8 dead, including gunman, at multiple homes in Missouri

[Derideo_Te]

Strange how none of the victims were protected by their own guns.

1) you know they had guns

2) they may have broken the cardinal rule about answering the door to a stranger without a gun in your hand

3) and where exactly were the police....with their guns.......you know...the guys who are the only ones you anti gun nuts want to have guns......

4) if they had been carrying guns.....would they have had a better or worse chance of stopping the gun armed attacker?

5) since they were unarmed in the face of an armed attacker........did that help them survive the attack?

Now for the questions that you anti gun nuts never, ever answer....

6) If you could go back in time to just before the attack....would you give those people a gun?

Isn't the gun fetishist's whole argument that they need their precious guns in order to protect themselves because the cops aren't around?

This was in rural Texas, right? The very heart of gun fetishist country. So it is no big stretch to say that there would have been at least one gun in at least one of those 3 locations. And since the killer could only shoot one of them at a time why couldn't any of the others have reached their gun and defended themselves?

The reality is that your bogus myth that "guns protect people" has just been exposed as BS. Even if you had given all of them guns beforehand they would all still be just as dead because none of them were expecting to be killed so they weren't ready.

Guns DON'T protect people. Period.

Sorry...you are wrong.....did not having a gun on them save them? And 1.6 million times a year law abiding citizens use guns to stop violent crime and save lives....vs......8-9,000 times a year guns are used to murder people...I assume you can tell which number is bigger....?

Gun fetishists never stop and question the source of the "1.6 million" number.

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

So why is it suddenly believable because it comes from the special interests who stand to make money out of selling you guns?

The reality is that guns are no protection at all if you are asleep or not expecting a crime to happen and have sufficient time to take the necessary action.

The OP is a case in point. 9 people are dead and they were killed by a gun and none of the victims were "protected" by a gun.

Those 8-9,000 people who are victims of guns every year would be just as dead even if they had guns if they were not expecting to be killed.

Guns kill people. That is reality.

 

[2aguy]

Okay...here is just one example...the clerk is shot...and still manages to stop the killer....

Armed Robber Shoots Store Owner in the Leg Store Owner Then Shoots Robber 10 Times

 

[Derideo_Te]

Anecdotes are not evidence.

 

[2aguy]

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

actually.......the obama administration backed that number....obama commissioned the CDC in 2013 to study defensive gun uses...and they came back with 500,000 to 3 million......

And the clinton Justice Dept. found in 1995, in an attempt to rebutt Dr. Kleck's study......that defensive gun uses as a total number were 1.5 million times a year.......

So....yeah....I guess you could say I would.......

 

[2aguy]

Anecdotes are not evidence.

No....18 studies on the defensive use of guns are evidence.......and they average out to 1.6 million...at least the 15 or so I cite....

 

[Brain357]

The 18 gun surveys.....

...law abiding citizens who have committed no real crime are more likely to respond about self defense gun use...since they did not attack anyone or commit a real crime with their gun...they were defending themselves or their families.....

Criminals can't respond without incriminating themselves to a total stranger over the phone....who may or may not be a police officer....or a parole officer......

The NCVS....

law abiding citizens have less incentive to respond about using a gun to an in person interview with a federal agent with a badge.....but as the woman in Pennsylvania shows...they still might if they aren't career criminals....but those with some knowledge definitely won't....

Career criminals....just won't confess to touching a gun to a fed......

Thus the under count on defensive gun uses

So yes that clearly shows how you are trying to use the same reason for why the NCVS survey is bad, but also why criminals won't respond to a survey. It makes no sense.

Criminals have no incentive to respond to either survey.....law abiding citizens who have committed no crime are more likely to answer an anonymous survey than admit gun use to a fed.........it's as simple as that.....

Well I disagree with you statement, and your law abiding citizens did commit a crime during the act of defense. Other criminals may not have committed any crime during the defense.

 

[2aguy]

Anecdotes are not evidence.

and this sad story from Missouri is...an anecdote...right.....?

 

[Brain357]

Brain....

nice debate...have a nice weekend........

you too.

 

[2aguy]

Strange how none of the victims were protected by their own guns.

1) you know they had guns

2) they may have broken the cardinal rule about answering the door to a stranger without a gun in your hand

3) and where exactly were the police....with their guns.......you know...the guys who are the only ones you anti gun nuts want to have guns......

4) if they had been carrying guns.....would they have had a better or worse chance of stopping the gun armed attacker?

