Family mourns man killed trying to stop shooting spree

[Luddly Neddite]

He may not have been trying to 'play the hero.' His only thought may have been to stop the shooting. However, it didn't work, and, to me, this is a salient point. The pro-gun people are always saying that if people were armed, they could stop things like mass shootings. Obviously, as we can see from this incident, that isn't true.

Exactly.

Further, guns draw fire.

You want to get shot at, pull out a gun.

the more that vicious attackers are distracted, the better chance there is in them failing to achieve their goal of more killing. If someone is breaking to your house you will call a man carrying a weapon to help you

Completely different situation. In fact, there is no comparison at all.

 

[Samson]

He wasn't trying to be safe. He was trying to make others safe. It's a choice he made.

Comparatively speaking, Luddley's cut-n-paste nonsense from the Daily Kos seems to accomplished as much, but interestingly, that OP-Ed piece omits what happened AFTER the "Good Guy" was shot?

Do we assume that the Miller's shooting spree continued? Or did he actually die preventing it from going on?

This very relevant fact is, I believe purposefully omitted because the Good Guy actually did STOP the shooting spree when he interrupted it, and had he been unarmed, then he may not have made the attempt.

Which is exactly why I posted TWO links. So that some partisan hack could not LIE about what I posted.

If you don't like the TWO links I posted, post your own.

silly little twerp

Poor Luddley,

I see you're still learning how to read.

Did I say I did not like either of the links in your little OP? I said they were incomplete.

Get you panties unwadded and try again.

 

[whitehall]

The guy tried to do the right thing and lefties want to make a political issue out of it. It's not unusual for even trained Police Officers to be surprised by a woman with a gun and the willingness to use it. Take the Nyack armored car robbery in the 80's for example. It was allegedly planned by Bill Ayers' wife Bernadine Dohrn and carried out by other radical women. Two Brinks guards and two Police Officers were blindsided by vicious women and shot and killed.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Where did I castigate him? Nowhere. I am simply saying his death was needless. Had he not been armed, he would not have considered doing what he did and needlessly losing his life. The way he died points to the fact that only trained professionals should have guns.

And even well trained people get shot or even shoot themselves.

The nutters live in LaLaLand. They think that any discussion about guns is all black or white. Its more guns everywhere or ban all guns. They can't think in terms of safety, of keeping people safe. All they care about is swaggering around, pretending to be what they are not and never will be.

Wrong again-----2nd Amendment advocates have never advocated that EVERYONE be armed nor are they dumb enough to want them banned. They also know that there is no such thing as security and depending on someone else to provide it will not always work.
You really want a gun but are afraid of them, aren't you ?

Not true. If that were true, the nutters would not be carrying into places like Starbucks and Target. Georgia would not have just passed an utterly stupid "more guns everywhere" law.

I own several guns.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

And, yet, this fellow had no fighting chance at all.

He did, he just missed the second shooter, and preferred not to kill in the heat of the moment. You should be praising him for not just shooting without being sure of the situation, instead you choose to hold him up as an example of why no one should carry a gun. If you can explain that you are smarter than anyone else in the universe, which is a statistical impossibility, so don't even try.

More fiction.

You really should stop digging.

Ok, let's deal in the facts, and only the facts.

Fact: He tried to stop the assailants.
Fact: He got killed
Fact: He had a gun

that's all the facts. We don't know if he would have died if he didn't have a gun. We don't know what would have happened to anyone there if he didn't have a gun.

There, that's the end of the debate. All the facts are now known.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Comparatively speaking, Luddley's cut-n-paste nonsense from the Daily Kos seems to accomplished as much, but interestingly, that OP-Ed piece omits what happened AFTER the "Good Guy" was shot?

Do we assume that the Miller's shooting spree continued? Or did he actually die preventing it from going on?

This very relevant fact is, I believe purposefully omitted because the Good Guy actually did STOP the shooting spree when he interrupted it, and had he been unarmed, then he may not have made the attempt.

Which is exactly why I posted TWO links. So that some partisan hack could not LIE about what I posted.

If you don't like the TWO links I posted, post your own.

silly little twerp

Poor Luddley,

I see your still learning how to read.

Did I say I did not like either of the links in your little OP? I said they were incomplete.

Get you panties unwadded and try again.

My what is still learning to read?

You couldn't find anything wrong with the links I posted so you made something up and pretended it was not included in the links. IOW, you lied.

 

[M14 Shooter]

We've got to end this madness.

You -still- think its possible to enact laws that will prevent people from breaking the law.
What a Nutty Luddite.

 

[dilloduck]

And even well trained people get shot or even shoot themselves.

The nutters live in LaLaLand. They think that any discussion about guns is all black or white. Its more guns everywhere or ban all guns. They can't think in terms of safety, of keeping people safe. All they care about is swaggering around, pretending to be what they are not and never will be.

