The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: dutch508 on September 23, 2015, 10:34:55 PM
-
This will be a hard one at the DUmp. Anti-gun freaks swear a gun has never stopped a crime if it has been used by a private citizen. Anti-gunners run the only pro-gun forum at DU so I see this one being flushed to the Dungeon quickly.
sarisataka (5,618 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141212972
Customer shoots bank robber in Warren
Source: Local 4 - ClickOnDetroit
WARREN, Mich. -
A man who was robbing a Citizens Bank near 9 Mile and Van Dyke roads on Monday was shot by a customer at the bank.
Police found two guns at the scene. The bank is at the corner of Van Dyke Road and Timken Avenue, which is a few blocks north of 9 Mile Road.
The robber initially fled the bank on foot but was found lying on the ground bleeding. He was taken to the hospital with a gunshot wound.
No other injuries have been reported.
Local 4 has learned the robber walked into the bank and announced a hold-up. He received money from a teller and then pointed the gun at the customer, who shot him. He shot him in both arms and the leg
Read more: http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/customer-shoots-bank-robber-in-warren/35398190
Star Member onehandle (45,611 posts)
2. Probably would have just taken the money and left.
The customer should be cited for public endangerment.
Meanwhile guns kill 15,000+ teens a year in the U.S...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141212977
Yup.
GGJohn (5,661 posts)
18. Lolololol!!!!
You're funny.
You just can't stand the thought that a law abiding citizen used their legally carried weapon to stop what could have been a deadly situation.
also, yup.
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
37. +1. Not long ago a cowboy shot a store clerk trying to save his own ass during a robbery that probably would have ended with no one injured. In this bank case, lucky robber didn't kill someone when the ignorant cowboy started shooting.
::)
Star Member Hoyt (21,244 posts)
46. So, he didn't shoot. Stupid cowboy did, endangering others.
Last edited Tue Sep 22, 2015, 08:51 AM - Edit history (1)
Fact robber didn't shoot at any time, shows he had no intention to. Probably bought his gun off some law-abiding collector - with more guns than he could fondle - with no background check.
Hoyt spams the pro-gun forum with anti-gun shit every day. Pro-gunners are banned from the Anti-gun forum on DU, btw.
GGJohn (5,662 posts)
137. So, now, self defense is a republican thing?
Hell, I thought it was a human thing.
Guess I was wrong according to rockfordfile
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
106. You strap a gun on to go to Chuck E Cheese, thinking you probably won't shoot an innocent kid,
no... there isn't anything else. that's all he posted.
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
107. Yeah I have know gun fanciers who consider it a defensive use to flash their gun at a Black
kid approaching on the sidewalk. No real threat other than the fear most gun toters have.
yeah, sure...
BarstowCowboy (110 posts)
4. Here's a question
If this average citizen was able to shoot this alleged robber in the arms and the legs, why can't A well trained police officer accomplish the same task?
A: Because we don't shoot to wound.
nichomachus (11,443 posts)
12. Oh goody. A wild west shootout in a bank
Filled with other customers and employees. Why what could go wrong? Could have turned into a bloodbath with others killed and wounded. It didn't this time, but it could have.
It's only money. Let them take it.
jmowreader (30,825 posts)
24. They let guns in banks in Michigan?
:thatsright:
sofa king (9,323 posts)
51. Yeah, where is it legal to take a gun into a bank?
Shouldn't this really be a story about two law-breakers cancelling themselves out and both winding up in the clink for STARTING A ****ING GUNFIGHT IN PUBLIC?
:banghead:
Star Member marble falls (7,699 posts)
49. Armed customers breaking up bank robberies is a bad, bad idea and an NRA wet dream.
Oh, well if it makes the NRA look good we must do something to stop it!
mac2766 (29 posts)
69. I understand <---- No you don't.
You support the action taken by what could easily be an untrained gunman in the situation. An action that could easily have been disastrous.
There is no argument that can be made by me or anyone else against a person who defends themselves in a life-threatening situation. What really needs to be considered is not the outcome, but the implication of the action taken by the shooter. If discharging a weapon in a building endangers the lives of innocent people, should the gun have been discharged? My position is no. Should one individual endanger the lives of one or more individuals to protect himself? My position is no. If I am threatened, I will protect myself, but I will not endanger the lives of others in doing so.