5) since they were unarmed in the face of an armed attacker........did that help them survive the attack?

Now for the questions that you anti gun nuts never, ever answer....

6) If you could go back in time to just before the attack....would you give those people a gun?

Isn't the gun fetishist's whole argument that they need their precious guns in order to protect themselves because the cops aren't around?

This was in rural Texas, right? The very heart of gun fetishist country. So it is no big stretch to say that there would have been at least one gun in at least one of those 3 locations. And since the killer could only shoot one of them at a time why couldn't any of the others have reached their gun and defended themselves?

The reality is that your bogus myth that "guns protect people" has just been exposed as BS. Even if you had given all of them guns beforehand they would all still be just as dead because none of them were expecting to be killed so they weren't ready.

Guns DON'T protect people. Period.

Sorry...you are wrong.....did not having a gun on them save them? And 1.6 million times a year law abiding citizens use guns to stop violent crime and save lives....vs......8-9,000 times a year guns are used to murder people...I assume you can tell which number is bigger....?

Gun fetishists never stop and question the source of the "1.6 million" number.

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

So why is it suddenly believable because it comes from the special interests who stand to make money out of selling you guns?

The reality is that guns are no protection at all if you are asleep or not expecting a crime to happen and have sufficient time to take the necessary action.

The OP is a case in point. 9 people are dead and they were killed by a gun and none of the victims were "protected" by a gun.

Those 8-9,000 people who are victims of guns every year would be just as dead even if they had guns if they were not expecting to be killed.

Guns kill people. That is reality.

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

I will highlight the obama study for you...in these actual studies on self defense with guns...you know...evidence.....and I will also highlight anti gunner clinton's study.....


A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys
Field...1976....3,052,717
DMIa 1978...2,141,512
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68
Kleck...2.5 million

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

--------------------


Bordua...1977...1,414,544
DMIb...1978...1,098,409
Hart...1981...1.797,461
Mauser...1990...1,487,342
Gallup...1993...1,621,377

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million Clinton's justice Dept. study

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
-------------------------------------------
Ohio...1982...771,043
Gallup...1991...777,152
Tarrance... 1994... 764,036
Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..



NCVS (National Crime Victimization Survey)....108,000


Notice, the 3 different groupings of stats from the research listed so far.....not one of them approaches the NCVS number of 100,000.....

 

[2aguy]

criminals may not have committed any crime during the defense.

Brain...brain....if they have a criminal record...they can't touch a gun, just touching the gun is a crime for a criminal...for any reason.....or they go to jail...even if they are using it for an actual defense....the criminal attacking them is arrested, and they are arrested....I have read the stories......

 

[Derideo_Te]

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

actually.......the obama administration backed that number....obama commissioned the CDC in 2013 to study defensive gun uses...and they came back with 500,000 to 3 million......

And the clinton Justice Dept. found in 1995, in an attempt to rebutt Dr. Kleck's study......that defensive gun uses as a total number were 1.5 million times a year.......

So....yeah....I guess you could say I would.......

Gun festishist selective reading on display again.

The study that gun-rights activists keep citing but completely misunderstand - The Washington Post

The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

108,000 sounds way more realistic to me.

Then there is the part gun fetishists deliberately ignore;

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."​

In other words that exact same CDC study established that guns cause 20,000 deaths by suicide too.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Anecdotes are not evidence.

and this sad story from Missouri is...an anecdote...right.....?

Yes, it is.

Just one of many that all add up to 8-9000 gun deaths every year.

 

[2aguy]

Strange how none of the victims were protected by their own guns.

1) you know they had guns

2) they may have broken the cardinal rule about answering the door to a stranger without a gun in your hand

3) and where exactly were the police....with their guns.......you know...the guys who are the only ones you anti gun nuts want to have guns......

4) if they had been carrying guns.....would they have had a better or worse chance of stopping the gun armed attacker?

5) since they were unarmed in the face of an armed attacker........did that help them survive the attack?

Now for the questions that you anti gun nuts never, ever answer....

6) If you could go back in time to just before the attack....would you give those people a gun?

Isn't the gun fetishist's whole argument that they need their precious guns in order to protect themselves because the cops aren't around?

This was in rural Texas, right? The very heart of gun fetishist country. So it is no big stretch to say that there would have been at least one gun in at least one of those 3 locations. And since the killer could only shoot one of them at a time why couldn't any of the others have reached their gun and defended themselves?

