• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Once again, a Gun saved Lives

Kelly J

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
493
Location
Blue Springs, Missouri, United States
imported post

Once Again, A Gun Saved Lives
By Chuck Baldwin
February 16, 2007


This column is archived at
http://chuckbaldwinlive.com/c2007/cbarchive_20070216.html


This past Monday night, a gunman walked into a popular Salt Lake City mall
and opened fire with a shotgun. The trench coat-clad gunman was heavily
armed and intended to kill as many people as he could. He killed five people
before being challenged by an armed off-duty police officer. Once again, a
gun saved lives.

Salt Lake City's police chief said, "There is no question that his [the
off-duty policeman's] quick actions saved the lives of numerous other
people."

According to press reports, "Ken Hammond, an off-duty officer from Ogden,
north of Salt Lake City, jumped up from his seat at a restaurant after
hearing gunfire and cornered the gunman, exchanging fire with him until
other officers arrived." The miscreant was killed in the ensuing shootout.

Mr. Hammond said, "I feel like I was there and did what I had to do."

The mall was crowded with Valentine's Day shoppers. Doubtless, had the
off-duty officer not confronted the gunman, the death toll would have been
staggering.

The incident in Salt Lake City is merely the latest example of how an armed
citizen saved the lives of innocent people. Professor Gary Kleck of the
College of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University has
meticulously documented that handguns are used to resist criminals on more
than two million occasions annually-far more often than they are used by
criminals to commit crimes.

More often than not, the citizen-defender is not even required to discharge
his or her weapon, as the mere sight of a firearm is enough to thwart many
potential acts of criminality. I can personally attest to at least two
occasions when the display of a handgun by a member of my immediate family
prompted a would-be criminal to quickly leave the scene.

In addition, noted author and gun rights advocate Don Kates reminds us that
Professor John Lott's book, The Bias Against Guns, states categorically that
at least three American massacres have been stopped by civilians with guns.
Make that four now.

At last count, forty states have some sort of concealed carry law. Two
states, Vermont and Alaska, do not even require their citizens to obtain a
concealed carry permit in order to legally carry a concealed weapon. It is
no coincidence that the states and cities that deny their citizens the right
to legally carry a handgun for self defense have the highest crime rates.
Just ask yourself: Would I rather take a midnight walk in downtown
Montpelier or in downtown Chicago? It is an undeniable fact that an armed
citizenry is much safer than a disarmed citizenry.

With Nancy Pelosi and her gun-grabbing Democrats now in charge of Congress,
and with neocon President G. W. Bush already on record as supporting Bill
Clinton's gun ban, it is doubly important that the American people
diligently defend their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. Not
only does safety on America's streets depend on it, so does liberty itself.

(c) Chuck Baldwin

NOTE TO THE READER:

This email editorial cannot be considered Spam as long as the sender
includes contact information and a method of removal. To be removed, see
instructions below.

To subscribe to these columns, click on this link and follow the
instructions: http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwsubx.html

To unsubscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
http://00799fb.netsolhost.com/cwunsubx.html

Chuck Baldwin's commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished,
reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not
charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact
and that full credit is given and that Chuck's web site address is included.

Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or
advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for
permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an
interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com.

When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless
otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon
address list.

Please visit Chuck's web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com.
 

baz

New member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

I am having trouble understanding your logic behind your argument that guns save lives.

A gunmen "killed five people", using as the name suggests, a gun.

"The incident in Salt Lake City is merely the latest example of how an armed
citizen saved the lives of innocent people"

The incident in Salt Lake City is ALSO an example of how another armed citizen has taken the lives of innocent people.

It is also stated that "at least three American massacres have been stopped by civilians with guns". Once again the massacre began with a civilian with a gun.

If people weren't allowed to have guns there wouldn't have been any deaths in the first place.

Cheers

Baz
 

jimwyant

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2006
Messages
342
Location
Mebane, North Carolina, USA
imported post

rady8um wrote:
baz wrote:
I am having trouble understanding your logic behind your argument that guns save lives.
You are correct baz. Maybe guns should be outlawed like they are in England and Australia. Nobody gets murdered there.
+1 rady8um


Not sure if we should feed the trolls, though. Sorry, too late.
 

BobCav

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,798
Location
No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
imported post

baz wrote:
I am having trouble understanding your logic behind your argument that guns save lives.

A gunmen "killed five people", using as the name suggests, a gun.