And as for the nit... vigilante / not a vigilante. We can agree to disagree. My opinion is that this was an act of vigilante justice carried out by a very reckless individual.
I strongly support the 2nd amendment. The right to keep and bear arms should remain a right... but... on the same note, we as American citizens should also have the right to protect ourselves against those who shouldn't posses a gun. There needs to be a balance between insanity and freedom. I live between two very different types of people. On one side of me is a highly trained ex-navy weapons expert. On the other side, a mentally unbalanced red-neck. Both have guns, as is their right. Which would I feel more comfortable being around when they are brandishing their weapons? Take a guess. There needs to be regulation. If you brandish a weapon, it should be a requirement that you have the mental capacity to understand the consequences of actions taken by you with that weapon. I was trained as a young man by the Indiana Hunters Association, by a friends father who happened to be a Deputy Sheriff, and by the US Military. I have yet to brandish a weapon in a public place, and would never carry one in a public place. That act alone could get a person shot.
what an idiot.
YabaDabaNoDinoNo (191 posts)
56. In one of the next robberies all the customers will be shot by the robbers, thanks NRA!
Watch and see
also an idiot.
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
77. Good point. My belief is that the more fools that carry guns, the more robbers will shoot first and not risk some gun toting fool playing cowboy.
:o
leftyladyfrommo (8,352 posts)
89. It's against the law to carry any weapon
Into a bank. I think it's a felony. If a teller spotted a weapon she would hit the silent alarm and you would walk out of the bank into a swat team.
Teller'S get guns pointed at them. They are trained on exactly what to do.
Most bNk robbers come in wearing a baseball cap, dark glasses and are carrying a bag. Tellers hit the cameras the minute they see anyone looking suspicious .
They have bait money they give out. After so many minutes it exploads. They are full of dye that won't wash off.
People need to let the bank employees do what they are trained to do.
:thatsright:
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
93. +1. Unfortunately, too many gunners aren't going to pass up an "opportunity" to play cowboy and shoot someone.
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
97. I hear you. zimmerman was well trained too, especially on what lies to tell police.
Being trained to shoot, and what to say, is not what they need to be trained in. Leaving their guns at home is the message they need to understand.
onehandle (45,611 posts)
109. So he was leaving and the brave, brave gun 'hero' went for it.
I'm convinced. Everyone should be armed to the teeth 24/7!
Anyone who thinks this helps the gun fetishist's argument doesn't get that no news is good news when it comes to guns.
Tick tock, gun nuts. The tipping point approacheth.
:o
LisaL (26,126 posts)
146. And the robber already had a second degree murder conviction on the record. So if he was pointing a gun at someone, I presume he meant business.
As always the truth doesn't really matter to leftists.
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
84. I don't think it takes "guts" to carry a gun on city streets, just the opposite. Besides, it is my experience that the majority of gun toters are callous, right wing racists, and many are militia types.
GGJohn (5,662 posts)
152. Just more nonsense from you.
BTW, are you aware that this POS already had a conviction for 2nd degree Murder?
So it's entirely conceivable that the ARMED robber was going to shoot the customer, but you don't care, because, GUNS!!!
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
162. Some of us don't need a gun, sorry you feel you do.
BUT- you, Hoyt, want to take everyone's guns away from them because you don't like them.
Hoyt (21,244 posts)
172. Are you going to vote for a Republican because of your love if gunz?
In my experience, anyone who would vote for greedy, racist, warmongering Republicans to protect their guns, is not likely a Democrat
Maedhros (7,481 posts)
126. Not self defense - the robber was fleeing. Nobody needed to get shot.
rockfordfile (45 posts)
124. Something's odd about this story
::)
Star Member Kennah (7,762 posts)
190. I'm told that's the most painful place to be shot n/t
Where? In teh bank?
-
What a bunch of DUmmies.
Hoyt - go **** yourself you imbecile. I sincerely hope that some gun wielding maniac... :censored: :censored: :censored:
-
The really scary thing is that these idjits really exist- and some of them reproduce.
-
What a bunch of DUmmies.
