Not a Tulsan, but this brings out the Christians with guns debate quite nicely. (//%22http://kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=130171%22)
This guy puts the Riverside shooter to shame. At what point does a youth pastor decide that bringing a gun to an overnighter is a good idea? Any defenders out there?
Good for him. He was there to guard the property from thieves and when the thugs showed up and started getting aggressive he took action.
The guy was running a business, at night, and sitting on a stack of cash. If this had been a gas station and the cashier shot someone who hopped behind the counter, everyone would support him. Same thing happened here.
In the Clint Eastwood movie "Pale Rider", Clint plays a preacher gunfighter.
This guy is just acting out what he sees in Hollywood. Let's blame them.
I blame pac-man, I eat all the time and usually run from ghosts.
It is kind of strange that a representative of a Church would find it necessary to carry a weapon. On the other hand, apparently it was necessary.
And again, state laws allows this guy to fire at will towards a crowd with no repercussions. Strange days, in a backward state. What can you do?
Don't you all find it curious that suddenly there are several of these 'stand your ground" shootings? Again, no warning shots, and it was a scene that could have been solved without a gun.
I hate thieves and have been their target many times. But never considered killing someone over property. The result is not that petty theft crimes will diminish. The result is that petty criminals will start carrying guns too and shoot back. We just raised the level of violence.
We did raise the level. And we'll see a lot more of this IMO.
And the guy was right to shut down the fireworks stand, he popped off at a group of people, any one of which could come back to haunt him and his church. Would anyone be terribly surprised if the youth pastor ends up dead, or his church on fire? It pays to let the police, or in this case sheriff, handle the problem. If possible.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
The result is that petty criminals will start carrying guns too and shoot back. We just raised the level of violence.
Do naive much?
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
The guy was running a business, at night, and sitting on a stack of cash. If this had been a gas station and the cashier shot someone who hopped behind the counter, everyone would support him. Same thing happened here.
yeah, i have to agree with you. You would think a pastor would not even have the gun and opt for dogs or professional faken bacon but the thieves got what they deserved.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
The result is that petty criminals will start carrying guns too and shoot back. We just raised the level of violence.
Do naive much?
What's more naive? The idea that criminals who wouldn't normally carry guns, will now. Or that the only effect of "concealed carry" on criminals is deterrence?
It will only take a few times for the wrong guy to be shot, before someone will take notice. Then it'll be revenge killings encouraging revenge killings, as opposed to concealed carry encouraging concealed carry.
Good for the Pastor....He protected one his flock from a violent beating.......
Yeah, it's an eye for a roman candle right? Oh no, it's a life for a sparkler? I forget.
5. Thou shalt not murder...without cause.
right?
If the only tool you carry is a hammer everything looks pretty much like a nail. I contend the Pastor wanted a confrontation, he wanted to catch some heathen stealing and the punks obliged him. There are so many other ways to catch a criminal than hope for a confrontation with an unarmed man.
Maybe the Pastor ought to teach his boys how to fight and he would not 'have' to use deadly force to protect them against unarmed criminals.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
If the only tool you carry is a hammer everything looks pretty much like a nail. I contend the Pastor wanted a confrontation, he wanted to catch some heathen stealing and the punks obliged him. There are so many other ways to catch a criminal than hope for a confrontation with an unarmed man.
Maybe the Pastor ought to teach his boys how to fight and he would not 'have' to use deadly force to protect them against unarmed criminals.
right on Tim. He set up a situation where the end result was likely violence. Go looking for frogs at 2am on a pond and you'll find them.
That is why he carried the gun. He is a trained reserve officer and knew what he could do. He also should have known that a security guard, guard dog, lighting, pro-active measures could have accomplished the task without bullets.
I know of several kids just west of the river that deface, steal, intimidate, fight and do drugs. They yelled at me from a group one day as I jogged by. I don't know why but I turned and faced them with both hands motioning for them to come over and talk to me as I kept running. I figured I would do some damage even if they beat me. Curiously, they laughed, and the next few times I've seen them they encourage me. I guess I built street cred! My point is that I am not as big as the youth pastor. I could have come packing with a gun the next run and been secure in shooting them. I chose not to. Protecting your fireworks is not worth killing someone even if its a group of punk-donkey thieves.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
The result is that petty criminals will start carrying guns too and shoot back. We just raised the level of violence.
Do naive much?
What's more naive? The idea that criminals who wouldn't normally carry guns, will now. Or that the only effect of "concealed carry" on criminals is deterrence?
It will only take a few times for the wrong guy to be shot, before someone will take notice. Then it'll be revenge killings encouraging revenge killings, as opposed to concealed carry encouraging concealed carry.
Deterrence. And for those deterrence isn't a concept they get, defense.
What do you think all the shootings we are reading about in north Tulsa are? Retaliation for some sort of theft or gang diss. A lot of small-time thugs can't or won't get a conceal-carry permit, doesn't stop them from getting a gun.
If I want to defend myself from someone else who does crazy better than I do, I'm going to defend myself with more than a quick wit and two fists.
I guess it would have been preferable to some of you for a gang of thugs to have beaten two un-armed people to death, stolen their property and money, rather than to read about someone using a gun to protect his own life and someone else and to repel crime.
Sorry, I'm not biting on that one. You are talking about a culture of people (criminals, regardless of race) for whom guns are indigenous to their daily life-style. People legally carrying guns sure as hell doesn't inspire them to get more, but might make them think twice before they try to jack another fireworks stand.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
If the only tool you carry is a hammer everything looks pretty much like a nail. I contend the Pastor wanted a confrontation, he wanted to catch some heathen stealing and the punks obliged him. There are so many other ways to catch a criminal than hope for a confrontation with an unarmed man.
Maybe the Pastor ought to teach his boys how to fight and he would not 'have' to use deadly force to protect them against unarmed criminals.
Unless you had Jackie Chan and Jet Lie running the stand, 2 guys are not going to hold off a mob. Plus, he didn't open fire until after they were already beating up the other guy. I don't see how the pastor is picking a fight when the people came into the secured area and started beating up the kid first.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Deterrence. And for those deterrence isn't a concept they get, defense.
What do you think all the shootings we are reading about in north Tulsa are? Retaliation for some sort of theft or gang diss. A lot of small-time thugs can't or won't get a conceal-carry permit, doesn't stop them from getting a gun.
If I want to defend myself from someone else who does crazy better than I do, I'm going to defend myself with more than a quick wit and two fists.
I guess it would have been preferable to some of you for a gang of thugs to have beaten two un-armed people to death, stolen their property and money, rather than to read about someone using a gun to protect his own life and someone else and to repel crime.
Sorry, I'm not biting on that one. You are talking about a culture of people (criminals, regardless of race) for whom guns are indigenous to their daily life-style. People legally carrying guns sure as hell doesn't inspire them to get more, but might make them think twice before they try to jack another fireworks stand.
Um.. can we get an amen? I agree 100%.
Amen, Conan and Waterboy. When it comes to hooligans and punks, it's a matter of getting them to respect you or to fear you-one or the other, and nothing in between; I learned this at an early age, and it's a lesson I've never forgotten. I don't go out looking for trouble, and I'm not one to habitually pick fights, but I won't run from it either. Besides, the whole world is watching. Give in to people like that, you'll be fair game for anyone else. Well, let's see, I've never been mugged or conned or robbed, so I must be doing something right.
Shoot a few people and hope the word gets out?
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Shoot a few people and hope the word gets out?
