The pastor of a Maryville, Illinois, church was shot to death during a service Sunday in front of horrified parishioners who then tackled the gunman, state police said.This is the first major incident of its kind since Jim Adkisson killed two and wounded six in the Knoxville Tennessee Unitarian Church. In the Tennessee case, Adkisson pleaded guilty last month in a deal that allowed him to avoid the death penalty and will face life in prison without parole.Fred Winters, the pastor of the First Baptist Church, was shot and killed during the 8 a.m. service, and the attacker and two parishioners suffered knife wounds in the attack, authorities said.
The gunman entered during the service and walked up to the pulpit.
Winters and the gunman apparently exchanged words before the 27-year-old man fired four shots, hitting the pastor's Bible and then the pastor.
The motive in the more recent killing is unclear at this point. You'll remember that Adkisson was driven by an obsessive hatred of liberals. Sometime after the Tennessee killings, the State of Arkansas erupted into a legal battle over whether parishioners should be allowed to carry guns in church. Apparently in that state it had been forbidden. In Illinois, I've been told recently, there are much stricter regulations about carrying guns anywhere, not just in church.
Do you think if the other parishioners had been armed they would have been able to prevent this tragedy? I don't see how? Perhaps arming the church-goers, or the teachers for that matter, might help in very limited circumstances. They might be able to prevent a drawn-out stand off with hostages and force a quicker bloodbath, but I agree with Paul Helme, who said on one of our recent videos, these killers are looking to get killed, they're not afraid of death nor are they deterred by armed security. What's your opinion?
What do you think about the difference between the immediate reaction of the parishioners who subdued the gunman in this case and the inaction on the part of the passengers on the bus with the Canadian Cannibal? What could account for such a difference?
Please feel free to leave a comment.
Oh boy, where to start with this one.
ReplyDeleteIllinois. The only state (other than DC) that still doesn't allow citizens to carry guns. (concealed or open) They have some of the strictest gun laws in the country.
You say there are "much stricter regulations about carrying guns anywhere." Yes Mike, not just "much stricter" but an outright BAN on the right to bear arms AND you need a government issued license just to buy a gun.
I hate seeing things like this, because Helmke and his ilk will use this tragedy to say "SEE! this is why we need stricter gun laws!" As if passing just one more law would stop such things from happening.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteThe assailant (notice how he also attacked people with a knife but isn't called a Knifeman, just gunmen, eh?) broke how many laws to shoot the pastor?
And exactly what law do you propose to stop something like this from happening again?
Please provide details, specific details on what laws will stop it, heck even reduce it.
Head over to your cohorts' sites (Brady Campaign, Coalition to Stop Gun Violence )and check out their suggestions.
By the way Mike, you've said you were a former Marine, but you've never said what your MOS was, would you share that?
A gunman stopped not by by the police, who citizen disarmament advocates state we should rely exclusively on, but by members of the congregation who risked their own lives to stop this killer. Think of how better it would have been for them if they hadn't needed to come withing slashing distance.
ReplyDelete911 calls go unanswered as Parker County woman tries to report intruder
ReplyDeleteAfter dialing 911 several times with no answer, Laverne Hokett called her daughter, Deborah Turpin, who lives nearby. Hokett then tried 911 again as the man inside her home screamed. (WFAA-TV)
Her family showed up w/ guns to help her.
http://www.dallasnews.com/video/index.html?nvid=339049&shu=1
The government shouldn't be the one deciding if guns are allowed in a church--it should be the church that makes the decision.
ReplyDeleteWhether an armed member would have helped depends on the exact circumstances. I haven't heard of any case where an armed defender made the situation worse.
The bigger issue isn't that a particular incident is stopped, it is to eliminate areas where armed resistance isn't legal--I've seen claims that all US spree shootings with more than 3 victims have taken place where guns were not allowed. I'm not certain that is true, but I haven't found a single example proving it false.
We are back to ratio here--people intent on harm should have as few places as practical where they are the only one with a gun.
didn't the gun jam in the church shooting as opposed to the crazy man in the bus with a knife? Not a good comparison.
ReplyDeleteBob, There's no law that could prevent something like this happening, but if we could find a way to prevent these dangerous people from getting dangerous weapons, we'd be better off.
ReplyDeleteOn another thread you posted tremendous volumes to prove that handguns are not all that dangerous. It's amazing to me the length you go to in order to prove me wrong. But in doing so, you only reinforced my point. Handguns are extremely dangerous, efficacious is what I called them, COMPARED TO other tools like knives and baseball bats. Now, I know it's possible to kill someone with a knife or a bat, but don't you think the survival odds are better than with a gun?
