Gunman Opens Fire in Phoenix

[Unabogie]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/31/us...plex.html?_r=0

Quote:

PHOENIX — A gunman opened fire at an office complex here on Wednesday, wounding at least five people, one of them seriously, before fleeing, the police said. Several hours after the shooting, members of a police S.W.A.T. unit continued to check the building, but the whereabouts of the gunman were not known.

Sorry to keep posting horrible gun stories every day, guys. I know this is really annoying that NRGOs (non-responsible gun owners) keep ruining the Soc-Cur forum.

Hopefully no one will go on a shooting spree tomorrow.

[Biscuit]

I wonder if this was a good guy with a gun turned bad guy with a gun.

[Unabogie]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

I wonder if this was a good guy with a gun turned bad guy with a gun.

Naturally, that couldn't be. If he was a good guy with a gun then he would have been out target shooting with the kids. This guy wasn't doing that, so he has always been a bad guy with a gun.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

I wonder if this was a good guy with a gun turned bad guy with a gun.

He was a terrible shot, luckily (hopefully full recoveries for all involved).

[Biscuit]

Originally Posted by Polaris

He was a terrible shot, luckily (hopefully full recoveries for all involved).

They said 5 injured, 3 critical on the news a few minutes ago. Been calling my friends up in phoenix just waiting to hear from one of them.

[BenBurch]

http://www.azfamily.com/news/Triple-...189066061.html

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by Biscuit

They said 5 injured, 3 critical on the news a few minutes ago. Been calling my friends up in phoenix just waiting to hear from one of them.

That's up from 1 critical in the OP link.

[BenBurch]

One described as "extremely critical".

[Polaris]

When they catch the gunman, how about they dissect his brain so we can gain some insight?

[BenBurch]

Originally Posted by Polaris

When they catch the gunman, how about they dissect his brain so we can gain some insight?

Heh. If he hasn't blown it to bits by now.

The critical patient is a lawyer. The shooter was at a settlement conference over some legal matter.

[Polaris]

Originally Posted by BenBurch

Heh. If he hasn't blown it to bits by now.

The critical patient is a lawyer. The shooter was at a settlement conference over some legal matter.

If he is still alive, good luck to the ************ in finding counsel.

[LTC8K6]

How about prosecuting the criminals? Unlike in Chicago?

http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130...t-face-charges

[ben m]

I'm still waiting for the stream of news posts about armed legal-buyer Nancy-Lanza-types spontaneously fighting off shooters. The NRA has assured us that this happens all the time, and indeed that fighting off crooks is the main thing legally-bought handguns are used for. Indeed, that gun laws of any sort---even simple registrations---will put us in danger by reducing the number of heroes fighting back in cases like this.

Unfortunately, those stories have been a bit ... um, nonexistent. Huh.

[triforcharity]

Non-existent? Horse ****.

Here's one.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/29/conce...-gun-on-a-dad/

Here's another.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/29/new-y...rs-with-ar-15/

Another? Sure.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/25/wheel...r-with-pistol/

One more? Of course!!

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/08/homeo...hters-bedroom/

Wanna try again with your "nonexistent" claim? Perhaps it's because the MSM doesn't want to cover it? Or maybe because it's usually not sensational enough?

Nope, must be non existent.

[LTC8K6]

Quote:

The Phoenix Police Department said one of three people shot during a Wednesday morning shooting at an office building is dead.

Quote:

He said the suspect is a white male and that police believe the shooting was a targeted act and that an altercation occurred prior to the shooting.

He said it is unclear what a motive may have been.

“At this point we don’t believe he is in the area,” Thompson said. “This doesn’t appear to be a random type of incident.”

http://www.azcentral.com/community/p...ting-abrk.html

[BenBurch]

It's now homicide;

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...oting/1877525/

[Unabogie]

Originally Posted by triforcharity

Non-existent? Horse ****.

Here's one.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/29/conce...-gun-on-a-dad/

Here's another.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/29/new-y...rs-with-ar-15/

Another? Sure.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/25/wheel...r-with-pistol/

One more? Of course!!

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/08/homeo...hters-bedroom/

Wanna try again with your "nonexistent" claim? Perhaps it's because the MSM doesn't want to cover it? Or maybe because it's usually not sensational enough?

Nope, must be non existent.

This one is interesting.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/08/homeo...hters-bedroom/

It says that the man was trying to break into both cars and homes and was acting erratically. Obviously, since this was the last house he tried, he wasn't specifically trying to target the girls' bedroom, but was delusional and possibly mentally ill. The homeowner thought he was reaching in his pocket, after the he confronted the stranger, so he killed him and it turned out the man wasn't armed.