I didn't say it quite like that; just because I hold to the Second Amendment, it doesn't mean that I'm "livin' large" or otherwise subscribe to the tenets of the Gangsta lifestyle. I'm just saying that it's better to be a hard target when it comes to violent crime. I do not court trouble, I don't go out picking fights with every Joe Schmoe to make a name for myself. I simply respect the rights of others and require the same in return. But if I'm confrointed with trouble, obviously I'm going to have to deal with that.
For some people, all you need to do is give them a certain look, and they'll back off; others, you may have to give them a knot or six on the head to get their attention. Either way, you have to show that you're a hard target.
As for "making a name and hope the word gets out," no, that's not what I'm saying either. But you don't want others to get the idea that it's OK to victimize you without a fight.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I guess it would have been preferable to some of you for a gang of thugs to have beaten two un-armed people to death, stolen their property and money, rather than to read about someone using a gun to protect his own life and someone else and to repel crime.
Sorry, I'm not biting on that one. You are talking about a culture of people (criminals, regardless of race) for whom guns are indigenous to their daily life-style. People legally carrying guns sure as hell doesn't inspire them to get more, but might make them think twice before they try to jack another fireworks stand.
Did these "criminals" from said "culture" have any weapons? I haven't heard of any.
If the youth minister dies because of retaliation, then in a way, he deserved it (in a Christian "eye for a eye" kind of way). I don't know him from anyone else, don't owe him anything. Certainly don't owe him any praise for poppin' off. It wasn't the brightest act.
For criminals, these were kind of dumb. I think overall, the message has to be, if you're going to rob someone in the country; they're armed, be prepared to slaughter them all. Or, two birds with one stone. Kill em all equals no witnesses and an easier event.
And what lesson did the punks learn: Next time carry your own gat, shoot first. The episode reinforced the idea that might makes right.
'Stand your ground' my buns, someone goes through CLEET and they think they have a license to hunt humans. The Pastor endangered his charge by his actions, fired randomly into a crowd, and I hope he and the flock are sued for damages.
All because the church was trying to make money by selling explosives. That is funny!
Look MC, I'm not even sure how many people comprised this "mob". Even if it was four on two, the odds weren't with the youth pastor and the 17 y/o who was there with them. Outnumbering is a "weapon" in itself. It bred the confidence in that gang that they were going to overrun and beat into submission the two fellows who were watching the fireworks stand and take fireworks and/or money. They just didn't think they would be faced down with a gun.
Put yourself in that position. I bet you'd be wishing you had more than a couple of hands and feet to defend yourself from four or five young thugs.
Sorry, but I'm having a problem faulting this guy's actions. He didn't go looking for trouble, it came to him and he had taken a prudent measure to defend himself, the property, and other person who were entrusted to his care. This isn't like the subway vigilante in New York (Bernhard Goetz) who took it upon himself to go looking for thugs.
I'm hardly paranoid and violent crime is pretty low in the neighborhood where I live. However, crime can be random.
If I hear breaking window glass or someone trying to force open a door at my house in the middle of the night, that creep is going to stagger out with a few new holes in their body or run out with a fresh load of crap in their underwear. If someone is willing to break into an occupied house, there is some reason they have the confidence they can do so without consequence and I don't plan on sitting down and having a conversation with them about it over a cup of tea.
A Christian pastor packing heat: that is Satanic. He knows the Word of God, and yet consults with none other but himself, like carnal men do, and gets him guns, and trusts in them, and so doing he rejects the counsel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I pray God remembers his deeds, and of those who do likewise.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
And what lesson did the punks learn: Next time carry your own gat, shoot first. The episode reinforced the idea that might makes right.
'Stand your ground' my buns, someone goes through CLEET and they think they have a license to hunt humans. The Pastor endangered his charge by his actions, fired randomly into a crowd, and I hope he and the flock are sued for damages.
All because the church was trying to make money by selling explosives. That is funny!
He wasn't hunting for anyone. He was defending property and himself. If those kids had known there was someone with a gat in there, they would have looked for another place to jack. It's no more incentive for this guy's buddies to get a gun than listening to gangsta rap. It might have even scared a few of them straight.
Why should someone be sued for defending his own life? He didn't start the melee. Makes zero sense.
quote:
Originally posted by rhymnrzn
A Christian pastor packing heat: that is Satanic. He knows the Word of God, and yet consults with none other but himself, like carnal men do, and gets him guns, and trusts in them, and so doing he rejects the counsel of the Lord Jesus Christ.
I pray God remembers his deeds, and of those who do likewise.
Are you saying that it's better to be a victim, and just allow these people to take what they want without meeting with any resistance? You must have lived and continue to live a very sheltered and secure lifestyle indeed! So because he's a minister, he doesn't have the right to defend himself? And since when is self-defense a sin anyway? Show me where in the Bible it says that!
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
[quote
Did these "criminals" from said "culture" have any weapons? I haven't heard of any.
If the youth minister dies because of retaliation, then in a way, he deserved it (in a Christian "eye for a eye" kind of way). I don't know him from anyone else, don't owe him anything. Certainly don't owe him any praise for poppin' off. It wasn't the brightest act.
For criminals, these were kind of dumb. I think overall, the message has to be, if you're going to rob someone in the country; they're armed, be prepared to slaughter them all. Or, two birds with one stone. Kill em all equals no witnesses and an easier event.
You know, Michael, we haven't met, but I think we'd get along famously if we did. I do like where you come from on many things. Just not on this.
If this situation happened to you, what would be
your reaction? Tell me true: Would you let these little thugs run roughshod on you and your safety and what you're trying to accomplish, or would you stand your ground?
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
And what lesson did the punks learn: Next time carry your own gat, shoot first. The episode reinforced the idea that might makes right.
Hopefully, it scared 'em onto the straight and narrow. Perhaps they'll think twice before trying to pull something like this on anyone else.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Look MC, I'm not even sure how many people comprised this "mob". Even if it was four on two, the odds weren't with the youth pastor and the 17 y/o who was there with them. Outnumbering is a "weapon" in itself. It bred the confidence in that gang that they were going to overrun and beat into submission the two fellows who were watching the fireworks stand and take fireworks and/or money. They just didn't think they would be faced down with a gun.
Put yourself in that position. I bet you'd be wishing you had more than a couple of hands and feet to defend yourself from four or five young thugs.
Sorry, but I'm having a problem faulting this guy's actions. He didn't go looking for trouble, it came to him and he had taken a prudent measure to defend himself, the property, and other person who were entrusted to his care. This isn't like the subway vigilante in New York (Bernhard Goetz) who took it upon himself to go looking for thugs.
I'm hardly paranoid and violent crime is pretty low in the neighborhood where I live. However, crime can be random.
If I hear breaking window glass or someone trying to force open a door at my house in the middle of the night, that creep is going to stagger out with a few new holes in their body or run out with a fresh load of crap in their underwear. If someone is willing to break into an occupied house, there is some reason they have the confidence they can do so without consequence and I don't plan on sitting down and having a conversation with them about it over a cup of tea.
Amen, Conan. You summed it up beautifully as always, and I do mean that!
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
And what lesson did the punks learn: Next time carry your own gat, shoot first. The episode reinforced the idea that might makes right.
'Stand your ground' my buns, someone goes through CLEET and they think they have a license to hunt humans. The Pastor endangered his charge by his actions, fired randomly into a crowd, and I hope he and the flock are sued for damages.
All because the church was trying to make money by selling explosives. That is funny!
He wasn't hunting for anyone. He was defending property and himself. If those kids had known there was someone with a gat in there, they would have looked for another place to jack. It's no more incentive for this guy's buddies to get a gun than listening to gangsta rap. It might have even scared a few of them straight.
Why should someone be sued for defending his own life? He didn't start the melee. Makes zero sense.
