Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wonder if the perp had a record? I'm gonna guess this wasn't his first rodeo.
This is why I conceal. It's virtually impossible to obtain a ccw in D.C. though so most just had to sit there and watch while the criminal had free reign. The remaining passengers were sitting ducks.
Good thing DC has some of the most restrictive self-defense laws in the country, right?
Help me understand your mindset on this. I use guns periodically and, at first blush, it makes sense but the odds of a guy like the victim of the attack carrying a gun, even if he were allowed to, are pretty minimal. Gun culture just isn't a high priority of the young professional urban set.
Speaking for myself, without devoting a lot of time to training to use it in an array of situations (not just shooting at a target), I would be very uncomfortable bringing a gun into a situation like that where I am being assaulted because it can easily get turned against the victim. The odds such an individual would have the wherewithal to access and use a gun effectively in a situation like that is pretty minimal. No doubt that victim was hurt or compromised in some way very early in that surprise attack.
Given the mindset of the assailant, the odds of that gun - once it's revealed - ending up in the hands of the cold-blooded murderer and terrorizing more people is incredibly high. And the same issues hold true for any of the other passengers on the car, who will no doubt live the rest of their lives with questions and guilt about whether they could have done more. Many people involved in the military and law enforcement carry concealed guns when they're off-duty in DC, but as a general rule in a dense city like that the idea of having non-professionals carrying guns in nightlife districts and tight quarters is something the population at large just is not comfortable with. Very few nonprofessionals in an urban environment spend enough time with guns in close combat situations to know how to handle it well and not have it used against them or others.
So, help me understand your mindset on this. I use guns periodically and, at first blush, it makes sense but the odds of a guy like the victim of the attack carrying a gun, even if he were allowed to, are pretty minimal. Gun culture just isn't a high priority of the young professional urban set. Speaking for myself, without devoting a lot of time to training to use it in an array of situations (not just shooting at a target), I would be very uncomfortable bringing a gun into a situation like that where I am being assaulted because research shows it gets turned against the victim at a high rate.The odds such an individual would have the wherewithal to access and use a gun effectively in a situation like that is pretty minimal. No doubt that victim was hurt or compromised in some way very early in that surprise attack.Given the mindset of the assailant, the odds of that gun - once it's revealed - ending up in the hands of the cold-blooded murderer and terrorizing more people is incredibly high. And the same issues hold true for any of the other passengers on the car, who will no doubt live the rest of their lives with questions and guilt about whether they could have done more.Many people involved in the military and law enforcement carry concealed guns when they're off-duty in DC, but as a general rule in a dense city like that the idea of having non-professionals carrying guns in nightlife districts and tight quarters is something the population at large just is not comfortable with. Very few nonprofessionals in an urban environment spend enough time with guns in close combat situations to know how to handle it well and not have it used against them or others.
So you think that possession of a gun either by the victim or by a passenger would have not made a difference? You even think it could have been dangerous?
Blue Skies to the young man, but there's no way in hell a train car full of passengers who idly stood by and watched this punk commit murder right in front of their eye's against a decent hard working chap and not even a few god damn passenger had the balls to take their belts off and beat the s#$t out of this murderer? everyone of these passengers are self servicing cupcakes, it's a crying shame that this punk murderer wasn't sent home screaming in a pool of blood for his mommy..
So you think that possession of a gun either by the victim or by a passenger would have not made a difference? You even think it could have been dangerous?
Well, yes. Distance is your friend in a gun-related situation. The closer one is to the assailant, the more likely it is that gun gets used against you. Imagine if the victim had reached for a hypothetical gun and the assailant, in between kicking his head, simply grabbed it out of his weakened hand.
When there are people standing at both ends of the narrow rail car, and a chaotic situation in the middle, the odds of firing a bullet that misses the attacker and hits an innocent person on the other side is quite high.
Or, someone pulls a gun and verbally threatens the assailant, only to lack the training and courage to pull the trigger and murder a person before that gun gets taken and used against him or her. Actually killing someone - even a horrific person like this - is something not a lot of people are prepared to do.
I can't find stats on that at that moment - perhaps you know of some - but it's in the same conceptual vein as the research showing people living in a home with a gun are far more likely to be injured or killed by that gun through an accident, homicide, or suicide than their neighbors without a gun. I'm not inherently against guns by any means but I grow more skeptical of their value in situations like this as I think through the scenario.
Well thank goodness another vicious baboon is brought off the streets. Sorry for this young man though!
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't making a broad racial comment, and were commenting on the animalistic behavior of the 18 year old, but your choice of wording is suspicious.
Well, yes. Distance is your friend in a gun-related situation. The closer one is to the assailant, the more likely it is that gun gets used against you. Imagine if the victim had reached for a hypothetical gun and the assailant, in between kicking his head, simply grabbed it out of his weakened hand.
When there are people standing at both ends of the narrow rail car, and a chaotic situation in the middle, the odds of firing a bullet that misses the attacker and hits an innocent person on the other side is quite high.
Or, someone pulls a gun and verbally threatens the assailant, only to lack the training and courage to pull the trigger and murder a person before that gun gets taken and used against him or her. Actually killing someone - even a horrific person like this - is something not a lot of people are prepared to do.
I can't find stats on that at that moment - perhaps you know of some - but it's in the same conceptual vein as the research showing people living in a home with a gun are far more likely to be injured or killed by that gun through an accident, homicide, or suicide than their neighbors without a gun. I'm not inherently against guns by any means but I grow more skeptical of their value in situations like this as I think through the scenario.
I'm not going to argue with you on gun vs. no guns but if you feel safer without a form of self defense on yourself and those around you, or anywhere in your home, that is purely your decision. You can hope police will respond fast enough to save you and your family. If you are on a rail car, and a crazed murderer attacks your child with a knife, just know that you are unable to protect your child or yourself....... because you feel that may be dangerous. I, however, take measures to have self protection. There is no guarantee or surefire way for staying safe, but I know that I do what I can. If this would've happen in a state where open carry is legal and there are many who do conceal, this situation could've ended differently and the criminal would be the one who needs burying.
How do you know nobody had one?
To me it appears everyone was just standing there watching. A train full of people could have easily subdued a single assailant, weapon or not.
True. In defense of the other passengers, however, people never know how they will react in emergency situations until they are faced with something like that. It's easy to sit at our computers at our safe homes or workplaces and say, "They should have helped," but are we positive we would have if faced with a similar situation? Not really. No matter who we are, or if we are carrying a gun even, we would have been scared out of our minds.
Additionally, what if only one person helped and the dude went after him/her, especially if we didn't have a weapon or are much weaker than the assailant? After all, we don't know how other passengers would react. What if the guy have stopped stabbing the victim and turned the knife on the Good Samaritan(s)? Then that person might have died instead of Kevin. I'm not suggesting that Kevin's life is worth less than anyone else's, just that it would have negated the benefits of the helper's attempts to save the victim's life.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
