If only he had been armed. Or maybe the present was a handgun?

We need to arm babies with handguns to protect from the Golden Eagle threat.

Yeah, I'm from the US, why do you ask?

@bobknight33

Jan. 21 2012, St. Charles Illinois; A gun owner with a concealed carry permit accidentally shoots a man through the chest after a night fundraiser at St. Patrick Catholic Church.

May 24 2011, Orlando Florida; A concealed weapon accidentally discharges in the lobby of a restaurant injuring 4 people injured, including a 4 year old boy and the gun owner. The owner had a concealed weapon permit.

November 9, 2012; Colorado University - a woman accidentally shoots a co-worker on the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical campus. The woman, who has a concealed carry permit, told police she bought the gun because of neighborhood concerns and recent campus thefts.

July 7 2009, Tampa Florida; While squatting down to use the toilet, the handgun of a woman with a concealed weapon permit falls out of her holster, hits the ground and discharges, shooting the woman sitting in the next stall.

January 24 2012, Dallas Texas; A 23 year old with a concealed carry permit accidentally drops his weapon while in line at a Walmart, injuring himself and 3 others, including 2 young children, when the weapon discharges.

We can do this all day. That's 1 google search and a few minutes of copy pasta.

I was 'victim' to road rage in my early 20's. Me and a bunch of my mates passed a truck on this road pretty much in the middle of nowhere, when we came to a light the truck rammed us, pushing us nearly into another car that was out late. The next few minutes were spent at high speed as he attempted to push us off the road, ram into us and it ended with our driver driving at high speeds in reverse with this huge truck barreling towards us. Driver was good, quickly turned into a wide driveway. The truck driver likely would have hopped out to continue the violence if six of us didn't jump out of the car, ready to beat the shit out of the guy. He sped away, we went to the cops, my buddies car was near totaled. They never did catch the guy.

Friend of mine since then keeps an unloaded handgun on him (Legally) just in case. He's had to flash it a few times to crazy drivers or punks out looking for a fight.

Funny thing is, I live in the country. But it still happens surprisingly often to people.

You do know what an assumption is right?

The CCW person was not lucky - he was unlucky he was near a crazy guy with a firearm intent on killing people. What he was was well prepared, and all the other people were lucky that a CCW person was near them and simultaneously unlucky they were near a bat shit crazy guy.

According to the anecdotal story the CCW person did not fire a shot. If they did fire a shot then it isn't luck if they didn't fuck up it is training. If they accidentally hit a bystander then it would be no different than a police officer accidentally hitting a bystander and it would still be better than a slaughter.

I've done a lot of handgun shooting (including full police officer firearms training) and looking at the hundreds of other regular shooters I've been with, almost all of them are better than a regular police officer at shooting (and some of them are police officers).

What do movies have to do with real life encounters? Unlike the movies, most CCW people realise the cops will not turn up in time like in the movies and they've taken it upon themselves to accept reality and defend themselves.

On Oct. 1, 1997, Luke Woodham, 16, part of a satanic cult, stabbed and bludgeoned his mother before driving her car to Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., where he shot dead two students and wounded seven others with a rifle he made no attempt to conceal. He then got back into his mother’s car and planned to go to Pearl Junior High School to kill some more. But assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieved a .45-caliber pistol from the glove compartment of his truck and subdued Woodham.

On Jan. 16, 2002, Peter Odighizuwa, 43, of Nigeria, went to the Appalachian School of Law campus in Virginia with a handgun and killed three and wounded three others. At the sound of gunfire, two other students – both police officers – retrieved guns from their cars. Meanwhile, another police officer and former Marine jumped Odighizuwa and disarmed him by the time the other officers got to the scene.

On Aug. 23, 1995, a band of crack cocaine addicts entered a store in Muskegon, Mich., with a plan to kill everyone and steal enough cash and jewelry to feed their habit. One member of the gang shot store owner Clare Cooper in the back four times. He still managed to grab his shotgun and fire on the gang as they fled. They were all apprehended.

