How Do Weapons Change the Wielder?

[Stillness]

Not far from my home a woman calls the police and said her husband chased a male that tried to break into their home. The police arrive and find the alleged thief down the street. He's a 14 year old boy.

His story is that he missed his bus and decides he'll walk, but gets lost. He stops at a home and rings the doorbell to ask for directions. A woman meets him at the door with a gun asking why he’s trying to rob her. Her husband grabs the gun, the boy runs, and he chases him and shoots.

The couple’s problem is that their doorbell triggers video and it supports the boy's account. Now the husband is facing assault with intent to murder, among other charges.

This is not the first time this has happened in this area. My wife asked what kind of a fearful, hate-filled world people have to be living in to attempt to murder a child like that. I don't know, but does anyone really see this happening if these people don't have a firearm? How do guns change the person that wields them? How would you feel differently if you had a gun or if you didn't have one?

[jns]

A report I heard said the perp had a record that included a weapons charge in 2005. I wonder if he should have even had the right to be armed. The report also indicated he came downstairs with a shotgun after being told there was a robber at the door by the wife. The boy saw that and ran. He was fortunate that the perp had the safety on when he attempted to fire at first. The extra delay gave the boy time to get farther away and was fortunately not hit.

There are all sorts of hate filled people in this world. Its kind of hard to say what would have happened if the perp had came with a knife or baseball bat. Would he have been able to close the gap, instead of fumbling with a gun. It could have been worse if the perp came with a handgun or a rifle as they can accurately shoot farther. I believe that a lot of husbands would not question what the wife said and instead defend her without thinking. I'm actually surprised that the wife wasn't charged.

As far as race, that should be explored. The perp's record as a fireman in Detroit should be examined to help determine that.

The boy's approach at ringing the doorbell was correct. Ring and step back. Don't crowd the occupant. Give yourself an out. Learned from door to door sales. I rang a lot of doorbells during my time as a field tech. Fortunately I never faced a gun. In a situation such as this, I would consider a large vicious dog to be almost as bad. Hard to outrun a dog. Getting mauled is no fun and could be deadly.

[atskitty2]

I don't think the gun ownership changed him. He was probably fiery and prone to explosive behavior prior to getting a gun.

[jns]

I know that I try to help someone in a bad situation if I can and if no one is helping. When I came to California, I did it in the middle of winter. I drove across lower Ontario and into Michigan at Detroit from Windsor. Halfway across the state on the Interstate I saw a guy walking along the side of the road. The conditions were snow and ice on the road and 12 degrees below zero Fahrenheit. Fortunately it was not snowing there (it was snowing in western Michigan when I got there.) Several cars in front of me passed him and it was a ways to the next off ramp with a service station. He was African-American. My car was packed with things going to California and didn't really have room for a passenger. Oh well, I stopped. I could see him having problems trying to walk the distance in those conditions. We managed to get him in the car and I took him to a service station so he could get help for his broken down car. We talked on the way there. He was grateful for me stopping. Try to help if you can.

[amy40]

I think having a gun does impact how one acts especially in OP

neighbor had someone go in garage/steal stuff

now if he'd been a gun owner, would he have run inside, got his gun, and confronted the robbers?
my thinking is yes as I believe people who have guns (for protection) are more likely to jump to conclusions, which my neighbor did not do (jump to a conclusion)

[atskitty2]

I don't really get that line of thought at all. The gun didn't change anyone. It's just become an extension of what is already unstable behavior.
My dad carried a gun all the time. ALL the time, as far as I know. He's the most docile, peaceful man I think I've ever known. He never became aggressive because he was armed, never became cocky about anything. It isn't who he is.

Some people have no business carrying or owning guns. No doubt about that. Of all the men and women I know now that carry, every single one is a calm, level headed individual that is NOT looking for trouble. They don't seem prone to overreacting or bullying. The gun is a last resort option, not the go-to.

In my experience, carrying a gun has made them more humble, if anything. They take that very seriously. They don't want to ever have to use it.

It's been a year now, since I was assaulted. I've thought carefully about whether I want to take the step of carrying a firearm for protection. I've decided it's right for me and I'm enrolled in classes finally. I'm not going to become a gun crazed lunatic because I begin to be more active with my gun. I'll still be me, just possibly empowered to stop some violence before it happens to me again.
As I've said before tho, I won't be carrying until I'm as comfortable handling a gun, as I am handling the dogs. And I doubt I'd carry every day. But having the option to fully protect my body if needed again, is something that is important to me.

