“In 1966, UT students rushed to their dormitories, grabbed their rifles and pinned (sniper Charles) Whitman down while police stormed the tower. The current mob look like they’d read Sylvia Plath’s poetry at him.” – Tim Blair in Australian Diary [at spectator.co.uk]
In the late 18th century, the shopkeepers, streetsweepers, stable hands and longshoremen of Boston walked out to make war on the greatest military the Earth had ever known.
In the early 21st, one lunatic with one handgun held the entire city hostage.
Well, not every city can be as bad ass as Houston, you know, where as recently as last night two men attempted to carjack a man at a gas station, only to be confronted by an armed (legally?) 3rd party.
That armed 3rd party fired on the carjacking suspects, but ended up shooting the carjacking victim in the head (oops!), instead. He then picked up his shell casings as he fled the scene.
That carjacking victim needed outside help like he needed another hole in his head. Turns out, he got both. So much for the “armed citizens to the rescue!” myth.
So what you’re saying is one example of a non-police citizen doing what the police seem to do all too often proves that no non-police citizen can ever be of assistance? I seem to remember several examples that prove your one example to be the exception rather than the rule. A short, incomplete list: Clackamas Mall, Pearl High School, Law School of the Appalachians, University of Texas (1966, before most of our times to remember).
“So what you’re saying is one example of a non-police citizen doing what the police seem to do all too often proves that no non-police citizen can ever be of assistance?”
Why, yes he is saying that. One of the logic errors gun grabbers make all the time, this one here by “Jonathon-Houston”(probably Argon the Antiquarian’s newest name), is the Hasty Generalization fallacy, whereby a too small sample of evidence is used to generalize. In this case, a single shooting(which we don’t even know who did it, perhaps the “armed citizen” in this case was a member of the carjackers and shot the victim instead of being a would be Good Samaritian) is used condemn the notion of armed citizens protecting themselves and others.
Focus a single sketchy shooting, use it to condemn legally armed citizens in spite of at least 1.4 million DGUs a year. This is the Hasty Generalization fallacy at work.
I would like to know the socioeconomics of the participants. Without going full conspiracy theory this sounds like a possible setup. What panicked armed citizen picks up his shell casings after shooting the wrong guy. That is a deliberate act of by a professional.
I can barely police up all of my brass at a range, let alone thinking about policing it up out in a parking lot. This story sounds fishy.
There is this apocryphal story about an instructor down on “The Farm” who asked a bunch of new recruits “what does it take to be an assassin?” The recruits said things like being a good shot, a cool head, expert on martial arts and be covert. The instructor said “anybody can learn those skills. Only a sociopath can be an assassin and we don’t recruit sociopaths.”
Only a sociopath can calmly go about his business picking up his spent brass and disappearing after shooting someone in the head. A normal person is either to stay put and call for help or panic and run away. I would like to see some follow up on this story.
Can you link the story? Nothing shows up in a web search.
Gee…wonder why. I mean, it’s not as though antis would just make things up to support their position, right?
Here’s the story. It’s real. But talk about a man-bites-dog story! http://www.khou.com/story/news/2015/09/27/one-man-injured-after-carjacking-shooting-at-gas-station/72923278/
Thanks for the link! I got friends in Houston, was curious about this.
Highly doubtful the 3rd party was legally armed. People with concealed carry permits go to class. They are background checked. And they have the lowest incidence of criminal activity, even lower than the police in some states. Highly doubtful, like I said. Nice try for the antis, though.
It occurs to me that building a list of such incidents IRONICALLY serves OUR objectives. Just how many such incidents occur? Who knows – nobody is keeping track. Pick a number; anyones guess is as irrefutable as any other. You like the Brady estimate; somebody likes the Moms’ estimate.
But, what if that number is – in reality – pretty low? How could we find out?
The answer has been discovered by the Guinness Book of Records. You simply publish and invite anyone who has evidence to correct the record. Say, for example, that some publisher – TTAG.com for example – published a list of all the incidents it could find for a period; e.g., last year or the last 5 years. OK, everyone who cares about gun violence: Here is the list. Dates, places, names. The figure is ##. That’s ##/year or ## over 5 years.
Brady, Bloomberg, the Moms can help all they want. But they can’t fabricate incidents. They have to have a news report and it has to be verifiable. If somebody got shot there really ought to be a police report.
I think the Anti’s will see where this process leads. So, we PotG find 12 incidents and they can find another 6. Do they really want to go on record proclaiming that there were 18 incidents over 1 or 5 years? Or, would they be better off trying to avoid any connection with this “book of recorded incidents” as quiet as they can.
OK, so we give them a year to decide whether to contribute new incidents or not. Either way, we come out and proclaim our list as the AUTHORITATIVE source for data on the question. We compare the number of incidents with bad outcomes to the various estimates of DGUs.
Who wins?
Do we want to find out?
How do you know he picked up the shell casings instead of just using a revolver?
DUN DUNT DUN!