Hoyt - go **** yourself you imbecile. I sincerely hope that some gun wielding maniac... :censored: :censored: :censored:
You don't need to censor "Turns your head into a cloud of red mist". Or did you mean "Turns your head into a canoe"? Either way, no censorship needed.
-
Star Member Hoyt (21,244 posts)
46. So, he didn't shoot. Stupid cowboy did, endangering others.
Rule #1 of gun ownership and use. Don't pull it unless you intend to use it.
The bank robber learned that the hard way.
The only one endangering others was the gang banger who was waiving gun his around.
And it sounds to me like the civilian who shot this thug knows what he's doing. Both arms and the leg? That sounds IMO like measured and aimed shots...not just wild or reflex shooting. The guy knew what he was doing and shot this creep in such a manner that he ensured no bystanders would get shot by the robber and at the same time making sure the robber wouldn't get far with his injuries.
Give that guy a key to the city...free checking for a year and tear up whatever violation he was cited for.
-
So thieves should be allowed to take what they want without fear of confrontation? I guess it makes sense to a bunch of thieves that are to lazy to steal for themselves.
-
Maedhros (7,481 posts)
126. Not self defense - the robber was fleeing. Nobody needed to get shot.
:???:
He received money from a teller and then pointed the gun at the customer, who shot him. He shot him in both arms and the leg
Once again the lack of reading ability by the DUmmies comes shining through.
Hey DUmbass...he fled AFTER he was shot...he wasn't shot as he was running away.
-
So thieves should be allowed to take what they want without fear of confrontation?
If the Libtards were to ever get their way and repeal the 2nd Amendment...that's what would happen.
-
The civilian who shot this robber is obviously skilled. He chose to disable rather than kill, and that is a dangerous thing to do unless one knows exactly what one is doing.
-
:???:
Once again the lack of reading ability by the DUmmies comes shining through.
Hey DUmbass...he fled AFTER he was shot...he wasn't shot as he was running away.
They read just fine. They just selectively edit what they see when they read.
-
Customer is in need of range time.
Three shots and none to center of mass.
-
The civilian who shot this robber is obviously skilled. He chose to disable rather than kill, and that is a dangerous thing to do unless one knows exactly what one is doing.
I can't count the number of LEOs in NYS who have said, "If you have to shoot to defend yourself, make sure you kill the perp." The thought here is that it's rather difficult for a dead perp to sue someone.
-
It's kind of funny to see the gun-haters trying to use hysterical hypotheticals to argue criticize what happened, when what happened is the opposite of their hysterical hypotheticals.
The customer displayed the kind of gun control I support - he hit what he aimed at! And he almost saved taxpayers a bunch of money!
-
Star Member onehandle (45,611 posts)
2. Probably would have just taken the money and left.
The customer should be cited for public endangerment.
Meanwhile guns kill 15,000+ teens a year in the U.S...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141212977
Meanwhile, According to the Guttmacher Institute, there were 1.21 million abortions performed in the United States in 2008, the most recent year for which data is available. This amounts to 3,322 abortions per day. A large percentage black. #blacklivesmatter
-
So thieves should be allowed to take what they want without fear of confrontation? I guess it makes sense to a bunch of thieves that are to lazy to steal for themselves.
It works great for the thieves. This is why urban England has become a thug's paradise.
-
It works great for the thieves. This is why urban England has become a thug's paradise.
I think they actually prosecute if you injure the assailant while trying to defend yourself.
-
nichomachus (11,443 posts)
12. Oh goody. A wild west shootout in a bank
Filled with other customers and employees. Why what could go wrong? Could have turned into a bloodbath with others killed and wounded. It didn't this time, but it could have.
It's only money. Let them take it.
I would put a visit to nichomachus' house on my schedule.
You know, to have him hand over all his money to me.
It's only money.
He'd let me have it.
My only problem with this plan is, I'm pretty sure nichomachus has no money.
-
What is he doing out of jail robbing a bank with a second degree murder conviction?
-
One of the best movie scenes of all time is when Harry Callahan's lunch is interrupted by a bank robbery.
-
its up to 233 replies and hasn't been hidden yet.
