• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Guns are good?

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
As you guy know, I am ANTI guns - I think I've made it plain by now;
My wife heard this on the radio yesterday, and very kindly managed to find a link for me

LAPD Chief Backs Baby Shoot Cops
LOS ANGELES, July 12, 2005

LAPD Defends Baby Shooting

Crime scene tape surrounds an area under investigation by police at the scene of a shooting in Los Angeles where a baby girl was killed when her father used her as a shield in a gun battle. (AP)

"My heart is out to a grieving mother who's lost her child. My heart is also out to those officers who put their lives on the line."
Antonio Villaraigosa,
Mayor

Police vehicles are seen at scene of shooting in Los Angeles where a baby girl was killed when her father used her as a shield in a gun battle. (AP Photo/LA Times, Robert Lachman)


(CBS/AP) Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton said Monday his officers were well within department policy when they shot a man who fired on them while wielding his toddler as a shield.
Both the man and his 19-month-old girl were killed Sunday — autopsies will determine whether the bullet that killed her was fired by police or her 34-year-old father Jose Raul Pena. An officer shot in the shoulder was expected to recover.
"You aren't going to stand there with somebody shooting at you," Bratton said. "The person responsible for any loss of life ... was the individual who held his child out as a shield and continued to shoot."
The 19-month-old child's mother, Lorena Lopez, said she pleaded with officers to hold their fire.
"He had problems with depression, his business was not doing well," Lopez told KNBC-TV. "I told them that he needed help, he needs a psychologist, but please don't shoot. They didn't understand, and the police fired, like, 300 shots."
Police spokesman Kevin Maiberger said 11 officers fired during the standoff, but it was not immediately known how many shots they took.
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said the officers were only trying to protect themselves and the public.
"My heart is out to a grieving mother who's lost her child. My heart is also out to those officers who put their lives on the line," Villaraigosa said. "Not a one of them went into that situation with the intent to hurt anyone. They were doing their jobs."
The standoff started when officers were called to an intersection in South Los Angeles west of Watts where Pena was behaving erratically and aggressively.
He fired at the officers and ran inside a fenced area that included his apartment and his car wash and detailing business. He had a 9 mm handgun and a shotgun and was intoxicated on drugs and alcohol, police said.
Police called in a special weapons team and tried to talk to the man. At one point, as officers helped a neighbor escape, he fired at them and they fired back, police said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/12/national/main708357.shtml:(
 

Snowbear

Nita Okhata
Did the guns do the shooting or did the people holding them actually pull their triggers? Kinda like a deranged loose nut (or drunk/stoned) behind the wheel of a multi ton car. It's not the car that gets blamed for the death and destruction, it's the driver..... But with guns, to many people they are unfamiliar objects, so they are "bad." Those people should probably not have guns.

Unfortunately, those are often the same people who would like to see to it that guns are taken away from ALL people, regerdless of whether they are "responsible" gun owners or those who have guns with the intent of causing harm. How about starting first with taking away the cars from the drunks who kill and maim far more people than the people who own guns do?
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Snowbear said:
How about starting first with taking away the cars from the drunks who kill and maim far more people than the people who own guns do?

The courts in the UK can order the confiscation and destruction of a criminal's car or indeed anything used in a crime.

Terry
____________________________________
Amen! Truly I say to you: Gather in my name. I am with you.
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
Asking whether or not a gun is good is like asking whether my dining room table is good. Guns are neither good or bad. The use to which they're put is good or bad and even my dining room table can be used to kill someone.

Why am I not surprised to see yet another problem with the LAPD? However, even in the UK where guns are illegal, you still have people killed by guns. Making them illegal did not stop the problem. It just made it so that only the criminals were able to get guns.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Melody said:
Asking whether or not a gun is good is like asking whether my dining room table is good. Guns are neither good or bad. The use to which they're put is good or bad and even my dining room table can be used to kill someone.

Why am I not surprised to see yet another problem with the LAPD? However, even in the UK where guns are illegal, you still have people killed by guns. Making them illegal did not stop the problem. It just made it so that only the criminals were able to get guns.
You may well be right; I still don't like guns - it was instilled in me by my Mum; after the War, she never wanted to see one again........:)
 

CaptainXeroid

Following Christ
A gun is a tool, much like the rope, candlestick, lead pipe, knife, and the wrench. The person wielding the tool is good or bad, not the tool itself. Remember to wear your safety goggles when you use them.:)
 

Saw11_2000

Well-Known Member
^Might have a bigger problem. Since they were already introduced in the US, people have them, and simply outlawing them will make the good people give their guns back, and the bad people start to go insane because people don't have a very good self defense weapon now.

They're good, in good hands. Bad in bad hands.
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
huajiro said:
If we did away with all guns, we wouldn't have a problem at all.
I'd bet people would just find a substitute and then we'd be outlawing pocket knives.
 

Lindsey-Loo

Steel Magnolia
I agree with Melody, Saw, and CaptainX. If guns were outlawed, crazy criminals would have an advantage. Because although their guns have been taken away, everyone else's have to -including good, law-abiding citizens. A gun used by a father while protecting his family from someone who has broken into their house is good. A gun used by a woman protecting herself from a thug is good. But what would the father and the woman do if they didn't own their guns? Perhaps the criminal is coming at them with a knife or rope, or some random household object. At my brother's elementary school, they have a motto; "Everything can be used as a weapon". (The art teacher uses this motto in an effort to keep the kids from taking clay out of her classroom; she says when it hardens, it could seriously hurt someone if it is thrown at them). So outlawing guns would not help. It would just increase the amount of good citizens who are getting killed because they cannot defend themselves.
 

