Yeah yeah---it aint the Gun that kills----- whatever!

[trumad]

Report: 2 Miami-
Dade officers dead in shootout

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY —
Two Miami-Dade police officers were shot and killed in a gunfight with suspects as they tried to serve a warrant for a violent fugitive in a Miami home Thursday morning.

It was the first time in decades two law enforcement officers had been killed in the line of duty. One of the dead officers was identified as Roger Castillo. The name of the other, a female officer, has not been released. One suspect was also killed in the gun battle. Another suspect is in custody, according Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez.

Investigators say they're not looking for any other suspects. "We're asking for the community's prayers,'' said Commander Nancy Perez, who broke down when she announced the news shortly before 12:30 p.m. Thursday.

Details were sketchy, but the shooting erupted between suspects and police at a home near Northwest Seventh Avenue and 69th Street.

The Miami-Dade female officer was rushed to Jackson Memorial Hospital, where she died during surgery. It was reported on WSVN-Ch. 7 that she had been shot in the head. Castillo died at the scene.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/florida/fl-officer-shooting-20110120,0,5993791.story

[GKirk]

1. Awful tragedy

but I see you blame a gun without offering a solution. What law would, had it been in effect, have prevented this tragedy?

[trumad]

4. Whatever...

[GKirk]

6. That was a helpful response...

...does it mean you are just reactionary?

[cleanhippie]

39. I think thats exactly what that means.

You asked a valid question that the poster couldn't answer.

[badtoworse]

7. Disingenuous response

It was a fair question.

[Renew Deal]

9. Why would even bother to type that?

[Tesha]

12. Here's one thing we might do:

We might decree that *ANY* crime committed with a
gun merits you a life sentence with no possibility
of parole.

Today, we give these sort of sentences to petty
criminals who've made their third strike, even
as shoplifters, but we routinely let gun criminals
of all sorts walk away. So from now on, commit
any crime with a gun, from illegal possession or
carriage to multiple murder, off you go out of
society, never to wave your gun at us again.

I'll bet *THAT* would see a precipitous drop in
gun crime, but I'll also bet you that the gun
manufacturers' lobby (the NRA) would never stand
for it, because it might actually be a *GUN LAW
THAT COULD WORK* and we can't have any of those!

Tesha

[hlthe2b]

13. And, what can we do with the "shoot first" and "think later" shootings...

the homeowner who shoots the Halloween "trick or treaters" on his front steps because he felt "threatened" or the pissed off driver who lets his road rage get a bit out of hand or the guy who is pissed at his neighbor for letting his dog poop on his yard?.... In all of these incidents that I can readily recall, the person with the gun not only killed, but either got off without repercussions or a slight slap on the risk. And those are just the first ones that come to mind. There have been many. What do we do about that and the policies that allow that to happen?

[Euromutt]

27. Don't you mean the "stereotype first and don't think at all" shootings?

Are you referring to the shooting of Yoshihiro Hattori who, not being familiar with American colloquialisms, ignored a homeowner's instruction to "freeze" and advanced on the homeowner?

Are you referring to the numerous incidents of "CCW permit holder involved in road rage shooting" where upon close inspectionit turns out it was the individual whom the CCW permit holder shot who was the one undergoing road rage?

Are you referring to the incident in University Park, Illinois in which the owner of lawn tried to remonstrate with the dog owner, upon which the dog owner threatened violence against the owner of the lawn, and the owner of the lawn fired after the dog owner assaulted him?

In "all of these incidents <you> can readily recall" I notice your recollection is biased against the gun owner. Maybe your personal recollection isn't a sufficiently reliable basis on which to base public policy. Just a thought.

[hlthe2b]

29. Defending the needlessly DEAD.

from those who so devalue life that they would rather err on the side of a fatal shooting. :eyes:

[Euromutt]

37. I wasn't disputing your basic point

What I can't understand is why you couldn't make it without distorting and/or obfuscating certain details about the incidents you cited as examples.

In a number of these cases, the shooters were not the aggressors; they didn't "shoot first," they shot in response to being physically assaulted. Now, you may argue that shooting a guy who's attacking you unarmed is disproportionate, and I would in fact heartily agree (which is one of the reasons I carry pepper spray along with a handgun, so as to have a "less lethal" option), but you can't in all fairness overlook the fact that those shootings would not have occurred if the deceased had kept their fucking hands to themselves like civilized human beings in the first place.

Maybe that would be a first step to avoiding these needless deaths: keeping our collective hands to our collective selves.