I am highly surprised.
guillaumeb (3,068 posts)
204. I just knew that if I waited long enough I would read a story like this.
This proves that every one of the 100 million or so guns in the US are absolutely necessary to prevent crimes like this.
No matter that 30,000 Americans are killed by guns every year. This incident balances out those 30,000 deaths.
::)
branford (2,774 posts)
209. Two-thirds are suicides, and how many of the remainder are actually the result of lawful gun owners? Hint - the rate is VERY low. Note also that out suicide rate is comparable to areas with strict gun control like much of Europe, and much lower than gun control havens like Japan and South Korea.
You also are quite dismissive of the innumerable defensive uses of firearms by lawful gun owners. Are the lives they saved any more or less valuable than victims of firearm violence?
Unless you can "uninvent" firearms or have a remotely practical plan to remove over 300 million legal guns in our country (btw, it's 80-100+ million gun owners, and 300 million legal guns, plus untold numbers of illegal firearms and owners), to say nothing of the legal and electoral impediments to such a plan, a gun is still the best and most effective tool for self-defense for most people, particularly against an armed or multiple assailants, or if you're small, weak, old, disabled, etc.
Lastly, you shouldn't be so surprised about a story concerning defensive gun use. They're quite common, and usually only a small local interest story. Try searching on Google. However, for a start, Reddit has an entire sub-forum devoted to the topic:
https://www.reddit.com/r/dgu/
-
its up to 233 replies and hasn't been hidden yet.
I am highly surprised.
::)
I wonder how long branford and his post survive. Too much obvious sense (I won't say "common" any more, even less so when DU is the context).
-
Where??
warren ‎(plural warrens)
The system of burrows where rabbits live.
An enclosed piece of land set aside for breeding game, especially rabbits.
(figuratively) A mazelike place of dark alleys etc in which it's easy to lose oneself; especially one that may be overcrowded.
A heart-shaped hoe.
Derived terms [edit]
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/warren
No Bunnies were injured in the making of this post. :o
In other news:
2 NEWS learned it took Dayton Police more than an hour to respond to the initial call from that area. Captain Matt Haines with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office says each call is classified based on priority level. Priority one being the highest and priority nine being the lowest. Each level standing for a number of things.
Haines says the first call from the woman calling about the intruder was a priority three (suspicious persons call), which by policy means a two person crew will come when available.
The second call was classified as a priority one (shooting), which Haines says Dayton Police responded to within
minutes.
http://wdtn.com/2015/09/10/woman-who-shot-intruder-waited-hour-for-police/
Gun control, it's all about getting lead on target.
-
zg, it sounds like the old adage that, "When seconds count the police are just minutes away," may be too optimistic, on occasion. In that case I think the staffing of the watch was not equal to things that happened (management assignments? unusual surge in activity?).
-
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
-
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Exactly.
-
The civilian who shot this robber is obviously skilled. He chose to disable rather than kill, and that is a dangerous thing to do unless one knows exactly what one is doing.
Sounds like he needed more practice at the range. You never shoot to wound. Shooting to wound just says to an attorney that you life was not really in danger.
-
:???:
Once again the lack of reading ability by the DUmmies comes shining through.
Hey DUmbass...he fled AFTER he was shot...he wasn't shot as he was running away.
C'mon man. Don't interrupt a good lie with facts. It ruins the argument.
-
Sounds like he needed more practice at the range. You never shoot to wound. Shooting to wound just says to an attorney that you life was not really in danger.
that's also exactly why one should NEVER fire a warning shot.
-
that's also exactly why one should NEVER fire a warning shot.
A warning shot is one through the kneecap.
-
A warning shot is one through the kneecap.
I understand but you get my drift. Into the ground or something to scare the bad guy off. If you can fire one into the ground, your life "really wasn't" in danger, even though you know it really was. An overzealous cop, prosecutor or judge can ruin your life for that.
-
So thieves should be allowed to take what they want without fear of confrontation?
YES! And never fear - the crack US Justice System will take care of teaching them a lesson.
/DUmode off.
-
Sounds like he needed more practice at the range. You never shoot to wound. Shooting to wound just says to an attorney that you life was not really in danger.
Hear, hear! That is why when a gun gets jerked, only one side of that tale needs to be told.