Not defending the guy, but two shots at center of mass is standard self-defense doctrine.I watched that video waiting for either family's reaction to a man actually being shot. There was no screaming, shock, horror, even from the woman in the car that carried on the conversation while her man is lying there.
The man shoots twice, not once. And never at the legs. Straight at the chest. Still no real reaction. Bloody hell America.
The bad (typically gun related) things happening in America thread
- Thread starter calodo2003
- Start date
apparently there were all kinds of weird incidents leading up to this. Vandalism, severing a deer head on campus….
Quick thinking from the kids in this class.
If you own a gun you are part of this. You can deny it all you want. Claim it’s only for “sport” or hunting. But no matter what your money empowers an industry with the money it needs to keep anything from being done. If you are proud of owning your guns then own up to this.
Not trying to be unnecessarily contrary, but this argument is rather weak ethically. Assigning blame to people by proxy can be used to condemn anyone for virtually anything. I believe you are an American (as am I). We both pay taxes that fund weapons development that go to the same industry. On your logic, you are to blame for this too. Your money empowers the industry too.
Products in many industries are used for ill in society. For example, alcohol is abused by people who drive drunk. DUIs lead to thousands of deaths every single year. Do you think it's right to assign guilt to everyone who buys alcohol for a given DUI fatality? I wouldn't, but it's the same logic in your post.
We definitely have a violence problem in the US, I don't dispute that; but I am not a fan of assigning moral guilt by proxy. If we make that an ethical standard, most of us will be declared guilty for many things we had nothing to do with personally or directly..
I would agree with your point in all things but guns. Guns have a singular reason to exist, which is to kill. The majority (60+%) of this country wants gun reform, yet nothing meaningful ever happens. The main reason for this is the buckets of cash that gun lobbyists dump into government. That cash come from the sales of ammo and guns. It comes from gun owners donating to orgs like the NRA. I know my opinion is probably wrong but how many more kids need to die? my two eldest nieces are already doing active shooter drills in school. Should my younger nieces and nephews be consigned to a future of fear as well? How many more? How much longer? At what point did owning tool of violence become a bigger right then a child living?
I appreciate your measured response, and I think this statement is a much more promising foundation for a gun reform argument.
Assuming for sake of argument that it's true (I think it is), then the question would then move to whether or not there is a morally acceptable reason for owning such a tool. Answers in the affirmative could include hunting, self-defense, and in the US at least, the notion of a civil populace defending themselves from government tyranny or foreign invaders.
Answers in the negative would have to explain these away, offer alternatives, or appeal to a higher moral standard (if morality has degrees [which is a disputed topic in its own right]). You have, at least in part, employed the third option in your post by appealing to the obvious problem of school shootings, murder, and the like.
While there are certainly a bunch of gun toting nuts out there that think everyone should have a machine gun, there is a more sophisticated side of this debate where you have people who see valid reasons for owning a gun but who also are concerned about gun violence and open to practical solutions in gun reform that will hopefully preserve the positives while reducing the negatives. The problem is that this issue is so polarizing that it has turned into an all or nothing kind of thing and, as you rightly have observed, nothing meaningful gets done. Pardon the pun, but being in the middle on this issue gets you shot at by both sides.
**Ducks and runs for cover**
I watched that video waiting for either family's reaction to a man actually being shot. There was no screaming, shock, horror, even from the woman in the car that carried on the conversation while her man is lying there.
The man shoots twice, not once. And never at the legs. Straight at the chest. Still no real reaction. Bloody hell America.
The current wife says that because the gun was silenced and there wasn't much reaction from Chad Read she thought it was a bb gun and hadn't realised he was seriously injured.
In my mind the shooter is guilty, there is no imminent threat at the time of the shooting.
In war right? Not when the other person is literally unarmed and not charging at you. The man with the gun was in no imminent threat to life.
BERKELEY COUNTY, S.C. (WCSC) —
A South Carolina gun store owner has been charged in the shooting death of an employee he told deputies he intended to “prank” with a BB gun, according to the Berkley County Sheriff's Office.
An affidavit states Whitley told deputies he brought a replica Glock BB gun into the store and placed it among other real firearms “with the intent of pranking his friend, the victim.”
Whitley mistakenly picked up a real firearm instead of the replica, pointed it at the victim and fired, the affidavit states.
https://www.wyff4.com/article/sc-gun-store-owner-shoots-employee/38388168#
A South Carolina gun store owner has been charged in the shooting death of an employee he told deputies he intended to “prank” with a BB gun, according to the Berkley County Sheriff's Office.
An affidavit states Whitley told deputies he brought a replica Glock BB gun into the store and placed it among other real firearms “with the intent of pranking his friend, the victim.”
