“Mrs. Green, you are a living example of why people should not have guns in their house. And I’m not saying that just to you. I say it to myself, too. I was an assistant prosecutor, and assistant United States attorney, defense lawyer and a judge for 30-some years, and I never owned a gun. And I never owned a gun was because . . .
“when I was a prosecutor, early in my legal career, I was trying a homicide case and there was a murder in the first degree, and the man who had been killed when these young people walked in his store to try to rob him, he tried to go for his gun and they killed. And the detective, I said to him,
“‘I should get me a gun.’ And he said to me, ‘Dalton, you don’t need a gun in your house because if someone comes into your house, or contacts you on the street, if you go for the gun you end up getting killed.'” – Judge Dalton Robertson in Judge to Detroit mother in You are living example of why people should not have guns at home [via clickondetroit.com]
Can someone please link the reliable data which shows people who resist violent crime have WAY lower injury rates?
We just had still another dgu reported here within a couple of days ago. Old guy being jumped by 2 young guys. Beating him and had their gun out. He shot the one with the gun.
Happens all the time. Maybe the judge should amend his statement to cover only the crooks not having guns. Will ensure they live long enough to stand in front of the judge.
jwm,
There is a highly credible source of extensive data which conclusively shows that victims who resist violent crime have a higher survival rate and lower injury rate.
I’m pretty sure the detective had correctly sized him up as a man, and the advice was meant specifically for him.
He, not realizing the insult, took it mean that NO ONE is capable of protecting themselves… which is some sort of projection.
There it is.
Yes. Agreed.
Couldn’t have said it better.
Spot on.
Uncommon sense, IIRC that is FBI data which comes out each year, likelihood of injury if you defend yourself with a gun, with a different weapon, with no weapon, or do not attempt to defend yourself. Every time I’ve seen it reported, the least injuries were in the “defend yourself with a gun” category, even lower than the “just give it up” category.
There is a study showing that. I think it was done by a federal agency, during the Obama administration. There might be some reference to it in “FACTS ABOUT GUNS” link at the top of the page, but I didn’t see anything that stood out as definitely that.
No but I can link to this sumary-
http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/
of this CDC research
https://www.nap.edu/read/18319/chapter/1
The report presents a lot of facts. It then try to dispute some of it with conjecture orr a need for more research, probably because the fact do nt match there theory.
That would be research done by Florida State Professor Gary Kleck:
Kleck, Gary and Jongyeon Tark. 2005. “Resisting Crime: The Effects of Victim Action on the Outcomes of Crimes.” Criminology 42(4):861-909.
Kleck, Gary and Marc Gertz. 1995. “Armed Resistance to Crime: the Prevalence and Nature of Self-defense with a Gun.” Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology 86(1):150-187.
I know better than everyone else… so my opinion is obviously fact. Love that mentality.
“Appeal to authority” is a common logic fallacy.
“Respect my authoritah!”
-Eric Cartman
Judge Dalton Robertson, You are a living example of why one person should not be able to pass judgement on any other one person. Idiot.
I don’t really object to a lot of the common logical fallacies. If an authority I trust says something, I’m going with it.
That said, “a cop” isn’t an authority I’m going to trust.
I believe it was Plato who called it the ‘supercilious schmuck’ fallacy. I could be wrong though.
Gotta “love” that fighting advice from someone who’s no good at fighting. I wonder what the response would be if you said cops and soldiers shouldn’t carry guns for the same reason.
So we little people are far better off defenseless and reliant upon the good will and charity of criminals because we are all too stupid or incompetent enough to keep and use firearms safely and effectively. Yep, that’s the liberal progressive party line sure enough.
Obviously true, given the well known fact that criminals as a rule go to school for years and years to become invincible experts in the offensive use of all firearms, in between their classes in breaking and entering, raping and murdering, etc. This is why they never enter the criminal world as professionals until their 40s.
Well, by that logic, I hope the judge doesn’t have a grandchild and a swimming pool.