Seems to me this was a perfect opportunity for the guy to call the cops, get his daughter up and leave the house or put them in the back room and take cover with his weapon. Instead, just like Mr. Sailors, it was time to shoot em up!

Well, at least the guy died which is a happy ending for everyone.

[TheL8Elvis]

Originally Posted by triforcharity

Non-existent? Horse ****.

Here's one.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/29/conce...-gun-on-a-dad/
<SNIP>

Smith set his son, who was in a car seat, down and then knelt down to shield the child from the gunman. He then handed over what money he had in his pockets: $40.
...
As the gunman began to leave, he turned and trained the gun back on the Smith, but Smith had already pulled his carry gun and then shot the suspect when he realized what was happening.
...
Although wounded and bleeding, the suspect was still able to flee the scene.


The guy lost his 40 dollars and tried to murder a robber by shooting him in the back.

That is spontaneously fighting off shooters exactly how ?

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by Unabogie

This one is interesting.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/08/homeo...hters-bedroom/

It says that the man was trying to break into both cars and homes and was acting erratically. Obviously, since this was the last house he tried, he wasn't specifically trying to target the girls' bedroom, but was delusional and possibly mentally ill. The homeowner thought he was reaching in his pocket, after the he confronted the stranger, so he killed him and it turned out the man wasn't armed.

Seems to me this was a perfect opportunity for the guy to call the cops, get his daughter up and leave the house or put them in the back room and take cover with his weapon. Instead, just like Mr. Sailors, it was time to shoot em up!

Well, at least the guy died which is a happy ending for everyone.

The cops had already been called, they hadn't arrived yet. I may not have a gun but if I caught someone trying to break into one of my kid's bedrooms, I wouldn't sit around and think about what a responsible person should do in this situation. If I think my kids are being threatened, I wouldn't think twice about protecting them.

[Unabogie]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

The cops had already been called, they hadn't arrived yet. I may not have a gun but if I caught someone trying to break into one of my kid's bedrooms, I wouldn't sit around and think about what a responsible person should do in this situation. If I think my kids are being threatened, I wouldn't think twice about protecting them.

But they weren't being threatened and the guy was unarmed. He was just obviously delusional, which is why he was randomly trying to open things and was not responsive.

My brother is diabetic, and a few times he had an insulin reaction, he acted like this. If someone thought he was "threatening their kids", then he could be killed by someone. Except if that someone called the cops and didn't just shoot him first.

This reminds me of a time some drugged out girl ran into my parents' house when I was just a kid. She was hallucinating and ran right into their bathroom and locked the door. I guess my dad could have shot her, but strangely he didn't and the fire department came and got her out.

I guess he was just a chump.

[Checkmite]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

The cops had already been called, they hadn't arrived yet. I may not have a gun but if I caught someone trying to break into one of my kid's bedrooms, I wouldn't sit around and think about what a responsible person should do in this situation. If I think my kids are being threatened, I wouldn't think twice about protecting them.

Fair enough, but it still fails to be a case of "a good guy with a gun fighting off a bad guy(s) with a gun".

[Ranb]

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

The guy lost his 40 dollars and tried to murder a robber by shooting him in the back.

So this is murder why? If you paid a gun wielding robber not to blow you away while you were shielding your child, would you continue to trust him not to harm you or your family when he turned back around to threaten you again?

Care to ease up on the murder claim until the local authorities have their say?

Ranb

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by Unabogie

But they weren't being threatened and the guy was unarmed. He was just obviously delusional, which is why he was randomly trying to open things and was not responsive.

He didn't know he was unarmed, that wasn't found out till after the fact. What he sees is someone attempting to break into his kid's bedroom who is not in their right mind. That's enough for me to go on the defensive and not the time I am going to sit around and contemplate my subjective experience or think, perhaps I shall just wait till the police arrive.

Quote:

My brother is diabetic, and a few times he had an insulin reaction, he acted like this. If someone thought he was "threatening their kids", then he could be killed by someone. Except if that someone called the cops and didn't just shoot him first.

Was your brother breaking into a child's bedroom window?

Quote:

This reminds me of a time some drugged out girl ran into my parents' house when I was just a kid. She was hallucinating and ran right into their bathroom and locked the door. I guess my dad could have shot her, but strangely he didn't and the fire department came and got her out.

I guess he was just a chump.

Yeah, she's hiding in the bathroom, not breaking into your bedroom window. I would say the threat level is a tad different.