Whitley mistakenly picked up a real firearm instead of the replica, pointed it at the victim and fired, the affidavit states.
https://www.wyff4.com/article/sc-gun-store-owner-shoots-employee/38388168#
So, even with a BB gun, he was still going to shoot his employee in the fecking face?!?
Not war. It's the standard teaching in CPL (concealed pistol license) and CCW (concealed carry weapons) courses for civilians who carry a gun for self-defense.
So the real guns in this gun store were loaded, with safeties off?
Americans FFS, get a grip. Your country is just spiralling into chaos.
i thought it was a BB gun too just from the sound.
I watched that video waiting for either family's reaction to a man actually being shot. There was no screaming, shock, horror, even from the woman in the car that carried on the conversation while her man is lying there.
The man shoots twice, not once. And never at the legs. Straight at the chest. Still no real reaction. Bloody hell America.
i thought it was a BB gun too just from the sound.
This is how desensitised America is. "Oh, it's just a BB gun. Let me carry on my conversation".
Returning to another issue you raised in your response: DUI's. DUI laws in Wisconsin are a joke and amongst the most lenient in the country. The vast majority of voters in Wisconsin want those laws changed but for decades they stall out when they get brought up for a vote in the legislature. Why? A huge reason is the lobbying effort of the Wisconsin Tavern League, the trade association made up of bars/pubs/taverns/restaurants. That's right, bars don't want tougher DUI laws because they see financial loss in them being in place. I know that if I go to a bar that is a member of the League that my money will, in some amount, make its way into the pocket of a state politician to "encourage" him/her to not vote for tougher laws. So I do the only thing I can, I check out the membership list of the league before going to any new bar/pub/etc. I have not, and will not, patronize those establishments until they not only STOP lobbying against these laws, but until they actively lobby for them.
Sandy Hook was the moment that a potential gun industry/culture led movement for change died. If the slaughter of 20 children resulted in not only no change, but a doubling down by the industry/culture, we have no hope in any meaningful reform. It doesn't matter if someone is a responsible gun owner, just like it doesn't matter that I never drink and drive. Ultimately our dollars, spent with these organizations, will be used to further block meaningful change for those things we say are important for us. So yes, there is collective guilt for the continued lack of real and meaningful change for people who continue to feed money into the coffers of those who actively prevent that change. The reason someone makes those purchases (hunting, Red Dawn Cosplay, etc.) does not matter. The money still flows in and to convince oneself that you are playing no role in the continued lack of action is denial.
So what does this mean? For me this means I decline going out with friends if they are going to a Pub that is a league member. It means spending more on an Uber to go somewhere further. It means pissing off friends when I ask to go somewhere else. For gun owners? I guess something similar. Stop purchasing ammo. Stop purchasing new guns. Stop contributing to organizations that lobby against reform. Money, and the loss of it, is the only message that will have impact because the blood of THESE kids apparently means feck all.
This is how desensitised America is. "Oh, it's just a BB gun. Let me carry on my conversation".
The guy dropped to the ground and is silent. Even if it was a BB gun that'd have worried me.
TBH i blame the guy who bought the gun for getting the gun involved, but I don't blame him for shooting the guy. He had just been chucked across the garden, if he didn't take the other guy down, he'd could have easily been at the other end of his own gun. He should have never have bought it out in the first place though.
That's what I was wondering, too.
I've never been into a gun store that had loaded guns in the display case.
I imagine the BB gun was unloaded... if his story is to be believed.
This is correct.
"You fire at center mass until the threat is neutralized."
Again I want to thank you for a cordial conversation, which is not a given with such an emotional topic. I also appreciate that you are trying to live consistently with your political/reform causes by avoiding businesses that promote things you oppose. I would just point out though, that your couse of action does not prevent you from using alcohol altogether (if it makes it a little inconvenient). Your solution for gun owners effectively makes it impossible for them to use the item at all, which probably won't sit well with them.Returning to another issue you raised in your response: DUI's. DUI laws in Wisconsin are a joke and amongst the most lenient in the country. The vast majority of voters in Wisconsin want those laws changed but for decades they stall out when they get brought up for a vote in the legislature. Why? A huge reason is the lobbying effort of the Wisconsin Tavern League, the trade association made up of bars/pubs/taverns/restaurants. That's right, bars don't want tougher DUI laws because they see financial loss in them being in place. I know that if I go to a bar that is a member of the League that my money will, in some amount, make its way into the pocket of a state politician to "encourage" him/her to not vote for tougher laws. So I do the only thing I can, I check out the membership list of the league before going to any new bar/pub/etc. I have not, and will not, patronize those establishments until they not only STOP lobbying against these laws, but until they actively lobby for them.