Wrong again-----2nd Amendment advocates have never advocated that EVERYONE be armed nor are they dumb enough to want them banned. They also know that there is no such thing as security and depending on someone else to provide it will not always work.
You really want a gun but are afraid of them, aren't you ?

Not true. If that were true, the nutters would not be carrying into places like Starbucks and Target. Georgia would not have just passed an utterly stupid "more guns everywhere" law.

I own several guns.

Why are you inviting danger into your home ?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

He did, he just missed the second shooter, and preferred not to kill in the heat of the moment. You should be praising him for not just shooting without being sure of the situation, instead you choose to hold him up as an example of why no one should carry a gun. If you can explain that you are smarter than anyone else in the universe, which is a statistical impossibility, so don't even try.

More fiction.

You really should stop digging.

Ok, let's deal in the facts, and only the facts.

Fact: He tried to stop the assailants.
Fact: He got killed
Fact: He had a gun

that's all the facts. We don't know if he would have died if he didn't have a gun. We don't know what would have happened to anyone there if he didn't have a gun.

There, that's the end of the debate. All the facts are now known.

No where near "all the facts".

Here's a couple more facts:

His family has suffered a needless loss that cannot be understood unless you suffer the same loss. His family cannot afford to bury him.

I really wish the nutters would think about what comes after. You write as though you think killing a "bad guy" makes you some kind of hero, that it makes you special and that you get to celebrate that and others celebrate it.

You just could not be more wrong.

 

[Samson]

Which is exactly why I posted TWO links. So that some partisan hack could not LIE about what I posted.

If you don't like the TWO links I posted, post your own.

silly little twerp

Poor Luddley,

I see your still learning how to read.

Did I say I did not like either of the links in your little OP? I said they were incomplete.

Get you panties unwadded and try again.

My what is still learning to read?

You couldn't find anything wrong with the links I posted so you made something up and pretended it was not included in the links. IOW, you lied.

Try to connect the dots.

A. You posted links.

B. Niether includes information about whether or not the Good Guy prevented other murders.


TWO DOTS!

Certainly even this bar is set low enough for you to hurdle?

 

[Samson]

Wrong again-----2nd Amendment advocates have never advocated that EVERYONE be armed nor are they dumb enough to want them banned. They also know that there is no such thing as security and depending on someone else to provide it will not always work.
You really want a gun but are afraid of them, aren't you ?

Not true. If that were true, the nutters would not be carrying into places like Starbucks and Target. Georgia would not have just passed an utterly stupid "more guns everywhere" law.

I own several guns.

Why are you inviting danger into your home ?

Obviously Luddley is making a statement.

If someone as moronic as he can own guns, then we need to change the constitution.


Frankly he seems to have a very good point.

Although I was under the impression that he had a gun-less plan:

These are all what-if posts.

Although, when it comes to chicken little nonsense, the gasoline around the house and the life savings loaded in the get away car is by far, the best. I wonder how you poor people ever get to sleep at night, especially since I would think its damn uncomfortable under the bed.

Speaking of "What-if posts;" What if Luddley had normal intelligence?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He tried---he cared. Are you really going to castigate him for that ?

Where did I castigate him? Nowhere. I am simply saying his death was needless. Had he not been armed, he would not have considered doing what he did and needlessly losing his life. The way he died points to the fact that only trained professionals should have guns.

And even well trained people get shot or even shoot themselves.

The nutters live in LaLaLand. They think that any discussion about guns is all black or white. Its more guns everywhere or ban all guns. They can't think in terms of safety, of keeping people safe. All they care about is swaggering around, pretending to be what they are not and never will be.

The only people in this thread that think the issues are black and white are the anti gun nuts. The rest of us understand that things go wrong, even when the guy with the gun is highly trained.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Remember the shooting insurance so when a nutter shoots someone, they've got insurance to pay for their defense...

Might be a good idea to include coverage for the poor families to bury their dead.

You nutters who are afraid to leave the house without your gun - Do you carry life insurance so your family can afford to bury you? And, how many of you will send a few bucks to this poor family?

Excuse me? Who the fuck did the good guy with a gun you want to penalize shoot? You are a fucking idiot when it comes to discussing guns in any way, why the fuck do you hate the fact that people have a right to live? Would you prefer that people just drop dead on the street to satisfy your fucking blood lust? Maybe you would like to see their heads explode.

READ the LINKS.

His family cannot afford to bury him.

Duh.

They can ask for help, I am sure hundreds of people would contribute for ti cover the funeral expenses.

Or, just a thought, you could tell the government to cut down on funeral regulations to make it less expensive to bury people. Never mind, I know you will never blame the government for that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

His honesty is exactly what you dislike about him most. He's got a different point of view than you....and he states it. You'd prefer that he wouldn't.

The dishonesty here comes from Yurt....who knows that Luddy wasn't referring to Yurt personally selling guns. Why is it that Yurt keyed in on that? Is it because he's so honest?

