And now for my herp-derp moment, I see that is what you were saying in the first place.

Thanks for the green :D

Aww, I didn't get a green :(


I have you favorited as "reasonable gun guy" so cheer up, buttercup!
 
2012-08-29 01:45:06 PM  

cassanovascotian: Then give Cattle Ranchers special permission to own the guns. You know damn well this is not what we are talking about. You guys want everyone to have the right to own these things, and there's no damn reason why the crack-dealer in the hood needs to shoot coyotes


Can't speak for Kit, but I want everyone to have the same legal rights until they have forfeited them through trial by jury. What's so wrong with that?
 
2012-08-29 01:46:02 PM  

quatchi: stlbluez: if they were armed with a butter knife threatening the clerks life... it's good enough.

Article says "armed". I'm just asking "armed with what?"

If it was a a gun I say fire away and hope you get nothing but net.

If it was a knife I'd say give the morons a chance to stop and wait to get arrested.

Shooting a guy with a butter knife without at least giving him the option of standing down when you have a gun out is a pussy move and I simply can't respect it.

No disrespect.


Even better, they where armed with pellet or BB guns. First link says BB, second link says pellet.

"The two men were armed with CO2 BB pistols and were attempting to rob the store when an armed customer told them to drop their weapons, said Lt. Rob Schoonover of the Sheriff's Office. The second man, Rakeem Deveal Odoms, 22, did not drop his weapon and was shot three times with a .45-caliber handgun." http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012-08-29/story/2nd-jacksonville- d ollar-general-robbery-suspect-arrested-charged-death


i.imgur.com
Source of image: http://www.firstcoastnews.com/topstories/article/270987/483/Arrest-ma d
 
2012-08-29 01:46:11 PM  
Oh. A data point that supports a talking point.
*shrug*
 
2012-08-29 01:48:08 PM  

SpectroBoy: That chart is so full of EPIC FAIL that it's hard to believe. According to this chart 19,161 people out of 100,000 people are killed annually

Are you REALLY claiming that 19.161% of the us population is killed every year?!?!?



I know one out of every five of my friends died violently last year, how about you?

/maths, how does they workses?
 
2012-08-29 01:48:32 PM  

Wrathskellar: I hate how these threads are like 500 posts long by the time I notice them. So wth I'm just leaping right in without reading any of it. Totally not trolling ...

And the bets that he's trolling....



100%! Thank you for playing.

 
2012-08-29 01:49:15 PM  

frank249: The last time I checked, the penalty for robbery is not death.


OK, it's funny by now in the same way Milhouse is not a meme.
 
2012-08-29 01:49:27 PM  

DingleberryMoose: SpectroBoy: That chart is so full of EPIC FAIL that it's hard to believe. According to this chart 19,161 people out of 100,000 people are killed annually

Are you REALLY claiming that 19.161% of the us population is killed every year?!?!?


I know one out of every five of my friends died violently last year, how about you?

/maths, how does they workses?


And climate change isn't real because it was cold outside in my neighborhood yesterday...
 
2012-08-29 01:51:06 PM  

SpectroBoy: cassanovascotian: Loaded Six String: Should we find a nice infographic on how many people were killed with knives in each of these countries as well? Violent crime is violent crime regardless of the method. There is a root cause, or indeed many, and guns are not it.

Sure, Let's do that. Comparisons against Europe would involve cultural differences, so that complicates things, but Canada and the US are pretty similar -the only major difference being gun control legislation.... and what's the result?


[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x615]

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 850x615]

yeah, so ... I'm gonna go ahead and say that guns have a lot to do with it.


That chart is so full of EPIC FAIL that it's hard to believe. According to this chart 19,161 people out of 100,000 people are killed annually

Are you REALLY claiming that 19.161% of the us population is killed every year?!?!?

I can only assume you do not know how to read charts OR qualify your data sources even a little bit.


Epic indeed. Most sources have the number as approximately 10.2 per 100,000. It's only off by a factor of 1800.
 
2012-08-29 01:52:41 PM  
And we have Wrathskellar in with the totally obvious troll, and the ever-amusing squirrelflavoredyogart continuing to stamp his foot and pout because people are discussing the concept of self defense and use against robbers in a legitimate situation, based on the case at hand.

Good show, gentlemen. Fark never ceases to be boring.

Oh, and Wrathskellar: I want my 20 seconds back from reading your post. Plonk.
 
2012-08-29 01:53:27 PM  
If the answer to guns is moar guns then...

We should allow Iran to have nuclear weapons then, right? Because more of them will make the world safer?

Yes?
 
2012-08-29 01:54:41 PM  

DingleberryMoose: cassanovascotian: Then give Cattle Ranchers special permission to own the guns. You know damn well this is not what we are talking about. You guys want everyone to have the right to own these things, and there's no damn reason why the crack-dealer in the hood needs to shoot coyotes

Can't speak for Kit, but I want everyone to have the same legal rights until they have forfeited them through trial by jury. What's so wrong with that?


Pretty much this...
 
2012-08-29 01:59:40 PM  

voodoowizard: Even better, they where armed with pellet or BB guns. First link says BB, second link says pellet.


Either is .17 caliber, most guns that will shoot one will shoot the other. And the .17 HMR is available in a handgun that looks much like those pictured and is quite deadly, so there was no real way for Gramps to know those weren't lethal weapons. It's still a good shoot, but my estimation of the perps' IQ just shrunk from an already very low number.

lh4.googleusercontent.com
Taurus Tracker in .17 Hornandy Magnum Rimfire
 
Displayed 50 of 754 comments

First | « | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report