"The incident in Salt Lake City is merely the latest example of how an armed
citizen saved the lives of innocent people"

The incident in Salt Lake City is ALSO an example of how another armed citizen has taken the lives of innocent people.

It is also stated that "at least three American massacres have been stopped by civilians with guns". Once again the massacre began with a civilian with a gun.

If people weren't allowed to have guns there wouldn't have been any deaths in the first place.

Cheers

Baz

Just another troll.....

Since an IP address is technically not private info, I wonder if a FOIA request would work in this instance?? Hmmmmm.....
 

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
imported post

If this story was about a lawfully armed citizen confronting this mass-murderer (note; NOT gunman), it would have had the effect of illustrating the importance of being armed.

Unfortunately- how this article is read will depend on the personal bias of the person reading it. It's also concievable that a reader will read this as "Off duty police officer shoots gunman." and could be construed as an argument to only allow policemen to be armed.
 

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

baz wrote:
<snip>

If people weren't allowed to have guns there wouldn't have been any deaths in the first place.

Cheers

Baz

Right. The perp was willing to break the law against murdering people, but a law criminalizing the possession of a gun -- now that would have stopped him.

Maybe Baz is just a troll, but I have actually met real live human beings who actually make this argument, and believe it. It's incomprehensible.
 

vermonter

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2006
Messages
340
Location
, ,
imported post

Hey Baz,

In England all handguns are banned and longarms are so tightly controlled that there is no way a legally owned one could be used in a crime. So why does England have a skyrocketing gun crime rate? Stay in Australia if you like being a victim so much you ******* idiot~

Read this and keep your laws off free Americans!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3195908.stm
 

baz

New member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

hey, yeh i am from Australia,

i don't mean to have a dig about gun laws guys, sorry if any offense taken.

i haven't been to america so don't know the extent to which guns are a problem. i see things in the media and doco's like bowling for columbine and this gives obviously a biased view towards these things.

i watched boys n the hood and menace II society the other day and it gives a twisted perception i guess.

what is it really like? does the media blow these things out of proportion? i guess when i think about it, america does have a massive population so of course more incidents are going to occur than over here.

thinking about it, over here, gangs have guns, or if not guns, knives or weapons that can hurt; with ur typical civilian being defenseless. i can see a use for guns for defense, what is sad tho is when they are in the hands of psychopaths.

so is it really like the movies portray it? is is it a twisted version of reality?

cheers
baz
 

LeagueOf1291

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2007
Messages
328
Location
Buffalo Valley, Tennessee, USA
imported post

I am a citizen of Switzerland and of the United States. I have a different perspective on this issue than most Americans in the gun debate. Frankly, I know a good bit more about life with guns than even most pro-gun Americans -- just because of exposure. The Swiss have a long history of personal defense and universal access to weapons. Sadly, it is changing for the worse even there. But that's another issue.

Keep in mind that the death rate by gun killings is higher in Washington DC (80 per 100,000) which has a total handgun ban, than it is for our soldiers in Iraq (60 per 100,000).

I attribute high gun violence to two primary causes:

1. Fathers have dropped the ball. This results in escalating criminality.

2. Too much reliance on government protection. People who don't have guns can't protect themselves as effectively, and there are tons of people who don't keep a weapon for defense.

There's a direct correlation between reduction in violent crime and availability of weapons for defense.

So the root cause of criminality has to do with fractured families, and then once there is an increasing criminal base, widespread availability of weapons for defense deters it.

Yes, the reports you get are biased. The news and entertainment culture is institutionally and culturally anti-gun, and it colors all of their productions.
 

baz

New member
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

hey,

u have some good points. as u said it is a cultural thing that we are brought up here thinking that guns are really bad, and is why i have trouble understanding the laws. as everything there are two sides to every story and so it is good to hear some of your valid points.

would you say that gun laws for protection is reactive to that fact that criminals have guns tho? or it is for the protection of oneself in general?

also, if given the choice would u like there to be no guns at all - so no criminals OR civilians could have it?

cheers

baz
 

novaccw

Regular Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
117
Location
Johnstown, Pennsylvania, USA
imported post

No guns at all is not realistic. What is realistic is that there have always been (and will always be) people that for one reason or another want to hurt other people. Guns do not make people criminals (unless you live in DC), if they did, I would be doing life. Look in rural areas in the United States, there is a higher percentage of gun owners in these areas but the violent crime statistics are much lower than major cities.

I cannot even begin to count the number of friends I have that own guns ...not one has ever used a gun to threaten, maim, or kill anybody.