[X_Digger]

15. You've got it backwards..

.. the NRA has always been for strong penalties.

They hold up 'Project Exile' as the right way to go.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Exile

The National Rifle Association (NRA) and the Brady Campaign were both early and vocal supporters of Project Exile, as were federal and city officials who claimed that Project Exile helped to reduce firearm-related violence in Richmond by 40 percent. The NRA lobbied the U.S. Congress to help secure $2.3 million for emulation of Exile in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Camden County, New Jersey where similar firearms-related violence has plagued the communities.

[Tesha]

19. You missed my point.

Not just murderers and other "serious" criminals
would be subject to my proposed penalty. Your
average asshole packing his only-slightly-illegal
weapon would also be subject to this penalty as
would (for example) the fellow whose Derringer
falls out of his pocket and shoots the woman
dining nearby.

The NRA has never supported penalties on their
"law abiding but unfortunate" gun owning members.

But I do.

Tesha

[X_Digger]

20. If I'd thought your reply was anything more than hyperbole..

.. I would have said,

"culpae poenae par esto " -- let the punishment fit the crime.

That's a principle of western democratic philosophy I could never support pissing on.

Keep on with your inanity. I'll remember next time that you actually are that far out there.


eta: And I think you'd see the ACLU right beside the NRA, for what it's worth.

[Tesha]

30. Perhaps we can "make the punishment fit the crime" in the same way as we do for...

...non-violent drug offenders, ehh? We're *SO* reasonable
with the sentences we hand out to them!

Tesha

[X_Digger]

36. You're talking to a pro-legalization person.. aka, the choir.

But if you want to compound one set of stupid mistakes with another stupid mistake..

Err.. two wrongs make.. umm.. a whole lot of stupid, I guess.

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Euromutt]

26. So, heavier punishment for possesion of a firearm than for strong-arm rape?

Yeah, that sort of policy might result in a reduction in gun crime, but whether it'll result in a reduction in violent crime overall... let's say I'm more than a little skeptical. I also have to admit I never ceased to be amazed at self-described liberals advocating heavier prison sentences as a "solution" to any social issue.

The fact is that the primary deterrent to crime is not the severity of the punishment, but the risk of being caught and convicted and undergoing any punishment. No rational actor commits an offense if he thinks he won't get away with it, no matter how trivial or severe the punishment. Thus, nobody jaywalks if there's a cop in sight, trivial as the punishment might be. On the other hand, who knows how many people have driven though the drop-off lane at the post office with a firearm in the vehicle, practically 100% secure in the knowledge that the Postal Inspectors have no way of knowing that these federal misdemeanors are taking place?

And as my subject line alludes, you're suborning the severity of the offense committed to the weapon involved. You'd consign a guy convicted of illegal possession of a firearm to a longer sentence than a rapist who used personal force, or perhaps a knife? Am I the only one who thinks that's a seriously fucked up way of thinking?

[Tesha]

31. You seem to be making some unwarranted assumptions about...

...the penalties I might impose for violent crimes.

In fact, our society seems to have a lot of money to
incarcerate folks, but they seem to waste an awful lot
of it on non-violent offenders, many of them minorities
who were convicted of drug offenses and grossly over-
sentenced.

If we let them all out of prison, we'd have plenty of
money and space to lock up the rapists, the petty thugs,
and the gun offenders who are truly disrupting our
attempt at conducting a civilized society.

Tesha

[pipoman]

40. Spoken like someone who has never been amongst a prison population..

some nonviolent drug offenders, also nonviolent tax evaders, nonviolent embezzlers, nonviolent securities violators, and you want to add nonviolent gun offenders. The vast majority of offenders in prison both deserve to be there and shouldn't be released early.

[ileus]

38. I'd say illegal concealed carry would drop to 0%.

[pipoman]

41. Really?

You think this would have stopped Cho? or this AZ asshole? or the armed guy who robbed the corner store? 0%, eh?

[hlthe2b]

2. Tragic...

Sure, they'd be at risk if the perp was only armed with a knife. But, at least they'd have a better chance.

[consigli]

17. Better chance? No...

Someone threatening you with a knife can close a gap 0f 20-25 feet and stab you before you could even pull a pistol to protect yourself. Don't be fooled about which weapon is 'safer' to be threatened with.