I guess he has never heard of self defense training….
Clearly not WISE enough to be a judge.
Goddamn that’s a whole lotta unintelligible nonsense. Somebody check that judge for a McCain tumor.
That detective probably gave that advice based on personal knowledge of this judge more than anything else.
You see this? This is why we have the 2nd amendment.
You might say he is the living embodiment of why we have the Second Amendment.
^This, hell yea.
I sure hope he walked to court then. Shouldnt use an automobile. Way too dangerous. And why the hell would you need a gun in Detroit in the first place…. Oh yeah. Gangbangers running around left and right and a 45 min response time for police. Public service and the justice system at its finest
“If that’s the case, detective, why do you carry a gun?”
Cause I’m highly blah blah blah; and yearly qualifications prove that blah blah blah.
One word. Coward
Wow… I’m… wow. Bright enough to be a judge, but not bright enough to Google “defensive gun uses” or “armed self defense” I suppose.
You actually don’t have to be very bright to be a judge. In some locations it is just another elected office. And passing the bar isn’t mathematics or science, it’s rote memorization.
” And passing the bar isn’t mathematics or science, it’s rote memorization.”
Here’s something to scare you – Getting your MD is over 90 percent “rote memorization.”
“The ‘Doctor’ will see you now…”
Passing the bar is not rote memorization. You have to memorize rules and then apply those rules to fact patterns.
That said, I know some stupid lawyers.
And some really smart ones.
I’ve relied on a couple through the years. The list is short.
Judge Dalton, your are a living example of why we need the Second Amendment. Because there will always be people like you, in positions of power in government, who think you know what’s best for me or what tools I should possess for my own security.
Our founders knew we needed the Second Amendment because of people like you.
Hey, I heard this anecdote one time about some guy who crashed his car and it caught on fire, and he couldn’t get his seatbelt undone and he died. So no one should ever wear seatbelts.
/So much stupid.
Judge is a racist. He thinks that minorities shouldn’t own guns and holds himself up as an example.
He just as well told every rape victim to just lay back and enjoy it.
Correct.
If the victim is armed, then it’s possible that two people may get hurt, rather than just one.
Don’t you find that logic compelling?
Moral equivalence colors every aspect of liberal ideology.
Without situational awareness and firearms practice, maybe he shouldn’t have a firearm.
Says the twisted mentality that it is morally superior to be unarmed and DEAD than armed and ALIVE. I choose life, MY life.
Even armed and DEAD, having tried to defend yourself, is better than being unarmed, cowardly and what ever plus dead. Maybe giving your life and having removed the perp from the mortal realm.
If a person can say ” Guns are bad because they make killing people to easy.” Then can follow that statement with” Self defense with a firearm is too difficult for most people.” That person is a moron.
Owning a gun, without the will and knowledge to use it when necessary, absolutely is a far greater danger to yourself than being unarmed.
I’d let my mother keep one of mine in her house if I thought that there was ANY chance of her actually using it to put down a bad guy intent on doing her harm.
As it stands IF she got to a gun in a DGU (and that’s a really big if) there’s nearasdamnit 100% chance it’s going to just be taken from her without firing a shot.
She’s the living embodiment of why a gun shouldn’t be kept in the house (of some people).
So one guy gave him some anecdotal advice 30 some years ago and he isn’t embarrassed to be spreading that today? I’m embarrassed for him.
When it’s advice that happens to support your prejudice, it’s a solid foundation.
Obviously you weren’t paying attention- he said a detective told him that. A DETECTIVE! Case-closed, can’t argue with that.
The stupid is strong in this “judge.”
YMMV
Well, bless his heart.
If victims fight back, then they’re just making it worse for themselves.
There is no T in his last name, it’s Roberson, you know, son of a robber. 😉
Did a bit of research on this ‘judge’, looks like he likes to release violent offenders on low bail and his son with wife are thieves. 😮
http://www.wxyz.com/news/region/detroit/local-judges-exposed-for-releasing-habitual-violent-offenders-on-low-bail
http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2016/09/09/prosecutor-judge-son-charged/90139092/
Well, now he has to release all of them on low/no bail because they all know he is unarmed and an easy target for retribution.