Johnathan- blue (D)
Your argument leaps the 1/4 mile wide moat on the actual problem.
1) there was a bad guy with a gun.
2) YOU AND OTHER LIBERAL BLUE (D) BAGS LED THE BAD GUY TO BELIEVE IT WAS A MORE LIKELY SCENARIO THAT HE WOULD NOT ENCOUNTER AN ARMED RESPONSE FROM HIS VICTIM.
3) he was also pretty convinced cops would not be there in time to stop him or catch him after.
That’s wat the POTG are fighting every day.
See my reply.
And what is so difficult about my name’s spelling? Is your and your buddies’ red mist blind haste so overwhelming that you can’t even transcribe a simple name when it’s right before you? With those skills and degree of control, perhaps you shouldn’t carry a gun.
Jonathan:
We live in the world of the party line. Any deviation from one element, even if only playing devil’s advocate, makes you an appostate.
Look how Trump supporters call everybody who disagrees with Trump on immigration a RINO all the while supporting a guy who is Hillary Clinton plus or minus.
It is Stalin ism writ large.
Yawn @ david and fleabag…..
What I am saying, is that this case demonstrates how moronic and insular some POTG can be. I throw out, in Devil’s Advocate fashion, an apple of discord, and you ravenous hounds pounce without thinking.
Gungrabber? Name changer? Moi? Bitch, please. Same and same-named uncompromising RTKBA’er here as ever. I just like to shake it up a bit and disrupt the echo chamber clique in here sometimes; force people to refresh and reinvigorate their arguments.
I write more, and more interesting and compelling, posts in here in a week in defense of our God-given right to keep and bear arms, than nobody-jackwagons like you two will in a lifetime. Meanwhile, you two hacks couldn’t get any wood on the ball gently lofted past the plate.
Take a cue from TDI’s more circumspect approach. He doesn’t take the bait, instead offering an interesting what-if perspective. That’s showing me something.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. One of our biggest problems is that we eat our young. I’m pretty sure that every single person on this site that I know to be a pro-gun person in every sense of the word has been accused of being an anti-gun, gun-grabbing, libtard MDA member, by someone who has disagreed with one thing they said. Often, it’s not even a disagreement over the broad point they were making, but with some minor detail. One little comment that gets misconstrued and it’s off to the races. Grab the pitchforks and light the torches, boys, we got us some Lib-catchin’ to do!
*Oh yeah, and bootlicker. That’s always one of my favorites. I’ve been called that quite a few times, mostly by people who no longer post here.
The TTAG comments section is not for the thin-skinned or faint-of-heart. Whether by design or otherwise, it is not a newbie/beginner-friendly place. Now, IMHO, there’s nothing inherently wrong with that – and there are other places that are far friendlier to newbies/beginners/undecideds.
Should the TTAG comments section be friendlier? That’s for management to decide. I try to be forthright but not insulting. If I find myself getting caught up in flame wars, I just take a break. Ain’t nobody got time fo’ that.
Unlike RKBA, which is, as a principle, universal and absolute, police officers are humans. Like all other humans, they run the spectrum from good to bad. I find that I sometimes get called “bootlicker” by the people who always hate the police, and sometimes get called a hater/extremist/[insert pejorative here] by the people who believe the police can do no wrong. Personally? I only care about the truth, whether that truth exonerates or implicates a given police officer.
I applaud your sentiments Chip.
The only qualification I might (dare to) offer is that if someone posts here disclosing that s/he is sympathetic to gun-control but wants to engage in a discussion then we ought to admit her/him and treat the comments with civility.
We know the Anti’s sites censor our submissions. Therefore, the only place for “a discussion” of gun-rights/-control can take place is here or elsewhere in the rights-respecting community. It is in OUR OWN best interest to welcome dialogue with the gun-control sympathetic commenters (however few there might be). By being civil we will invite more traffic from people who might become our friends.
(Now, then, at the other end of the spectrum, if we relax the rules about civil discourse between claimants of competing ideological purity, that’s just fine. We aren’t going to offend visitors if an SBS advocate claims his preferred armament is more righteous than that of his opponent, the SBR advocate.)
In the early 21st, one lunatic with one handgun held the entire city hostage
Wasn’t a handgun, it was a rifle
I believe Russ was referring to the Boston bombers having a single pistol between them. Not the the Texas shooter.
This is what you get when you turn your children, and the universities you send them to, over to people who believe that Al Gore was elected but had the election stolen from him. We give out participation trophies to kids for just showing up, to boost their self esteem instead of rewarding excellence. Simply put we surrendered our children, our future, to nitwits. Now we must reclaim our own country from the fools we put in charge.
IF AlGore had won his own home state of Tennessee he would have won the election outright; the Florida results would have merely been a footnote in history.
But he didn’t and, therefore, he didn’t.
Exactly. Al Gore lost because the voters from TN, who knew him better than anyone else, picked W — who ended up winning the electoral college by five votes. TN was worth eleven EC votes. Math is math. Unfortunately, most Americans can’t do math. Or logic.