Sandy Hook was the moment that a potential gun industry/culture led movement for change died. If the slaughter of 20 children resulted in not only no change, but a doubling down by the industry/culture, we have no hope in any meaningful reform. It doesn't matter if someone is a responsible gun owner, just like it doesn't matter that I never drink and drive. Ultimately our dollars, spent with these organizations, will be used to further block meaningful change for those things we say are important for us. So yes, there is collective guilt for the continued lack of real and meaningful change for people who continue to feed money into the coffers of those who actively prevent that change. The reason someone makes those purchases (hunting, Red Dawn Cosplay, etc.) does not matter. The money still flows in and to convince oneself that you are playing no role in the continued lack of action is denial.
So what does this mean? For me this means I decline going out with friends if they are going to a Pub that is a league member. It means spending more on an Uber to go somewhere further. It means pissing off friends when I ask to go somewhere else. For gun owners? I guess something similar. Stop purchasing ammo. Stop purchasing new guns. Stop contributing to organizations that lobby against reform. Money, and the loss of it, is the only message that will have impact because the blood of THESE kids apparently means feck all.
I think we want essentially the same thing (reduced violence). The death of those children and many other should absolutely matter to all of us, and we definitely need to get our act together in this country. I believe conversations like the one we are having are helpful in trying to find real solutions that attempt to find middle ground. You have given me much to think about and have made many good points. Thanks for the conversation. I am going to bow out as this thread is really more of news feed than a gun control debate. See you around the forum.
Hypothetically, if a 14 year old comes at you with a bat, can you just shoot him in the center mass without any consequence. Surely you can't shoot in the center mass in every instance you feel threatened, are there any limitations?
In a state like Texas (or here in South Carolina) with Castle Doctrine + Stand Your Ground laws, "a person is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect the actor against the other’s use or attempted use of unlawful force.”
In your "a 14 year old with a bat" hypothetical, if the person is legitimately attacking you with a bat, they could cause death or great bodily harm with the bat, so you'd nearly certainly be legally justified in responding with force.
Also since this usually comes up - the idea of not shooting center mass is a myth and silly.
I guess if I got hold of a gun and was feeling threatened by someone without a gun I would go for legs but yia if someone with a gun threatened me will have to go for center mass too.
Aaaaand you'd miss. We've really gone through this like 100 times on the Caf by now. That's a thing for the movies, not real life.
Not to mention the legs have a ton of large blood vessels. Shoot a guy in the thigh, sever the femoral artery, and they're just as dead as if you hit the aorta.
America is a quasi war zone, its not a stable country and shouldn't be thought of as such.
I'd just like to say that in many places, particularly in Europe (that's what I'm familiar with, anyway), self-defence is generally not a valid reason for owning firearms, unless you can prove your life is in genuine danger - in practice, this means that say, a politician getting credible death threats or a witness in a high-profile organised crime case might get approval but Average Joe certainly won't. And I'm very much OK with that.
Norwegian police aim for the legs sometimes. It's not just a thing in the movies.
The mindset is very different here in the US for sure. Owning firearms is thought to be a fundamental right (2nd ammendment), and the right to defend your person and in some cases (not all) your property is also seen as fundamental. The Declaration of Independence states that all people have a right to life, and the corresponding assumption is that people have a right to preserve or defend that right to life with deadly force if necessary. Thus, even the idea of getting government approval to have a firearm for self-defense is seen as an infringement of fundamental rights by a huge portion of our population.
I suspect that this all sounds very foreign to Europeans, but I'm just trying to explain how people here think. This mindset is ingrained in our society and won't easily be changed for better or for worse.
Cool. Highly trained Norwegian police aim for the legs in a small number of specific situations.
We are talking about civilians in self defense situations.
Sure, I was just pointing it out because it's become a bit of a counterjerk.
What is? The training to not shoot legs or the statement that most people get their ideas of what a shooting is about is from what they see on a tv screen?
The counterjerk is that every time "why didn't they shoot them in the leg" is asked on the internet, a hundred people will descend on them to explain that that's only something that happens in movies, that no one would do it in reality, maybe that no one could do it in reality. It's intimately connected with the idea that every time police shoot, they shoot to kill, because anything else is basically impossible (so center mass, keep shooting until they're down).
It's possible but it's high risk and in a pressure situation it's going to be more prone to errors. With the right weapon and optic combination that's perfectly set up it's definitely doable but when your life is on the line you will take a percentage shot and that's aiming at centre mass. For officers whose primary weapon is a handgun that they might take 50 shots a year with to remain certified a leg shot just isn't viable.
The truth is that most people have no idea what shooting a gun is like. They only know what they see in films and TV shows, where shooting a pistol is portrayed as being as easy as point and click. This is the reason why the leg shot query comes up.