Conan, you're reading too many newspaper headlines and watching too much inflammatory TV. Gangs, thugs, gats, gangstas, gangs of thugs, ...even (shudder)Rap! Could just be a group of stupid teenage thieves that did what any stupid group does. Resort to the lowest common thought.
This whole thing smells like a load. This is not a small, untrained, 67 year old unexpectedly cornered at Riverparks. This is a large, young, Cleet trained, reserve officer WHO CAME LOOKING FOR TROUBLE! He brought with him another teen. Why? Because he knew these stands get burglarized. He figured he would protect the product with force if necessary and of course it became necessary.
Ever talked to one of these big guys who is used to using firm intimidation as a bouncer, an event security guard or such? I'll take the odds of a 17 yr old, this guy and the knowledge that I have a piece in my back pocket against 4 teenagers. This guy should have known better.
Any money they saved protecting their product with a gun is offset with a possible civil suit. Stupid, simply stupid.
You guys are crackpots. I hope you people get the opportunity to exercise your "holy than thou" attitudes when someone is preparing to kick the sh!t out you or one of your kids. I wonder how you'll enjoy your high horse attitude after a nice beating? I'll take my chances with a firearm if I'm sitting on cash in the middle of nowhere, especially in Muskogee, thanks...
The best parts of this discussion are the people who think that criminals are suddenly going to start carrying guns, as if this would be a new development in world of criminal activity.
This just devolves into absurdity. You can make the exact same argument against even fighting back with fists. Thug attacks kids, and pastor fights back with fists, detering said thug. Thug learns to take a knife to the next robbery to ensure he wins.
How is that silly scenario any different? Would you have suggested he allow the idiot to finish with the kid and move onto him next?
You people amaze me.
Reading between the lines from the OP this is nothing more than a pathetic half-a$$ed opportunity to bash a Christian for something the OP feels as "un-Christian." It has nothing to do with self defense.
Christian ministers packing pistols. God will judge.
Really, if you think about it, that Gumm fellow had less of a reason to shoot the other guy in Riverparks than the Rev. did. Unless Turney's buddies had exited the car and were surrounding him, he could have kept backing over to the cafe and into the crowd which is usually there at the River's Edge. That would have likely dispersed that situation. Judging from where he showed the TV types where he parked.
Two things which usually, not always, work as a deterrent for crime: crowds and armed people.
Again, Waterboy, protecting your property (or property which is entrusted to you) and defending yourself is not looking for trouble any more than a homeowner keeping a gun under the mattress. He figured being there was deterrence for thieves, just in case that wasn't enough, he armed himself.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
You guys are crackpots. I hope you people get the opportunity to exercise your "holy than thou" attitudes when someone is preparing to kick the sh!t out you or one of your kids. I wonder how you'll enjoy your high horse attitude after a nice beating? I'll take my chances with a firearm if I'm sitting on cash in the middle of nowhere, especially in Muskogee, thanks...
The best parts of this discussion are the people who think that criminals are suddenly going to start carrying guns, as if this would be a new development in world of criminal activity.
This just devolves into absurdity. You can make the exact same argument against even fighting back with fists. Thug attacks kids, and pastor fights back with fists, detering said thug. Thug learns to take a knife to the next robbery to ensure he wins.
How is that silly scenario any different? Would you have suggested he allow the idiot to finish with the kid and move onto him next?
You people amaze me.
Reading between the lines from the OP this is nothing more than a pathetic half-a$$ed opportunity to bash a Christian for something the OP feels as "un-Christian." It has nothing to do with self defense.
From one crackpot to another, welcome to my ignore list.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Sorry, but I'm having a problem faulting this guy's actions.
I'm not faulting the guy. He did what he did, it was legal to do so. And if his church burns down or if he ends up dead, so be it. Chances are, he'll be fine. If he isn't, I don't see where it would be a problem for me. It wasn't a bright decision, but he made it. And he had every right to do so.
I won't applaud him.
quote:
Originally posted by rhymnrzn
Christian ministers packing pistols.
And the Bible prohibits this how?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Really, if you think about it, that Gumm fellow had less of a reason to shoot the other guy in Riverparks than the Rev. did. Unless Turney's buddies had exited the car and were surrounding him, he could have kept backing over to the cafe and into the crowd which is usually there at the River's Edge. That would have likely dispersed that situation. Judging from where he showed the TV types where he parked.
Two things which usually, not always, work as a deterrent for crime: crowds and armed people.
Again, Waterboy, protecting your property (or property which is entrusted to you) and defending yourself is not looking for trouble any more than a homeowner keeping a gun under the mattress. He figured being there was deterrence for thieves, just in case that wasn't enough, he armed himself.
We will have to agree to disagree on that. Unfortunately for all involved his motivations for going there with a gun will likely be decided by others in the DA's office or civil court. I just don't remember reading about a lot of people being killed in these situations before this law was passed. Do you? It has spurred a belief that a gun is the answer to any low level hostile situations.
Even thirty years ago when one of my neighbors threatened to jump my fence with a rifle and shoot my dog, the officer who came to investigate told me I would easily fulfill the criteria for "justifiable homicide" should I respond by shooting him. I relayed that information to the hothead and the problem dissappeared.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
quote:
Originally posted by rhymnrzn
Christian ministers packing pistols.
And the Bible prohibits this how?
As Christ walked, so should we. As he is, so are we in this world..........
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Not a Tulsan, but this brings out the Christians with guns debate quite nicely. (//%22http://kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=130171%22)
This guy puts the Riverside shooter to shame. At what point does a youth pastor decide that bringing a gun to an overnighter is a good idea? Any defenders out there?
Sorry - I'm new here. I wasn't aware of the "Christians with guns debate".
Short refresher, maybe? Or a link?
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Really, if you think about it, that Gumm fellow had less of a reason to shoot the other guy in Riverparks than the Rev. did. Unless Turney's buddies had exited the car and were surrounding him, he could have kept backing over to the cafe and into the crowd which is usually there at the River's Edge. That would have likely dispersed that situation. Judging from where he showed the TV types where he parked.
Two things which usually, not always, work as a deterrent for crime: crowds and armed people.
Again, Waterboy, protecting your property (or property which is entrusted to you) and defending yourself is not looking for trouble any more than a homeowner keeping a gun under the mattress. He figured being there was deterrence for thieves, just in case that wasn't enough, he armed himself.
We will have to agree to disagree on that. Unfortunately for all involved his motivations for going there with a gun will likely be decided by others in the DA's office or civil court. I just don't remember reading about a lot of people being killed in these situations before this law was passed. Do you? It has spurred a belief that a gun is the answer to any low level hostile situations.
Even thirty years ago when one of my neighbors threatened to jump my fence with a rifle and shoot my dog, the officer who came to investigate told me I would easily fulfill the criteria for "justifiable homicide" should I respond by shooting him. I relayed that information to the hothead and the problem dissappeared.
I think we are starting past each other. Which is nothing new. [;)]
My point is, if this guy was really looking to shoot someone, it wouldn't have been lying in wait at a fireworks stand out in the country. He'd have walked into Taco Bueno or WalMart and started shooting if his intention was to kill someone.
Without being in his shoes it's impossible for you to say that this guy was hoping to shoot someone, which is the implication you are making. You seem to make the assumption that anyone carrying a firearm legally is doing so with the intention of shooting someone else which is patently false. You are essentially equating legal gun ownership with predatory behavior.
Given such pandemonium, how did this guy even know whether or not anyone was armed? I'm guessing maybe he reads too many headlines and has watched "Boyz in the 'hood" a few too many times to, eh Waterboy? Yeah all that adrelaline must have been the result of deep-seeded racism.
