This story was buried by the media . . .

[Deerthug]

70 year old BB coach from Detroit defended himself and two girls he was escorting to the school when he was attacked by two teenage thugs. A struggle ensued and Coach pulled his CC and shot/killed one kid while wounding the other. Coach is a reserve P.O. and licensed to carry.

Love the comment by the 'momma' - "I lost my son and I want answers". Here you go - your son was a criminal, attempted to rob someone and was killed in the process. Period end of message.

http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/02/06/coach-shoots-teen-during-robbery-near-mich-school/

[growalot]

Well that's too bad...but..." my son didn't have a gun" doesn't cut it. No mention if he had a knife, tire iron, pipe or even tazer(sp)...Suppose the guy defending him self and the players should have said.." Wait a minute... could you tell me if you have any weapons on you?....Geezzzz

Edited February 7, 2013 by growalot

[josephmrtn]

Good night!!! i would have done the same thing!!!

[WNYBuckHunter]

If the kid did or didnt have a weapon doesnt matter IMO. Beating a 70 year old man could easilly result in his death. Im glad the little puke is no longer a problem for the rest of us.

[WNYBuckHunter]

BTW, Im guessing the 16 year old 9th grader wasnt exactly the studious type....

[fasteddie]

A "16 year old freshman" ? The kid should have been hitting the books instead of planning to hit a 70 year old .

Yeah Momma , your kid was a punk thug !

[shawnhu]

Glad the scum was removed from society.

[virgil]

I have no issue with someone legally defending themselves as in this case. Good for him. But, not so sure about the theory that 'the media buried' the story. Also, as far as I can tell, there hasn't been much talk from the gun activists regarding the fact that the two men who were murdered last week at a gun range in Texas were highly trained and carrying weapons of their own, yet were still unable to defend themselves. Or, the district attorney, also in Texas last week, who was licensed and armed at the time he was gunned down. I think the statistics show that weapons owned for the purpose of self defense are far more likely to be used in a tragic accident than for personal protection.

[nyantler]

I have no issue with someone legally defending themselves as in this case. Good for him. But, not so sure about the theory that 'the media buried' the story. Also, as far as I can tell, there hasn't been much talk from the gun activists regarding the fact that the two men who were murdered last week at a gun range in Texas were highly trained and carrying weapons of their own, yet were still unable to defend themselves. Or, the district attorney, also in Texas last week, who was licensed and armed at the time he was gunned down. I think the statistics show that weapons owned for the purpose of self defense are far more likely to be used in a tragic accident than for personal protection.

Really? I'd like to see that statistic... nevermind I probably can find it on MSNBC or the Huffington Post.

Edited February 7, 2013 by nyantler

[ants]

I have no issue with someone legally defending themselves as in this case. Good for him. But, not so sure about the theory that 'the media buried' the story. Also, as far as I can tell, there hasn't been much talk from the gun activists regarding the fact that the two men who were murdered last week at a gun range in Texas were highly trained and carrying weapons of their own, yet were still unable to defend themselves. Or, the district attorney, also in Texas last week, who was licensed and armed at the time he was gunned down. I think the statistics show that weapons owned for the purpose of self defense are far more likely to be used in a tragic accident than for personal protection.

So should people not be allowed to own weapons (guns) for self protection because someone might accidentally be shot with those weapons? Dose the fact that people are licensed and trained to carry guns mean that they can never be the victims of bad people with guns??? Im just missing your point....I think

[Elmo]

I have no issue with someone legally defending themselves as in this case. Good for him. But, not so sure about the theory that 'the media buried' the story. Also, as far as I can tell, there hasn't been much talk from the gun activists regarding the fact that the two men who were murdered last week at a gun range in Texas were highly trained and carrying weapons of their own, yet were still unable to defend themselves. Or, the district attorney, also in Texas last week, who was licensed and armed at the time he was gunned down. I think the statistics show that weapons owned for the purpose of self defense are far more likely to be used in a tragic accident than for personal protection.

