Gun Control Makes It Safer

[MajGenl.Meade]

But if he'd had a gun, he would have backed off, turned away, vanished (as they ordered him to do) and then come back and opened fire from behind the nearest cover. Always noting that cover from view is not necessarily cover from return fire.

I bet shooting just one of them would have sent them running (and still running). But maybe not. I'd take the chance.

[Big RR]

If it was my daughter I'd probably take the chance with a rock or even my fist against the gun(s), but it likely would have ended up with me (or both of us dead). Luckily this guy had the sense to go and get a cop, and they both are still alive.

[Scooter]

It's looking like there was no gun at all, the five did not "take turns" raping the girl, and the father was either drunk or otherwise lacking the brain cells that God gave a savoy cabbage:

The father said the teenagers entered the playground brandishing a gun, and that he ran off, the officials said. Two minutes later, he returned and threw a bottle at the teenagers, to try to drive them off, but they chased him again, the officials said. When he returned 12 minutes later with police officers, the assailants were gone and his daughter was there, half clothed.

When she was interviewed, the woman told investigators she was raped by at least one of the suspects, the officials said. She was forced to perform oral sex on two others, they said, citing her account, and all of the suspects touched her breasts.

“The initial report, that all five of them raped her, is not looking like it happened that way,” one of the officials said.

The woman did not report seeing a gun and so far, the suspects have denied they had one.

police ... had not recovered a gun

At Zaida Deli and Grocery, the father said only, “Gimme the phone,” Santos recalled, adding that he did not explain why.

Santos said he refused the man because he had no idea what he wanted and because the shop needed the phone for business. The father then continued on down the block.

The father stopped at Gaston Deli, two blocks from the playground, and asked to use the phone, again without explaining why or even saying that he wanted to call the police, said Sammy, a clerk there. Sammy, who said he was busy with customers, told him no. He added that the father seemed drunk.

“How he look, how he act, how he sway,” Sammy said.

Silent security footage from Gaston Deli captures the roughly 70 seconds he spent inside. Wearing jeans and a black-and-red coat, the father stopped and stood in the middle of the store as he motioned to the clerk and spoke with two customers.

One of the customers handed him a phone, but grabbed it away before he could start dialing. The father appears to speak to the clerk, lean toward the customer, and then haltingly leave.

When Payne asked the father on Sunday how he was doing, she said he seemed baffled by the question.
“He said, ‘I have no idea what they’re doing around here,’” referring to the scrum of reporters and police officers nearby at the playground, Payne recalled. “He said, ‘I didn’t do nothing.’”

So instead of grabbing the first person he sees and screaming, "My daughter is being attacked in the park, call 911!" he goes meandering down the street for at least two blocks asking to use a phone without ever explaining why, until making contact with the police at some undisclosed point. Sounds like there could have been 7 or 8 or maybe even 10 minutes shaved off this 12 minute attack, if he has been acting with even minimal faculties intact.

But the village idiot insists that all would have been well, if only this drunken subdefective had had a gun...

[Bicycle Bill]

One gun or five guns, I can't imagine me leaving my daughter with the scum. Guess I would be dead but I would try and get someone (or more than one) to come with me.

That right, oldr.  You'd be dead; your daughter would still get gang-banged; and then, having killed one person (you) these walking turds might just think "leave no witnesses" and kill her too.

-"BB"-

[Big RR]

Scooter--I don't know if he was drunk or not, but under those circumstances, any of us may well not act with all our mental faculties firing. The adrenaline alone might have made him act impulsively, not to mention the realization as to what was happening to his daughter. I've seen people under stress act quite irrationally, and I do not blame him if he did so under the circumstances. But I agree a gun would likely have not helped, and would probably have made things worse.

BB--exactly.

[wesw]

yeah oldr, don t defend yourself or your daughter, that s just stupid, man!


what a bunch of crap , bill.

me and oldr might be dead, but some of those bastards would be dead too, and the next batch would think twice about jumping the next guys' daughters.

grow a set.

I m gonna stop now before I say something truly nasty and regrettable .

[Big RR]

Wes--from the account posted by Scooter, the guy couldn't even make a simple phone call--you think he'd be able to defend anyone with a gun?

And it is likely his daughter would have been killed as well; being raped is no picnic, but I'd rather have that than my daughter dead.

[MajGenl.Meade]

What a lot of selective reading

IF these five had no gun after all
IF even a confused or adrenaline pumped or inebriated guy started shooting from behind cover
THEN these five "clowns" would have run like the wind

Wouldn't they? Wouldn't you?

I don't necessarily agree with dave/lib (whoever's) point that a gun would have helped in this case. But I also question the certainty with which other people dismiss the claim by distorting the facts and making conjectures that are not supported by the facts. And note that no one engaged me on the facts

[wesw]

well, I am unlikely to change my position on this.

if someone attacks my daughter in that way they are fair game. come jail , death or hell, I will pay the price,

if anything is worth dying for it is this. if we allow our daughters to go undefended and accept their being assaulted we will not survive as a nation and we will suffer for our weakness.

the founders got it right. we should stop infringing on the people and go after the criminals. we know where they are we know who they are.

we need to take care of the unpleasant business of destroying the drug gangs and cartels in America. that will require arresting and deporting and jailing a lot of black and brown men..., oh well. black and brown people will largely breathe a sigh of relief.

we will have to legalize many drugs to accomplish this. drugs and money make the gangster world go round. we need to turn that upside down on them.

guns for everyone!!!!
...except the thugs.

oh yeah, we need to destroy the outlaw bikers and their drug running too. can you say RICO?