If some whitebread like myself drives up to the 500 block of E. 46th N. or somewhere up there or into the barrio in east Tulsa in the middle of the night with a loaded pistol, then yeah you can say I'm probably looking for trouble.
If a business owner keeps a gun behind his counter and shoots someone in the face when they jump the counter, he's hardly looking for trouble. Trouble found him and now has an instant lead body piercing.
Fortunately, the DA, who is better trained in the law than any of us, including yourself and myself, will make the decision as to whether or not this guy had a right to protect himself.
The criminals already have the guns. It's when you hear about random shootings that take innocent law-abiding lives that makes honest people seek out legal gun ownership.
As long as criminals have access to guns, I will continue to enjoy my 2nd amendment right.
The account from the Phoenix (//%22http://www.muskogeephoenix.com/local/local_story_177005951.html%22) gives a better account than the KOTV link.
Being bum-rushed is a different ball o' wax than just standing by and squeezing off rounds into a large crowd as KOTV reported. Also, the teen was screaming for help after being assualted behind the tent.
Still seems like we are living in Pottersville when a youth pastor 'needs' a gun to protect explosives the Church is selling.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Really, if you think about it, that Gumm fellow had less of a reason to shoot the other guy in Riverparks than the Rev. did. Unless Turney's buddies had exited the car and were surrounding him, he could have kept backing over to the cafe and into the crowd which is usually there at the River's Edge. That would have likely dispersed that situation. Judging from where he showed the TV types where he parked.
Two things which usually, not always, work as a deterrent for crime: crowds and armed people.
Again, Waterboy, protecting your property (or property which is entrusted to you) and defending yourself is not looking for trouble any more than a homeowner keeping a gun under the mattress. He figured being there was deterrence for thieves, just in case that wasn't enough, he armed himself.
We will have to agree to disagree on that. Unfortunately for all involved his motivations for going there with a gun will likely be decided by others in the DA's office or civil court. I just don't remember reading about a lot of people being killed in these situations before this law was passed. Do you? It has spurred a belief that a gun is the answer to any low level hostile situations.
Even thirty years ago when one of my neighbors threatened to jump my fence with a rifle and shoot my dog, the officer who came to investigate told me I would easily fulfill the criteria for "justifiable homicide" should I respond by shooting him. I relayed that information to the hothead and the problem dissappeared.
I think we are starting past each other. Which is nothing new. [;)]
My point is, if this guy was really looking to shoot someone, it wouldn't have been lying in wait at a fireworks stand out in the country. He'd have walked into Taco Bueno or WalMart and started shooting if his intention was to kill someone.
Without being in his shoes it's impossible for you to say that this guy was hoping to shoot someone, which is the implication you are making. You seem to make the assumption that anyone carrying a firearm legally is doing so with the intention of shooting someone else which is patently false. You are essentially equating legal gun ownership with predatory behavior.
Given such pandemonium, how did this guy even know whether or not anyone was armed? I'm guessing maybe he reads too many headlines and has watched "Boyz in the 'hood" a few too many times to, eh Waterboy? Yeah all that adrelaline must have been the result of deep-seeded racism.
If some whitebread like myself drives up to the 500 block of E. 46th N. or somewhere up there or into the barrio in east Tulsa in the middle of the night with a loaded pistol, then yeah you can say I'm probably looking for trouble.
If a business owner keeps a gun behind his counter and shoots someone in the face when they jump the counter, he's hardly looking for trouble. Trouble found him and now has an instant lead body piercing.
Fortunately, the DA, who is better trained in the law than any of us, including yourself and myself, will make the decision as to whether or not this guy had a right to protect himself.
The criminals already have the guns. It's when you hear about random shootings that take innocent law-abiding lives that makes honest people seek out legal gun ownership.
As long as criminals have access to guns, I will continue to enjoy my 2nd amendment right.
I'm not against gun ownership at all. I am against any use of a gun until it is a last resort. Somehow many of us have faced hostile situations and managed them without plugging someone. I am just worried that we have opened the gates to subconscious reactions to threats that aren't really there.
One more story and I'll yield. I went over by the projects West of the river on 23rd a few years ago to pick up my son whose alternator had failed and left him in the middle of a parking lot. He absolutely shouldn't have been there. I tried to start it with no success. As it started to get dark the local teens started coming out from their hidey holes. About a dozen of them. Some remarks were made and the young 20 yr old who I brought with me was ready to rumble with them. They started to circle the car. The leader came over and asked who I was, and why I was there besides asking for a cigarette. I spoke to him as I would to any adult including that I don't smoke. I told him we had called a wrecker and the police. I wouldn't let the kid with me exit the car even though he was still game for it. While my son was at the convenience store calling the police on his own, I called the police on my cell, told them my location, the situation and my intentions if it got out of hand. TPD knows this area. They had their sirens on a few blocks away and the kids dispersed. They then (laughingly) gave me an escort as we pushed the car home. I could have shot these punks and gotten away with it. I was somewhat scared, but just as much resolute that they were just kids after-all. Maybe they had a weapon but none showed it.
This pastor had confronted these kids at 2:30am and ran them off. Did he call the police and report a break in and ask for a patrolman? No. He waited and took care of it himself. My fear once again is that this will create a legal vigilantism that we don't want.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
The account from the Phoenix (//%22http://www.muskogeephoenix.com/local/local_story_177005951.html%22) gives a better account than the KOTV link.
Being bum-rushed is a different ball o' wax than just standing by and squeezing off rounds into a large crowd as KOTV reported. Also, the teen was screaming for help after being assualted behind the tent.
Still seems like we are living in Pottersville when a youth pastor 'needs' a gun to protect explosives the Church is selling.
You need to load the "local media slant filter" which I think works in firefox and IE. The muskogee report reads exactly as I was reading it the whole time, clear self defense without the slightest bit of provocation.
I don't know about christians with guns... I have an mp3 of "cows with guns" which is always fun to listen to.
quote:
..he mooed 'we must fight, escape or we'll die' cows gathered around, 'cuz the steaks were so high... (bad cow pun)
No doubt! The story is in the telling, and I am shocked at the discrepancies between the Phoenix and KOTV. I hope they sort out some kind of charges for the assailants; I should like to know their plans before I going off again half-cocked, but I wonder if conspiracy to commit murder transpired on the way back to rob the place.
This man is an all-American hero, and I congratulate him on successfully fending off the forces of evil that came at him and his charge in the dark of the night. I hope they get rid of the explosives as soon as possible, and make lots of money for the Church of God of Wagoner. Sorry I doubted. I hope they do not come looking to beat me up.
Why, 71! Even if I saw you leanin' like a cholo I would not think you were looking for trouble. UNLESS it was 2am and you and five others were planning on jumping me and this kid three-on-one, grabbing the gun and killing us on the spot. In that instance I would fire a warning shot, command them to stop, and then fire as soon as necessary to keep anything from happening to the kid. I would have to tell his parents what happened, and the Church would hate me, if I survived. Later, if I was right, and it turns out your crew had actually planned on killing me, I would feel even better about it! (That hypothetical is of course fantasy because 71 would never lean like a cholo at 21&Garnett. For my part, I would secure the explosives better, establish perimeter defenses, use psyops, and make sure the kid was armed, too.)
Holy smokes, H2O! That was a close call! Good thing you kept your cool!
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
From one crackpot to another, welcome to my ignore list.
Yeah somehow I doubt you can resist responding to my posts, but good luck with all that.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
The account from the Phoenix (//%22http://www.muskogeephoenix.com/local/local_story_177005951.html%22) gives a better account than the KOTV link.