[Unabogie]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

He didn't know he was unarmed, that wasn't found out till after the fact. What he sees is someone attempting to break into his kid's bedroom who is not in their right mind. That's enough for me to go on the defensive and not the time I am going to sit around and contemplate my subjective experience or think, perhaps I shall just wait till the police arrive.

Or you could go out the back door.

Quote:

Was your brother breaking into a child's bedroom window?

He did all kinds of stuff, including swearing at people and swinging at anyone trying to help him eat something. Diabetic reactions are hard to distinguish from crazy.

Quote:

Yeah, she's hiding in the bathroom, not breaking into your bedroom window. I would say the threat level is a tad different.

How so? She rapped on the back sliding door, then as soon as my dad opened the door, she ran inside the house without explaining herself. By your standards, he could have shot her since that's enough for your to go on the defensive. Small kids? Check. Crazy, non-responsive person? Check. Cops on the way but not there yet? Check. So what's different?

[ben m]

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

The guy lost his 40 dollars and tried to murder a robber by shooting him in the back.

That is spontaneously fighting off shooters exactly how ?

Originally Posted by Unabogie

he wasn't specifically trying to target the girls' bedroom, but was delusional and possibly mentally ill. The homeowner thought he was reaching in his pocket, after the he confronted the stranger, so he killed him and it turned out the man wasn't armed.

So, let's keep tallying up American gun culture: costs and benefits.

In the "costs" column: Lots of dead people of all ages.

In the "benefits" column: a mugger, prevented from escaping with $40. A family, prevented from being scared for a few minutes before the cops pick up the unarmed guy who's scaring them.

Quote:

a college student armed with an AR-15 rifle scared off two armed and potentially dangerous burglars during a midnight home invasion last week in Rochester, New York.

Rochester police believe the intruders were armed with BB guns ...

Another minor burglary averted! The people of Newtown, CT can sleep easy in the knowledge that no one stole your iPod and laptop.

Quote:

Without hesitation, Sikes pointed the gun (what looks like a 9mm Browning Hi-Power) at the intruder and told him to “get the hell out,” which the intruder quickly did ...

Sikes said he didn’t notice if the intruder was actually armed, not that it matters much

Wait a second. If "sometimes a robber is scared of an armed victim and runs" counts as a gun benefit---surely "sometimes a victim is scared of an armed robber, and complies" count as a gun cost? Because the latter happens a LOT more often than the former.

Thanks, TFC, for four pro-gun-control stories. In a world without handguns, these stories would have been:

a) A mugger gets away with $40.
b) A father punches the guy on his porch while yelling for his kids to get away from the window. The police arrive a few minutes later and everything's fine.
c) A college kid gets burgled by BB-gun-armed robbers. Either he scares them off with a bolt-action rifle, or they steal some electronics.
d) An old guy gets burgled by one unarmed robber. Either: he scares them off with a breech-action shotgun, or the burglar flees like most burglars do.

I'd accept those four outcomes---ranging from "no problem" to "minor property theft" to "brief scare"---in order to avert some of our 20,000+ handgun murders deaths. Wouldn't you?

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by Unabogie

Or you could go out the back door.

So let me understand this; you hear a noise outside and go to check it out. You discover a man trying to break into your child's bedroom (assuming you have kids). You tell him to stop and he reaches into his pocket. You are going to just hope he's not pulling out a weapon, run back inside and hope you are faster at reaching your children then this person is, so you can grab them and run out back, hoping he doesn't follow to confront you?

Quote:

He did all kinds of stuff, including swearing at people and swinging at anyone trying to help him eat something. Diabetic reactions are hard to distinguish from crazy.

I know what a diabetic can look like, at their worst, my father was a diabetic. If he was threatening the safety of children, I don't think I would judge anyone for assuming the worst.

Quote:

How so? She rapped on the back sliding door, then as soon as my dad opened the door, she ran inside the house without explaining herself. By your standards, he could have shot her since that's enough for your to go on the defensive. Small kids? Check. Crazy, non-responsive person? Check. Cops on the way but not there yet? Check. So what's different

First, she knocked, she wasn't trying to break in. Second, she went for a room not occupied by you or any possible siblings. If that happened, I would probably assume she'd been attacked and probably in shock. I would probably call the police too.

[NWO Sentryman]

Originally Posted by ben m

So, let's keep tallying up American gun culture: costs and benefits.

In the "costs" column: Lots of dead people of all ages.

In the "benefits" column: a mugger, prevented from escaping with $40. A family, prevented from being scared for a few minutes before the cops pick up the unarmed guy who's scaring them.



