It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

GUNS just saved another life

page: 1
26
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 12:21 PM
link   


Victim says she saw a shadow before the suspect tried to pull her into a wooded area


Not good...but, thank goodness she was armed.



The unidentified victim was able to pull out her gun during the incident and shoot at the man. He fled the scene and it is unclear if he was hit by any gunfire, Chavis said.

The victim then called the police.


Good thing she didn't have to only rely on calling the police...otherwise, it would have been after the sexual assault (if the attacker decided to even let her live)

Yet again, guns have saved another life. Anti-gunners are provably wrong, as we've always known anyhow.

Anti-gunners, reconsider your failed positions. Otherwise, you are basically advocating for the sexual assault/murder of this woman along with every other person that is still here today because they were smart enough to carry a gun and bold enough to smoke their attacker.

SOURCE: www.foxnews.com...

*When mere seconds count, police are just minutes away.

My only regret is that there wasn't a body laying there for police to find. I hope his next victim(s) are also armed, because there will be more victims until he is captured or killed. Marksmanship people! Having the gun is one thing, being able to dump the magazine into your target under high stress life or death conditions is another. Practice, practice often. Don't shoot at cans, shoot at human sized/shaped targets. Practice to shoot humans.

You aren't hunters. You aren't hobbyists. You are carrying a firearm to defend your life. Act like it.

*Just because he managed to flee does not mean he was not shot. Poorly placed shots will not incapacitate a target fast enough to drop them where they stand. Good shot placement to the high center of mass/head will put the subject down hard.

It is legal to own a firearm in all 50 states. It is legal to carry a firearm in all 50 states, despite attempts by a handful of bad faith actors in extremist jurisdictions that have attempted to infringe on your Constitutional right to bear arms. I say bad faith because the second amendment/supremacy clause already informs these states that anti-gun laws are patently unlawful. Despite that clear fact, they still attempt to pass illegal laws against firearms and abuse the court systems (the time it takes them to overturn such illegal laws). Personally, I would ignore the illegal laws in favor of retaining the capability to save your own life. Because, lets face it, unless you are behaving inappropriately to begin with, nobody will ever know you are carrying.
edit on 10/13/2021 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 01:13 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

Guns don't save lives people do.

Saying that a gun saved a life is just as dumb as saying that a gun killed someone.

How many people were killed by a person with a gun today?
How many people were saved by a person with a gun today?

Does it even matter what they were killed or saved with?



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: JBurns

Guns don't save lives people do.

Saying that a gun saved a life is just as dumb as saying that a gun killed someone.

How many people were killed by a person with a gun today?
How many people were saved by a person with a gun today?

Does it even matter what they were killed or saved with?


Your logic is unassailable. And yet, the typical response to a criminal murder where the weapon used was a firearm is some red faced rant against widespread gun ownership by good-faith actors. This is a response to those occurrences.

Of course you are both technically correct and factually correct. This woman saved her own life would be a more apt title. She saved her own life by having the wisdom and foresight to realize the world is a dangerous place, that an attack can come from anyone at any time, and making the choice to carry a firearm. She decided her life was more valuable than some grungy scum of the Earth rapist, an assessment I'd agree with, and took concrete and overt actions to turn that belief into objective reality. I applaud her.



Does it even matter what they were killed or saved with?


It shouldn't. But according to the anti-gun nut jobs (AGNJ) it does. So I never miss an opportunity to shove something like this in their face. It is fun to watch their entire position collapse under the sheer lunacy and illogicality of their poorly formed arguments.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 02:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.



In my opinion, an attempted sexual assault is grounds for deadly force...regardless or whether or not the assailant was using a weapon or if the victims life was in danger. There's no hindsight is 20-20 in a potential life or death situation.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

A person can be beaten to death fairly easily
Yes the human body is resilient, but there comes a point it simply cannot take any more shock trauma. I have seen individuals killed as a result of unarmed combat.



It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.


