Good thing this wasn't a "gun-free zone" business...


SALT LAKE CITY (ABC 4 News) - A citizen with a gun stopped a knife wielding man as he began stabbing people Thursday evening at the downtown Salt Lake City Smith's store.


Police say the suspect purchased a knife inside the store and then turned it into a weapon. Smith's employee Dorothy Espinoza says, "He pulled it out and stood outside the Smiths in the foyer. And just started stabbing people and yelling you killed my people. You killed my people."


Espinoza says, the knife wielding man seriously injured two people. "There is blood all over. One got stabbed in the stomach and got stabbed in the head and held his hands and got stabbed all over the arms."


Then, before the suspect could find another victim - a citizen with a gun stopped the madness. "A guy pulled gun on him and told him to drop his weapon or he would shoot him. So, he dropped his weapon and the people from Smith's grabbed him."


By the time officers arrived the suspect had been subdued by employees and shoppers. Police had high praise for gun carrying man who ended the hysteria. Lt. Brian Purvis said, "This was a volatile situation that could have gotten worse. We can only assume from what we saw it could have gotten worse. He was definitely in the right place at the right time."


Dozens of other shoppers, who too could have become victims, are also thankful for the gun carrying man. And many, like Danylle Julian, are still in shock from the experience. "Scary actually. Really scary. Five minutes before I walk out to my car. It could have been me."


Police say right now they have no idea what caused the suspect to go on the dangerous rampage.


So far, police have not released the names of the suspect, the victims or the man who pulled the gun.


http://www.abc4.com/content/about_4/bios/story/conceal-and-carry-stabbing-salt-lake-city-smiths/NDNrL1gxeE2rsRhrWCM9dQ.cspx



http://www.abc4.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoid=3453937

^ From April. Not a current event.

Good thing this wasn't a "gun-free zone" business...


I would say good thing the stabber wasn't in full body armor and a feeling of being invulnerable. Otherwise it probably wouldn't have matter.

Never bring a knife to a gunfight.

[/LEFT]

I would say good thing the stabber wasn't in full body armor and a feeling of being invulnerable. Otherwise it probably wouldn't have matter.

or in the dark with tear gas and a few automatic weapons.

Wow - you gun haters can't see the positive side of anything. Second thought - not so 'wow'.

I assume that everybody's seen the story in today's DO about the 18-year-old from Woodward who was arrested Tuesday night on weapons charges? He made several bizarre statements to a taxi driver (on separate occasions) regarding hiding bodies and avoiding arrest for murder. Law enforcement officials found a shotgun, rifle and 250 rounds of ammunition at his home, all purchased earlier this month. He also is reported to have ordered two sets of handcuffs and a ski mask. A judge in February ruled him to be mentally ill and committed him to in-patient treatment. He was recommitted again in April. Thank goodness the taxi driver reported what he heard.

Not to hijack this thread, but this is an example of an existing law on the books that - if followed - would have kept this individual from purchasing the guns (you must disclose on application for gun purchases if you've been "adjudicated mentally defective"). If it takes days or weeks for that check to be completed, then who would object to that?

If it takes days or weeks for that check to be completed, then who would object to that?

It should be as easy to get a gun as it is to vote (and we all know you can't ask for an id to vote) - both are protected by the exact same constitution. Or do you think some rights are more 'right' than others? Once again, the problem is not the shotgun - it did nothing wrong. The problem was a mentally ill person and crappy parents. Maybe someday we will actually focus on fixing the problem - or not.

Wow - you gun haters can't see the positive side of anything. Second thought - not so 'wow'.

Not sure who a gun hater is. My family loves hunting and I have several of my own. Just pointing out the obvious case that the OP was trying to make that letting people carry guns into public places is always a good idea. There are various circumstances where it would not make sense or have made a difference. That's all. Thought it was pretty common sense where I was coming from.


It should be as easy to get a gun as it is to vote (and we all know you can't ask for an id to vote) - both are protected by the exact same constitution. Or do you think some rights are more 'right' than others? Once again, the problem is not the shotgun - it did nothing wrong. The problem was a mentally ill person and crappy parents. Maybe someday we will actually focus on fixing the problem - or not.

Well if you want it to be as easy as someone who wants to vote, how are you going to allow time for background checks and mental health checks? This is a guy that should have been blocked due to his mental health history, but was still allowed to purchase. Of course you agree with this point by the bolded part of your comments. So how are we going to fix that if you want a process that is easy in and easy out? Background checks take time and I'd rather someone have to wait a week to get a weapon to make sure it is going into the correct hands. If the vendor selling it doesn't follow the proper procedures and the law, I could see the proper penalty being equal to what the person who purchase the item did.

I have no problem with people own guns (though assault weapons should be left to the military in my opinion), but it seems anytime a typical "pro-gun" person touts about fixing the "real" problem they want someone that is unrealistic due to the resources needed.

Is there anyone upset that a guy went into a store, bought a knife and attacked people?

Is there anyone upset that a guy went into a store, bought a knife and attacked people?