[Scooter]

if someone attacks my daughter in that way they are fair game. come jail , death or hell, I will pay the price

I certainly don't take any issue with that. What I did take issue with, was the village idiot seizing on this particular case as a clarion call for why gun control is bad, when all of the facts scream that it played no role in what transpired.

[Big RR]

wes--there's a difference between protecting and avenging, and a gun could certainly be a help in exacting revenge. And while I don't think it's right or should be legal to exact revenge, I might well do the same thing.

meade--would a confused, etc, person be able to get the gun out and start firing before he was shot? Would he have the presence of mind to shoot from behind cover? Who knows, but I'd bet he'd be shot before he could even retrieve his gun (if the attackers had one or more guns).

[MajGenl.Meade]

Once again, selective reading...

IF there was no gun..... IF there was no gun.... IF there was no gun....

The argument put forward now is that the five jolly lads out for an innocent walk did not have a gun after all.

So... IF there was no gun..... IF there was no gun..... IF there was no gun. How could he be shot if they had no gun?

But even if they did have one gun, why assume a person could not move away, pull his own gun and shoot before the poor lads innocently assaulting a girl even knew what was happening to their poor little selves? I'm not suggesting he start to pull his piece before they were too preoccupied with pulling their own. Probably get caught in his clothes and shoot himself

But thanks for at least responding.

[Big RR]

How could he be shot if they had no gun?

Who said they could if they had no gun? Certainly not me. A little selective reading there, it appears. But, FWIW, in his agitated state of mind it is possible any of them could have disarmed him when he tried to pull the gun out and then shot him, and you even state he could have shot himself.

But even if they did have one gun, why assume a person could not move away, pull his own gun and shoot before the poor lads innocently assaulting a girl even knew what was happening to their poor little selves?

Again, it would depend on his state of mind and the ability to think clearly. It appeared the guy could not ask for help or even make a phone call, so I would not assume he'd have the strength of mind to do any of those things. IF he did, a gun would possibly have been a help, if not, it likely would not have been and even could have made things worse.

And I'll extend the same thanks for at least responding to you.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Well, you were responding to this:

IF these five had no gun after all
IF even a confused or adrenaline pumped or inebriated guy started shooting from behind cover
THEN these five "clowns" would have run like the wind

Which begins, "IF these five had no gun after all" and to which you responded:

would a confused, etc, person be able to get the gun out and start firing before he was shot? Would he have the presence of mind to shoot from behind cover? Who knows, but I'd bet he'd be shot before he could even retrieve his gun (if the attackers had one or more guns).

How could he be shot if they had no gun? Why must he "retrieve" his gun and get shot while doing so... oh, IF they had one or more guns - so your response used circumstances specifically ruled out in the first quote. That's OK.

I don't doubt if they had a gun and if he stood there like a clod trying to drag his own gun out of his pants or pockets, then he might well have been shot, by them or accidentally by himself. It's all too panicky.

If that were me, I certainly wouldn't be pulling a gun on them right there. Knowing that I had one (and therefore not confused as to what to do), I most definitely would have walked away, out of sight, pulled the gun, made sure the safety was off (and it would be a revolver by the way, not an auto pistol) and then gone back to shoot the preoccupied criminal(s) - cover or no cover. Especially if they didn't have a gun.

But the issue isn't this specific individual and a hypothetical utter inability to turn away, then turn back (with his gun if he had one) and fire it in the general direction of hoodlums. It's the hypothetical posed by lib (for it was he) suggesting that circumstances such as these could be altered by victims being legally armed.

It's not sufficient IMO to use the specific, "Well this guy was too confused" as a response to the general assertion. It's not sufficient for me to write, "well this is what I'd do" either. Question is: would most people react sensibly if they had a gun and would that make a difference for the better?

Again, thanks for the reply

[oldr_n_wsr]

I have had a gun pulled on me. I had no gun but did have a pocket full of money and a baseball bat. I still had the money, the bat was broken and the cops got the gun.
The perp ran away.

I defended money (not even mine), I am certainly going to defend my daughter (or wife or son or....) regardless of the odds against me.

[Gob]

I've had a knife pulled on me twice, never a gun.

Once faced the guy down. Second bloke had a long stay in hospital and life changing injuries.

[Big RR]

Thanks for the clarification meade. But as you a referring back to the post by Lib, at the time it was made there was no suggestions that the perps were not armed; the only information stated that they had at least one gun that was pointed at him. However, you apparently were making your comments in light of Scooter's post which indicated that they may or may not have had a gun or threatened him with it, which apparently prompted you to posit "If they had no gun". Thanks for clearing that up.