This is a good article on the incident:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/ethan-crumbley-identified-as-oxford-high-school-michigan-mass-shooter
And this letter to Trump from the shooter's mom is a really good example and how and why Trump got elected and continues to appeal to a section of the public with the help of right-wing propaganda and the inability of the Democrats and failure of progressives and twitter activists to effectively counter the propaganda:
"You see Mr. Trump I can go on and on, in fact I used to think Democrat. I don’t believe in God and Im quite opposite of your typical “republican”. But now I am 38 years old. I have a family. My husband and I both work full time jobs. I have watched our insurance premiums double. I cannot afford to buy into this Obamacare. For my family its over $600 a month with deductibles. We bust our ass Mr. Trump. I pay taxes, my husband pays his child support, I donate to charities.. We are good fecking Americans that cannot get ahead. And what makes me sick, is people that come over here from other countries and get free everything.
My son struggles daily, and my teachers tell me they hate teaching it but the HAVE to. Their pay depends on these stupid fecking test scores. I have to pay for a Tutor, why? Because I can’t figure out 4th grade math. I used to be good at math. I can’t afford a Tutor, in fact I sacrifice car insurance to make sure my son gets a good education and hopefully succeeds in life. My parents teach at a school where their kids come from illegal immigrant parents. Most of their parents are locked up. They don’t care about learning and threaten to kill my mom for caring about their grades. Do you realize Mr. Trump that they get free tutors, free tablets from our Government so they can succeed. Why cant my son get those things, do we as hard working Americans not deserve that too?
My husband suffered a stroke and a broken back and we were with just my income. Do you know how hard it is to support a family on only $40,000 a year? I couldn’t qualify for State Aid. I made to much.
Mr. Trump, this is why I voted for you. I see the change that we so desperately need. I see jobs coming back, people having to work for their handouts, money going to who really deserve it. Big Pharma taken down, Monsanto stop poisoning us. Jobs given back to our American workers. I believe YOU are the President who will make these things happen. I have NEVER had this much belief in one person, and you are it."
https://archive.vn/rRL9y
https://www.thedailybeast.com/ethan-crumbley-identified-as-oxford-high-school-michigan-mass-shooter
And this letter to Trump from the shooter's mom is a really good example and how and why Trump got elected and continues to appeal to a section of the public with the help of right-wing propaganda and the inability of the Democrats and failure of progressives and twitter activists to effectively counter the propaganda:
"You see Mr. Trump I can go on and on, in fact I used to think Democrat. I don’t believe in God and Im quite opposite of your typical “republican”. But now I am 38 years old. I have a family. My husband and I both work full time jobs. I have watched our insurance premiums double. I cannot afford to buy into this Obamacare. For my family its over $600 a month with deductibles. We bust our ass Mr. Trump. I pay taxes, my husband pays his child support, I donate to charities.. We are good fecking Americans that cannot get ahead. And what makes me sick, is people that come over here from other countries and get free everything.
My son struggles daily, and my teachers tell me they hate teaching it but the HAVE to. Their pay depends on these stupid fecking test scores. I have to pay for a Tutor, why? Because I can’t figure out 4th grade math. I used to be good at math. I can’t afford a Tutor, in fact I sacrifice car insurance to make sure my son gets a good education and hopefully succeeds in life. My parents teach at a school where their kids come from illegal immigrant parents. Most of their parents are locked up. They don’t care about learning and threaten to kill my mom for caring about their grades. Do you realize Mr. Trump that they get free tutors, free tablets from our Government so they can succeed. Why cant my son get those things, do we as hard working Americans not deserve that too?
My husband suffered a stroke and a broken back and we were with just my income. Do you know how hard it is to support a family on only $40,000 a year? I couldn’t qualify for State Aid. I made to much.
Mr. Trump, this is why I voted for you. I see the change that we so desperately need. I see jobs coming back, people having to work for their handouts, money going to who really deserve it. Big Pharma taken down, Monsanto stop poisoning us. Jobs given back to our American workers. I believe YOU are the President who will make these things happen. I have NEVER had this much belief in one person, and you are it."
https://archive.vn/rRL9y
The small amount of Norwegian police that are allowed to carry guns shot less than 30 people between 2005 and 2018. Less than half of those were shots to the legs.
https://www.idunn.no/njsp/2020/02/norwegian_police_use_of_firearms_critical_decision-making_
I really don't think it is a knee jerk response to tell people that it is highly unlikely that shooting in the legs will be effective in a self defense situation and to assume that they get their limited understanding of what shooting a firearm at a moving target is via a tv screen vs. police / military training.
Exactly this.
She definitely has her delusional, right wing bingo card all filled out.
Okay? I guess don't comment about guns to Americans.