Another minor burglary averted! The people of Newtown, CT can sleep easy in the knowledge that no one stole your iPod and laptop.



Wait a second. If "sometimes a robber is scared of an armed victim and runs" counts as a gun benefit---surely "sometimes a victim is scared of an armed robber, and complies" count as a gun cost? Because the latter happens a LOT more often than the former.

Thanks, TFC, for four pro-gun-control stories. In a world without handguns, these stories would have been:

a) A mugger gets away with $40.
b) A father punches the guy on his porch while yelling for his kids to get away from the window. The police arrive a few minutes later and everything's fine.
c) A college kid gets burgled by BB-gun-armed robbers. Either he scares them off with a bolt-action rifle, or they steal some electronics.
d) An old guy gets burgled by one unarmed robber. Either: he scares them off with a breech-action shotgun, or the burglar flees like most burglars do.

I'd accept those four outcomes---ranging from "no problem" to "minor property theft" to "brief scare"---in order to avert some of our 20,000+ handgun murders. Wouldn't you?

Er, source please on the bolded part.

[angrysoba]

**** happens!

[ben m]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

He didn't know he was unarmed, that wasn't found out till after the fact. What he sees is someone attempting to break into his kid's bedroom who is not in their right mind. That's enough for me to go on the defensive and not the time I am going to sit around and contemplate my subjective experience or think, perhaps I shall just wait till the police arrive.

The question isn't "If you were in this situation, and armed, what would you choose to do?"

The question is: "If US gun policy resulted in the father not having been armed, what would have happened?"

And the answer---including, appropriately, the hindsight knowledge that the guy was unarmed---is "a short fistfight or some shoving or something."

And that's usually the answer. That's why the US would be a better place if we had a gun policy resulting in fewer people being armed. When guns go harm, like in murders and suicides, you look back and say "it would have been better if the shooter had not been armed". Even when guns do apparent good, like in these fending-off-robbers stories, you still look back and say (in most cases) "It would have been okay if the shooter had not been armed", or at worst "It would have been the same if the shooter had had a hunting rifle or shotgun" (and always "it would have been better if the person-shot-at had not been armed". I am continually amazed by the NRA's ability to say "A robber with a Sig Sauer tried to rob a guy, but he had a Glock!" and chalk it up as a victory for guns.)

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Unabogie

Hopefully no one will go on a shooting spree tomorrow.

Think of the bright side; you'll be able to post about it!

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Polaris

If he is still alive, good luck to the ************ in finding counsel.

Isn't everyone entitled to that?

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by ben m

The question isn't "If you were in this situation, and armed, what would you choose to do?"

I was replying to this

Quote:

Seems to me this was a perfect opportunity for the guy to call the cops, get his daughter up and leave the house or put them in the back room and take cover with his weapon. Instead, just like Mr. Sailors, it was time to shoot em up!

I disagreed with that. If you are not interested in my perspective on what I would do, you are welcome to not involve yourself in the conversation. You may feel that the ultimate question is something different because you've already decided what the answer is, but you do not define the direction of a conversation I am having with someone else.

As to the rest of your post, I would say you are a good candidate for the million dollar prize as you seem to know what the guy's intentions were and the only result would have been frightened children as well as an attempt to restrain him would have only resulted in a short fist fight. You got some mad psychic skills there.

[ben m]

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

Er, source please on the bolded part.

My mistake, that was supposed to be "handgun deaths". It's ~10,000 murders and ~20,000 suicides for ~30,000 total. Data says ~75% of murders are with handguns, I extrapolate that to suicides too and get ~20,000 handgun deaths.

[NWO Sentryman]

Originally Posted by ben m

My mistake, that was supposed to be "handgun deaths". It's ~10,000 murders and ~20,000 suicides for ~30,000 total. Data says ~75% of murders are with handguns, I extrapolate that to suicides too and get ~20,000 handgun deaths.

Of murders involving guns (~8,500), you are somewhat correct about handguns accounting for 75% of murders, but overall murders (~12,500), not so much.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...-data-table-11

[ben m]

Originally Posted by sgtbaker

I disagreed with that. If you are not interested in my perspective on what I would do, you are welcome to not involve yourself in the conversation. You may feel that the ultimate question is something different because you've already decided what the answer is, but you do not define the direction of a conversation I am having with someone else.

No offense. You talk about your thing, it brings something to mind, and I'll talk about that.

Quote:

As to the rest of your post, I would say you are a good candidate for the million dollar prize as you seem to know what the guy's intentions were and the only result would have been frightened children as well as an attempt to restrain him would have only resulted in a short fist fight. You got some mad psychic skills there.