Being bum-rushed is a different ball o' wax than just standing by and squeezing off rounds into a large crowd as KOTV reported. Also, the teen was screaming for help after being assualted behind the tent.
Still seems like we are living in Pottersville when a youth pastor 'needs' a gun to protect explosives the Church is selling.
Apparently other news stations in town did a better job reporting this as well. I never heard the story about him randomly shooting into a crowd. I heard two stories about him shooting a guy after someone assaulted a child. Seems like someone at KOTV wanted to make this story into something it wasn't.
I hope their helicopter crashes...oops.
Still, if he used his brain, he used it only once. Nothing sounds right about his story, except there probably was some sort of "invasion".
You asked the question:
quote:
At what point does a youth pastor decide that bringing a gun to an overnighter is a good idea?
It's valid. And the answer is, the youth minister was either doing something stupid or devious. Stupid: Not packing it up and sleeping in your own bed. Stupid: Having a gun and somebody's seventeen year old kid there for security. Stupid: Not having another adult around for this "sleepover". Stupid: Thinking it was so important to be there with a gun, yet closing it the next day. Stupid: Being in the middle of Muskogee, and not calling the police immediately. Devious: Pedophilia. Stupid/Devious: Stands been robbed before, going to pop them this time.
What little I know about Youth Ministers, I'd bet on stupid. Can't count devious out. He's not a hero, he's a fool with a gun. And fools with guns end up in lots of places and situations.
Fool? Devious?
I have been unfortunate enough to have worked fireworks stands for various fund raising activities over the years, and each year, without fail, every stand owner/operator who lived on premises or slept overnight had a gun on the premises, both for personal safety and to prevent theft.
Why are people still acting as if this was a youth event, as if they were have a lock-in and watching movies?
Someone is being very deceptive about this story, but it isn't the guy who shot someone. And from the sound of MichaelC's last post making generalizations about how youth pastors are stupid, I can be confident in my previous assessment that this is just a good opportunity to take pot shots at religious people. Your bias against religion is sad.
Maybe if he were out shooting fetuses instead of criminals you'd be happy?
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Why are people still acting as if this was a youth event, as if they were have a lock-in and watching movies?
The only one that's implying that is you. And the author of the thread, sort of. No reason to get too defensive, though the topic and title should be changed.
Not every Youth Minister is brilliant, not every Youth Minister is the model of "Christianity." Even though the thread starts off implying that it's all about "Christians."
And yes, I'm still betting on fool. And can't count out devious. Everything this guy has said so far, is that "The stand was so important that we had to defend it with somebody else's 17 year old kid and a gun. But not so important as to keep it open after this event."
"Did you say 'two YOOTS'?"
(http://www.nndb.com/people/639/000043510/fg3-sized.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Why are people still acting as if this was a youth event, as if they were have a lock-in and watching movies?
The only one that's implying that is you. And the author of the thread, sort of. No reason to get too defensive, though the topic and title should be changed.
Not every Youth Minister is brilliant, not every Youth Minister is the model of "Christianity." Even though the thread starts off implying that it's all about "Christians."
And yes, I'm still betting on fool. And can't count out devious. Everything this guy has said so far, is that "The stand was so important that we had to defend it with somebody else's 17 year old kid and a gun. But not so important as to keep it open after this event."
Not upset at all as I have no dog in this hunt, but I do take exception to you generalizing all youth pastors as stupid.
What difference does it make whether he had another adult or a 17 year old with him? It was a good opportunity for the kid to work or volunteer time and would having another adult there changed the outcome? Doubt it. As for your insinuation that the youth pastor was having sex with the kid, that's just sad.
And yes, closing a fireworks stand after someone gets shot is a reasonable reaction by all parties. Why would they want to close it before an incident? It's like demanding QT never open again because one QT closed down for a day after a robbery...you don't stop living because some jackasses think you're an easy target.
Thanks for the levity Conan..... one of the funniest movies ever.
Do not fret, I have not abandoned all sense, MC. I still believe that all involved were put into peril because of bad decisions: not to better secure the product, to bring a gun (which allows for a heightened, false sense of secuity), and for the assailants to mistake the WCOG for Quakers.
But all you gun owners know that you would love nothing better than to shoot someone justifiably. How could you not? In that sense, do you not hope for a just such a confrontation because it validates owning the damned thing. Nothing to be ashamed of.
Are gun-toting Brothers militant Christians or militant about their Christianity? Does the sequence of the 'Mercan Trinity of God, Country, Family matter as long as all three are there?
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
But all you gun owners know that you would love nothing better than to shoot someone justifiably. How could you not? In that sense, do you not hope for a just such a confrontation because it validates owning the damned thing. Nothing to be ashamed of.
Absolutely not true. I hope the only thing I
ever shoot with a firearm is targets, or the old refrigerator we use for target practice where we go shoot out in the country. I don't even hunt anymore and wasn't that big on it when I used to on occasion.
I believe that would be the same statement you'd get out of 98% of all legal gun owners- that they hope they never have to shoot someone. Probably the exact opposite percentages for creeps who don't own a legal firearm or don't own it legally.
BTW- here's my self portrait. You're right I'd never hang cholo out in the barrio:
(http://www.wrestlingzone.ru/images/cholo.jpg)
quote:
But all you gun owners know that you would love nothing better than to shoot someone justifiably.
Wow. Talk about bias. I own two guns and not once have I ever fantasized about shooting another human being, nor have I ever heard someone I know say that would be a pleasant experience. That's just sick, and probably the most ignorant statement I've heard in a long time.
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Not upset at all as I have no dog in this hunt, but I do take exception to you generalizing all youth pastors as stupid.
What difference does it make whether he had another adult or a 17 year old with him? It was a good opportunity for the kid to work or volunteer time and would having another adult there changed the outcome? Doubt it. As for your insinuation that the youth pastor was having sex with the kid, that's just sad.
I wasn't insinuating that, but it's an option to this guy being just plain stupid. Obviously, fireworks stands get robbed. The guy knew this, instead of packing it up, he camped out and brought his own weapon. Then he proceeded to bring someone else's 17 year old kid along, nothing about his story says he's smart.
Smart would have avoided this. No reason to set yourself and someone else's kid up, for a robbery, killing, maiming, or anything else, over a fundraiser.
I haven't met many bright youth ministers, that's not to say there aren't any, but his story fits my experience perfectly.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
Not upset at all as I have no dog in this hunt, but I do take exception to you generalizing all youth pastors as stupid.
What difference does it make whether he had another adult or a 17 year old with him? It was a good opportunity for the kid to work or volunteer time and would having another adult there changed the outcome? Doubt it. As for your insinuation that the youth pastor was having sex with the kid, that's just sad.
I wasn't insinuating that, but it's an option to this guy being just plain stupid. Obviously, fireworks stands get robbed. The guy knew this, instead of packing it up, he camped out and brought his own weapon. Then he proceeded to bring someone else's 17 year old kid along, nothing about his story says he's smart.
Smart would have avoided this. No reason to set yourself and someone else's kid up, for a robbery, killing, maiming, or anything else, over a fundraiser.
I haven't met many bright youth ministers, that's not to say there aren't any, but his story fits my experience perfectly.
I see where you're coming from. Not really the place for a kid, especially one you have custody of, but I still don't get why it's not okay for him to have a gun while he's there.
Unless the city is willing to provide security like a bank, they really don't have any other option. Regardless of this being a church or not, the same dangers exist for anyone who runs one of these places.
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
But all you gun owners know that you would love nothing better than to shoot someone justifiably. How could you not? In that sense, do you not hope for a just such a confrontation because it validates owning the damned thing. Nothing to be ashamed of.