Of course, but that isn't what the OP's intentional topic was about. It was obviously to point out how OC/CC laws and the ability to carry in stores can help stop crime. Perhaps we should have full background checks on all knives purchases as well? Hell it is harder to buy cough medicine than it is a knife. LOL

If that brave patriot hadn't been there he would probably still be stabbing people, 3 months later.

Of course, but that isn't what the OP's intentional topic was about. It was obviously to point out how OC/CC laws and the ability to carry in stores can help stop crime. Perhaps we should have full background checks on all knives purchases as well? Hell it is harder to buy cough medicine than it is a knife. LOL

Near as I can tell, this was a text book case of when to use a concealed carry to protect yourself or stop a crime. I am not sure why anyone would want to use this circumstance to attack CC - surely they could find a better example. Attacking this case just makes someone look fanatical instead of practical.

Near as I can tell, this was a text book case of when to use a concealed carry to protect yourself or stop a crime. I am not sure why anyone would want to use this circumstance to attack CC - surely they could find a better example. Attacking this case just makes someone look fanatical instead of practical.

Who attacked having a CC?

Well if you want it to be as easy as someone who wants to vote, how are you going to allow time for background checks and mental health checks? This is a guy that should have been blocked due to his mental health history, but was still allowed to purchase.

He was allowed to purchase because he lied. How about this - you register to vote, how about registering to buy a gun. You register once and show your registration card every time you buy a gun. Just keep in mind that the gun seller can't ask for a photo id. Just present the card, say you are the person whose name is on the card, and buy the gun. Then there is no waiting period or background check necessary because you were pre-approved. Then if a doctor finds you mentally ill they do a weapons card lookup and if you are registered they submit your name for removal.

The type of gun you can purchase then depends on the laws of the town/city/state you are registered in. For instance, you live in New York City where hand guns are illegal. You register and on your weapons card it has a code identifying the types of restrictions. Then if you try and buy a hand gun in New Jersey you are denied that purchase. If you don't like that then move out of NYC.

^ From April. Not a current event.
Perhaps, yet it was new to me. However, it would also qualify as an "Open Topic" which would fall within the purview of this forum. Your service as thread monitor is appreciated.

I assume that everybody's seen the story in today's DO about the 18-year-old from Woodward who was arrested Tuesday night on weapons charges? He made several bizarre statements to a taxi driver (on separate occasions) regarding hiding bodies and avoiding arrest for murder. Law enforcement officials found a shotgun, rifle and 250 rounds of ammunition at his home, all purchased earlier this month. He also is reported to have ordered two sets of handcuffs and a ski mask. A judge in February ruled him to be mentally ill and committed him to in-patient treatment. He was recommitted again in April. Thank goodness the taxi driver reported what he heard.

Not to hijack this thread, but this is an example of an existing law on the books that - if followed - would have kept this individual from purchasing the guns (you must disclose on application for gun purchases if you've been "adjudicated mentally defective"). If it takes days or weeks for that check to be completed, then who would object to that?

How do we at this point not have some sort of computer cross checking for mental illness since there will be records of him being ruled mentally ill and being treated, relying on mentally ill people to self report is going to have failures.

Perhaps, yet it was new to me. However, it would also qualify as an "Open Topic" which would fall within the purview of this forum. Your service as thread monitor is appreciated.

What I meant to convey was the fact that that this is just now getting spread around in the wake of a gun attack is pretty suspect. This wasn't news until the pro-gun folks needed to counter a pretty terrible massacre perpetrated by someone who should never have been allowed to own firearms.

How do we at this point not have some sort of computer cross checking for mental illness since there will be records of him being ruled mentally ill and being treated, relying on mentally ill people to self report is going to have failures.

Well, there is mental illness and there is mental illness. A category they try to capture in background checks would be "serious mental illnesses" which typically include schitzophrenia (a cognitive disorder that typically manifests in early adulthood) and bi-polarism - a mood disorder. People can also be seriously depressed (also a mood disorder). But they can also have mild depression, psycho-social disorders, ADD, ADHD, post partum depression, specific instance depression, Dissociative identity disorder, etc., etc. There is a wide, wide range of severity in most of these (although schitzophrenia typical is very bad) that could range from mild manifestations where the person isn't even aware of it, all the way to needing to be hospitalized due to being a danger to self or others. Absent being committed to a mental institution, there are really no good way to keep track of these disorders and, in fact, the vast majority of mentally ill people are more lambs than lions - typically fit a prey profile rather than predator. With a young person, there is even a good chance that the illness was so recent that they don't even have a track record of oddball behavior. And on top of that, there are many potentially dangerous personality disorders - including anti-social personality disorder - that isn't technically even a mental illness so a check for mental illness won't pick it up.

What I meant to convey was the fact that that this is just now getting spread around in the wake of a gun attack is pretty suspect. This wasn't news until the pro-gun folks needed to counter a pretty terrible massacre perpetrated by someone who should never have been allowed to own firearms.

Most gun related publications routinely publish stories like that and the folk who subscribe to those publications, be they hunters, marksmen, collectors or people who carry for self defense, are aware of the stories. There is typically a lag between the event and the publication.

A person can have a serious mental illness and, yet, never been to
a doctor.

I was oh so tempted, but hand over mouth. LOL