CaptainXeroid

Following Christ
Melody said:
I'd bet people would just find a substitute and then we'd be outlawing pocket knives.
This is the point that the people who are 'anti-gun', IMHO, are missing. The article said the man was intoxicated on drugs and alcohol. Does anyone think if we ban drugs, alcohol, and guns that this sort of stand-off would never happen again??
Los Angeles Police Chief William Bratton said:
..."The person responsible for any loss of life ... was the individual who held his child out as a shield and continued to shoot."...
Emphasis mine to demonstrate where the blame belongs. And here's what the mayor had to say:
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said:
..."My heart is out to a grieving mother who's lost her child. My heart is also out to those officers who put their lives on the line," Villaraigosa said. "Not a one of them went into that situation with the intent to hurt anyone. They were doing their jobs."...
Pray for everyone involved. There were no winners this day.:mad:
 

Terrywoodenpic

Oldest Heretic
Melody said:
I'd bet people would just find a substitute and then we'd be outlawing pocket knives.
We do! Knives and bladed weapons are outlawed. and carry a very high sentence if carried( not just used) when committing a crime.
In the UK we would not want it any other way.

Terry
_____________________________________
Blessed are those who bring peace, they shall be children of God
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
CaptainXeroid said:
This is the point that the people who are 'anti-gun', IMHO, are missing. The article said the man was intoxicated on drugs and alcohol. Does anyone think if we ban drugs, alcohol, and guns that this sort of stand-off would never happen again??
Emphasis mine to demonstrate where the blame belongs. And here's what the mayor had to say:
Pray for everyone involved. There were no winners this day.:mad:
Exactly, you can pray for the mother of the child, for the child, for the man, for the policeman who killed him and who killed the little girl (unless it was the father).:(

O.K, shall we have a comparisson of deaths from the use of illegal weapons in the sates, compared to the whole of the UK, per capita as at the latest figures ?
I 'll find the stats for the UK, one of you who still think weapons are alright do the same ?;)
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
michel said:
O.K, shall we have a comparisson of deaths from the use of illegal weapons in the sates, compared to the whole of the UK, per capita as at the latest figures ?
I 'll find the stats for the UK, one of you who still think weapons are alright do the same ?;)
nono...to be fair. Let's just compare the stats for any murder....not just illegal weapons. If weapons are the cause, then by eliminating them, your murder rate should go down...or else your citizens are just finding other weapons...which may include just their fists or feet.

If your murder rate is comparable per capita to the U.S., then the idea of gun/knive/blunt object control solving anything becomes ludicrous.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Melody said:
nono...to be fair. Let's just compare the stats for any murder....not just illegal weapons. If weapons are the cause, then by eliminating them, your murder rate should go down...or else your citizens are just finding other weapons...which may include just their fists or feet.

If your murder rate is comparable per capita to the U.S., then the idea of gun/knive/blunt object control solving anything becomes ludicrous.
O.K - any murder.:)
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
Table 1.01
Offences 1 initially recorded by the police as homicide by current classification 2
Numbers and rates per million population

Column 1)Year

Column 2)Offences currently recorded as homicide per million population

Column 3) Number of offences initially recorded as homicide

Column 4) Number of offences no longer recorded as homicide

Column 5) Number of offences currently recorded as homicide



2002/031,045381,00719.3:)
 

Melody

Well-Known Member
michel said:
Table 1.01
Offences 1 initially recorded by the police as homicide by current classification 2
Numbers and rates per million population

Column 1)Year

Column 2)Offences currently recorded as homicide per million population

Column 3) Number of offences initially recorded as homicide

Column 4) Number of offences no longer recorded as homicide

Column 5) Number of offences currently recorded as homicide



2002/031,045381,00719.3:)
Uh, Michel....are you trying to confuse me? :D
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
michel said:
Table 1.01
Offences 1 initially recorded by the police as homicide by current classification 2
Numbers and rates per million population

Column 1)Year

Column 2)Offences currently recorded as homicide per million population

Column 3) Number of offences initially recorded as homicide

Column 4) Number of offences no longer recorded as homicide

Column 5) Number of offences currently recorded as homicide



2002/031,045381,00719.3:)
Am I trying to confuse you? - no, but I must admit I amconfused!:D

lets see, in simple terms; population UK 2002/2003 = 60 Million
Offences currently recorded as homicide per million population:-1,045

Lets take that figure - sorry, when I copied & pasted the table everything went askewed; http://www.police999.com/stats/crime2003-02.html was the source of the info. Phew; good luck to you!:)
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Well, Michel -- you certainly walked into this one. Predominantly Yanks on this board, and you know how we love our guns..

Seriously, though, and speaking as a non-gun owning, pacific, vegan hippie sort of guy, I have to bow to the statistics. It's not gun ownership, per se which causes problems. It's a cultural thing. Canadians own as many guns, per capita as Americans, but gun violence is nowhere near comparable. And those American jurisdictions that have required residents to possess a firearm have seen a significant decrease in violent crime.

It's all very perplexing....
 
Top