The policemen chose to act with his police training and was able to disarm the situation without costing the kid his life. Good for the cop.

 

-----signature-----

As satisfying as it is to see some criminal punk have his ass kicked, the officer was foolish in his decision.

You don't know if the kid is hyped up on meth, or has a knife or gun (or all 3). I'm sure I can dig up plenty of stories where someone tried to physical accost a burglar and ended up in the hospital themselves.

It certainly does...if you are untrained, out of practice, do not provide gun education to your family, and do not follow proper storage procedures.*

Of course, the gub'ment sucktistics somehow don't take that into account. Curious, that.


* Which even some cops don't do. But I do. Perhaps because my father was both a cop and a vet, he did, and taught me. As I teach my children.

 

-----signature-----

WALL OF TEXT BISHES!!!

* Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be
killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family
with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's
long-discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a
family member than an intruder."[17] This fallacy , fabricated using tax
dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense
lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives
saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property
protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count. Only 0.1% (1 in
a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the
predator.[3] Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only
counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a
thousand-fold. Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only
measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed
by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are
the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by
deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives
protected by guns for every life lost to a gun.[2]

Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times,"[18] but he
persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot
distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like
finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then
concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.

Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality,
alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse . From
such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his
findings to normal homes. Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was
interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her
to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even
believe his own studies.


[17] Kellermann AL. and Reay DT. "Protection or Peril? An Analysis of
Firearms-Related Deaths in the Home.¾ N Engl J. Med 1986. 314: 1557-60.

[3] Kleck G. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America. New York:
Aldine de Gruyter. 1991.

[2] Suter E. "Guns in the Medical Literature - A Failure of Peer
Review." Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia. March 1994; 83:
133-48.

[18] Kellermann AL, Rivara FP, Rushforth NB et al. "Gun ownership as a
risk factor for homicide in the home.¾ N Engl J Med. 1993; 329(15):
1084-91.

[19] Japenga A. "Gun Crazy.¾ San Francisco Examiner. This World
supplement. April 3, 1994. p. 7-13 at 11.

 

-----signature-----

Your father was a veteranarian?

I hate yo break it to ya, but what your dad meant when he said he'd "been putting down some bitches" isn't quite what you may have imagined.

Nothing wrong with being a vet of course.

 

-----signature-----

I would have shot the knucklehead twice, just to be safe.... I'm just sayin!

 

-----signature-----

Just taser his ass a few times, then see if he gets the message.

 

-----signature-----

I'm surprised he doesn't look worse TBH.

Respect for that cop. Always nice to see when the good ones get publicity.

 

-----signature-----

statistics in this case are stupid. but so are most people, so still probably a good rule of thumb.

 

-----signature-----