[jns]

now if he'd been a gun owner, would he have run inside, got his gun, and confronted the robbers?
my thinking is yes as I believe people who have guns (for protection) are more likely to jump to conclusions, which my neighbor did not do (jump to a conclusion)

My feeling is that the neighbor would have done the exact same thing. Responsible people aren't going to overreact if it is not their nature. Some people overreact on many things, so I would expect them to overreact if they had a gun, but it doesn't always work out that way.

[jns]

I don't really get that line of thought at all. The gun didn't change anyone. It's just become an extension of what is already unstable behavior.
My dad carried a gun all the time. ALL the time, as far as I know. He's the most docile, peaceful man I think I've ever known. He never became aggressive because he was armed, never became cocky about anything. It isn't who he is.

Some people have no business carrying or owning guns. No doubt about that. Of all the men and women I know now that carry, every single one is a calm, level headed individual that is NOT looking for trouble. They don't seem prone to overreacting or bullying. The gun is a last resort option, not the go-to.

In my experience, carrying a gun has made them more humble, if anything. They take that very seriously. They don't want to ever have to use it.

It's been a year now, since I was assaulted. I've thought carefully about whether I want to take the step of carrying a firearm for protection. I've decided it's right for me and I'm enrolled in classes finally. I'm not going to become a gun crazed lunatic because I begin to be more active with my gun. I'll still be me, just possibly empowered to stop some violence before it happens to me again.
As I've said before tho, I won't be carrying until I'm as comfortable handling a gun, as I am handling the dogs. And I doubt I'd carry every day. But having the option to fully protect my body if needed again, is something that is important to me.

This is an important message that all people concerned with gun violence should read. This is why I don't fear my neighbors owning guns. Messages like this are deliberately left out of the media because it doesn't fit their agenda and it doesn't contain enough blood. Leaving out messages like this is the reason we do not have a balanced debate over the role of guns.

[amy40]

interesting......

because when people go for target practice, they are shooting in the middle of a target and on a man that's heart area, therefore kill zone
so someone with a gun for protection is knowingly going to kill a person

as opposed to aiming at a shoulder (for example) to just stop a person
unless there are people who do practice to hit a shoulder or another area of person's body to stop as opposed to kill

but have never heard of that.....please correct me if wrong (about aiming)

[jns]

interesting......

because when people go for target practice, they are shooting in the middle of a target and on a man that's heart area, therefore kill zone
so someone with a gun for protection is knowingly going to kill a person

as opposed to aiming at a shoulder (for example) to just stop a person
unless there are people who do practice to hit a shoulder or another area of person's body to stop as opposed to kill

but have never heard of that.....please correct me if wrong (about aiming)

Shooting at a shoulder to stop someone is good for the movies. Between missing and many other things that could go wrong, it is a good way to get yourself killed. If you are protecting someone else, it is also a good way to get them killed, too. It is also a good way to get sued and lose everything you have if you survive. Better not to shoot in the first place if that is your mentality. If you have to shoot and have the proper reason to do it, go for the center of the mass unless there is a problem with that. If someone has body armor, it could be ineffective so you have to go for a secondary location, such as head, neck, legs and feet. Remember, as the target becomes smaller the ability to be on target becomes harder.

Shooting at a paper target helps with aim and is a great sport. As far as be close to the equivalent of a live target, no. Most people cannot divorce themselves that far from reality. A target that shoots back or charges you takes it to a whole different level.

[WaveRider]

Not far from my home a woman calls the police and said her husband chased a male that tried to break into their home. The police arrive and find the alleged thief down the street. He's a 14 year old boy.

His story is that he missed his bus and decides he'll walk, but gets lost. He stops at a home and rings the doorbell to ask for directions. A woman meets him at the door with a gun asking why he’s trying to rob her. Her husband grabs the gun, the boy runs, and he chases him and shoots.

The couple’s problem is that their doorbell triggers video and it supports the boy's account. Now the husband is facing assault with intent to murder, among other charges.

This is not the first time this has happened in this area. My wife asked what kind of a fearful, hate-filled world people have to be living in to attempt to murder a child like that. I don't know, but does anyone really see this happening if these people don't have a firearm? How do guns change the person that wields them? How would you feel differently if you had a gun or if you didn't have one?

What's the involved neighborhood crime rate? Were the homeowners prior victims of home invasion robbery?