The reality is that your bogus myth that "guns protect people" has just been exposed as BS. Even if you had given all of them guns beforehand they would all still be just as dead because none of them were expecting to be killed so they weren't ready.

Guns DON'T protect people. Period.

Sorry...you are wrong.....did not having a gun on them save them? And 1.6 million times a year law abiding citizens use guns to stop violent crime and save lives....vs......8-9,000 times a year guns are used to murder people...I assume you can tell which number is bigger....?

Gun fetishists never stop and question the source of the "1.6 million" number.

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

So why is it suddenly believable because it comes from the special interests who stand to make money out of selling you guns?

The reality is that guns are no protection at all if you are asleep or not expecting a crime to happen and have sufficient time to take the necessary action.

The OP is a case in point. 9 people are dead and they were killed by a gun and none of the victims were "protected" by a gun.

Those 8-9,000 people who are victims of guns every year would be just as dead even if they had guns if they were not expecting to be killed.

Guns kill people. That is reality.

The reality is that guns are no protection at all if you are asleep or not expecting a crime to happen and have sufficient time to take the necessary action.

Yes....if you are completely unconsious...a gun is not going to help you...you are correct...but...as the stories show...if you are awake and have a gun on your hip in a holster....and are attacked by one...even many criminals...and they are armed, and even if they wound you but don't kill you.....

You can fight them off with your gun.....

But....if you don't have that gun...you will be killed...if that is their intent....

And again...where were the police with their guns when this killing was happening....you know....the only people you anti gunners want to have guns......so they can protect us......except when they aren't around and we have only ourselves to protect ourselves.......

You answered the last question...here is another one...

If you are attacked by a man with a gun intent on murdering you.....do you want to be unarmed...or do you want to have a gun?

If you and your wife are attacked by 2 cleaver wielding attackers, like the Indian Blogger this week, do you want you and your wife to have guns or not.....considering the blogger and his wife did not have guns and he died and she was in critical condition?

 

[2aguy]

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

actually.......the obama administration backed that number....obama commissioned the CDC in 2013 to study defensive gun uses...and they came back with 500,000 to 3 million......

And the clinton Justice Dept. found in 1995, in an attempt to rebutt Dr. Kleck's study......that defensive gun uses as a total number were 1.5 million times a year.......

So....yeah....I guess you could say I would.......

Gun festishist selective reading on display again.

The study that gun-rights activists keep citing but completely misunderstand - The Washington Post

The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

108,000 sounds way more realistic to me.

Then there is the part gun fetishists deliberately ignore;

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."​

In other words that exact same CDC study established that guns cause 20,000 deaths by suicide too.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

The 108,000 gun number is from the National Crime Victimization Survey.......it is not a study on the defensive use of guns...it is a study of crime victims...and doesn't even claim to study gun violence.....it's numbers can't be accurate because it isn't a study focused on the use of guns.....it is that simple......

The other 18 studies that support those high numbers are all actual guns studies....and Dr. Kleck's methods are the most accurate of the studies....that is why the anti gun nuts target him out of all the other 18-19 studies.......

and again...it was Bill Clinton who had his Justice Dept. do a study that found as an actual number 1.5 million defensive uses...whereas I average the all the studies listed above...including bill clinton's and barak obama's, and yes...even the NCVS study........ to get 1.6 million

In other words that exact same CDC study established that guns cause 20,000 deaths by suicide too.

Guns do not cause suicide...mental illness causes suicide which is why the CDC should't study gun violence...they should focus on ebola...

And keep in mind...you must be new to this debate....that Japan, South Korea, have absolute gun control...and higher suicide rates than the U.S.

 

[Nutz]

Who is anti-gun? I'm just saying something needs to be done about these white savages that are shooting up 8 - 10 people at a time.

Seems to me they either kill themselves, the police kill them, or they wind up in prison.
What do you suggest we do about them?

Well, it is rare that the cops kill them. When white savages break the law or are violent, cops seem to show an amazing amount of restraint. A white person can point a gun at a LEO...they don't shoot them.

 

[2aguy]

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

actually.......the obama administration backed that number....obama commissioned the CDC in 2013 to study defensive gun uses...and they came back with 500,000 to 3 million......

And the clinton Justice Dept. found in 1995, in an attempt to rebutt Dr. Kleck's study......that defensive gun uses as a total number were 1.5 million times a year.......

So....yeah....I guess you could say I would.......

Gun festishist selective reading on display again.

