Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'In the News' started by GAGunOwner, Aug 6, 2007.
Two things sorta caught my attention here...
One is this gem of wisdom:
"A Seattle mother of four was fatally stabbed early today despite a court protection order against her knife-wielding ex-husband."
It appears, to me at least, as though the reporter was truly surprised the restraining order wasn't enough to prevent the attack. Hello!!! Just recently received that shiny new journalism degree did you?
"Police spokeswoman Renee Witt said the party guest had a concealed-weapons permit. She said he likely won't face charges since he acted to prevent further harm."
I guess the police spokesperson has to use weasel words in this situation, but it still leaves the impression the guy just might possibly be charged for trying to save a woman's life...
Too bad he wasn't able to do so. At least, the bastid with the knife won't be getting into any additional relationships...
If this were in Georgia, he would be charged with carrying a deadly weapon to a public gathering.
Thank God for the PG law and restraining orders though - they'll keep me safe.
And besides, in GA, it's illegal to carry openly or concealed - even on private property if there's more than one. (All lessons I learned this weekend)
Which is why I sometimes wonder if it would be worth it to risk the misdeanor weapons charge and carry a mousegun or pocket pistol anyway. The old "rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6" conundrum.
I know some people who think so.
I do too. One is a friend of mine that is also a MARTA cop. I was shocked when he told me as much. Note that I would never carry a gun on MARTA, the felony just isn't worth it. I was still shocked.
Or you could join the military or reserves and just carry everywhere
I think that this is a good example why we need to get that law fixed.
What caught my eye was that he sustained life-threatening wounds and was bring treated.
Now, I work in healthcare and am fully aware of the provisions of the EMTALA law, and know that treatment of everyone is required no matter what, but it still pisses me off that criminals are entitled to (free) medical care.
One of our ER docs carries on a regular basis... I asked him if he would ever shoot someone, if he were justified in doing so. He said, "Without a doubt. I carry for the same reasons you do."
I then asked him if, after shooting the guy who was trying to (for example) rape his daughter, he would treat the guy. His answer was "Without a doubt. I took an oath to my profession."
So... you'll shoot to kill, then immediately begin emergency treatment for a potentially lethal gunshot wound?
Sounds like a tough situation for him.
Man, I wish I could shoot to kill. Right now, I can only shoot to stop the threat. If my accuracy were that good, I'd be ecstatic.
I see the perp wasn't deterred by the restraining order. Maybe they should have sent him to time-out instead.
Gotta be alive to be taken to court.
True Ramm, but I prefer the other option much more.
As I have not been in this situation yet, I am not sure how I'd react. But I admit that this (I think) would be my action as well - IF AND ONLY IF 1) the threat was completely ended when this guy hit the ground; 2) my gun is secured either on myself (and away from the b/g) or in the hands of my wife; and 3) if there are no sound of sirens in the air or sight of flashing lights.
I don't shoot to kill - I shoot to stop (end the threat); death is a potential side effect.