If more criminals got shot or got out of the profession due to the risk, it’d put him out of a job.
He just blurted out why he should have recused himself from every case he’s ever tried involving a gun, and from every case he might ever try.
He should have just said “you know why I became a judge? Because it suits me.”
PACK YER SH_T AND GO THE F HOME STUPID.
Some things are worse than death
It is worth risking death by “going for your gun” than to have your family raped in your own home by a home invader criminal with a gun
A real man fights back
Even if he gets killed
Because that store owner wasn’t up to it and some idiot told him he wouldn’t be competent, he assumes no one else would be either. Besides, all the “gun safety” people tell him he’s incompetent so why shouldn’t he believe he’s incompetent?
I guess ANY one can be a judge in DE-troit. Duh…
Ironically, the cited article continues reporting the Detroit Police Chief is urging Detroit Homeowners to “arm-up” and analyzing the incident as not accidental. The Chief implies the incident could have been prevented by training.
Apparently, neither Ms. Green, nor the “Judge” paid sufficient heed to the Police Chief’s advice. In that Ms. Green was negligent and the “Judge’s” admonition embarrassingly dimwitted. There are many things one can form an opinion about based on one experience, or one piece of advice, but this is not one of them, particularly when living in a lawless situation like Detroit.
You left your child unattended and he gets into your lubes. Really this is TMI.
Maybe secure the toys. Or do you want Bloomberg to outlaw them? Different cuffs my friend. Background checks for Astraglyde? You can only purchase one “novelty” per month? Oh that would make you unhappy. Took your rights away?!!!
Note to all criminals: Judge Dalton Roberson of Detroit has made it public record that there are zero guns about his home or person.
What a maroon.
Having a gun doesn’t guarantee you a win. Just gives you options to survive you wouldn’t have otherwise.
Nor does this “judge” respect the Constitution, it seems.
A prime example of why detroit is detoilet.
So one guy screws up and gets himself killed 40 years ago and that means no one should own a gun. Makes sense to me!
So, according to this detective, cops and soldiers don’t need guns because having guns would get them killed.
“Dalton, you don’t need a gun in your house because if someone comes into your house, or contacts you on the street, if you go for the gun you end up getting killed.”
Give that judge a gun! Please!
That dufus seems to be saying: If someone breaks into your house, just lay down and die.
I don’t think so, I will die in a pile of hot brass before I do that……………
The best source for accurate data regarding crime and firearms is
https://crimeresearch.org
Second one out of the holster usually loses a gunfight. That being said, I feel like most criminals aren’t planning on armed resistance when comitting a crime. I’ll take my chances
It would be reasonable to assume most gun owners are not trained in any way. However, it is equally unreasonable to believe that the average criminals has any training either. So the odds are really in the untrained civilians favor considering hes probably been to a shooting range at least a couple times, wheres a criminal likely never fired his gun before.
Normally, I’d like to tag a comment earlier, but I got here late. It did give me a chance to look over everyone else’s comments and to notice that seemingly no one has clicked the link and read WHY this judge was lecturing this person: she left a loaded gun in her purse and her kid found it and shot himself in his hand.
Whatever else we may think of this judge, the woman he was lecturing was by no means a great example of a gun owner.
I think most of the comments were in response to the judges anecdote. However I agree, terribly irresponsible of her. Her kid is 9, he definitely should have had some firearms safety classes by now.
I don’t disagree with you that this woman shouldn’t have a gun, but by the same reasoning, she also shouldn’t have children. A nine year old is plenty old enough to know better than to shoot himself.
I’d really need more information to come to an opinion either way on this.
More proof that a college education does not make a person smart.
Y’r honor, with all due respect, go f*ck yourself.
Soooo glad that I don’t live in Detroit if he’s an example of the Justice System there.