Worse. Al Gore lost the vote despite HUGE amounts of voter fraud on his side. His biggest mental anguish that night was his loss despite the fix being in
As a recent college graduate i can assure you that not all college students are like this. Not even close. Theres about 5% of any given college that are foaming at the mouth leftists who never shut the fuck up ever about anything. A lot are liberal, but honestly only due to peer pressure. The rest are like the general population and don’t care about politics at all. I went to Rutgers, as a political science student (i’m actually going into political work for the 2A and took relevant classes to help me with my career) and i can tell you that the teachers, while self described liberals, are just as sick of these kids as everyone else. Hell, one of my professors actually said he was turning from a “namby pamby NYC liberal” (his exact self description) to a conservative because of this constant nonsense.
tl;dr
Its a very small group of students and professors who never shut the hell up. There’s still hope.
A lot are liberal, but honestly only due to peer pressure.
You were trying to be kind to them, I know. And yet, you couldn’t have said anything worse about them if you simply called them sheep.
Well he are a collage grad.lol
I didn’t know universities had nap time for the students. This explains a lot.
You mad bro?
Why are you microaggressing on naps?
Looks like someone suggested racing around the quad without a trigger warning and everyone in earshot fainted straight away.
Liberal progressive indoctrination: you shouldn’t fight. Not ever. Therefore, don’t carry weapons of any sort or train to use them. Trust the government for that. Even if the cause is just, there is no reason to fight. Just talk things out. And if that doesn’t work, hide under a desk. Call 911. Try to find a door and lock it. As a last resort, attack with a pencil and textbook or use your body as a human shield.
I just described described the response of the average public school to an armed aggressor.
In the words of Texas Obama, “This isn’t who we are”.
The article was great and spot on…by the way, and Burges is a hoot.
UT has always been the epicenter of liberal thought in Texas, but a number of things over the years have really changed the nature of the school from a great place to go to school to what it has become recently. One of those has been the admissions policy which has basically eliminated the “average” student. That probably sounds like a good thing…but these days, those high school students that are drivien to excel in high school academically are frequently not the well rounded students of years past, with a balance of academics, sports and extra curricular activities.
A student graduating in the top 8% of graduating class is provsionally accepted, as long as they meet other requirments for course work. This accounts for 75% of the entering class. the remaining quarter is filled with those who compete for a spot, which means those whoe did not make top 8% are not likely to fare well. This is where special programs, out of state and international students come in. There is a pretty famous lawsuit regarding this that has gone to the Supreme Court. So the bottom line is that the student body at UT is not representative of the values of the state for the most part.
Texas A&M on the other hand, has become what UT used to be. It’s admission standards are top 10%, and less restrictive on percentages. Once the exclusivce domain of serious civil engineers (the Dept of Trans training pipeline), big agriculture, future vets and the those destined for military service…it is now home to more of the “average” students who spent thier high school years in places other than the library. The student culture there is much more reflective of the middle class in the state.
There are other things too at a corporate level, but I think at the student level, this has been the biggest driver of the shift at UT.
You know, A&M just adopted a “Yes means Yes” consent to sex policy. I’d say they’re following along in the treat the student like babies just as-well as UT.
And yes, that surprised and depressed me, A&M was one of the last schools I was expecting to implement that nonsense.
Texas State University in nearby San Marcos is a great school and retains much of the spirit of traditional Texas higher education. It still feels like a “real” university, unlike UT.
UT has definitely been passed up by a&m academically. Austin is a cesspool of deviancy these days. A bunch of effeminate men and women with green hair. Last time i was there i saw one of these die ins where every protester is laying on the ground, and half the kids were taking selfies.
The best thing the town is known for is sxsw. Thats the only reason to visit austin.
Here’s another good reason:
https://www.facebook.com/thetruthaboutguns/photos/a.151125314954904.37078.151091791624923/939709576096470/?type=3&theater
Talk about “behind enemy lines”. Interesting choice of venue!
I loved this comment..
“Aaron M • 3 days ago
Nonono, none of this. Please. We’re already being overrun by economic refugees from California, rushing in by the tens of thousands, eager to vote for the same stupid policies that wrecked their original home like idiot locusts.
Texas is bad! Guns! NASCAR! Oil! Football! We beat up vegans! Please stay out.
Unless, I suppose, you love guns, NASCAR, oil, and football, but hate vegans.”
The current mob look like they’d read Sylvia Plath’s poetry at him.
Not the entire mob, only the ones who can actually read. The rest will draw something pretty with a crayon.
Where might I find a university in America today where I wouldn’t be the only one grabbing a rifle from my dormitory in such a circumstance?
http://study.com/articles/List_of_the_Top_Gunsmithing_Schools_in_the_US.html
🙂
Too LAYDOWN and DIE with all rights extinguished with not a single shot to be fired!
The Face of Progressive Liberalism at its finest!
Reading Plath to him would have been just as lethal.
That article rocked. Especially the poetry quip. And the dig on college students, haha.