Just saw this on news this morning

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

HankT wrote:

Michigander wrote:

Just listened to the call. Happy ending, but I feel so friggen sorry for the lady.

Click to expand...

Yeah, she was controlled and decisive before she actually shot the guy.

But after the shot, she was a mess. She said:


"I'm so sorry."


"I'm so sorry, Father."


Good example why guns are probably not the best methodology we can devise to protect ourselves.

I mean guns are OK and all. Plenty of benefits.

But there are some rather severe negative aspects to 'em.

As Donna Jackson is finding out now...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Would you feel better had she killed him with a knife or baseball bat?

Click to expand...

No.

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Are you saying she should be as decisive and in control after the factas much as she was before the shooting?

Click to expand...

No.



Now one for you, SXD:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

imported post

HankT wrote:

SNIP
Now one for you, SXD:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

Based on what circumstances?

Please provide a self defense scenario relevant to your question.

Backing up: Based on the 911 call, should she have locked herself in the bathroom as instructed by dispatch until the police arrived? Or, should she have just made a run for it with hopes she would evade an encounter/attack?

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

HankT wrote:

SNIP
Now one for you, SXD:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

Based on what circumstances?

Please provide a self defense scenario relevant to your question.

Click to expand...

In general. The question is, for self-defense in general.

Like Donna Jackson's case....

imported post

No I would say that a non lethal means COULD be better in the sense that it would leave the person defending themselves with the possibility of less guilt... However as of now no means that we have fielded is guaranteed non lethal...

One final thought.... my great uncle fought in WW2 from D-Day to the battle of the Bulge and he said that the first one you kill hurts but that each successive person is less difficult ... so as this was most likely here first (and hopefully last) it is understandable that she came unglued afterwords!

imported post

Can I try? Lets see, we first shielded ourselves with animal hides, then wooden shields then metal shields and chain male(sp) and used sticks and spears to fend off attackers, then bows and arrows then guns...hmmmm. I think firearms are the best methodology/technology to protect ME! MY opinion is that we are programed to have feelings for others, even if they mean us harm. That is not the way we should necessarily think. Exodus 22:2 If a thief be found breaking up, and he be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.springerdave.

imported post

Drunk or high people don't always get stopped by less lethal methods. You can find dash cam footage on the web of what happens when drunk or high people get hit with stuff like tasers and eye irritants. They don't always go down and stay down.

My opinion is that everyone involved did exactly the right thing.

By the way, as far as the response time by the police, rural Oklahoma tends to be dirt poor, and pretty much cannot afford luxuries like being covered in cops. Anyone who lives in an area like that puts their safety in their own hands, and they know it. I'd say thats why she had a shotgun ready enough to put into use.

imported post

Not to mention the condition of many of the rural roads down there!

imported post

She did it right!

imported post

Well I now live in Charlevoix County and Summer of 2008 we only had two Deputies on duty after 11PM on even Weekend nights. Now we are lucky to have two on duty and judging by the police scanner we may have none some nights.

It might seem inexcusable, but one must take a serious step back and think. Even if there were 10 Deputies on patrol, what if there was a fatal accident? Bar fight? Barricaded gun man in the county, then you now have the same scenario. NO one to help you. I belonged to a few Tactical Response associations and groups and here's a show stopper folks. Terror groups have been practicing attacks in rural areas because they know the Police response is not only slow due to manpower and distance, but they also know a strike and run terror hit is basically possible without any danger to them and they can plan numerous hits in a two hour period on the four corners of a rural county and due to the Police responding and being tied up on the first hit they are free to do several more almost unabated.

Anyone who thinks the Police are anything other than the Janitors of Law Enforcement they are delusional. Oh the Janitor label is what officers tell me they are called among each other. All they do is basically clean up after a crime.

Here's another little known danger the community at large is unaware of. The press almost never reports these incidents, but in Detroit these are more common than anyone would guess. Home invasions by 5 thugs fully armed. They now are doing commando style home invasions and they get almost no resistance due to the overwhelming use of force, numbers and shock value.



People better wake up and realize the Police can't be there PERIOD. They are short staffed and too busy and or too far away.

imported post

T Vance wrote:

Look how long it took for the police to show up. Not blaming them, just saying they can't be everywhere at once, and its another example for EVERYONE to carry a firearm for protection. So sad she had to be put in that situation though.