Mike,
ReplyDeleteThanks for admitting that no law that can be passed would stop something like this from happening.
So, what would be the effect of any laws?
It would be the continued efforts to disarm the law abiding citizens and put them at a disadvantage against the criminals.
but if we could find a way to prevent these dangerous people from getting dangerous weapons, we'd be better off.
And if we could find a way to have unicorns fart natural gas and pee high octane gasoline we'd be better off also. You are living in a fantasy world and 90% of your argument is based on that impossible to achieve goal.
On another thread you posted tremendous volumes to prove that handguns are not all that dangerous
This is a distortion Mike and you know it. I posted information countering your claim that handguns are the most lethal killing device EVAH or some bushwa like that.
Handguns are effective, handguns are dangerous, the statistics prove that. Where we disagree is the fact that handguns are beneficial to society.
The effectiveness of the defensive use of handguns is something you under value while over counting the number of crimes.
Handguns are extremely dangerous, efficacious is what I called them, COMPARED TO other tools like knives and baseball bats
I've never said handguns weren't dangerous, or they weren't more effective compare to other tools.
That is exactly the reason why people carry them. It doesn't make sense to continue to push laws that make people defend themselves ONLY with baseball bats or knives.
But that is what the Brady Campaign wants, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence wants it, you appear to want it.
Now, I know it's possible to kill someone with a knife or a bat, but don't you think the survival odds are better than with a gun?
Depends, honest answer Mike. You like movies, go back to the Untouchables and the scene where (De Niro) Capone killed someone with the baseball bat.
Now if someone wants to kill you or your wife with a baseball bat, what would you rather have, another bat or a firearm?
Now, I know it's possible to kill someone with a knife or a bat, but don't you think the survival odds are better than with a gun?
ReplyDeleteif i've got lawful, justified reason to try and kill somebody, then better odds of survival is the LAST fucking thing i want them to have. by the time i'm anywhere near making such an attempt, the time for giving the other bastard a fair chance is LONG past.
Nomen,
ReplyDeleteMike will miss it completely, missed it completely because he doesn't see self defense when he looks at firearms.
All he focuses on is the violent criminals, instead of the rights of the law abiding folks.
Common sense and reality tell me that a church full of armed parishioners confronting a madman would have been made quite a mess for the cleaning lady.
ReplyDeleteViolence is a fantasy ballet for so many, it is elegantly played out in their "would have, could have, should have" rationalizations...
Violence is never as choreographed as Quentin Tarantine artfully presents it....
Microdot,
ReplyDeleteHow about getting real.
Common sense and reality tell me that a church full of armed parishioners confronting a madman would have been made quite a mess for the cleaning lady.
Most people won't even draw their firearm even if the church was full of people carrying.
The reason is simple, people wouldn't draw unless they had a reason, had a target, wouldn't had a chance to fire without hurting innocent people.
The laws didn't, prevent the criminal from walking in with a firearm, just the law abiding.
Talk about a fantasy, that is the pro-ignorance folks insistence that gun owners are the types that will draw and start firing wildly.
I say some of you are exactly that type:
ReplyDelete"Talk about a fantasy, that is the pro-ignorance folks insistence that gun owners are the types that will draw and start firing wildly."
Just like some of you are not interested in the rules of engagement. No one is saying all of you are anything. It's all in the percentages, which is exactly where we part ways.
Microdot:
ReplyDeleteIf the entire church were armed, you would probably be right, but that's not what we are talking about. When states have objective licensing criteria, licenses stabilize at about 2-5% of the population. Real-world experience shows that when they shoot, they hit innocent bystanders far less often than police.
"Common sense and reality tell me that a church full of armed parishioners confronting a madman would have been made quite a mess for the cleaning lady."
ReplyDeleteAnd here we see the BS emotional argument the anti-gunners have been trotting out for 30 or so years now. CCW will create bloodbath where innocents will be killed in the crossfire.
Funny, we have millions of citizens regularly carrying guns (even in church) over a period of DECADES and the hysterica fantasy scenario you describe above hasn't happen even ONCE.
Do you know what that tells me? That tells me you're dead wrong. Your reality is not real, and "common-sense?" Yeah, again, you're basing said common-sense on nothing but hysterics and your feelings.