Perhaps. But whether her life was in imminent jeopardy is immaterial in this instance, as all 50 US states permit use of deadly force to stop a forcible felony (such as a rape, robbery, kidnapping). The reason is that such actions are so egregious that any reasonable person would believe the criminal actor was capable of causing gross bodily injury/disfigurement or death through those acts alone.

At the very least, her judicious and timely use of a firearm prevented the violation of her own body by a ruthless criminal, years of trauma and the loss of the feeling of security. It is not unreasonable to think the attacker would've decided that leaving her alive as a witness was too great a risk, and choked/beat/stabbed/however her to death.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.






posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: chr0naut

A person can be beaten to death fairly easily
Yes the human body is resilient, but there comes a point it simply cannot take any more shock trauma. I have seen individuals killed as a result of unarmed combat.



It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.


Perhaps. But whether her life was in imminent jeopardy is immaterial in this instance, as all 50 US states permit use of deadly force to stop a forcible felony (such as a rape, robbery, kidnapping). The reason is that such actions are so egregious that any reasonable person would believe the criminal actor was capable of causing gross bodily injury/disfigurement or death through those acts alone.

At the very least, her judicious and timely use of a firearm prevented the violation of her own body by a ruthless criminal, years of trauma and the loss of the feeling of security. It is not unreasonable to think the attacker would've decided that leaving her alive as a witness was too great a risk, and choked/beat/stabbed/however her to death.


He might have drowned her with a glass of water, a bulldog clip and some superglue?

Or have forced her to swallow a billiard ball?

We'll just never know.




posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 02:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.





I often feel like that when I read some American 'news' articles that are clearly 99% 'spin'.




posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 03:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.


Doesn't matter .
A crime was avoided .
Learn the US laws .
Don't try and interpret from your country's law and /or your own feelz .



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.



What a f###en scumbag opinion that is

Pro criminal, anti freedom, disgusting comment

“Rape doesn’t warrant self defence”

The gun most definitely saved that woman’s life. And that is the part that upsets you.
edit on 13 10 2021 by Breakthestreak because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

The efficacy of guns are mostly circumstantial in my opinion.

A gun in the right hand at the right time = Good result mostly
A gun in the right hand at the wrong time = Most likely a disaster
A gun in the wrong hand at the right time = Disaster
A gun in the wrong hand at the wrong time = Ultimate disaster

Just my two cents. Then again, what do I know?



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Point well made & taken in the spirit of which it is offered


I generally do not approve of using deadly force against someone who is not an imminent deadly threat myself. However, I make exceptions when it comes to crimes like rape or kidnapping

Of course there is no way to know what may have happened, thankfully she was able to pump the brakes before it got to that point



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Trigger chart


And most importantly, learn how to use it.

Yea, I know the chart is little over the top but we're living in crazy times...YPOVMV.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.



That should really placate the #MeToo denizens from your tribe.

"It's ok, he was just going to /rape/ you; he probably wouldn't kill (so we think)"

Brilliant logic.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Kreeate



Just my two cents. Then again, what do I know?


Right there with you Kreeate




A gun in the right hand at the right time = Good result mostly
A gun in the right hand at the wrong time = Most likely a disaster
A gun in the wrong hand at the right time = Disaster
A gun in the wrong hand at the wrong time = Ultimate disaster


More unassailable logic. But in this particular instance, it easily could've saved her life and most certainly prevented what would be a traumatic and horrific experience

I try to focus on those first two groups, #1 is good to go and #2 can usually be remedied with good training, the right mindset, that sort of thing. The last two, #3/#4 are generally outside my own purview as laws tend to do little in the way of mitigating or eliminating the danger they pose

Especially the second group are the ones we can reach. They follow the law, attend classes or at least seek to improve their own skill set. This is about good tactical decision making, sometimes no shot is better. One thing we can't have is innocent people put at risk by stray (misses) rounds. Or someone trying to intervene in a hostage crisis only to realize they put a hole through John Q Hostage along with the hostage taker



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: EndtheMadnessNow
Trigger chart


And most importantly, learn how to use it.

