The escaped convicts from GA were caught by private citizens with guns

[Lee-Lee]

Last edited Sat Jun 17, 2017, 07:37 AM - Edit history (1)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2017/06/15/us/escaped-georgia-inmates-captured/index.html

-----Update---- since this article was published updated accounts by the homeowner list that he had loaded his gun and had it on his person when the inmates came to his property but he did not have to draw it.

Since after every event people here ask "where was the good guy with the gun" here is an example worth as much discussion.

The two had just killed two corrections officers to escape and just before this did a home invasion on an elderly couple, stole their car, led police on a high speed chase shooting at them. Then the wrecked the car and ran into the woods. They came out at a home expecting to repeat what they did with the elderly couple and instead met a person who had the ability to defend himself. And like most defense uses of a firearm it was not even fired, its presence and the threat of it were enough.

[Lee-Lee]

1. Additional details at this link

https://www.google.com/amp/www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/amp/escaped-georgia-inmates-captured-after-foot-chase-tennessee-n773191

[Towlie]

18. Let's all ignore masses of data we DON'T like and instead focus on rare anecdotes that we DO like.

[Lee-Lee]

21. Like ignoring all the defensive uses of guns and focusing on only misuse?

That's the common pattern of action for most here.

[Vinca]

2. It's nice to hear one positive outcome, BUT . . . on June 15, 25 people died as a result of gun

violence. Something has to be done. http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/last-72-hours?page=1

[Lee-Lee]

3. Focus on the causes of the violence, not the implementation method

If you want to really make change happen.

What you won't see is how many people that same day used a firearm defensively and were saved for death or serious injury, because that is a much harder total to pin down. Most estimate other than ones that use really narrow definitions of what a defensive use is will show an average of more than that number of defensive uses.

[Vinca]

5. There's no good way to spin this, but nice try.

[Lee-Lee]

14. It's not spin, it's that the whole issue needs to be discussed and studied

Focusing on defensive use of guns without studying misuse and focusing on misuse without studying legitimate defensive uses are both flawed ways of thinking.

The goal should be the minimization of misuse while not placing obstacles in the patch of beneficial defensive use.

Part of the problem is even when funded it's hard to study defensive use. Misuse is easy- statstics are readily collected on shootings and things like armed robbery. Most defensive uses never result in a person being shot so it's much harder to study. There are no good statistics kept by police departments and they don't get nearly the same level of press coverage.

Another part of that is the wildly different standards used in defining what a defensive gun use is. Some of the more restrictive studies that place the number as low only counted incidents where a person was actually shot and it was ruled self defense, ignoring the vast majority of cases where the gun isn't fired. Other swing too far the other way.

This series of articles does a good job of future discussing the problem of quantifying defensive gun uses.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/9/17/1238623/-Defensive-Gun-Use-The-CDC-Report-on-Gun-Violence

I can tell you from my time as a Sheriff's deputy I saw more defensive uses of firearms than I saw misuse. But that was one rural southern county and you can't extrapolate that to the nation as a whole.

[Spider Jerusalem]

26. Yeah, it's spin, and bullshit.

You know WHY it's spin and bullshit? Because other countries that don't have the USA's level of gun ownership, and that don't have lax gun laws like the USA, have significantly lower rates of gun-related violence. The yearly rate of shootings in the US only happens elsewhere in the world in war zones. One or two examples of "well here's some law-abiding person with a gun who stopped a crime!" don't offset that in the slightest.

[EX500rider]

31. You mean like Jamaica or Mexico where firearms are...

....either illegal or hard to acquire legally?

How that working out for them?

Like this:

Jamaica: homicides per 100,000: 43.2
Mexico : " " " 16.3
USA : " " " 4.8


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Jamaica

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Mexico

[Spider Jerusalem]

32. No, I mean like in Japan or the UK or Canada or France or any other advanced, developed country

Since the US pretty clearly isn't a developing country with severe breakdowns of law and order in rural areas and criminal gangs acting as de facto warlords (unlike, say, Mexico or Jamaica). If the best you can do is "we're not as bad as places with significantly greater inequality and endemic organised crime" then you aren't making a very good argument at all.

[EX500rider]

33. Actually the argument is stricter guns laws...

.....do not equal less deaths or Jamaica wouldn't have 9 times the homicide rate of the US.

[Spider Jerusalem]

34. Except they do in other developed countries.

Unless you're arguing that the USA is a third-world country, as well.

[EX500rider]

35. Then the question is it society or the guns laws that drive that?

Jamaica & Mexico would say society.

[Spider Jerusalem]

36. Which pretty clearly displays your astounding ignorance, honestly

since Jamaica and Mexico's murder rates are extremely high because of violence by criminal gangs in the illegal drugs trade. (Jamaica is the largest external supplier of cannabis to the USA, specifically to states where it isn't decriminalised, and both Jamaica and Mexico are major transshipment points for cocaine from South America.) If anything is driving the murder rate in those countries it's the USA's misguided 45-year "war on drugs".

[EX500rider]

37. Please...

.....most US weed is US grown, nobody wants crappy/seedy Jamaican brown pot anymore.