On Dec. 9, 2007, a 24-year-old gunman named Matthew Murray launched an attack on the congregants of the New Life Church in Colorado Springs that left two victims dead. A former police officer, Jeanne Assam, a member of the security team for the church, shot Murray 10 times, killing him, as he was shooting at her. Murray had killed four others at a church 70 miles away earlier in the day.

On July 24, 2012, Richard Gable Stevens rented a rifle at a shooting range in Santa Clara, Calif., and herded three employees out the door, saying he intended to kill them. One of the employees, however, was carrying a .45-caliber handgun and shot the assailant.

On Dec. 17, 1991, two men armed with stolen pistols herded 20 customers and employees of a Shoney’s restaurant in Anniston, Ala., into a walk-in refrigerator and locked it so they could rob the establishment. However, one customer was armed with a .45-caliber handgun hidden under a table. He shot one of the gunmen dead. The other robber, who was holding the manager of the restaurant at gunpoint, began firing at the customer. But he was wounded critically by return fire, ending the incident.

On July 13, 2009, an armed man entered the Golden Food Market in south Richmond, shooting and wounding a clerk while firing at store patrons. He was shot by another customer who had a concealed-carry permit, likely saving the lives of eight other people in the store.

On July 29, 2012, Charles Conner shot and killed two people and their dogs at the Peach Tree RV park in Early, Texas. Vic Stacy got a call from one of the neighbors, got his .357 magnum and shot Conner as he fired upon the first police officer to arrive at the scene. Stacy was credited with saving the life of the officer.

The truth is that every single day mass murders are averted by armed civilian

Yet, every time there is a horrendous slaughter like we saw at the Sandy Hook Elementary School, there is a knee-jerk outcry for stricter control of guns.

taken from http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/how-to-stop-the-slaughter-of-the-innocents/#oA9kiFClUvLJ8gIK.99

Loved the video, but I wouldn't recommend dealing in RL.

Had two friends who were into it college. One kept smoking his own supply to the point where he not only was losing money, but eventually got kicked out of school because he was always too wasted to go to class.

The other guy gave up dealing when a deal went bad and the "clients" pulled out 9mm handguns, forced him into the bathroom, and pistol-whipped him until he gave up both his stash and where the money was. While lying on the cold tile bathroom floor with a gun to the back of his head, he decided the money from dealing wasn't worth the associated risks.

>> ^L0cky:
I'm not sure who's disagreeing with who here.
The fact that you can teach a child in order to make their access to guns safer doesn't mean that every child that has access to guns will be taught this in a sufficient way. Besides, how many children had lots of training and still ended up shooting themselves or someone else.
You can get very detailed statistics from the CDC, unfortunately I can't link to them because they are generated by a search and the URLs generated are session specific. The statistics, as detailed as they are, don't state weather the child was educated in the use of firearms, but accidental firearms death in children is quite low. According to the CDC, between 1999 and 2010 the leading cause of accidental deaths to children ages 1-4 is motor vehicle accidents (28.9%), poisoning is 8th (2.4%) and firearms is 12th (1.0%). Going up to the 5-9 age range MVA is still the leading cause of accidental death (46.7%), with poisoning still 8th (1.8%) and firearms still 12th (1.5%). You can look them up yourself at the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention & Control.

>> ^L0cky:
If you don't think having a gun in your home would automatically make it the most dangerous thing in that home then you're either being disingenuous or you have some freaky shit going on in your house.
Having a gun in your home does not make it the most dangerous thing in the house, and the statistics I posted above back me up. There are plenty of things even in a gunless household that are lethal if a child gets its hands on it. I would argue that a gun is far safer because it can be unloaded and therefore be rendered harmless if a kid gets a hold of it. A bottle of drain cleaner, bug spray, bottle of medicine, etc. is always going to be dangerous if a child gets a hold of it. With those items, all you can do is lock them away in a safe place where a child can't get them until they are old enough to understand that they are dangerous. Any responsible gun owner would treat a gun the same as any other dangerous object in the home, by unloading it and/or locking it up until the child is old enough to be taught that it's dangerous and not something to play with.

