PDA

View Full Version : Citizen with gun stops murder attempt



tpeichel
07-27-2012, 01:46 PM
http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.

Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."

Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."

Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."

Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."

Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)

So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun.

mrveggieman
07-27-2012, 01:50 PM
Good story. I don't have any problems whatsoever with the way it was resolved. The guy with the gun is a hero.

habsheaven
07-27-2012, 01:52 PM
http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx

A citizen with a bat stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.

Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."

Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."

Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a bat stopped the madness. "A guy pulled a bat on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would strike him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."

By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for the bat carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."

Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the bat carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."

Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage. (We will update as soon as we learn new information.)

So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the bat.


Fixed it for you.

duane1969
07-27-2012, 01:56 PM
That story must be wrong. Citizens with guns are dangerous people. Only law enforcement and the military are capable of safely and properly operating a firearm in a stressful situation.

tpeichel
07-27-2012, 02:00 PM
Fixed it for you.

That's funny, the media does usually try and hide it when a gun is successfully used defensively by a citizen. I must say I'm pleasantly surprised.

habsheaven
07-27-2012, 02:28 PM
I think it has a lot to do with the current events going on. Normally "good news" stories get very little coverage; because this is in a sense an advocation for a gun-toting public, it is newsworthy. There's no denying that occasionally a good samaritan with a gun is a good thing. It just as often can escalate a situation and end in greater tragedy.

pghin08
07-27-2012, 02:29 PM
That story must be wrong. Citizens with guns are dangerous people. Only law enforcement and the military are capable of safely and properly operating a firearm in a stressful situation.

Dude, come on, very few US citizens are against all forms of gun ownership. Nobody is saying that everybody with a gun is instantly dangerous, but rather that when unstable people have guns, then we have danger. That's why we have things like background checks. The guy with the gun in this situation used it in the best manner possible, as a threat to someone about to cause bodily harm to another.

duwal
07-27-2012, 02:31 PM
That story must be wrong. Citizens with guns are dangerous people. Only law enforcement and the military are capable of safely and properly operating a firearm in a stressful situation.


without proper training and firearm practice that is true

tpeichel
07-27-2012, 02:34 PM
I think it has a lot to do with the current events going on. Normally "good news" stories get very little coverage; because this is in a sense an advocation for a gun-toting public, it is newsworthy. There's no denying that occasionally a good samaritan with a gun is a good thing. It just as often can escalate a situation and end in greater tragedy.

Do you have any examples of defensive gun use causing collateral damage?

pghin08
07-27-2012, 02:36 PM
Do you have any examples of defensive gun use causing collateral damage?

Uh...Trayvon Martin?

habsheaven
07-27-2012, 02:41 PM
Not off the top of my head, but I know it's out there. For that matter, if you consider one gang member firing back at an opposing gang member on a city street, I can cite numerous cases of innocent...

tpeichel
07-27-2012, 02:49 PM
Uh...Trayvon Martin?

If Martin was attacked and it was him screaming over and over for help, then he successfully defended himself with a gun. We'll have to wait for the trial to get a final determination on that though.

tpeichel
07-27-2012, 02:54 PM
This is a chart that shows all the defensive gun use reported in the newspapers.

http://www.cato.org/guns-and-self-defense/

Gun control proponents want legislation that will restrict access to firearms. The rationale for such legislation is to reduce accidental shootings and the criminal use of guns against people. But if harm reduction is the goal, policymakers should pause to consider how many crimes--murders, rapes, assaults, robberies--are thwarted by ordinary persons who were fortunate enough to have access to a gun. Gun control proponents cannot deny that people use guns successfully against criminals, but they tend to play down how often such events take place. The purpose of this map is to draw more attention to this aspect of the firearms policy debate.

Two additional points are worth noting. First, the map is not comprehensive. Criminals will often flee the scene when they discover that their intended target has a gun. With no shots fired, no injuries, and no suspect in custody, news organizations may report nothing at all. Thus, it is important to remember that news reports can only provide us with an imperfect picture of defensive gun use in America. Second, when a citizen is able to shoot an attacker or hold a rapist or robber until the police arrive, it is very likely that more than one crime has been prevented because if the culprit had not been stopped, he could have targeted other citizens as well. The bottom line is that gun owners stop a lot of criminal mayhem every year.

duwal
07-27-2012, 03:02 PM
This is a chart that shows all the defensive gun use reported in the newspapers.

http://www.cato.org/guns-and-self-defense/

Gun control proponents want legislation that will restrict access to firearms. The rationale for such legislation is to reduce accidental shootings and the criminal use of guns against people. But if harm reduction is the goal, policymakers should pause to consider how many crimes--murders, rapes, assaults, robberies--are thwarted by ordinary persons who were fortunate enough to have access to a gun. Gun control proponents cannot deny that people use guns successfully against criminals, but they tend to play down how often such events take place. The purpose of this map is to draw more attention to this aspect of the firearms policy debate.