They export it the other Caribbean Islands mostly, is the the fault of the US too?

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Jamaica-remains-largest-illicit-producer-and-exporter-of-marijuana-in-Caribbean

98 or so countries have a higher homicide rate then the US and most have much stricter gun laws than the US...is that all due to drug trafficking too?

[Spider Jerusalem]

38. It's largely due to economics, poverty, weak central government and inefficient police, actually

but when you compare the USA to similar countries in terms of economic development every single one has a murder rate much lower than the US.

[EX500rider]

40. And yet Indonesia has a lower homicide rate then all those countries...

So does Palestine..

In fact there seems to be no correlation between gun laws and ownership and homicide rates.

[Lee-Lee]

44. Interestingly about 80% of firearm homicide in the Us are drug/gang related too

If you wanted to take the one single biggest step to reducing firearm violence and violence overall addressing that root cause would be the most bang for your buck and your time.

[Hoyt]

13. Yeah, even the capture of these murderers isn't really a defensive use of a firearm. But NRA will

count it.

The fugitives were unarmed at the point or capture having lost their guns in police chase, police were all over them. Gun owners didn't do much and are lucky the fugitives weren't armed.

This is not an incident for gunners to cheer their beloved lethal weapons. Of course, George Zimmerman's murdering Trayvon Martin wasn't either. But gunners cheered AND the NRA counted it as a defensive gun use.

[Lee-Lee]

19. Not a defensive use?

Two murderers who just hours earlier did a violent home invasion and assaulted an elderly couple to steal a car we're targeting his home to steal another car.

Do you actually think they wouldn't have used as much violence as needed against him to get that car? While they had lost the guns they could have easily and grabbed all kinds of items to use as weapons.

I know you have an affinity for robbers and probably see these guys as just poor robbers trying to escape corrupt police or some such nonsense, but stopping people who have just done a violent home invasion to steal a car from targeting your home is 100% a defensive act- of both yourself and society at large.

[Hoyt]

25. The police were on their tail. The fugitives were stealing a car, not breaking into a house.

They were minutes from being caught, and were probably ready to surrender.

I know guns are your life, but still, we'd be better off without them except maybe allowing one or two per gun lover for hunting and home defense, with no toting in public. That would have worked fine in this situation.

[jpak]

15. NRA Moran Bullshit

yup

[LanternWaste]

24. Would not the corollary be true as well?

"Focus on the causes of the violence, not the implementation method..."

Would not the corollary be true as well? Your OP focused on the implementation of the capture (indeed, you state that's the fundamental reason you posted it) rather than the cause of the capture.

I realize holding others to a different standard than we hold ourselves to is ethically convenient, but it illustrates an irrational mind. No doubt, you'll rationalize the discrepancies in standard as something other than what it actually is... if you really want to make change happen.

[Lee-Lee]

27. The capture wasn't a crime or violence

Our goal should be to reduce violent crime in those country, including gun crime but not (as many people seem to do) focused only on gun crime. My statement was that if we want to stop it focus on the causes.

The right thing there is to focus on the underlying cause. Because we want to reduce it in society.

We don't want to stop criminals from being captured. As least most of us don't.

There is no incentive for us as a society to want to stop honest citizens from stopping criminals. Well, not unless you are a criminal. So I'm not focusing on the wrong thing here because there isn't a reason to focus on any part of it to stop it.

[Trust Buster]

4. I don't have a problem with having a gun at home to protect yourself.

Did he pass a background check ? Was it an AR 15 with a 30 round magazine ? Did this happen in a public area where many are opposed to guns in public ? I think this OP is a pretty simplistic attempt to address a complex issue.

[Lee-Lee]

16. Does the answer to any of those questions change anything ?

If so, how?

For the record, I hope he had something like an AR15. Outnumbered 2:1 against hardened criminals willing to kill who you don't know if they are armed or not is not the place to have a bolt action 22

[kacekwl]

28. +1000

[jmg257]

6. Very nice....great news they were captured.

"Dubose and Rowe ran from the vehicle into some woods but they were discovered by a homeowner who called his neighbor and they each grabbed a gun. The fugitives lost their weapons in the crash and surrendered, authorities said."

[malaise]

7. Then there's this guy

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029211664

[ExciteBike66]

8. Looks like we can chalk up another one in the "good guy" column,

but what is that other column up to now?

[safeinOhio]

9. If those that support reasonable gun control

Had their way and those guns they took had the technology to only be able to to be fired by the owner, it would another story.

[Lee-Lee]

11. That "way" is fantasy still with today's technology

And will be for quite some time.

If it was actually a workable reliable technology police departments would have adapted it in large scale. Even the most progressive agencies in the most progressive cities with the most progressive mayors and city councils have yet to try it, because it's not a reality yet.

Sure, you can make it work in a lab for a few rounds. It's another to make it reliable in the field subjected to years of shock from firing, harsh chemicals, rain, sweat, beating around, dirt, and have it still function just as reliably with no delay when needed.