I don't understand your objection to teaching a kid how to properly operate a firearm when the're old enough. I was taught by my father as his father taught him, and I've never killed anyone on purpose or accident.

>> ^L0cky:
So my question is: despite the fact that some kids can be taught to be careful with a firearm, what is the justification of owning one...
I can't speak for every gun owner, but I have several reasons. I personally own four guns, two rifles and two pistols. It's a hobby, I like to shoot them, but I also own them for self defense. I also like archery and own a bow. A bow is also an instrument of war and designed for the taking of human life as well as hunting, just as a rifle, but how come no one pitches a fit about bows like they do guns? I don't hunt, but I have friends that do, so there's another reason for you.

I also have gone through the steps to acquire a license to carry a concealed firearm in my state. I think of it as insurance. I have car insurance, but I don't intend to get in a wreck, and I also have home owners insurance though I don't intend for my home to get damaged or destroyed. I don't carry a gun intending to kill someone, but just like car and home insurance I have it just in case.

>> ^L0cky:
I'll play devil's advocate and say 5: to defend your property and family against an armed burgler. Yet if you take a look at the rest of the world, at countries where guns are not prolific, gun assisted burglaries are so rare that it doesn't even bear thinking about.

The fact that you need a gun to defend yourself against someone with a gun is because you both have guns. - Captain "Circular" Obvious

From everything you've posted, you seem to be thinking that someone needs a gun to defend oneself from an attacker with a gun. The majority violent of crimes do NOT involve the use of a gun, and up to 2.5 million reported crimes (many are unreported) are prevented by lawful gun owners each year, most of which do not involve discharging the weapon.

Ninety percent of violent crimes are committed by persons not carrying handguns. This is one reason why the mere brandishing of a gun by a potential victim of violence often is a sufficient response to a would-be attacker. In most cases where a gun is used in self-defense, it is not fired." [source]

>> ^L0cky:
I can't really budge on this unless you can somehow convince me that it's not preferable to live in a western society where almost all people have never even seen a real gun, therefore removing all their associated problems.
That's not an idealism, that's pretty much most of Europe.

Personally I would rather live in a society where people are educated and non violent so that we can own guns for sport, collecting, hunting, etc. and not have to deal with people's irrational fear of them. You seem to have some delusional idea that removing guns from society is going stop crime and violence. Removing guns isn't going to magically stop people from being violent and committing crimes. The UK and Australia did ban personal ownership of guns and their crime rates went up because the only ones left with guns were the criminals. [1][2][3][4]

>> ^bmacs27:
I think most criticism of gun ownership is alarmist, and heavily influenced by confirmation bias and sensationalist media.

I don't really agree with this. There really is only one major criticism and that's the amount of death and injury caused by firearms, which is backed up by statistical research rather than media hyperbole.

If you're a 25 year old US citizen you're almost as likely to die by gunshot as you are by a vehicular accident.

You may or may not agree with the justification (I, like you, agree - the world is an inherently dangerous place) but vehicles do bring obvious benefits to society in many ways.

I have a hard time saying the same about guns.

I know a few European countries have a relatively high gun ownership rate (about a third of the US) but without the same death and injury rate, so I agree it's not a simple relationship between ownership and injury. Perhaps it'd be fairer to say that the US' high gun ownership, and their high injury/fatality rate has a common root. I see that as the gun regulations.

Taking Switzerland specifically (which, as you said has half the gun ownership of the US) they have compulsory conscription. I had two separate friends who (both reluctantly) had to do it. They learn how to use their weapons and I believe this has a positive impact on reducing death and injury. Their conscription is not about guns though; using a gun is just one part of that experience.

I don't really agree with the whole concept of mandatory conscription though, so don't see that as a solution.