[hlthe2b]

18. Oh fer gawd's sakes.. A knfe is going to take out three armed

officers more effectively than a gun? I want some of whatever you are drinking/smoking. :eyes:

[Euromutt]

23. If so, the punishment resulting from the crime would already be proportionate

Namely, if you "only" managed to kill one cop because all you had was a knife, rather than being able to murder two because you had a gun, then it follows that the guy who killed two cops should receive double the punishment of the guy who "only" killed one cop. And thus, there is no need to impose disparate sentences based on the specific weapon used to commit the crime.

[shadowrider]

25. Dude, you're using logic on a logic-impaired person. You might as well do this

:banghead:

[madinmaryland]

3. Recommended. Just another day of deadly gun violence. nt

[Motown_Johnny]

5. Do you think a "Shootings" Forum, or an "Official Shootings" thread on the guns forum

could get enough support to keep it going



My feeling on the subject seem to be echoed in your response. Maybe if we, as a community, attempted to document all the shootings reported in our various communities it could eventually bring some perspective on this subject.

I have been thinking about suggesting a forum or a thread for a week or so now but I keep talking myself out of it because I don't expect much support on the subject.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[spin]

16. Twenty three percent of Democrats personally own firearms ...

While a higher percentage of Republicans and Independents own firearms, about 1/3 of Democrats have a firearm in their home.


Almost one out of every four Democrats personally owns a firearm.


Note the source is the Gallup Poll Gun Ownership Higher Among Republicans Than Democrats from February 16, 2006 http://www.gallup.com/poll/21496/Gun-Ownership-Higher-Among-Republicans-Than-Democrats.aspx

Surprisingly more Democrats own a firearm for self defense than for hunting or target shooting.


The Democratic Party is indeed a broad tent.

Many of the Democrats who support RKBA feel that gun ownership is a VERY liberal and progressive idea. Very few governments in the world allow their citizens the freedoms we enjoy as most governments hate a free press, free speech and armed citizens. Instead they love power and control.

Of course, most gun owning Democrats believe that there should be laws concerning the sale and ownership of firearms. Obviously violent criminals and those with SEVERE mental problems should not be able to simply walk into a gun store and leave with a firearm. The majority of the gun laws we currently have in our nation are reasonable and some of the more discriminatory laws against gun ownership which are based on the concept of keeping "those people" from owning firearms are being overturned by the voters or the courts.

Posters here often use "right wing" sites as reference because the common sites favored by Democrats are opposed to firearm ownership and rarely publish anything that is remotely pro-gun.

I sincerely feel sorry for your tragedy and understand your feelings, but I have had people in my family who successfully used a firearm in self defense. My mother and my daughter both are alive today because they had access to a handgun in an emergency. No one was shot in either incident. Both attackers ran at the sight of an armed woman.

[Tejas]

22. I would vote YES, but trolls would still post flamebait here.

[xchrom]

8. Recommend

[MNBrewer]

11. It's not the guns, it's the bullets

[petronius]

14. Horribly sad - can't imagine what the families are going through

Something that strikes me as a bit of a disconnect: we hear all these stories of police making SWAT-team, no-knock, late-night entries on minor drug-related issues, and yet it sounds like these officers basically walked in to serve a murder warrant. Seems like the flash-bangs and battering would have been better used here...

[AtheistCrusader]

21. Um, first off, let's put away the guinness book of world records there...

4 were killed at the same table near Fort Lewis in Washington last year.

Grisly as the comparison need be.

[Remmah2]

28. Whatever?

The most important part of the article was this:

"But Johnny Simms, a tattooed thug fresh off his most recent prison stint, refused to face justice, jumping out from another room with his pistol blazing at point-blank range."

Do you think the felon really gave a rat's ass about any gun laws?

[Tesha]

32. Which is why you might want to adopt my suggestion:

Commit *ANY* crime with a gun and be removed from
polite society for the rest of your natural life.

Tesha

[shadowrider]

33. I think that's a position that this pro-2A person would support

and have supported long before you started commenting on this board.

Non-violent offenders SHOULD be released and room opened up for the true scumbags.

Leave the law-abiding, including law abiding 2A owners, alone.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

34. Depends ont he exceptions...

There must be a qualifying list of offenses or an exception for non-violent crime.

for example, if you get caught shoplifting or speeding, or smoking some pot and you have a gun... you should not get life in prison.

Assault, violent crime, brandishing, etc... would be crimes that you would want to target.
Crimes that involve using a firearm (or bladed wepons) to give you an advantage should be severely punished.

[shadowrider]

35. It's in the details. Non-violent offenders shouldn't be put in with hardcore cons

all that does is produce more hard-core cons.