The guy wasn't in the house, hadn't broken the window yet, and wasn't armed. The father was only a few steps away and moving in, and the police were a few minutes away. Without knowing his intentions---which for all I know were evil---it seems pretty clear that nothing too bad could have actually happened if the father had found himself unarmed. Short fist fight? Long fist fight? Some shoving? Some running away? I'm not able to dream up a likely scenario (short of the bad guy being a ninja) where the unarmed intruder gets past the unarmed dad and hurts anyone before the cops arrive. So I said so.

I agree that the father had good reason to imagine worse things happening. However, for 9000 murder victims, the fact that their killer had a gun was the "worse thing" happening, and it wasn't their imagination, and it would have been much much better if everyone involved had found themselves unarmed.

[ben m]

Originally Posted by NWO Sentryman

Of murders involving guns (~8,500), you are somewhat correct about handguns accounting for 75% of murders, but overall murders (~12,500), not so much.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...-data-table-11

Yeah, 2011 was a good year with ONLY 8500 gun murders. 10000 is a rough past-few-decades average and it's the round number I remembered.

But I really have no idea about handgun/rifle/shotgun use in gun suicides; if you have data please share.

[NWO Sentryman]

Originally Posted by ben m

Yeah, 2011 was a good year with ONLY 8500 gun murders. 10000 is a rough past-few-decades average and it's the round number I remembered.

But I really have no idea about handgun/rifle/shotgun use in gun suicides; if you have data please share.

If the FBI are anything to go by, violent crime as a whole (including gun crime) has been going down since 1990, and evidence points to removal of lead as being the cause for this decrease.

http://www.motherjones.com/environme...-link-gasoline

[sgtbaker]

Originally Posted by ben m

No offense. You talk about your thing, it brings something to mind, and I'll talk about that.

If you were saying the important question "for you" and I misread that, my apologies for getting aggressive.

Quote:

The guy wasn't in the house, hadn't broken the window yet, and wasn't armed. The father was only a few steps away and moving in, and the police were a few minutes away. Without knowing his intentions---which for all I know were evil---it seems pretty clear that nothing too bad could have actually happened if the father had found himself unarmed. Short fist fight? Long fist fight? Some shoving? Some running away? I'm not able to dream up a likely scenario (short of the bad guy being a ninja) where the unarmed intruder gets past the unarmed dad and hurts anyone before the cops arrive. So I said so.

The father is not basing his decisions while sitting safely behind a computer playing armchair quarterback. He sees a man attempting to break into the bedroom of his 4 and 7 year old daughters. I searched to see if there was any follow up on who the guy was and what is deal was but all I can find are other reports of the same incident, since everyone wants to remain unnamed. Witnesses describe the guy as yelling at his hands and talking loudly to himself and it sounds to be that he was either bat **** crazy or on drugs. I don't see why he either has to have ninja skills or he is easily overpowered so I am not so quick to assume that an unarmed man would be in no real danger.

Quote:

I agree that the father had good reason to imagine worse things happening. However, for 9000 murder victims, the fact that their killer had a gun was the "worse thing" happening, and it wasn't their imagination, and it would have been much much better if everyone involved had found themselves unarmed.

Again, you are assuming that things wouldn't have gone horrible wrong with a crazy person on his porch and the police are still a few minutes away. In the link to the FBI statistics, 726 people were murdered without a weapon.

[That19Guy]

From another article:

Quote:

Giffords' husband, Mark Kelly, broke the news of Wednesday's shooting to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, interrupting his own answer to a question from Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

"While we were having this hearing, ... in Phoenix, Arizona, there is another what seems to be, possibly, a shooting with multiple victims," he said.

What a coincidence.

[triforcharity]

Originally Posted by Unabogie

This one is interesting.

http://www.guns.com/2013/01/08/homeo...hters-bedroom/

It says that the man was trying to break into both cars and homes and was acting erratically. Obviously, since this was the last house he tried, he wasn't specifically trying to target the girls' bedroom, but was delusional and possibly mentally ill. The homeowner thought he was reaching in his pocket, after the he confronted the stranger, so he killed him and it turned out the man wasn't armed.

Seems to me this was a perfect opportunity for the guy to call the cops, get his daughter up and leave the house or put them in the back room and take cover with his weapon. Instead, just like Mr. Sailors, it was time to shoot em up!

Well, at least the guy died which is a happy ending for everyone.

Did the DA press charges for what you would classify as murder? Oh, wait, no, they didn't, and the grand jury didn't return an indictment either.

Color me surprised.....