You cannot get statistics of the number of times criminals thought about mugging someone or robbing a home but never actually acted on it because of the assumption that the person/home owner might have a gun.

[Doc]

Also, as far as I can tell, there hasn't been much talk from the gun activists regarding the fact that the two men who were murdered last week at a gun range in Texas were highly trained and carrying weapons of their own, yet were still unable to defend themselves. I think the statistics show that weapons owned for the purpose of self defense are far more likely to be used in a tragic accident than for personal protection.

Actually, this story has already been discussed in a thread from way back when this actually happened, so it has been talked about. I'm not sure how this is relevant to anything that we are talking about here. Have you heard anyone say that it is impossible for a mentally disturbed person to shoot people (armed or otherwise)? I don't think so.

As far as your imagined stats, it all reminds me of that old saying that "Figures don't lie, but liars figure". Actually that page that is printed in every issue of The American Rifleman that has news article after news article from around the country giving accounts of people defending their homes and their lives with legal weapons kind of makes your stats sound a bit suspect. And they only print whatever they can fit on one page....lol.

[josephmrtn]

What amazes me is as soon as there is a school shooting or other gun violence related crime the media jumps on it like a bunch of wolves but when there is a story where the shooter or bad guy was stopped by a CCW holder they NEVER talk about it.... take the shopping mall shooting (i think it was in WA) right around the time of the Aruora CO theater one, in that one the shooter was drawn on by a man (while he was in the food court) with a CCW but he held his fire since there were some innocent people in his line of fire, the way i heard it, then the shooter ran away thru the mall and commited suicide... (i heard this from a friend of the guy who had the CCW, on another forum)

[apoallo]

" My son did not have a guN" well momma thug you must have had involvement on this attempted crime if you knew your son did not have a gun . Were you the get away driver??? Based on this article there was no mention of any weapon of any sort used by the two male attackees. Maybe the momma knows more then led on However I am sure the males had something, but the media is fixated on the legal gun used for self defense

[G-Man]

Why do people even listen to biased media, as soon as newspapers, unions, employers, celebrities starting endorsing candidates this country went to hell. Its all lobbing and all biassed. Research yourself, look at news from both sides of the media, be intelligent. Make your own decision. I personally am sick of everyone telling me what to think or do. Freedom of speech is great, but it is abused when the people/groups in power use it to push their own beliefs or the beliefs they get paid to push. All i know is there are millions of guns out there (been made for a few hundred years) and only a hand full of murders caused by guns( around 8000 a year in the us with a population of 80 mill) so guns obviously aren't the problem.

[virgil]

Doc, you can use terms like 'imagined stats' if it makes you feel better. I don't expect to change your mind. Studies like these have been done many times and the conclusions are always the same. Again, I'm sure you'll dismiss the findings. But, this is just one example, if you'd care to read it.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.

Kellermann AL, Somes G, Rivara FP, Lee RK, Banton JG.

Source

Center for Injury Control, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS:

We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS:

During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS:

Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

[ants]

Doc, you can use terms like 'imagined stats' if it makes you feel better. I don't expect to change your mind. Studies like these have been done many times and the conclusions are always the same. Again, I'm sure you'll dismiss the findings. But, this is just one example, if you'd care to read it.

Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home.

Kellermann AL, Somes G, Rivara FP, Lee RK, Banton JG.

Source

Center for Injury Control, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

Determine the relative frequency with which guns in the home are used to injure or kill in self-defense, compared with the number of times these weapons are involved in an unintentional injury, suicide attempt, or criminal assault or homicide.

METHODS:

We reviewed the police, medical examiner, emergency medical service, emergency department, and hospital records of all fatal and nonfatal shootings in three U.S. cities: Memphis, Tennessee; Seattle, Washington; and Galveston, Texas.