In Switzerland the issued firearms have to be stored separately from the bolt. Carrying is only permitted when you're called for service, unless you have a specific permit, a valid reason and pass an exam once every 5 years.

In Finland you need a specific reason and evidence in order to gain a gun license such as hunting, sport or your job. Self defense is not a valid reason. Only firearms appropriate to your license purpose can be purchased.

In Iceland you have to take compulsory training and exams before you can get a license for a shotgun. Self defense with a firearm is not a valid reason for a license. A year of training is required for a handgun license. Semi automatic and automatic weapons are illegal. You can't buy ammunition for weapons you are not licensed for. Licenses are only granted by your local chief of police. Licenses are only granted for hunting, sport, or collecting.

France, again you need a hunting or sport license, and they limit the amount and type of ammunition you can purchase. You can only purchase firearms appropriate to your license class (hunting rifles for hunters, etc).

In Austria you need to pass a psychological test, and pass a shooting exam every 2 years. Non sport weapons require evidence of requiring them from your employer (such as the police).

They all have laws about storing weapons in lockable closets; and laws against carrying (you can only carry a weapon to the place of purpose, and in a manner that accords to regulations) with the exception of Germany which requires training, tests, an additional license and a provable reason for requirement to carry; such as your job.

If your justification for gun ownership is hunting, sport or collecting then why object to implementing these kind of controls?

>> ^Stormsinger:

I have personally witnessed one murder and one attempted murder, both committed with handguns. I have yet to witness a "defensive" use of a handgun.
There are just too many morons out there, for the number of guns circulating around.

Oh, so since you haven't personally witnessed a gun being used in self defense, it must not happen at all. I personally haven't witnessed a police officer stopping a crime, so why do we need them?

>> ^arekin:

You know taking the deathcows arguments into account (though I don't agree with them), Guns are meant to be fired. The guy only has two arms. I've heard the argument "what about his friends?" If they wanted to fire a gun they probably already have one. So either the guy has to grow more arms or hes just carrying around alot of extra weight.
Buy more clips and less guns.


I like to play video games, but by your logic, one game is enough. Also, stamp collectors, they only have two eyes, so why do they need so many stamps?

>> ^L0cky:
And you want to live in a country where every child is taught how to use a firearm?
I'd prefer a society where my kids play too much video games, so I tell them enough already go outside and play!
I'd rather that than feel like I live in a society where I have to teach a seven year old how to kill people (sorry, defend oneself with a deadly weapon).
You know, like Liberia or Mozambique.


No one said anything about teaching a child how to use a gun. You have lots of things in your house that are deadly to kids (knives, chemicals, etc.), and I hope you would teach them that those things are dangerous and not to be played with rather than hiding them and hoping they wont find them. Why would a gun be any different?

I was raised around guns, I've been trained with guns through the Hunter Core program. Purely for hunting game. (not human targets on the shooting range - mostly tin cans and paper circle targets.)

I've seen rampant gun use by teens because they thought guns were cool. I've seen my dog get his eye shot out because the neighbor kid didn't know the gun he just loaded was loaded. I've seen powder burns up the arm of a friend who thought it would be cool to saw off a shot gun and fire it. I was standing there when a good friend fired a rifle and the barrel exploded showering us all in shrapnel as it ripped apart his ear drums.

I was trained to handle guns, how to hold them, and all the safety and respect that anyone needs to handle guns. But that doesn't change the fact that they can be dangerous.

I live in Canada, yes, I could go out and get a gun any time I wanted, but our culture on guns is different. I don't feel the need to own one and I know the guy next to me isn't holding a concealed one. I have never let my kids have any toy gun that looked like a gun. (Nerf is ok) Guns are never toys - ever - and I've taught my kids that their entire life, just like matches and fire aren't toys. You just don't mess around with them.

I don't own a gun now nor do I ever see myself owning one. I like the culture of not needing to own one. I can understand a rifle and a shotgun for hunting (locked in a gun safe when not used.) I don't understand and cannot support the necessity for handguns and automatic weapons. Even semi-automatic weapons are unnecessary. Having an Uzi is just plain ridiculous as it's only intended use is for killing humans. That's just how I feel.