Two additional points are worth noting. First, the map is not comprehensive. Criminals will often flee the scene when they discover that their intended target has a gun. With no shots fired, no injuries, and no suspect in custody, news organizations may report nothing at all. Thus, it is important to remember that news reports can only provide us with an imperfect picture of defensive gun use in America. Second, when a citizen is able to shoot an attacker or hold a rapist or robber until the police arrive, it is very likely that more than one crime has been prevented because if the culprit had not been stopped, he could have targeted other citizens as well. The bottom line is that gun owners stop a lot of criminal mayhem every year.

but you have to agree that gun ownerships also results in stuff like heated arguments sometimes turning into deadly consequences. Where what would only be shoving or possibly punches thrown by people in/out of a bar or nightclub or sporting event. The danger of course escalates a lot as well when alcohol is consumed. There is also all of the cases of road rage shootings. As well shootings that involve domestic disturbances. An argument over some relationship or child custody decision then turn into a deadly altercation with one or both pointing a gun at the other. Yes there is a small percentage of gun owners who stop some crimes from happening but that is negated with the small percentage of examples like above

habsheaven
07-27-2012, 03:06 PM
For an 8-year period, that's not a whole lot of balloons. Did they do a similar map for all the gun murders over the same period? How about a map for just the kids that killed after they got their hands on a gun? Not many gun control advocates are looking for the banning of all guns. They want laws enacted that will slow the current tidal wave of gun-ownership and reverse the trend to levels that are more sane.

duane1969
07-27-2012, 03:27 PM
Dude, come on, very few US citizens are against all forms of gun ownership. Nobody is saying that everybody with a gun is instantly dangerous, but rather that when unstable people have guns, then we have danger. That's why we have things like background checks. The guy with the gun in this situation used it in the best manner possible, as a threat to someone about to cause bodily harm to another

Yet everytime something like Colorado happens the gun rights of law-abiding citizens are reduced while the need to take guns out of the hands of criminals is ignored. As we speak the liberal left is using Colorado as a tool of manipulation to try and restrict guns even more. It seems that these geniuses have the bright idea that if law-abiding gun owners have smaller clips then psychopaths won't go on shooting rampages.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/27/595101/democratic-senators-introduce-ban-on-high-capacity-gun-magazines-like-the-one-used-in-the-aurora-shooting/


Uh...Trayvon Martin?

There is a difference between self-defense and collateral damage.

pghin08
07-27-2012, 03:34 PM
Yet everytime something like Colorado happens the gun rights of law-abiding citizens are reduced while the need to take guns out of the hands of criminals is ignored. As we speak the liberal left is using Colorado as a tool of manipulation to try and restrict guns even more. It seems that these geniuses have the bright idea that if law-abiding gun owners have smaller clips then psychopaths won't go on shooting rampages.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/27/595101/democratic-senators-introduce-ban-on-high-capacity-gun-magazines-like-the-one-used-in-the-aurora-shooting/



I can't speak for the intelligence/intentions of U.S. Senators. But I think anyone that uses the shooting for political gain is gross. Occurrences like the Aurora shooting should be catalysts for reasonable debate, not knee-jerk reactions, of which this clearly is.

duane1969
07-27-2012, 03:35 PM
For an 8-year period, that's not a whole lot of balloons. Did they do a similar map for all the gun murders over the same period? How about a map for just the kids that killed after they got their hands on a gun? Not many gun control advocates are looking for the banning of all guns. They want laws enacted that will slow the current tidal wave of gun-ownership and reverse the trend to levels that are more sane.

What is a "sane" level of gun ownership? Is only one gun sane?

Why does the number of guns owned have to be something decided by people who don't even own guns or want others to own guns? Is it fair for anti-gun people to dictate what pro-gun people can and can't do? This country and current administration prides itself on letting people live their own lives. When issues like abortion, homosexuality or legalization come up we hear "It's their life, nobody has a right to tell them how to live it" but when guns come up those same people try to take control and dictate what others can and can not do. If it isn't my right to tell gay people that they can't get married or to tell women that they should not have an abortion then it is nobody else's right to tell me that I can't own 40 guns or that I can't own a clip that holds 15 rounds.

pghin08
07-27-2012, 03:58 PM
What is a "sane" level of gun ownership? Is only one gun sane?

Why does the number of guns owned have to be something decided by people who don't even own guns or want others to own guns? Is it fair for anti-gun people to dictate what pro-gun people can and can't do? This country and current administration prides itself on letting people live their own lives. When issues like abortion, homosexuality or legalization come up we hear "It's their life, nobody has a right to tell them how to live it" but when guns come up those same people try to take control and dictate what others can and can not do. If it isn't my right to tell gay people that they can't get married or to tell women that they should not have an abortion then it is nobody else's right to tell me that I can't own 40 guns or that I can't own a clip that holds 15 rounds.

There's a definite logic to that.

andrewhoya
07-27-2012, 05:25 PM
Never would have expected this in Salt Lake City. It was so peaceful when I went three months ago.

Now that I think about it, I went to that shopping center, too. Creepy.

habsheaven
07-27-2012, 07:00 PM
What is a "sane" level of gun ownership? Is only one gun sane?

Why does the number of guns owned have to be something decided by people who don't even own guns or want others to own guns? Is it fair for anti-gun people to dictate what pro-gun people can and can't do? This country and current administration prides itself on letting people live their own lives. When issues like abortion, homosexuality or legalization come up we hear "It's their life, nobody has a right to tell them how to live it" but when guns come up those same people try to take control and dictate what others can and can not do. If it isn't my right to tell gay people that they can't get married or to tell women that they should not have an abortion then it is nobody else's right to tell me that I can't own 40 guns or that I can't own a clip that holds 15 rounds.

Duane, you think I should be able to own a bazooka? How about a tank? You draw the line somewhere, right? What gives the government the right to restrict anything I own?

shrewsbury
07-27-2012, 07:44 PM
habs, great point. where does someone draw the line?

Wickabee
07-27-2012, 10:49 PM
Duane, you think I should be able to own a bazooka? How about a tank? You draw the line somewhere, right? What gives the government the right to restrict anything I own?

That's exactly how I feel about drug laws.