RESULTS:

During the study interval (12 months in Memphis, 18 months in Seattle, and Galveston) 626 shootings occurred in or around a residence. This total included 54 unintentional shootings, 118 attempted or completed suicides, and 438 assaults/homicides. Thirteen shootings were legally justifiable or an act of self-defense, including three that involved law enforcement officers acting in the line of duty. For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings, seven criminal assaults or homicides, and 11 attempted or completed suicides.

CONCLUSIONS:

Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense.

Is your point that guns should not be kept for self defense ? or are you just pointing out this study?

[mike rossi]

When serious crimes outnumber accidents I think we might as well blow up the planet... Besides, take these numbers one step further, how do gun accidents compare to other accidents, including automobile...

[virgil]

I do believe that it should be possible for guns should be kept for self defense. Earlier in this thread, I commented that the story of a gun owner who successfully used his weapon in self defense was probably not 'buried in the media', as the title of the thread implies. My point was that it's silly to claim that cases where guns are successfully and legally used in self defense are 'buried by the media' in favor of stories about victims of gun crimes, especially when the stats show that guns owned for the intended purpose of self defense are more likely to be used in crimes or tragedies than for self defense. I also thought that it was a little hypocritical to blame a perceived media coverup for not celebrating the story of the gun that was used in self defense, when there was little mention from the pro-gun' crowd of the cases involving legally armed and trained men who were gunned down regardless of the fact that they were armed and trained to use their weapon for self defense.

[Big Indian]

They also did not say that his mom was a 30 year old senior at the same high school.

Too effin bad mom, you should have done a better job raising your son !

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I do believe that it should be possible for guns should be kept for self defense. Earlier in this thread, I commented that the story of a gun owner who successfully used his weapon in self defense was probably not 'buried in the media', as the title of the thread implies. My point was that it's silly to claim that cases where guns are successfully and legally used in self defense are 'buried by the media' in favor of stories about victims of gun crimes, especially when the stats show that guns owned for the intended purpose of self defense are more likely to be used in crimes or tragedies than for self defense. I also thought that it was a little hypocritical to blame a perceived media coverup for not celebrating the story of the gun that was used in self defense, when there was little mention from the pro-gun' crowd of the cases involving legally armed and trained men who were gunned down regardless of the fact that they were armed and trained to use their weapon for self defense.

Ths one variable that the study does not seem to address I think makes a big difference. It studied shootings in and around residences. I can not see if they mean that the people involded in the actual incident were the residents there and that it was actually the residents gun that was used for the crime.

It also does not note if the gun used was even legally owned.

[ants]

They also did not say that his mom was a 30 year old senior at the same high school.

Too effin bad mom, you should have done a better job raising your son !

You're kidding about the mom going to the same school.....Right???

[ants]

I do believe that it should be possible for guns should be kept for self defense. Earlier in this thread, I commented that the story of a gun owner who successfully used his weapon in self defense was probably not 'buried in the media', as the title of the thread implies. My point was that it's silly to claim that cases where guns are successfully and legally used in self defense are 'buried by the media' in favor of stories about victims of gun crimes, especially when the stats show that guns owned for the intended purpose of self defense are more likely to be used in crimes or tragedies than for self defense. I also thought that it was a little hypocritical to blame a perceived media coverup for not celebrating the story of the gun that was used in self defense, when there was little mention from the pro-gun' crowd of the cases involving legally armed and trained men who were gunned down regardless of the fact that they were armed and trained to use their weapon for self defense.

Did that study mention whether or not the guns , that were initially kept in the home for self defense but later used in "crimes and tragedies" were first stolen, from the lawful owners, and then used in the crimes and tragedies or were the crimes and tragedies all committed in the homes where the guns were legally possessed???

[Big Indian]

You're kidding about the mom going to the same school.....Right???

yes, just making a mockery of the fact he is a 16 y.o. freshman he should be at least a junior, but now we dont even have to worry about this POS

[Culvercreek hunt club]

yes, just making a mockery of the fact he is a 16 y.o. freshman he should be at least a junior, but now we dont even have to worry about this POS

Just an FYI......Not making excuses but it is very common for a Sophomore to 16. That is one failing grade.