Gun carrying man ends stabbing spree at Salt Lake grocery store

[KingCracker]

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."

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

[Marshall Veteran]

Here's one for the anti-gunners. How many people would have been injured/killed if this man didn't choose to carry a concealed weapon and more importantly, have the bravery to engage this psycho. Kudos to this man.

[DocM]

Good job!!

And like the vast majority of cases where an armed citizen stops a crime, no shots fired. There's something about that big, gaping hole at the end of the barrel that stops 95% of perps in their tracks. The rest....

[Lucas]

Glad he used it smartly instead of just shooting him right away. Kudos! And poor guys, wonder what the report of the guy is going to say.

[KingCracker]

Why only 3 replies. If a man with a gun shot a lot of people this thread would be full of people commenting. But when it comes to someone doing good with a gun...

[max22]

Why only 3 replies. If a man with a gun shot a lot of people this thread would be full of people commenting. But when it comes to someone doing good with a gun...

This is exactly why I hate pro gun people. They hate when a gun is used in a good way.

[KingCracker]

This is exactly why I hate pro gun people. They hate when a gun is used in a good way.

You mean anti gun people?

[Davo]

The guy used a gun properly so there is no outrage. The problem is not owning a gun or liking guns. The problem is when people take it upon themselves to deem the world their "castle".

[KingCracker]

The guy used a gun properly so there is no outrage. The problem is not owning a gun or liking guns. The problem is when people take it upon themselves to deem the world their "castle".

Where I live my home is my "castle" and its legal to use deadly force if necessary to protect it.

[JonathanMarston]

Where I live my home is my "castle" and its legal to use deadly force if necessary to protect it.

Guess it's different in Tenessee than Arkansas. Here if I were to use deadly force to protect my property I'd get thrown in jail. I can only use deadly force to protect my own or others' lives. Unless, of course, the perpetrator is actively engaging in arson; then I'm free to shoot away.

I have a concealed carry license, but it's one of those things that I hope I never have to use. Major props to the guy in the story above!

[KingCracker]

Guess it's different in Tenessee than Arkansas. Here if I were to use deadly force to protect my property I'd get thrown in jail. I can only use deadly force to protect my own or others' lives. Unless, of course, the perpetrator is actively engaging in arson; then I'm free to shoot away...

Can use it to protect yourself others and your property here.

39-11-614. Protection of property

A person in lawful possession of real or personal property is justified in threatening or using force against another, when and to the degree it is reasonably believed the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.

(b) A person who has been unlawfully dispossessed of real or personal property is justified in threatening or using force against the other, when and to the degree it is reasonably believed the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property, if the person threatens or uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession.

[THolman Veteran]

If only we didn't have guns, things like this wouldn't happen! Oh, wait...

[KingCracker]

If only we didn't have guns, things like this wouldn't happen! Oh, wait...

Well if the anti's had their way the people inside the store would of been helpless because anti's always use the call the police line like they will protect you.Sure thing while some dude is stabbing people.

[Krome]

I would like to own a gun too, but carrying it with me would get me hunt down by the cops.

[Miuku.]

Here's one for the anti-gunners. How many people would have been injured/killed if this man didn't choose to carry a concealed weapon and more importantly, have the bravery to engage this psycho.

Here's one for you; how many homicides with firearms were committed during the day this guy used his gun for something useful, in the USA? The answer is approximately 80.

And here's another comment; once you've been aimed in the head with a gun while trying to help someone, your perspective on how wonderful they are might change. But I don't really expect most of you to understand, you're just children that haven't seen real life outside TV anyway.

[DocM]

Studies by researchers and the FBI show that each year in the US between 1,5 and 2.5 million crimes are stopped by an armed citizen, either in their home or in the public square. Calculate that out.

BTW: I've been there, multiple times and once had to fire to save my dad so no TV jockey here. I agree it's nothing like fiction, it's a helluva thing but not having a weapon would have been far, far worse.

[Aethec]

Studies by researchers and the FBI show that each year in the US between 1,5 and 2.5 million crimes are stopped by an armed citizen, either in their home or in the public square. Calculate that out.

BTW: I've been there, multiple times and once had to fire to save my dad so no TV jockey here. I agree it's nothing like fiction, it's a helluva thing but not having a weapon would have been far, far worse.

Doesn't change the fact that the U.S. have a higher crime rate, rape rate, gun crime rate, than most developed countries who have much more restrictive gun policies.

[excalpius]

Here's one for the anti-gunners. How many people would have been injured/killed if this man didn't choose to carry a concealed weapon and more importantly, have the bravery to engage this psycho. Kudos to this man.

