Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

WHO Could Ever NEED An Assault Rifle? Maybe Colleen Hufford Could Have

All you "WHY do we need "guns" or "assault rifles only lunatics and white-neo-Nazi's (like me?) want one!"

Right, gun-banning Leftists, take a few mimutes and tell me if you ever heard of Collen Hufford?

WHO? Of course you haven't -

The September 24, 2014 attack in Oklahoma is somewhat notable in the annals of many officially uncalled terrorist strikes in that Nolen emulated a favorite ISIS death tactic no doubt learned online: he fully beheaded a co-worker—the beloved wife, mother, and grandmother Colleen Hufford—inside the Moore, Oklahoma food processing plant where they both worked. Shouting “Alluah Akbar” throughout the attack, Nolen used the same oversized butcher knife on the neck of a second co-worker, Tracy Johnson, when the company’s chief operations officer, a reserve law enforcement officer named Mark Vaughn, burst in with an AR-15 rifle. He shot and wounded Nolen as Nolen disengaged from his second victim and charged at him with the bloody knife.

The 2017 trial, which received only some highly localized Oklahoma TV news coverage, decisively showed this was neither mental illness nor workplace violence. Taped police interviews of Nolen and other evidence showed Nolen was motivated by Qur’anic scripture.Nolen has proven unrepentant.He responded that the Qur’an gave him the idea. (Qur’an 47:4 states that “When you meet the unbelievers, strike their necks.) Nolen answered: “Uh, no. I read the Qur’an. Like I say, the Qur’an is easy to understand. No one guides me but Allah.” (The Federalist December 4, 2018 Jihadist Beheader in Oklahoma Cleared For Execution.")

Did you get that? An evil assault rifle saved a woman's life. What? Didn't hear that story on CNN? Well then for you I guess it didn't really happen, then...but it did for Hufford's family.

So Leftists … you want to confiscate the guns of American citizens while at the same time opening America's borders to allow unlimited immigration from every country on Earth, right? There is a word for that sort of person...begins with a "T" and ends with a "R". Let you fill in the missing letters cause you already know what they are.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
windinhishair · 61-69, M
Well, gosh, since a single assault weapon worked once, we should arm everyone with them, even children, the elderly, the mentally ill. Maybe even make it mandatory with a prison term if you don't own one. Then we'll all be much, much safer.
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
@windinhishair Terrible rebuttal, total strawman argument. Why even bother?
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@SumKindaMunster The fact is the more people have guns, the more gun deaths there will be. That part you like to ignore because every once in a long while, one is used to prevent other deaths. You conveniently forget about the suicides and the murders that far outweigh an outcome like this one.
SumKindaMunster · 51-55, M
@windinhishair Not disputing any of that, its common sense.

Once again though you are not debating the point, which is, these types of anecdotal examples are routinely brushed aside and overlooked by the left wing media.

If we are to have an honest debate about what, if anything, should be done about guns, I believe it should take all sides into account.

That doesn't mean I support gun confiscation, but the fact of the matter is to affect any sort of political change in this country, compromise is the way to go. To do that, we need to logically and soberly look at the whole picture and decide what the best course of action is.

Dismissing the whole other side, and mocking people who don't agree is neither genuine or helpful.

Guns are part of American culture, and while you may not like that, there are plenty of responsible gun owners who do, and they have a right to continue to be a responsible gun owner and enjoy their rights just like you do.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@SumKindaMunster I agree that we need to take all sides into account. In fact, most gun owners, and most NRA members, believe in universal background checks. So why isn't that law already? And no one is trying to take all guns away from all people. There are plenty of responsible gun owners, but no one really needs an assault weapon, whose only purpose is to kill large numbers of people quickly and efficiently.

I think there is ground for compromise that will allow the vast majority of people to keep their guns, while making assault weapons more difficult to obtain for people who are more likely to use them inappropriately. That's where we need to go.
Abrienda · 26-30, F
@windinhishair THANK YOU! I LOVE IT when people like you fall into the trap I set for them!

First...

Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed…While the data and the debate about guns rage the only aspect we can confirm is that when civilians use Firearms against offenders it is effective. -2012 CDC Report commissioned by then President Obama


And second...

https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-documented-cases-where-an-AR-15-was-used-successfully-in-self-defense-for-a-home-invasion

http://extranosalley.com/how-often-is-the-ar-15-used-in-crime/

However, @windblowingthroughyouremptyhead, having AGAIN shown you people have NO IDEA what you are talking about you also MISS MY POINT again! it is NOT about the AR 15 but the fact it is ONLY referenced by the elite media when it is used in a crime not when it SAVES LIVES. That just too complicated for you people to understand? Maybe if I type it s-l-o-w-e-r next time?
@windinhishair FINALLY you are starting to make sense.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Abrienda An AR-15 rarely saves lives. And it does get reported, perhaps not to the extent you would like, but reported it is. One of the posters here remembers the incident you describe reported in the press. Your whole premise is wrong.
@windinhishair The number of DGUs (defensive gun uses) far outweighs criminal gun violence. In the vast majority of those cases, the potential victim was convinced they would have been killed or seriously injured. The firearm is merely brandished, and that alone usually stops the assault. Rarely are shots fired, and DGUs do not reported in the news. But I've seen 13 independent studies conducted on DGUs, including studies from the CDC, LA Times and even CNN. CNN, by the way, did NOT publish their findings...I wonder why? The numbers from the survey range from 100K+ DGUs per year to more than 3 million DGUs per year. The truth is likely somewhere in the middle - but that's a helluva lot less than the 33K gun deaths - 67% of those are suicides. And if we learned anything from the Australian gun grab - take away guns from those who want to kill themselves, and they use another method.

More guns more deaths? Nope - and I know you've seen this one before. It's the FBI's Uniform Crime Report. Firearm homicides have been in a steady decline over the last 25 years. They are approximately 50% less firearm homicides in the US today than in 1993. But gun ownership over this same period? It's way up. Citizens in the US purchase millions of guns legally every month.

The old leftist saying used to be "no good guy with a gun has ever stopped a mass shooting." Mass shooting, by the Mother Jones definition is a shooter shooting/killing 4 or more people. It's basically illogical because if the mass shooter isn't stopped almost instantly, it's because there is no one there with a gun. If they are there with a gun, the shooter is stopped almost instantly. Case in point, when a shooter took a rifle to a mall in Portland Oregon, armed with multiple magazines. Perfect scenario for a mass shooting...except there was a good Samaritan with a concealed pistol. The shooter ultimately turned the gun on himself and no one else was hurt. Did the good Samaritan stop a mass shooting? Probably yes...but because he didn't shoot and kill 4 people first, Mother Jones doesn't report it.

Using the same logic as above, I can say "no gun law has ever stopped a criminal from using a gun in a crime."