Yea, I know the chart is little over the top but we're living in crazy times...YPOVMV.


Perfect!


Looks like I need a new gun


Going to top 3 figures one of these days



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Kreeate



Just my two cents. Then again, what do I know?


Right there with you Kreeate




A gun in the right hand at the right time = Good result mostly
A gun in the right hand at the wrong time = Most likely a disaster
A gun in the wrong hand at the right time = Disaster
A gun in the wrong hand at the wrong time = Ultimate disaster


More unassailable logic. But in this particular instance, it easily could've saved her life and most certainly prevented what would be a traumatic and horrific experience

I try to focus on those first two groups, #1 is good to go and #2 can usually be remedied with good training, the right mindset, that sort of thing. The last two, #3/#4 are generally outside my own purview as laws tend to do little in the way of mitigating or eliminating the danger they pose

Especially the second group are the ones we can reach. They follow the law, attend classes or at least seek to improve their own skill set. This is about good tactical decision making, sometimes no shot is better. One thing we can't have is innocent people put at risk by stray (misses) rounds. Or someone trying to intervene in a hostage crisis only to realize they put a hole through John Q Hostage along with the hostage taker


By all means, I'm not criticizing your perspective.
Just my personal perspective

In an ideal world, let's "give guns to everyone and let's see who's left standing". I have extremely liberal views regarding guns.
Sure, they can deter and kill. But they can also mainly deter others from killing ME, if the whole "deterring" thing didn't work out.

For those who have difficulty in comprehension, that means that I'd probably shoot the living c#@p out of anyone that tries to invade my home.



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

If you have ever been in a physical confrontation (lets call it a fist fight) and survived, the endurance of the human body only gets some of the credit. It is usually because both mutual combatants are engaged in a fight governed by unspoken/unwritten rules. You are attempting to physically get the better of one another, not kill each other. I'm not saying both parties fight fair, but in general neither party is actually intending to end the life of the other.

Contrast this to a crime such as rape, kidnapping, various types of robbery. There is nothing mutual about it. One party is the prey and the other is the predator. Their goal is to take you by surprise, efficiently put down any resistance on the part of the prey and overwhelm your ability to think tactically with extreme violence. To make matters even more dangerous, the part of the predator knows they face lengthy incarceration should they be caught. Given the rightfully stiff penalties for rape, kidnapping, robbery some decide the increased penalties for murder do not outweigh the decreased risk of being caught by eliminating their prey entirely. They have a self-serving motivation to step up from those acts to murdering the witness. And its a very small step.

A person who would rape, kidnap or rob someone is capable of anything

One case comes to mind, a gay man shoved down two stairs outside of a local area bar. Not two flights of stairs, two cement blocks doubling as a stair case. The two drunk guys who did it to him, there is no doubt they were motivated by prejudices against him, and yet, there is also no doubt they did not intend to kill him. Ultimately they were charged with second degree murder (under PA law involving a secondary felony that lead to a person's death) but eventually were acquitted by a jury because they didn't think they intended to kill him (even though the law here for second degree murder doesn't require that intent at all). My point is there wasn't any punches thrown, no forcible penetration of the body, no stabbing, none of that. Just one shove and now you have a deceased individual with two people standing there liable for it. It is so easy to see how this ends up with that woman dead had she of not been armed

edit on 10/13/2021 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 13 2021 @ 05:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: JBurns

A bit of a melodramatic title.

It was clearly a sexual assault, but we don't know if her life was in danger.

It seemed clear that the assailant was not using a weapon.



What a f###en scumbag opinion that is

Pro criminal, anti freedom, disgusting comment

“Rape doesn’t warrant self defence”

The gun most definitely saved that woman’s life. And that is the part that upsets you.



Thank you for posting what I was thinking!




top topics



 
26
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join