'Good Guy With A Gun' stories

Most of your post just proved my point and I don't think you realized it. I agree that news outlets don't cover the millions of good stories and mainly just focus on the bad one's that people want to know about. People slow down so they can observe a car wreck in as much detail as possible and journalists understand and use that to get people to pay attention to their stories. The problem is that they don't ever seem to provide any context that would show the big picture, instead they seem to do their best to make the horrible stories more like the norm.

The George Floyd story is probably one of the most destructive stories this country has seen in a long time. I consume a lot of left wing news because it's the best way to be informed prior to debating someone with liberal/progressive views. From what I've observed over the last year, most of the news media used this story to claim there is systematic racism (without real statistical evidence) in our police departments instead of focusing on the one man who ended up killing Floyd. Cities were burned and looted but these 'protests' were called "mostly peaceful". The millions of people who gathered for Trump over the last four years were also "mostly peaceful", but that's not how the media wants people to think about those people.

It all comes down to honesty for me Wayne. Journalists should be unbiased, but they are just people like everyone else and none of us can escape our biases which are directly tied to our individual ideologies. BUT, that doesn't mean journalists can't be expected to be honest and give the full context of what they are reporting and the bigger picture they are trying to paint.

I jumped on you for this thread because I believe there are many more stories that haven't made the news where good people have been protected by their guns. Your point seems to be that there are more people (or too many people) who don't know how or when to use their guns for protection. I just disagree with that assumption which is just based on the stories the media wants to promote in order to justify their stances on guns.

Actually, the point of this thread is to show the "good guy with a gun" is like a unicorn. You hear about them but you rarely see them.

In each of the stories I posted, a good guy with a gun could have stepped in and engaged the shooter. They didn't, because there was no "good guy with a gun" around (or there was the the good guy with a gun was unwilling to step up).

I've read about a few instances where a good guy with a gun stepped up, but in a country of more than 328 million people, there should be thousands more.

The stories indicate that many times a "good guy with a gun" becomes a "bad guy with a gun" when they get cut off in traffic or McDonald's doesn't get their order right.

50+ years as a "journalist" and you offer us "Good Guy With A Gun stories" with a first posting that denigrates someone with a gun. Straw arguments seem to be the signature of "journalists". You had no intention of relating a story of someone protecting themselves or others with a gun. Rather a poor attempt to disparage individuals who are gun owners.
As I mentioned in a previous post on this thread, the obtaining of a CCP does not make one a quasi policeman, it allows one to carry a firearm for personal protection, to be used when one's life is threatened. As a wordsmith, rather than a" printsmith" you are aware of the distinction, but would rather attempt to be sublime and besmirch others with what you think is a clever demonstration of your "wordsmanship."
Sorry, but it doesn't make the grade.

I am sorry, in that Wayne made a strong statement about his 50+ years as a journalist with no collage background, and was proud of it, as he should be, I interpreted that o mean that he still holds himself out as a journalist, mea culpa.
I am at a loss as to how this post persists in discussing his personal background, please help me in this respect:
50+ years as a "journalist" and you offer us "Good Guy With A Gun stories" with a first posting that denigrates someone with a gun. Straw arguments seem to be the signature of "journalists". You had no intention of relating a story of someone protecting themselves or others with a gun. Rather a poor attempt to disparage individuals who are gun owners.
As I mentioned in a previous post on this thread, the obtaining of a CCP does not make one a quasi policeman, it allows one to carry a firearm for personal protection, to be used when one's life is threatened. As a wordsmith, rather than a" printsmith" you are aware of the distinction, but would rather attempt to be sublime and besmirch others with what you think is a clever demonstration of your "wordsmanship."
Sorry, but it doesn't make the grade.

Wayne Harrison wrote: Actually, the point of this thread is to show the "good guy with a gun" is like a unicorn. You hear about them but you rarely see them.

In each of the stories I posted, a good guy with a gun could have stepped in and engaged the shooter. They didn't, because there was no "good guy with a gun" around (or there was the the good guy with a gun was unwilling to step up).

I've read about a few instances where a good guy with a gun stepped up, but in a country of more than 328 million people, there should be thousands more.

The stories indicate that many times a "good guy with a gun" becomes a "bad guy with a gun" when they get cut off in traffic or McDonald's doesn't get their order right.

Again Wayne, you conveniently ignore the point you already made that the media is not interested in reporting on the good stories, especially when those stories go against the narrative that guns are bad and only the military and cops should be carrying them. You said somewhere that we don't get al our information from the press, but is that really true? Sure, we have our anecdotal experiences and maybe one of these days I'll personally witness a good guy saving himself or someone else with a gun, but I have not as of yet. The real truth is that the press gets to decide what they tell us and it's rarely the full picture.

My example of what they have done with the police narrative is still one of the best examples. All they would have to do is give us the percentage of good cops doing good work compared to the cops that are the bad ones. When these George Floyd type stories pop up, they could remind their audience that the bad cop represents a tiny minority and painting the entire occupation as bad and racist would be reckless and wrong... but that doesn't further their anti-cop narrative. The same thing could be said about gun owners who carry... why would they go out of their way to hurt their desired narrative?

IF the color of your skin was anything but WHITE,u would have an entirely different outlook on enforcement.

homeagain wrote: IF the color of your skin was anything but WHITE,u would have an entirely different outlook on enforcement.

That statement is very far from being accurate. I have a very white friend who is also very woke (we are business friends and don't really socialize but I read is crap on FB). This guy got his 3rd DUI at the old age of 35 and lost his license for 5 years (I think). He hates cops and thinks they are racist because of what he sees on TV. I challenged him to show me the evidence that the police as a whole are racists and actively try to arrest or harm people who are not white. He wasn't able to produce that evidence and eventually just ignored me.

His argument always pointed to the number of black men who were in jail but didn't have a way to prove that those men were in jail for crimes they didn't commit. I asked him if California was a racist state and he said no... how could it be, it's run almost exclusively by Democrats, and we know Democrats are not racists. So I asked him why it was that about 70% of California inmates were Latino or black. Could it be that black and Latino people are more likely to be poor and or grow up in a home without both a mom and a dad that kept them on a straight path? Now in too many parts of California the idiots in charge have decided to allow crimes like theft under $1000 to be ok and not prosecutable because the majority of these thefts are committed by minorities. That doesn't seem like a very good plan in the long term

If you just look at numbers and don't look at the full picture, of course you will conclude that the police are racists, or the "system" is systematically racist. I would suggest you look more at the full picture and not focus on the few stories the media decides to endlessly cover for ratings and divisive outrage.

Please excuse me for saying so....BUT, U have a immature,irresponsible "friend". For every story u may
come up with, I have a counter. FACT....an acquaintance (male,responsible small business owner in
G.Jct. ) has a last name of MONTOYA. He made a trip to the Front range in a white econovan,and
before he left he told his girlfriend (white) that they would be stopped,going and coming back on I-70.

YEP, racial profiling is alive and well...HE WAS STOPPED for no LEGITIMATE reason. ANOTHER incident (no police involved,but racial profiling.) He was in Home Depot in G.J. and KNOWS to walk out the main door
his girlfriend (white) walked out the contractors door,expecting him to be following. NOPE, he was detained
and questioned, until the employee was satisfied there was no theft.

A Houston dad pulled out a gun during an alleged road rage incident, and then unintentionally shot his son while holstering his weapon. The boy received critical injuries in the shooting.

Last month, Texas lawmakers voted to remove training requirements for concealed carry.

abcnews.go.com/US/year-boy-accidentally-...ad/story?id=78249887