Gang bangers younger than 14 routinely carry guns that gun control laws prevent them from carrying. Why aren't criminals obeying law???

I've known many minors who were charged with murder. Your wife is operating off a lack of knowledge. My bet's on were a 14 year old about to mete out capital punishment to your wife, her dying wish would be for a handgun.

We do live in a hate-filled world. It always has and always will arise from the left, for it's antithetical to the conservative tenet of maximum individual liberty. I don't dwell on it. I'm an optimist.

For further edification, search engine, "1960's decline of American culture." The Port Huron Statement was a manifesto of hatred.

Your vignette proves nothing. Watching a video w/o sufficient knowledge to interpret what it captured is basis for erroneous conclusion. It's fallacious to conclude "hate-filled" from an incident about which you know only what you've read or been told. It's much wiser to wait until cops conclude their investigation before forming an opinion.

[WaveRider]

Stillness,

You ought to ask Apolinar Altamirano how possessing and using an illegal handgun changed him. While you're conducting your case study, you might want to ask parents of Grant Ronnebeck how they feel about illegal immigration, a border wall, aggressive border enforcement, efficacy of gun control laws, and if their son should have been able to defend himself."

"An undocumented immigrant from Mexico was out on bond when he allegedly shot a store clerk in Mesa on Thursday.

Apolinar Altamirano, 29, was captured early Thursday morning in the West Valley after a chase with Mesa police and Arizona Department of Public Safety officers.

He is suspected of shooting and killing Grant Ronnebeck, 21, a clerk at the QT store at 414 S. Stapley Dr.

Police said surveillance video showed Altamirano walking into the QT about 4 a.m. Thursday and asking Ronnebeck for a pack of cigarettes. Ronnebeck asked several times what type of cigarettes, and Altamirano pointed to a pack behind the counter, a Mesa police officer said.

Altamirano then dumped a jar of coins onto the counter and Ronnebeck told him he needed to pay for the cigarettes first, the officer said.

Altamirano became agitated and pulled a gun and pointed it at Ronnebeck, who then tried to hand the suspect the pack of cigarettes.

Altamirano said, "You're not going to give me my cigarettes," and fired one shot into Ronnebeck.

Altamirano calmly walked behind the counter, over Ronnebeck's body and grabbed several packs of cigarettes before slowly walking out of the store."

[atskitty2]

Amy, fwiw, targets can be circular, deer shaped, bird shaped, etc. It depends on the course you're taking. I'm involved in a shooting education class. The targets are round and nobody has asked about what or who I intend to shoot.

Some background: there's a lot of time spent just getting acquainted with the gun. Learning how it works, where hands go and should NOT go, body position, before they ever let us load it, much less fire it. There's no bloodthirsty lectures on how to best take down a person...

I have signed up for beginners classes. The instructors are serious, professional and knowledgeable guys that have safety in mind, not teaching us how to kill anyone, or anything else for that matter. Their job is teaching how to safely use and clean and discharge my weapon. So far they've done just that with no ranting about joining the NRA or other politics as some may expect.

Also, fwiw, some people enjoy target shooting just for the fun of it. Not everyone who shoots even uses a gun for defense. It's a hobby for some people too.

[Stillness]

I understand the desire to have a gun to protect oneself. Right before I started studying the Bible, I was leaning towards getting one and had I not converted, I'd likely be a gun owner.

When I let go of the desire to own one I felt a psychological change towards a more peaceful state. Although I never followed through and got the gun, I was always interested in what I'd be if I had. I’ve long suspected that there'd be a change in the opposite direction. Knowledge and experience change you. So, just intuitively, learning to deliver lethal force and arming yourself with the capability to do so doesn't seem to lend itself to tranquility.

In the past I had looked at the chances of violence occurring for gun owners and had seen evidence of it being higher. After starting this thread I saw studies about the psychological effects. There's something called the “weapons effect,” which is an increase of aggression in the presence of a gun. These things confirm what I suspected.

[WaveRider]

Stillness,

The converse is true. Read John Lott's scientific, "More Guns, Less Crime".

Guns don't change personalities.

A gun has been compared to a parachute: they're good to have when it's needed to save your life...or lives of loved ones. W/o one when its needed, the outcome is sealed.

Avoid the trap of becoming thoroughly entrenched within a position that's not founded upon facts that you'll shun facts in favor of emotion...and defending an emotional position.