Click to expand...

Fact is they can't be everywhere. It's not the officers fault they go where they are told to.

We lessen the dangers to the Police if we the People start fighting crime one armed citizen at a time. In this case there is safety in numbers. More open and concealed carry helps fight crime.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Michigander wrote:

Just listened to the call. Happy ending, but I feel so friggen sorry for the lady.

Click to expand...

Yeah, she was controlled and decisive before she actually shot the guy.

But after the shot, she was a mess. She said:


"I'm so sorry."


"I'm so sorry, Father."


Good example why guns are probably not the best methodology we can devise to protect ourselves.

I mean guns are OK and all. Plenty of benefits.

But there are some rather severe negative aspects to 'em.

As Donna Jackson is finding out now...

Click to expand...

"It is better for a man to think you a fool than to open your moth and prove it."

imported post

EM87 wrote:

Hank is the resident troll. I ignore his comments when they're like that, because it's obviously not meant to be constructive. He does have good points occasionally though.

Click to expand...

I don't think he is a troll, rather when I read his post's they tend to strike me as someone trying to make people think about a situation from all angles. I know a lot will dis agree with me but I do think it is important to do. Its easy to be pro gun and for us to see things from our point of view but it is more educational to see how "they" think about it and be more prepared for what we might face as opposition.

imported post

Bailenforcer wrote:

T Vance wrote:

Look how long it took for the police to show up. Not blaming them, just saying they can't be everywhere at once, and its another example for EVERYONE to carry a firearm for protection. So sad she had to be put in that situation though.

Click to expand...

Fact is they can't be everywhere. It's not the officers fault they go where they are told to.

We lessen the dangers to the Police if we the People start fighting crime one armed citizen at a time. In this case there is safety in numbers. More open and concealed carry helps fight crime.

Click to expand...

That's why I said the above statement in BOLD.

imported post

HankT wrote:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

How about trip wires at all doors connected to C4?

imported post

T Vance wrote:

HankT wrote:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

How about trip wires at all doors connected to C4?

Click to expand...

Yup!!! That would blow their minds wouldn't it???

imported post

T Vance wrote:

HankT wrote:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

How about trip wires at all doors connected to C4?

Click to expand...

Actually, TV, you're on the right track....

imported post

HankT wrote:

T Vance wrote:

HankT wrote:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

How about trip wires at all doors connected to C4?

Click to expand...

Actually, TV, you're on the right track....

Click to expand...

So illegally booby-trapping a home is the "right track?" I believe it would be a "bad strategy" to commit an illegal action for PD. The person in this thread example employed a much better strategy.

imported post

wrightme wrote:

HankT wrote:

T Vance wrote:

HankT wrote:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

How about trip wires at all doors connected to C4?

Click to expand...

Actually, TV, you're on the right track....

Click to expand...

So illegally booby-trapping a home is the "right track?" I believe it would be a "bad strategy" to commit an illegal action for PD. The person in this thread example employed a much better strategy.

Click to expand...

Nah.

The C4 is out.

But think about ... prevention to entry, wright me.

Think, man.

You can do it...

imported post

I believe HankT is simply trying to say that wouldn't it be nice if there was some other way to stop criminals.

A better way, that wouldn't leave the victim feeling bad for killing the BG.

Star Trek's Phaser comes to mind..... "set on stun"

And yes, if you step back and really think about it, guns suck for personal defense, but they seem to be the best that we have right now.

It's kinda like saying the American Justice system sucks but it's still the best in the word.

imported post

HankT wrote:

wrightme wrote:

HankT wrote:

T Vance wrote:

HankT wrote:

Do you think that guns are the best methodology/technology we can devise to protect ourselves?

Click to expand...

How about trip wires at all doors connected to C4?

Click to expand...

Actually, TV, you're on the right track....

Click to expand...

So illegally booby-trapping a home is the "right track?" I believe it would be a "bad strategy" to commit an illegal action for PD. The person in this thread example employed a much better strategy.

Click to expand...

Nah.

The C4 is out.

But think about ... prevention to entry, wright me.

Think, man.

You can do it...

Click to expand...

"Every home a fortress." :quirky



Sure, lets live in stockades. So what? Someone somewhere will still find a way in. And sooner or later, we will have to come out. Fail.