On the flip side....

I do understand the need for a militia. They are an integral part of a free society. the last defense against invasion and more so against government forces when the military is turned against the people.

I just don't believe military weapons should be kept in a home environment. There are any number of places they can be stored but at the very least - a proper gun locker with a lock is the only alternative. I don't care whether you have kids living in the home or not. I also don't think anyone should be in possession of military weapons unless they are registered with the militia.

I have personally witnessed one murder and one attempted murder, both committed with handguns. I have yet to witness a "defensive" use of a handgun.

There are just too many morons out there, for the number of guns circulating around.

Did you even read my post? I specifically mention that I am from Canada and that the US is different. Second I have my PALR and know quite a lot about our gun laws here in Canada.

Cool story tho

EDIT: I realized I cut the "Canada vs US" out of my abbreviated post here, so I can see what you mean.

>> ^Shepppard:

@Buck
DO NOT drag Canadian gun ownership into your thought process. Your entire post is invalidated if you refer to Canadian gun ownership the way you do American gun ownership.
Buying a gun in most of (if not all) of the U.S. is basically passing a 3-15 day background check. If you don't have a felony, history of mental health problems, or even some larger misdemeanors, you get your gun.
Canadians need to first off pass a safety course (C.anadian F.irearms S.afety C.ourse) then mail away an application for gun ownership. If you're granted the PAL (Possession and Acquisition License) you can then go out and buy sporting rifles, shotguns and airguns with an overall length of 660mm or greater. (Air rifles that are capable of a muzzle velocity of over 500 feet per second require the license.)
Handguns, and anything fully automatic are still prohibited.
If you want a handgun, you can take a CRFSC (R for Restricted) test and pass it, and then you're allowed to own and use Handguns. Fully automatic weapons, however, are still prohibited.
TL;DR:
Canadians have to jump through hoops and actually pass safety courses and tests before even being allowed to mail off your application and be considered for gun ownership.
Americans have to not be crazy, not have been in jail, and be able to wait up to two weeks.
Comparing gun ownership between the two is NOT valid.

@Buck

DO NOT drag Canadian gun ownership into your thought process. Your entire post is invalidated if you refer to Canadian gun ownership the way you do American gun ownership.

Buying a gun in most of (if not all) of the U.S. is basically passing a 3-15 day background check. If you don't have a felony, history of mental health problems, or even some larger misdemeanors, you get your gun.

Canadians need to first off pass a safety course (C.anadian F.irearms S.afety C.ourse) then mail away an application for gun ownership. If you're granted the PAL (Possession and Acquisition License) you can then go out and buy sporting rifles, shotguns and airguns with an overall length of 660mm or greater. (Air rifles that are capable of a muzzle velocity of over 500 feet per second require the license.)

Handguns, and anything fully automatic are still prohibited.

If you want a handgun, you can take a CRFSC (R for Restricted) test and pass it, and then you're allowed to own and use Handguns. Fully automatic weapons, however, are still prohibited.

TL;DR:

Canadians have to jump through hoops and actually pass safety courses and tests before even being allowed to mail off your application and be considered for gun ownership.

Americans have to not be crazy, not have been in jail, and be able to wait up to two weeks.

Comparing gun ownership between the two is NOT valid.

No sarcasm. An exercise most Law enforcement instructors perform is showing recruits what a person is capable of doing while handcuffed. Behind the back doesn't limit you that much if the palms are facing each other. A person handcuffed in this fashion can still access and control a handgun, including shooting forwards or his own head.

I'm not making any comment on this specific incident because there are too many possibilities, but I'm just saying that what Cenk is saying is impossible is actually easily possible. >> ^Sagemind:

Um, Huh? (Sarcasm?)
>> ^TheSofaKing:
It's 100% possible to shoot yourself in the temple while handcuffed behind the back... regardless of what hand you are.