Armed robber shot by his would-be victim

[Hoopla Phil]

http://www.examiner.com/x-18149-SelfDefense-Examiner~y2010m7d11-Armed-robber-shot-by-his-wouldbe-victim

Police say that a man was in a parked car, on the 5400 block of Riverview Blvd in St. Louis, MO just after 10 PM when a robber drove up, got out of his own vehicle, approached the parked car on foot, and brandished a handgun. The victim reportedly drew his own gun and fired in self defense, striking the robber in the arms and chest, and ending the attack. The robber is said to have fled a short distance through an alley, before collapsing in front of a home. Police arrived to find a suspect, who was taken to a local hospital where he was listed in serious but stable condition, according to news reports.

[armueller2001]

1. Sucks to be that dude.

Don't start no shit, won't be no shit.

[villager]

2. Yet four dead in New Mexico today -- funny how you don't post those news items

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8732644

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rrneck]

11. A warning in the subject line about that image would have been nice. nt

[one-eyed fat man]

15. Point taken, edited.

Sorry that you were disturbed by the images. The brutality that some people are capable of is limitless. To rely on their good graces that they won't hurt you borders on lunacy. Remember, the ones who did that, slapped each other on the back and had a great laugh over a beer when they were done.

[rrneck]

18. Thanks,

It didn't really bother me, but others might have been upset. I agree that that humans can indulge in incredible brutality, and a little dose of reality never hurt anybody. Since I'm an artist I've had to listen to a certain amount of "what the fuck did you do that for!?", so I know how people can react.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

13. Pics or it didn't happ-... oh wait... oh shit!

that's nuts.

[one-eyed fat man]

16. Not exactly.............

They are over with the "heads" on the sidewalk. No, you really don't want to see that picture. That was a June 23, 2010 drug hit by "La Resistencia" in Zapopan, Jalisco, which is part of the Guadalajara Metro Area.

[slackmaster]

21. villager, there's a tacked thread at the top of this forum that explains its purpose

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x95935

Some of us abide by the rules, some do not.

[knownothing]

25. Mexico has strict gun control

Mexico has very strict gun laws, and yet their crime rate is very high.

http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m3d5-Mexicos-gun-laws-responsible-for-violent-holocaust


I would assume that the people responsible for the heinous crime in this photo were not legally in possession of firearms, thus proving Mexican guns laws to be something of a mooth point.

[one-eyed fat man]

28. They were not shot.

Guns may or may not have been used to initially capture the three men. They were bound and their extremities were hacked off with machetes while alive. After which they were decapitated. At which point they likely quit screaming. Messages to the rivals were scrawled on the headless and limbless torsos.

It's a fair bet that it wasn't so 'merciful' as a clean bullet to the head was part of the message they meant to send. They were slow in dying. It was meant to be brutal.

Doubtless there are those about who would explain all that away a desperation borne of poverty and speak of the innate humanity of the criminals. Yet in all likelihood those who committed the savagery likely went to the cantina after, and amidst much beer and hilarity regaled each other with tales of which 'pendejo' begged the most to be spared.

[knownothing]

29. Yes, my mistake

even though I would suspect they were taken captive with guns, they may not have been involved with this particular incident.

Even so, my far more general point is that with all the drug wars raging south of the border and guns being used for much of the terror down there, the drug traffickers involved are likely not in possession of guns legally.

[Hoopla Phil]

27. Please feel free to start you own thread and your own topic. Please don't

divert this one with topic that do not conform to the standards set for the gun forum. Thank you.

[onehandle]

3. Why didn't you post more of this article from the right-winger owned examiner.com? --->

You are allowed up to four paragraphs. Here's two more:
_______________________________

'As we’ve seen in the USA as well as other countries, armed self defense works. It enables law abiding people to defend themselves against armed, and/or physically stronger, attackers.

Gun control, on the other hand, fails to disarm criminals. Instead, it only ensures that crime victims are defenseless against the gun-toting criminals. Indeed, even when criminals are unarmed, they tend to still be capable of killing or seriously harming their victims, since violent criminals tend to be young males who are among the strongest members of society.'
_______________________________

Nope, no bias in this 'news' article. None at all. No sign of an agenda either.

On edit: Instantly in the gungeoneers reponses, they show that they do not recognize the difference between journalism and propaganda.

Clearly.

[cleanhippie]

4. Seems like the relevant part got posted

and a link provided for anyone that wants to read the rest. The last two parts really are just supporting facts. You seem to imply that there is some kind of misdirection going on in the OP. Can you be more specific at what you feel the OP left out and why?

[TPaine7]

5. Bias, what bias?

What bias is there in your quotation, and against whom?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

6. What does the article's bias matter?

As reposted in the OP... only the factual events were reposted.
The events happened or they did not. Reporting of events is fact, not opinion.

[GreenStormCloud]

7. Looks like straight facts to me.

'As we’ve seen in the USA as well as other countries, armed self defense works. It enables law abiding people to defend themselves against armed, and/or physically stronger, attackers.

Gun control, on the other hand, fails to disarm criminals. Instead, it only ensures that crime victims are defenseless against the gun-toting criminals. Indeed, even when criminals are unarmed, they tend to still be capable of killing or seriously harming their victims, since violent criminals tend to be young males who are among the strongest members of society.'


Yep, just the facts. Tough luck for you that you don't like the facts.

[TPaine7]

12. Oh you mean *editorial* bias, not racial, gender, national, ability or similar bias.

I give you that the quote takes a position--a position well grounded in facts, mind you, but a position nonetheless.

I'm so used to hearing those who respect gun rights accused of racism, misogyny, and the like that I mistook your meaning.

[Statistical]

14. Those are facts not biases.

* Armed Self Defense does work. It doesn't work 100% of the time but it does work.
* Armed self defense DOES give people the option (not requirement) to defend themselves against " armed, and/or physically stronger, attackers."
* Gun control has never been proven to disarm criminals.
* Gun control DOES ensure crime victims are defenseless (or at a minimum at a tactical disadvantage) to both against both armed criminals and criminals who are physically stronger.
* The largest segment of violent crime IS committed by young males.

Sorry you consider facts to be "biases". Maybe that is why you have such a hurt time with this topic?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

17. You shouldn't expect antis to recognize facts when put right in front of theri noses.

[TPaine7]

19. Self delete, posted in the wrong place.

[Hoopla Phil]

26. Allowed up to four paragraphs in a three paragraph report? Did you read it? Can you count?

I posted the relevant portion and honored the intent of the DU rules on copyright infringement. Or is that work alien to you - honor? Kinda like well regulated or militia, you don't seem to grasp the concept of any of those terms.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

8. So even when an armed suspect ALREADY has his gun drawn, your own firearm can still be effective?

I wonder how many antigun heads will explode after reading this. LOL

[TPaine7]

20. No, that is a forbidden thought. Remember, the bad guys always win.

You are not permitted to entertain the idea that you might do better in a violent attack if you rely on yourself. Call the police and hope for the best, give the thugs what they want, throw up on yourself, beg and grovel, but don't use a gun for self-defense--that's so barbaric only the state can do it.

Be careful friend, there's a reeducation camp for people who think like you.

[old mark]

9. Maybe the robber will take a positive lesson from this, but most of them are so dumb

than I doubt it.
Fortunately, the right person was armed in this incident.

mark

[KansasVoter]

22. How many here whine when someone posts a ant-gun story?

[one-eyed fat man]

23. ant-gun?

[slackmaster]

24. An ant-gun story would clearly be outside of the chartered subjects for this forum

It's really very simple.