That's not it at all. But I'd rather have a couple of firearms and never once needing them, than to one day find myself in the situation where I'll need one and not having one.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
But all you gun owners know that you would love nothing better than to shoot someone justifiably. How could you not? In that sense, do you not hope for a just such a confrontation because it validates owning the damned thing. Nothing to be ashamed of.
That's not it at all. But I'd rather have a couple of firearms and never once needing them, than to one day find myself in the situation where I'll need one and not having one.
And here's your: AMEN! Brother Jaynes [;)]
quote:
Originally posted by iplaw
I still don't get why it's not okay for him to have a gun while he's there.
It's legal, I guess that makes it "okay".
quote:
Unless the city is willing to provide security like a bank, they really don't have any other option.
He could have called the Police. He was in Muskogee, not a terribly small town. According to the Phoenix story, the YM was afraid as soon as they arrived the second time. Also, the cops were called out on a "shots fired" complaint (not by the YM), and the cops arrived before the wounded invader could pick himself up. That's a pretty quick response. There is a police presence there, he fired first and didn't even think about calling the cops until they showed up.
However, again, nothing about this guys story says he's smart. It seems to keep coming back to that. That Church needs to think about fundraisers, fireworks, and who they want to represent them as Youth Minister IMO.
Of course that guy could have been KO'd by the time the cops got there. His options were to:
A) Let the thugs keep beating the kid and reach for his cell phone while he was being rushed, then get his donkey kicked, or stabbed, or ??? while he waited for the police to respond.
or
B) Pull his piece and stop the melee before it escalated further.
The police can't be everywhere at once, and can't stake out every podunk fireworks stand, convenience store, or house.
That's why there are laws which do allow people to defend themselves with a firearm.
I personally would have fired a warning shot, but who knows what I would do in a situation like that. The pastor was well within his rights to shoot this moron, and the criminal has no one to blame but himself. Best not to assault an innocent person, then you don't have to concern yourself with getting shot.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Of course that guy could have been KO'd by the time the cops got there. His options were to:
A) Let the thugs keep beating the kid and reach for his cell phone while he was being rushed, then get his donkey kicked, or stabbed, or ??? while he waited for the police to respond.
or
B) Pull his piece and stop the melee before it escalated further.
The police can't be everywhere at once, and can't stake out every podunk fireworks stand, convenience store, or house.
That's why there are laws which do allow people to defend themselves with a firearm.
It's a matter of meeting force with force and responding appropriately.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Of course that guy could have been KO'd by the time the cops got there. His options were to:
A) Let the thugs keep beating the kid and reach for his cell phone while he was being rushed, then get his donkey kicked, or stabbed, or ??? while he waited for the police to respond.
or
B) Pull his piece and stop the melee before it escalated further.
The police can't be everywhere at once, and can't stake out every podunk fireworks stand, convenience store, or house.
That's why there are laws which do allow people to defend themselves with a firearm.
Do you think it would take these punks 30 minutes to whip his donkey? The first break in was at 2:30. He didn't call the police to report it. What, he was being a good guy by not reporting it? Yes, the police know that fireworks stands are easy targets. So do stand operators. That is why they often have a dog nearby, some big guys staying on premises, lighting etc. The police would have staked the place out. When my neighbor was burglarized, the first thing the cop told us was, they'll be back again soon. They were.
I have to agree with MC. There were other ways to deal with this. Some forethought. A warning shot would have helped for one. BTW anyone notice how the young man he had with him has been referred to as "a child"? Helps the case presented to the DA when the aggressors are referred to as teen-age assailants assaulting a child.
As a parent I would be plenty mad at this YM for such poor planning and putting my "child" in harms way.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Of course that guy could have been KO'd by the time the cops got there.
And maybe not, he wasn't smart enough to try. "He was worried when they pulled up the second time." He saw them coming, and he didn't even think about it?
I'm sure he was scared, I'm sure he had no plan other than to shoot, and in his situation as a representative of a Church with a child under his care, it shows very basic stupidity.
Well, we know where the other side stands on firearms-owning 3 guns myself (one specifically designated for home defense, the other two for target and skeet shooting), I obviously do not agree with these poor misguided souls, but here's hoping they're never violently victimized.
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Well, we know where the other side stands on firearms-owning 3 guns myself (one specifically designated for home defense, the other two for target and skeet shooting), I obviously do not agree with these poor misguided souls, but here's hoping they're never violently victimized.
Both of us have acknowledged that we are not anti-gun. Do I have to own one to be in the club? Also both of us agree that the man was probably legal in his actions. Stupid, but legal. What misguided souls are you referring to? I have been violently victimized since I was in second grade when I got roughed up by Gary Disney's "gang". I still don't see a gun as the answer to low level hostility and defending against petty larceny. Do your customers know you're packing?[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by mr.jaynes
Well, we know where the other side stands on firearms-owning 3 guns myself (one specifically designated for home defense, the other two for target and skeet shooting), I obviously do not agree with these poor misguided souls, but here's hoping they're never violently victimized.
Both of us have acknowledged that we are not anti-gun. Do I have to own one to be in the club? Also both of us agree that the man was probably legal in his actions. Stupid, but legal. What misguided souls are you referring to? I have been violently victimized since I was in second grade when I got roughed up by Gary Disney's "gang". I still don't see a gun as the answer to low level hostility and defending against petty larceny. Do your customers know you're packing?[;)]
No offense intended, Waterboy. It just seemed as if you were on the anti-gun side. I stand corrected.
By the way, if this is any consolation, but had we-you and myself- been in second grade together, this Disney guy (never had the privelege of meeting him, don't even know who he is, wouldn't know him even if ya pointed him out to me) would have cleared a path for you. And hey, I don't need a gun to make the point either.
None taken Mr. Jaynes. Gary Disney was a bully that later came to respect me for NOT fighting him. He wanted me to join his gang or he was going to beat me up! Second grade no less! He pushed me down and called my mom bad names (this was the fifties) but I told him as long as your gang is nearby I won't fight you cause they will join in. He was afraid to fight me without them so it was a draw. I cried all the way home and my older brother with the silver studded black leather jacket offered to beat them all up (he could have!) but I refused the offer. Had to sit with these guys at lunch ya know. Gary was an abused child that later was glad to have me as an ally. I suppose he's in McAlester now. Tough neighborhood but good experience.
In light of my previous comment, let me state for the record that I'm no thug and never was. It's just that in grade school, I never took well to the school bully type, and didn't hesitate to stand up for myself and those that the resident bullies would have in their sights.
quote:
low level hostility
How would you know at the time that this was the case? How did he know that they didn't have a knife or a gun? Was he supposed to wait until they were finished before he decided what action(s) was/were appropriate.
The law allows you use deadly force in situations like this primarily because you NEVER know what degree of force may be used by an attacker. Once someone has crossed the line of physically assault, one should suspect that they have no intention of using "low level hostility."
You think it was "low level hostility" because it wasn't allowed to go any further than that. Had he not shot this guy, the story may have turned out very different. Our society today is one where people getting shot over video game consoles. You can't simply hope for the best in a situation like this one, and this isn't the playground in elementary school. Real life in 2007 is a bit more dangerous.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Do you think it would take these punks 30 minutes to whip his donkey? The first break in was at 2:30. He didn't call the police to report it. What, he was being a good guy by not reporting it? Yes, the police know that fireworks stands are easy targets. So do stand operators. That is why they often have a dog nearby, some big guys staying on premises, lighting etc. The police would have staked the place out. When my neighbor was burglarized, the first thing the cop told us was, they'll be back again soon. They were.
I have to agree with MC. There were other ways to deal with this. Some forethought. A warning shot would have helped for one. BTW anyone notice how the young man he had with him has been referred to as "a child"? Helps the case presented to the DA when the aggressors are referred to as teen-age assailants assaulting a child.
