Posted by Charity on May 6th, 2009

A group of college students said they are lucky to be alive and they’re thanking the quick-thinking of one of their own. Police said a fellow student shot and killed one of two masked me who burst into an apartment.

No wait, that is why we need citizens to be allowed to arm themselves.

The intruders were apparently planning to rape the women and kill all 10 of the people in the apartment for a birthday party when the break in occurred.  That is, until they were shot by one of the hostages, who had a gun in his backpack.

10 Responses to “This Is Why We Need More Gun Control”

  1. I’ll bet GMNBC did not report this anywhere on the nightly news.

    One needs to remember, “When every second counts, the police are only minutes away.” Isn’t that comforting?

  2. I love happy endings!!!

  3. Peter Buknatski
    May 7th, 2009 at 12:11 pm

    OK. Wonder what that student will be charged with? Discharging a firearm in a residential area? Manslaughter? Wait til the dead guy’s family lawyer-up. This is why I’m against gun control. Guns don’t kill people, the government does.

  4. We know from our own state that a gun in the home is far more likely to result in the death of a child or other accidental death (accidental discharge, shooting at a family member mistaken for an intruder), suicide death, or domestic homicide than it is in protecting the home from a murderous intruder. Most victims of murder knew the killer, and it wasn’t a stranger breaking into the home.

    Note that in this case the gun was immediately at hand in a backpack. Safely stored guns are usually not readily available in the case of an emergency. I have to wonder why the college student had a loaded gun in his backpack at a birthday party. I for one would not have appreciated someone bringing a loaded gun to my birthday party. Especially if it was a drinking party. Fights are not uncommon at college parties. And a loaded gun takes an altercation among friends to a much more dangerous level.

    And in this story, the “hero” killed one of the intruders but also shot one of his female friends. She could just as easily have been killed as injured. With three people holding guns in two rooms containing 13 people, the body count could have been much higher.

    If you believe 10 people would have otherwise been raped and murdered, maybe it was worth the risk, but the facts are pretty sketchy in the article and that does not appear to be a foregone conclusion. I have a feeling there is more to this story. It does not ring true to me as written. If the facts are true and complete as stated, this is a highly unusual crime. In any event, this scenario is far outside the norm for crime anywhere and especially outside the norm in Vermont.

    What is much more likely are scenarios like:

    Child finds parent’s gun and accidentally shoots playmate.
    Man stalks ex-wife/girlfriend and shoots her to death.
    Troubled Teen goes to school and shoots students and teachers.
    Fired employee kills former boss and co-workers.
    Driver shoots and kills driver in road rage.
    Or, depressed man puts gun in his mouth and pulls the trigger.

    Notice that in all of these scenarios, the gun owner ends dead, or with a dead child, or in jail for a very long time.

    Owning a gun puts you at higher risk for death, loss of a loved one, and incarceration.

    I’m don’t feel passionately about gun control, but I wish people who own guns would assess their personal risk for the above events in comparison to the risk of a murderous intruder.

    I find it hard to understand how guns can be that much fun that it is worth putting yourself and your family at risk to own one.

    I remember my Dad (a veteran) telling me that his Dad (a veteran) always kept a gun in a shoe box in his closet. My Dad said he would never keep a gun in the house with children in the house. The risk was too high in comparison to the potential benefit. He installed an alarm system in our house instead. And we always had dogs. My Mom and Dad both chased away prowlers over the years (usually my Mom, in her nightgown) but they didn’t need a gun to do it. The prowlers usually turned out to be neighborhood kids stealing a tent, a bike, gas from a car, or doing a prank. Not good, but not worth killing them over. Maybe it could have been Charles Manson and the Family, but not likely enough to arm up for it.

    Maybe the need to feel powerful, or to have the illusion of safety is worth it to some people. I’d rather actually be safer and not have one in my house.

  5. Safely stored guns are usually not readily available in the case of an emergency.

    A safely stored gun is locked and cocked on my hip.

    That way, not only is it immediately available in an emergency, but I know exactly where it is at all times and no one else can get to it without my knowledge.

  6. The only thing is, who are YOU to decide WHICH kinds of weapons are acceptable and which are not? If you have the right to carry a .38, I should have the right to have an assult rifle. To put programmable mines in my driveway and on my property line.

    Chemical, biological, nuclear weapons . . . if godless hippie terrorists attacked us, THEY might have those weapons! Yet we are only allowed pea shooters in comparison?

  7. The only thing is, who are YOU to decide WHICH kinds of weapons are acceptable and which are not? If you have the right to carry a .38, I should have the right to have an assult rifle.

    Exactly.

  8. Tom said, “I for one would not have appreciated someone bringing a loaded gun to my birthday party.”

    That is unless two thugs crash the party with the intention of robbing, raping, and murdering everyone. Would you still be angry?

    Then Tom said, “Maybe the need to feel powerful, or to have the illusion of safety is worth it to some people. I’d rather actually be safer and not have one in my house.”

    OK, Tom, I now give you the standard challenge to this common anti-gun statement: I want you to post a sign in front of your house that declares your abode to be GUN FREE. Let all those thugs and perpetrators among us that they have nothing to fear if they decide to stride into your home.

    You see, it is gun owners like me and millions of others who make it possible for you to not have a gun in your home and feel “safe.”

    You’re welcome.

  9. Charity, thanks! Nice to see a clear thinker! The # of potential “victims” of our own self defense weapons is irrelevant. You either have the right to defend yourself or not. I should have the right to have any weapon I want! Even if it IS biological or chemical!

    Just like the Muslim whacko down the street, I don’t agree with him – but he is a legitimate American and has the right to also defend himself! The idea of “WMD’s” is liberal garbage!

  10. Nothing wrong with an “Assault” weapon. In fact, I could easily defend the idea that an AR-15 with a 16 inch barrel is a very nice home defense weapon. (Actually, I’m thinking a 14.5 inch barrel would be better, but I don’t such a great advantage that I would fork over the extra 200 bucks to the government for the “privilege” of owning a “short-barreled” carbine.)

    Easily as good as a 12-gauge shotgun, if not better in many scenarios.

    And I would also argue that for every “victim” of “our own self-defense”, there are 10 instances where a gun was used successfully for self-defense.

    And in most of those instances, the weapon was never discharged.

    Criminals, for the most part, are very similar to predators: They pick on the weak. Display strength, and they generally leave.

    What most anti-self defense advocates fail to recognize is that there are in fact predators among us. And predators are most successful when they remain hidden until the point of attack. And unless you are incalculably lucky, at the point of attack there is only you and the predator.

    So, do you feel lucky?

    I personally, don’t rely on luck.