And this extremely rare lucky moment when the gunman doesn't accidentally shoot himself, bystanders, his family, innocents, or have the weapon taken away from him (thus creating an even bigger threat to the public) is supposed to make up for the thousands killed every year by poorly educated men who feel massively inadequate about their penis size and/or social status? Riiiight.

Note that in ANY grocery store, there are plenty of other potential weapons on hand. Not to mention people like myself who could have disarmed the man with our bare hands without danger to ourselves or others.

You know, the way the entire rest of the civilized world handles these things?

The ONLY solution to such problems is to keep guns out of the hands of the mentally ill period...and to keeping military grade weapons out of the hands of EVERYBODY, since none of those are appropriate or necessary for home or personal defense.

BTW, I'm a well and properly trained marksman and I think the NRA is an organization made up of complete whackos.

[excalpius]

Studies by researchers and the FBI show that each year in the US between 1,5 and 2.5 million crimes are stopped by an armed citizen, either in their home or in the public square. Calculate that out.

Cite a source or I'm calling Fox News-grade propaganda bull****.

[Krome]

lol 1.5 to 2.5 million crimes stopped by arm citizen... this is the first news I hear about a gun citizen stopped a crime like ever...

[DocM]

Cite a source or I'm calling Fox News-grade propaganda bull****.

Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America by Dr. Gary Kleck, professor School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Florida State University, a frequently referenced source in law enforcement, put the number at up to 2.5 million in 1991 when far fewer people were armed. The laws started to be changed in 1992 to allow easier concealed carry permitting. The FBI Uniform Crime Report stats have shown a steep decline in major crimes since - they're now at the lowest levels in the last 40 years in spite of a huge increase in gun ownership and carrying.

The Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice 1994 study Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, estimated that 1.5 million to 4.7 million defensive uses of a firearm every year depending on how tight the constraints on the data were.

More recent estimates put it at 1.5 million, probably lower because of the general reduction in violent crime.

[sopharine]

Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America by Dr. Gary Kleck, professor School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Florida State University, a frequently referenced source in law enforcement, put the number at up to 2.5 million in 1991 when far fewer people were armed. The laws started to be changed in 1992 to allow easier concealed carry permitting. The FBI Uniform Crime Report stats have shown a steep decline in major crimes since - they're now at the lowest levels in the last 40 years in spite of a huge increase in gun ownership and carrying.

The Department of Justice's National Institute of Justice 1994 study Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, estimated that 1.5 million to 4.7 million defensive uses of a firearm every year depending on how tight the constraints on the data were.

More recent estimates put it at 1.5 million, probably lower because of the general reduction in violent crime.

According to ?Comparing the Incidence of Self-Defense Gun Use and Criminal Gun Use? Harvard Injury Control Research Center, 2009, the first report is based on a survey that count preemptive strike etc. as "self-defense gun use". The appropriate way is to ask only those who first report that someone tried to commit a crime against them (rape, robbery etc.). If the later approach is used the number of self-defense gun use per year is only about 80,000.

Regarding the FBI report, you are not implying the crime level dropped because of increasing gun ownership, are you?

[Davo]

Where I live my home is my "castle" and its legal to use deadly force if necessary to protect it.

In your home, in Tennessee. Beyond that, it's not the Wild West.

I'm glad there's finallly a story on here that's not bleeding heart or gun-nut.

[excalpius]

Regarding the FBI report, you are not implying the crime level dropped because of increasing gun ownership, are you?

Apparently in both cases that is exactly what he is asserting. Which, of course, is RIDICULOUS, since there appears to be no causal connection between the increased paranoia of gun owners and the drop in violent crime.

In truth, the violent crime rate dropped for completely unrelated reasons to gun ownership - and indeed predates the current rush of purchasing (post Obama election) by 10-20 years as the real drop in violent crime rates happened under Clinton's presidency. I know, I was there and I remember those news reports.

Meanwhile, gun ownership increased because of targeted MARKETING by gun manufacturers because they were worried sales would slide as people felt safer. The NRA was a party to this scam (and still are), because they would be negatively affected as well, for obvious reasons.

So the quotes you use, DocM, are wholly unrelated and make no claims whatsoever related to what YOU said they did. Shame on you for such a transparent piece of propagandizing.

[ILikeTobacco]

So the quotes you use, DocM, are wholly unrelated and make no claims whatsoever related to what YOU said they did. Shame on you for such a transparent piece of propagandizing.

Even if they are not related, rates still went down while gun ownership went up. According to you, less guns = less crimes which also means more guns = more crimes. Are you now changing your stance and saying guns have absolutely no effect on crime rates? If not, DocM has proven you wrong, period.

Your only other choice is saying statistics don't matter, in which case you have no proof for your own claims, making you as credible in your own opinions as a religious nut.