The study that gun-rights activists keep citing but completely misunderstand - The Washington Post

The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

108,000 sounds way more realistic to me.

Then there is the part gun fetishists deliberately ignore;

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."​

In other words that exact same CDC study established that guns cause 20,000 deaths by suicide too.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

I already pointed out...gun grabber obama gave 10 million dollars to the CDC in 2013 to study gun violence....they found that guns were used 500,000 to 3 million times a year to stop crime and save lives..........and they are not pro gun.....

and suicides still don't count....

 

[2aguy]

Who is anti-gun? I'm just saying something needs to be done about these white savages that are shooting up 8 - 10 people at a time.

Seems to me they either kill themselves, the police kill them, or they wind up in prison.
What do you suggest we do about them?

Well, it is rare that the cops kill them. When white savages break the law or are violent, cops seem to show an amazing amount of restraint. A white person can point a gun at a LEO...they don't shoot them.

Sorry...cops actually kill more whites during arrests......

 

[Derideo_Te]

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

actually.......the obama administration backed that number....obama commissioned the CDC in 2013 to study defensive gun uses...and they came back with 500,000 to 3 million......

And the clinton Justice Dept. found in 1995, in an attempt to rebutt Dr. Kleck's study......that defensive gun uses as a total number were 1.5 million times a year.......

So....yeah....I guess you could say I would.......

Gun festishist selective reading on display again.

The study that gun-rights activists keep citing but completely misunderstand - The Washington Post

The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

108,000 sounds way more realistic to me.

Then there is the part gun fetishists deliberately ignore;

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."​

In other words that exact same CDC study established that guns cause 20,000 deaths by suicide too.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

I already pointed out...gun grabber obama gave 10 million dollars to the CDC in 2013 to study gun violence....they found that guns were used 500,000 to 3 million times a year to stop crime and save lives..........and they are not pro gun.....

and suicides still don't count....

You don't get to decide that "suicides don't count".

 

[2aguy]

Anecdotes are not evidence.

and this sad story from Missouri is...an anecdote...right.....?

Yes, it is.

Just one of many that all add up to 8-9000 gun deaths every year.

And my story is one of 1.6 million defensive uses of guns where law abiding citizens stop violent criminal attack and save lives....

again...

8-9,000 gun murders committed mostly by inner city gangs.... vs. 1.6 million times law abiding citizens use guns to save lives and stop violent criminal attack....

Which number is bigger.....?

You should go to the gun fight story collection sites.....the NRA has "The Armed Citizen" and there are others like thetruthaboutguns and gunssavelives....this one sorts stories by state and also by weapon type.....

You could also read the CATO white paper Tough Targets...they collected 5,000 gun defense stories from 2003-2011...interesting and enlightening reading...it might change your mind.....

 

[2aguy]

Would you believe that same number if it came from the Obama administration?

actually.......the obama administration backed that number....obama commissioned the CDC in 2013 to study defensive gun uses...and they came back with 500,000 to 3 million......

And the clinton Justice Dept. found in 1995, in an attempt to rebutt Dr. Kleck's study......that defensive gun uses as a total number were 1.5 million times a year.......

So....yeah....I guess you could say I would.......

Gun festishist selective reading on display again.

The study that gun-rights activists keep citing but completely misunderstand - The Washington Post

The study (available as a PDF) calls the defensive use of guns by crime victims "a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." While it might be as high as 3 million defensive uses of guns each year, some scholars point to the much lower estimate of 108,000 times a year. "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field," the study notes.​

108,000 sounds way more realistic to me.

Then there is the part gun fetishists deliberately ignore;

The authors also say gun ownership might be good for defensive uses, but that benefit could be canceled out by the risk of suicide or homicide that comes with gun ownership. The depth of the relationship is unknown "and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."​

In other words that exact same CDC study established that guns cause 20,000 deaths by suicide too.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

So feel free to believe your 1.5 million number while ignoring the rest of the facts but since the CDC is now free to continue investigating you can be certain of one thing, you are not going to be happy when they produce results that show that guns kill people rather than "protect" them.

I already pointed out...gun grabber obama gave 10 million dollars to the CDC in 2013 to study gun violence....they found that guns were used 500,000 to 3 million times a year to stop crime and save lives..........and they are not pro gun.....

and suicides still don't count....

You don't get to decide that "suicides don't count".

Yes I do.....when countries with absolute gun control have higher suicide rates than we do...guns aren't the issue......