How the fuck is calling for insurance on a guy that dies honest? Or did you miss the fact that he wants to penalize heroes for trying to save lives?

As usual, you're making stuff up to fit your own agenda. Quit lying and read the links.

The man is dead.
His family cannot afford to bury him.
If he had been insured, they might have enough to $ to bury him.
There's a link if you want put your money where your big mouth is.

What I said has nothing to do with the links you posted, it was a comment on your personal opinion. Learn to tell the difference.

 

[UllysesS.Archer]

More fiction.

You really should stop digging.

Ok, let's deal in the facts, and only the facts.

Fact: He tried to stop the assailants.
Fact: He got killed
Fact: He had a gun

that's all the facts. We don't know if he would have died if he didn't have a gun. We don't know what would have happened to anyone there if he didn't have a gun.

There, that's the end of the debate. All the facts are now known.

No where near "all the facts".

Here's a couple more facts:

His family has suffered a needless loss that cannot be understood unless you suffer the same loss. His family cannot afford to bury him.

I really wish the nutters would think about what comes after. You write as though you think killing a "bad guy" makes you some kind of hero, that it makes you special and that you get to celebrate that and others celebrate it.

You just could not be more wrong.

The biggest mistake he made was not pulling the trigger first and asking questions later. He did not want to kill the 'bad guy' he wanted to stop the assailant. Big difference there.

And killing the 'bad guy' is something I have no problem with at all.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Where did I castigate him? Nowhere. I am simply saying his death was needless. Had he not been armed, he would not have considered doing what he did and needlessly losing his life. The way he died points to the fact that only trained professionals should have guns.

And even well trained people get shot or even shoot themselves.

The nutters live in LaLaLand. They think that any discussion about guns is all black or white. Its more guns everywhere or ban all guns. They can't think in terms of safety, of keeping people safe. All they care about is swaggering around, pretending to be what they are not and never will be.

The only people in this thread that think the issues are black and white are the anti gun nuts. The rest of us understand that things go wrong, even when the guy with the gun is highly trained.

Like I said -

I really wish the nutters would think about what comes after. You write as though you think killing a "bad guy" makes you some kind of hero, that it makes you special and that you get to celebrate that and others celebrate it.

You just could not be more wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

He may not have been trying to 'play the hero.' His only thought may have been to stop the shooting. However, it didn't work, and, to me, this is a salient point. The pro-gun people are always saying that if people were armed, they could stop things like mass shootings. Obviously, as we can see from this incident, that isn't true.

They have, but they aren't always successful. Funny thing is that you probably never criticize cops who get killed in the line of duty, even if their deaths actually end up with more people dying as a result of their inability to stop someone from killing others. That makes you wrong, just like it makes Duddly wrong.

Oh gawd. Now you've got him being a cop shot in the line of duty.
Or, you're saying I criticize cops killed in the line of duty.
Or, you have no frikken idea what you're saying.

Carry on.

Damn, you are even dumber than I thought. I posted to a specific person in reply to something she said, and never claimed that the guy was a cop. Did I upset you because you felt I was criticizing you? perhaps you need to reexamine your position if you think my criticism is addressed to you. Come to think of it, I have never seen you make a post about how a cop should have been paying more attention so he wouldn't get shot, perhaps what I said actually does apply to you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And, yet, this fellow had no fighting chance at all.

He did, he just missed the second shooter, and preferred not to kill in the heat of the moment. You should be praising him for not just shooting without being sure of the situation, instead you choose to hold him up as an example of why no one should carry a gun. If you can explain that you are smarter than anyone else in the universe, which is a statistical impossibility, so don't even try.

More fiction.

You really should stop digging.

Your link says he was shot by a second shooter, how the fuck is my post fiction?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Excuse me? Who the fuck did the good guy with a gun you want to penalize shoot? You are a fucking idiot when it comes to discussing guns in any way, why the fuck do you hate the fact that people have a right to live? Would you prefer that people just drop dead on the street to satisfy your fucking blood lust? Maybe you would like to see their heads explode.

READ the LINKS.

His family cannot afford to bury him.

Duh.

They can ask for help, I am sure hundreds of people would contribute for ti cover the funeral expenses.

Or, just a thought, you could tell the government to cut down on funeral regulations to make it less expensive to bury people. Never mind, I know you will never blame the government for that.

And there he goes, wandering off on another tangent ...................

 

[Luddly Neddite]

How the fuck is calling for insurance on a guy that dies honest? Or did you miss the fact that he wants to penalize heroes for trying to save lives?

As usual, you're making stuff up to fit your own agenda. Quit lying and read the links.

The man is dead.
His family cannot afford to bury him.
If he had been insured, they might have enough to $ to bury him.
There's a link if you want put your money where your big mouth is.

What I said has nothing to do with the links you posted, it was a comment on your personal opinion. Learn to tell the difference.

Then you don't know what my opinion is.

That's it.

I give up.

You go right on making it up as you go. If you run out of lies, ask Samson for some of his.