As a parent I would be plenty mad at this YM for such poor planning and putting my "child" in harms way.
The newspaper account didn't characterize the first encounter at 2:30 as a break-in.
For your reading pleasure, here is the account from the Muskogee Phoenix:
quote:
A group of individuals first came to the big tent about 2:30 a.m. Sunday and asked to buy some fireworks, said Muskogee Police Spokesman Brad Holt.
Donnelly asked the group to come back during daylight hours, Holt said.
The group returned about 30 minutes later. Donnelly said he was pretty worried then. Several of the individuals went into the back of the tent stand and attacked the juvenile, Donnelly said Sunday.
The youth was attacked, knocked down and then rolled outside the tent, screaming for help.
Donnelly said that was about the same time three subjects rushed him.
"I shot — I was in fear of my life and Daniel's life — I feel I did what I had to do," Donnelly said Sunday night.
He said he was angry to have been put in that position....
...Holt said Gilbert was the only adult, and that four juveniles are in custody. Police are seeking three more people in connection with the early morning attempt to overpower Donnelly and the 17-year-old, Holt said.
Okay, according to the last paragraph, sounds like it was eight on two. Other part is, the YM didn't put the kid in harms way, the parents apparently must have known where he was, who he was with. The punks who rushed the stand put the kid in harm's way.
Eight-on-two, that's reasonible to fear for your life. Shoot away.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
QuoteOther part is, the YM didn't put the kid in harms way, the parents apparently must have known where he was, who he was with. The punks who rushed the stand put the kid in harm's way.
And it would have been the "punks" fault had this numbskull shot the kid instead. I'm sure his parents would have been thrilled.
That it didn't go down that way, doesn't contribute to the Youth Ministers claim to forethought.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
Do you think it would take these punks 30 minutes to whip his donkey? The first break in was at 2:30. He didn't call the police to report it. What, he was being a good guy by not reporting it? Yes, the police know that fireworks stands are easy targets. So do stand operators. That is why they often have a dog nearby, some big guys staying on premises, lighting etc. The police would have staked the place out. When my neighbor was burglarized, the first thing the cop told us was, they'll be back again soon. They were.
I have to agree with MC. There were other ways to deal with this. Some forethought. A warning shot would have helped for one. BTW anyone notice how the young man he had with him has been referred to as "a child"? Helps the case presented to the DA when the aggressors are referred to as teen-age assailants assaulting a child.
As a parent I would be plenty mad at this YM for such poor planning and putting my "child" in harms way.
The newspaper account didn't characterize the first encounter at 2:30 as a break-in.
For your reading pleasure, here is the account from the Muskogee Phoenix:
quote:
A group of individuals first came to the big tent about 2:30 a.m. Sunday and asked to buy some fireworks, said Muskogee Police Spokesman Brad Holt.
Donnelly asked the group to come back during daylight hours, Holt said.
The group returned about 30 minutes later. Donnelly said he was pretty worried then. Several of the individuals went into the back of the tent stand and attacked the juvenile, Donnelly said Sunday.
The youth was attacked, knocked down and then rolled outside the tent, screaming for help.
Donnelly said that was about the same time three subjects rushed him.
"I shot — I was in fear of my life and Daniel's life — I feel I did what I had to do," Donnelly said Sunday night.
He said he was angry to have been put in that position....
...Holt said Gilbert was the only adult, and that four juveniles are in custody. Police are seeking three more people in connection with the early morning attempt to overpower Donnelly and the 17-year-old, Holt said.
Okay, according to the last paragraph, sounds like it was eight on two. Other part is, the YM didn't put the kid in harms way, the parents apparently must have known where he was, who he was with. The punks who rushed the stand put the kid in harm's way.
Eight-on-two, that's reasonible to fear for your life. Shoot away.
Its confusing to have so many stories floating around. And different adjectives. The first story I thought I read said that in the first encounter that two of the kids had gone behind the counter. It also sounds like this was a ruse and they brought more kids with them for the second encounter.
Remember, this episode is being recounted from the shooters viewpoint and no one is going to pay much attention to the stories of the punks. Nonetheless, as a juror I could entertain two melodramas here with little evidence to prove either one.
I don't wish to seem cavalier about his protecting himself and the young man. Neither do I savor the attitude of "shoot away". Soft heart that I am, they are someone's children, and human beings that can be put on a Godly path without killing them. Its ironic that it is a church pastor involved. I can see why he is angry but he was limited in his response by their actions and his gun. The church is the big loser in all this.
You might ask yourself this. If the action had taken place in the lobby of the church, would the administration have allowed him to carry a gun and shoot them? Probably not. Well their ministry is everywhere, not just the building.
quote:
Soft heart that I am, they are someone's children, and human beings that can be put on a Godly path without killing them.
Thank God you have no say so when it comes to me or others defending our families. You probably applaud a judge that sends the homeowner to prison when the criminal slips and falls on a wet kitchen floor.
quote:
You might ask yourself this. If the action had taken place in the lobby of the church, would the administration have allowed him to carry a gun and shoot them? Probably not. Well their ministry is everywhere, not just the building.
Surely you must be kidding...
How does this analogy even correspond? Not only is this not comparing apples to apples, it's like comparing apples to shoe horns. There is no reason for someone to anticipate a physical altercation in a church, whereas there is a much greater chance of one when you're out in an unprotected, unsecured area with money and no security personnel.
Pastor or not, he's just a human and reacted as any typical human being should have given the facts.
It is confusing WB. As I said in the Riverside shooting post, we are but a peanut gallery. I also mentioned that the Tulsa media has a knack of reporting crime stories that leave enough gaps to drive a semi-truck of speculation through them. [;)]
You keep mentioning the work "kill" or "killing". At last report, the fellow who was shot is in good condition. He was wounded.
Churches aren't frequent targets of robbery, so there's no expectation you might need a gun. They are frequent targets of burglary however, when no one is around. Criminals generally will avoid crowds, police, and other places they might meet resistance unless it's someone bent on mass-murder. How many times have you heard of a crowded bar being robbed? I can't think of one account. I have, however, heard of bars being robbed at 2:30am to 3:00am plenty of times. Why? Because there is the expectation of far less resistance.
Apparently, fireworks were being sold in a tent which would be difficult to secure. Instead of counting on the fireworks to raise money, the church could have wound up in the hole to the wholesaler if they got ripped off. Made good sense to have someone there. It's reasonible to expect that one or two people being present would be a deterrent to theft. In this case, the thieves figured they could outnumber and overwhelm two people.
Personally, I have a 17 y/o who is very involved in church youth group activities. There's no way I'd allow her to be part of a security detail in the middle of the night at a fund-raising event. Perhaps that kid is 6'5" and 275 pounds. Who knows? That was his and his parent's decision. Not what I would have done, but I'm not going to criticize their judgement.
Had the pastor not had a gun, we would have likely read about two badly beaten or possibly dead people instead of a thief recovering from a gun-shot wound.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Not what I would have done, but I'm not going to criticize their judgement.
Fine, I'll take care of it for you. His parents are morons too. There, I said it. My kid wouldn't be allowed to do that either, and after an event like this, wouldn't be allowed to hang out with the Youth Minister.
I bet the Fireworks stand idea was put into motion by the YM, that's the way these things normally go down. I think I'd find another way to raise funds, or at the very least sell the fireworks out of a more defensible fixed location. As opposed to a tent, protected by Gomer Pile and Smith & Wesson.
And I disagree with warning shots. Can cause more trouble than it's worth. If you're going to pull it out, make it count.