Let's take your example...no guns for anybody. Do you still think there would be people who would try to hurt and kill others? The answer is, most certainly, yes.

If somebody was threatening your life with a knife or gun...would you rather be armed or unarmed? I consider a gun the same as a seatbelt in a car...I never plan on getting into a wreck, but I wear it just in case. Same with my gun...it makes me responsible (at least partially) for my own safety. I would much rather call 911 and let the police deal with violent criminals...but that may or may not be an option...I have a plan B...do you?
 

CPerdue

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2006
Messages
235
Location
Salem, ,
imported post

Hi Baz,

I'll try to give you a quick answer. No doubt there are more eloquent and better reasoned responses buried in other threads but this will serve as practice for me being on the spot.

With you last question first, this is kind of akin to asking, "Would you prefer a flock of flying pigs to sing or to whistle Dixie?" We will never be given the choice to be "free" of weapons in any Utopia this side of Heaven. This is crucial to understand.

Go look at laws regarding assault, robbery, etc. with deadly weapons. You will note that there is generally no encyclopedic listing of weapons that could be employed - Why? Because virtually anything can be used to kill someone. Guns are not even the loudest, most effective, most portable, or most concealable choice.

Given that all of us are always heavily armed, whether we realize it or not, how then do we avoid carnage and mayhem in the streets? I think it comes down to culturally inculcated morals. Violent criminals are just a species of barbarian, a person outside our culture.

It is also crucial to realize that there are always such people among us. No tightly governed police state has ever managed to do away with crimes of violence. Not even in prisons, where most people spend their time in cages, is violence unknown.

What guns are really good at is evening the odds, giving everyone better chance to assert their rights to life and liberty. They are freedom tools. From this perspective I would rather live in a place where absolutely everyone, even the sicko child-molesting murderer, was armed because then none would be without the means to put such a monster down. This does not mean I want chaotic vigilante justice, more that I believe in the principle, "An armed society is a polite society."

In summary, weapons = freedom and peace. Guns = good weapons.
 

Jersey Ron

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Messages
192
Location
, New Jersey, USA
imported post

I always see it and it always makes me laugh but can someone tell me what the hell does "troll" mean? And Baz, you're a troll!!







Jersey
 

Maxvolt

New member
Joined
Mar 2, 2007
Messages
1
Location
, ,
imported post

Baz,

Typically in America, the guys who use guns for criminal purposes...never bought them legally anyway.

Hence if one uses their brains; making laws against guns only therefore affects law abiding citizens, making it harder for good citizens to purchase and own a gun. Now in The US of A we have something called the 2nd Amendment, that says US Citizens have an ABSOLUTE right to OWN FIREARMS...and that the Government has NO RIGHT to prevent OWNERSHIP. This came about, because our founders fledfrom ENGLAND, who saw fit to enter peoples homes and confiscate their guns. So here we are full circle...it is actually our GOVERNMENT that is performing the ILLEGAL UNCONSTITIONAL ACT of prohibiting Gun sales and ownership. Why?

Because never didour FOUNDING FATHERSwant to have happen here in America, what happened in England. They wanted the PEOPLE to have the POWER over the GOVERNMENT. As Thomas Jefferson put it: "When the people fear the Government, thats Tyranny, When the Government fears the people, thats DEMOCRACY!". I think Thomas Jeffersons own words coupled with the 2nd Amendment tells even an idiot what our Founding Fathers Intent was.

Unfortunately WE THE PEOPLE are to blame, as we have become fickle and limp wristed in our maturity into a GREAT NATION. We have forsaken our own republic and allowed socialist oppression to enter our political processes, and our little Ikemanns and Stalin in Congress are constantly trying to sell folks on the benefits of a socialist system...even though factually and historically SOCIALISM has always failed. WHY DONT WE STAND UP AND FIGHT? WHAT IS WRONG WITH US?

Now as for the impact of these unconstitutional laws on the criminals? Not a damn thing...why? Because they steal their guns from the military/police or private citizens anyway,and no law has any impact on their intent to break the law anyway (I feel I must add a "DUH!" here). They never apply for a GUN LICENSE, NOR WILL THEY. Only law abiding citizens are penalized, when they attempt to follow the bueacratic process...and in some statesit nearly impossible to get a gun to protect our homes from thugs and/or keep our heavily armed government in check!!!

Ok , so I hope that was easy enough for even an ASSCLOWN to understand. Im not real hopeful though, Ive been around a few ASSCLOWNS before, nothing going on between the ears if you get my meaning.
 
Top