Believe me, when they make the technology work I will be the first in line to buy one for myself. Right now I don't carry in my purse because there is too great a chance of it being taken or separated from me. If there was a technology that ensured a gun in the purse was totally unusable against me or anyone else if taken it would change the aspects of that.

[safeinOhio]

17. If the NRA invested 1/10

of what it spends on lobbiest, it would be here. Question, how much does it spend and how much has it spent to block this technology?

[Lee-Lee]

20. How does the NRA block private development

Especially when the firearms industry is worldwide and there are lots of countries in Europe and elsewhere that would also buy this.

If someone made it work, it would sell.

The only thing blocking it is that the technology doesn't exist.

I don't see why the NRA should be funding it. Or why you would want them too since if they developed it they would control it and make a profit on every unit sold using the technology.

On the flip side that would be a great thing for gun control groups like the Everytown and Brady to finance. I wonder why they haven't raised money to fund development of it.

Oh, I know why. The technology to make it work is fantasy at this point. And they know it too. It ain't a lack of application, it's a lack of the technology in everything from batteries to recognition to making reliable enough electronic components of a small enough size. That isn't technology that the firearms industry will develop or could, it needs to come from the broader technology field and reach the point where it is reliably adaptable to firearms.

You can make it work in a lab under ideal conditions. Nobody has been able to make it reliable yet.

I know the NRA is your go-to boogeyman for everything firearms. But when you blame them for the state of technological development of batteries and miniaturized circuitry you have reached a point disconnected from reality.

As I pointed to above if it was actually feasible gun control groups would be all over the funding of it and demanding that police departments adopt it as a way to prove its viable.

[safeinOhio]

29. No one thought cars could get the mileage they do now.

There wasn't the tech for it. Not until Federal mandates for fleet milage. Who was going to finance the development and tech?

[Lee-Lee]

30. And it didn't happen overnight

Why didn't the Obama administration mandate smart guns for Federal LE by a certain date to spur it? That's a huge market and if they mandated all Federal LE carry then gun makers would scramble to be the ones who could get those sales.

Why did New Jersey exempt law enforcement from their smart gun law that would require all guns sold in the state to be "smart guns" 3 years after the first on was sold.

Because in both cases they know that it wasn't practical yet.

[Ilsa]

10. The story reads like it was a homeowner and neighbor who

fetched their weapons. They may or may not have had open or concealed carry permits. It is possible that these were guns for home protection. Do you have a different source for this detail? Did they need open carry or concealed carry permits for this? I just don't see where the current liberalization of gun laws assisted in the apprehension.

Not trying to pick a fight. I'm thrilled the homeowners had the means, the ability, and the courage to safely hold these two criminals. I expect to read of their executions, hopefully sooner than later. They are the worst of humanity.

On edit: I'm glad the two homeowners will (presumably) receive the big award, $130,000, for the capture.

[Ilsa]

12. Another news source:

"The homeowner on Pruitt Road saw Donnie Rowe, 43, and Ricky DuBose, 24, attempting to steal a car from his home.

The homeowner heard a noise outside the home and came out and caught the escapees, then called the Rutherford County Sheriff's Office."

http://www.wsmv.com/story/35677424/rutherford-co-homeowner-captures-ga-escapees-at-gunpoint

This story doesn't include the part about calling his neighbor.

[GoneOffShore]

22. And another anecdote that proves the anecdote.

[NCTraveler]

23. The two corrections officers should have been armed.

The elderly couple should have been armed.

The police should have been armed.

[MyNameGoesHere]

39. I am not sure one case

Of successful barrel ejaculation makes everything peachy. But I am sure someone feels relief.

[Alea]

41. On another note, Hale, the homeowner and gun owner, didn't shoot them.

He had no way of knowing they were unarmed, knew they were the murdering escaped convicts, but he chose not to shoot them.

Anti-gun activist claim all gun owners are just waiting for their chance to shoot someone.

From the article: "Hale said he had a gun and had loaded every gun in his house after neighbors called him to warn him they were in the area"

I know I'm not hoping for my chance to blast someone. I hope I never have use them anywhere but at the range and suspect most non-criminal gun owners feel the same way.

[HAB911]

42. OH NO! It wasn't the homeowners gun, it was Jesus

"I realized I had two ex-cons wanted for murder who had just shot at law enforcement who had nothing to lose and for some reason they surrendered and laid down on the concrete in my driveway," Patrick Hale said. "If that doesn't make you believe in Jesus Christ, I don't know what does."

SNIP

he saw them climb over his fence and approach his home, where he was alone with his little girl.

He decided to flee — getting into his car with his girl. Then, just as he prepared for the worst, the inmates took off their shirts and waved them in the air in a sign of surrender. He thinks they mistook his car for a law enforcement vehicle.

He said he never had to pull out his weapon — but the wait was agonizing. More than 45 police officers began showing up within three minutes, he said.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/escaped-georgia-prison-inmates-recaptured-tennessee-48077764


Maybe you should rethink your OP?

[Lee-Lee]

43. Goes to show the inaccuracies of news reports

I had not seen that update yet, thanks.

[Hoyt]

45. Yep, didn't even pull, or need, his gun. The fugitives just gave up because they were tired, hungry