The most important part of the story is the fact that they were selling fireworks in a tent.
It has rained so much in the few legal days that fireworks can be sold, I am thinking of getting with waterboy and his boat for a ride to work.
Don't fireworks go bad if they get moist? Wouldn't storing little pieces of paper stuffed with gunpowder in such a wet environment have a negative effect on the fireworks?
Buying and selling fireworks like that is not just a bad idea, it is a dud.
I still like the idea of a warning shot, sort of like a flashbang disorienting thing.
Now, based on the comments about in past from this peanut gallery about punk criminals getting what is coming to them I find it hard to believe that a certain amount of 'Dang right!' would follow a successful 'stand yer ground' shooting or 'self-defense' shooting.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
Churches aren't frequent targets of robbery, so there's no expectation you might need a gun. They are frequent targets of burglary however, when no one is around.Well, the stats may not be solid on those statements. They may not be reported, they may be thwarted, they may even be common for all we know. Since we know they are common targets for burglary, and since burglaries often become assaults, should the night janitor or night watchman be armed? Should the usher who carries the collection plate back to the church office alone while others continue the service be armed? As you say, he has money, there is no crowd, little chance of resistance so a criminals wet dream. I doubt my church council would approve that policy but maybe some would. Regardless, the expectation thing is the important part. Why is a church participating in fund raising that has the expectation of robbery anyway?
Apparently, fireworks were being sold in a tent which would be difficult to secure. Instead of counting on the fireworks to raise money, the church could have wound up in the hole to the wholesaler if they got ripped off. Made good sense to have someone there. It's reasonible to expect that one or two people being present would be a deterrent to theft. In this case, the thieves figured they could outnumber and overwhelm two people.Agreed. You are describing a poor business model, then blaming human nature that anyone could have foreseen, for what happened. Thieves, punks, criminals exist. Prudent people plan for them and if your only plan is a gun and a couple big guys, then this is what happens. If you're a church this is probably not a good plan. I think we agree on stuff, we just disagree on how it best could have been prevented.
TextPersonally, I have a 17 y/o who is very involved in church youth group activities. There's no way I'd allow her to be part of a security detail in the middle of the night at a fund-raising event. Perhaps that kid is 6'5" and 275 pounds. Who knows? That was his and his parent's decision. Not what I would have done, but I'm not going to criticize their judgement. Agree again, we just have a different conclusion. I believe in accepting the responsiblity for a poor decision. If his parents were aware that the plan was to put two big guys with a gun to guard the merchandise, then they deserve criticism. Jeez, even good parents make poor decisions.
WB, I think you are letting your imagination run away with this thing to the point of absurdity in re: churches.
I really don't remember ever hearing of a fireworks stand being robbed, or at the foggiest of my recollection, maybe one. Burglaries on the other hand, I don't think would be uncommon as most stands are either built out of plywood or are in a tent.
Why does it make a difference if it was a church running the stand or the Hell's Angels? There are hundreds of other stands being run around the state this time of year. Is that a bad idea for every other operator? Church or not?
On the part of the church it likely sounded like a very good opportunity to raise funds. Who would have reasonably thought it would lead to a robbery and shooting? Just because he had a gun doesn't mean he for certain was anticipating trouble, it was for "just in case". Parse that all you like, as I'm sure you will.
The only thing significant incident prior to this which stands out in my mind with fireworks stands is hearing about some idiot firing a roman candle into one...as far as that result, use your imagination.
Staying with the merchandise is not unique to this situation, especially when selling out of a temporary location like a tent.
I guess if someone slips, falls, cracks their head, and dies at a church bake sale you guys are going to say what a stupid fund-raising idea that is. [B)]
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I guess if someone slips, falls, cracks their head, and dies at a church bake sale you guys are going to say what a stupid fund-raising idea that is. [B)]
If they slip, fall, and the Youth Minister shoots them, well then yes.
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I guess if someone slips, falls, cracks their head, and dies at a church bake sale you guys are going to say what a stupid fund-raising idea that is. [B)]
If they slip, fall, and the Youth Minister shoots them, well then yes.
[}:)]
(http://www.bjacked.net/LuvToHunt/forums/phpBB2/modules/gallery/albums/album01/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
I guess if someone slips, falls, cracks their head, and dies at a church bake sale you guys are going to say what a stupid fund-raising idea that is. [B)]
If they slip, fall, and the Youth Minister shoots them, well then yes.
But they might have been armed! Shoot them as soon as they fall then ask questions later.[:D]
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Not a Tulsan, but this brings out the Christians with guns debate quite nicely. (//%22http://kotv.com/news/local/story/?id=130171%22)
This guy puts the Riverside shooter to shame. At what point does a youth pastor decide that bringing a gun to an overnighter is a good idea? Any defenders out there?
Everyman has a right to defend himself and others.
Thanks JR for wading in so timely! You certainly capsulated the discussion!
'A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive the suicidal destruction wrought upon it by paranoid despots and their sychophantic, pantywaist yesmen at the local level.'
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Thanks JR for wading in so timely! You certainly capsulated the discussion!
sychophantic
Was that a typo or did you create a really cool new word with two meanings? I hope the latter.[;)]
sycophantic would describe Condoleeza. (p)sychophantic would describe G. Gordon Liddy.
Man is attacked
Man defends self by shooting the scum with his gun.
Sounds good to me.
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Thanks JR for wading in so timely! You certainly capsulated the discussion!
sychophantic
Was that a typo or did you create a really cool new word with two meanings? I hope the latter.[;)]
sycophantic would describe Condoleeza. (p)sychophantic would describe G. Gordon Liddy.
Condoleezza-she's loyal to her boss to a fault, and just as dedicated to bringing his objectives to fruition.
Liddy? The man is clearly insane. No other way to describe him.
Back to my point that it is all about fireworks...this is my conspiracy theory portion of the day.
Fireworks are symbols of war...they represent bombs bursting in air...or so the song says. People who like fireworks are secretly and/or subconsciencely approving of violence. The gun people and the military/industrial complex use fireworks and the scent of gunpowder to lure children into becoming gun owners and voting for pro-war candidates.
Fireworks are also the reason why Bell's was moved. The biggest day of the year for RiverParks is the fourth of July and Bell's was competing with their own show. Now, the powers of the RiverParks Authority have fourth of July fireworks all to themselves.
It is all about fireworks.
What if he'd shot him with a roman candle?
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
Back to my point that it is all about fireworks...this is my conspiracy theory portion of the day.
Fireworks are symbols of war...they represent bombs bursting in air...or so the song says. People who like fireworks are secretly and/or subconsciencely approving of violence. The gun people and the military/industrial complex use fireworks and the scent of gunpowder to lure children into becoming gun owners and voting for pro-war candidates.
Fireworks are also the reason why Bell's was moved. The biggest day of the year for RiverParks is the fourth of July and Bell's was competing with their own show. Now, the powers of the RiverParks Authority have fourth of July fireworks all to themselves.
It is all about fireworks.
Dis-jointed, not cohesive, full of speculation. Makes perfect sense to me!
quote:
Originally posted by tim huntzinger
Thanks JR for wading in so timely! You certainly capsulated the discussion!
I find it amusing how anti-2nd amendment nuts,criminal apologist and anti-religious nuts try to use this as a means to attack gun ownership,feel sorry for scum and to bash christians.The thugs that were shot at could have easily killed the minister and one of his congregation member.
If criminals do not want to get shot then they should not try threaten and or assault people,nor should they be trying to steal **** that is not theirs.
[refer to Conan's pic of horse, please]
For the sake of tenderizing the meat, however, JR, do you find any of your bogeymen participating in this discussion?