Two doughnut shop employees shot in the head

[Lefty48197]

Two employees of the Dawn Doughnuts on Moross near I-94 in Detroit were shot to death this morning in a pre-dawn robbery. This isn't a tough neighborhood in Detroit, mind you. In fact, it's one of the best neighborhoods in Detroit. It's just a stone toss from posh Grosse Pointe Woods.
The employees were murdered for money. Whatever was in the cash register, and whatever was in the safe they stole too. Who knows how much money they got $10,000? BFD. Was it more? Was it worth two lives?
Only to a barbarian. That's what these murderers are: Barbarians. Don't expect them to act like normal people, because they aren't normal people. Don't let them get their hands on guns either, or they will kill people. That's the problem with this country: Too many people are willing to grab a gun and kill an innocent person, and those guns are just far too easy for the killers to get their hands on.
They don't choose rocks, or knives, or baseball bats, or automobiles. Those things aren't efficient enough killing machines. A gun pointed at the back of the head and fired, however, is a very effective killing machine. That's what they did this morning to the two immigrants who were trying to make an honest living in this country. Some fucking reward they got.
If guns fall into the wrong hands, then killing is likely to happen. It happens all too often in this country.

http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews/pm15528_20030723.htm

This one wasn't your average, every day, senseless gun killing. This one hit home with me. I exit I-94 at Moross on the way to work every day. Today, the large number of police cars, the crime scene tape, and the grieving family that owned the shop made it obvious that something terrible had happened. Not 1/2 mile from where I work.
If I live to be 100 years old, I will never forget the look of shock and horror on the faces of those people who had come to this country to make a better life for themselves, and their families. Never.

[MrBenchley]

1. And a multi-million dollar lobby works every day

in conjunction with the corrrupt turds in the GOP to keep us all in the line of fire.

And some here think we should climb into bed with these scumbags?

[Cha]

2. I am so sorry for the horror they had to go through!

The helplessness of it all.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jody]

4. This incident is sad, like every murder, but law enforcement is not

required to protect individuals. Dawn Doughnuts must have known that and they still left their workers unprotected. More importantly similiar companies enforce policies preventing their employees from carrying handguns to protect themselves.

It took a number of murders and other crimes to make quick-shops install various protective systems for their stores and employees.

If a business will not protect its employees under conditions of predictable danger and law enforcement is not required to protect individuals, then a business has a moral obligation to let the employees protect themselves.

[MrBenchley]

5. Geeze, there's a truly awful idea

Armed doughnut clerks...if you can tell the honey-dips from the Boston creme, you're qualified to pack heat!

[Lefty48197]

21. FYI Jody

This wasn't your typical 'stick a gun in their face' robbery. This store was actually closed at the time of the robbery. It appears that the employees let the killers into the store, even though it wasn't open for business yet. Possibly, they knew the killers.

[jody]

28. And your point is?

[Pert_UK]

34. Yep...let's arm all employees or armour-plate all businesses......

rather than trying to stop criminals getting their hands on weapons...

Makes perfect sense - we all wander around in body armour carrying pistols, that way we're all safer......

Peace.

P.

[TreadNot]

35. "trying to stop criminals getting their hands on weapons"

We try to stop it, but violent criminals tend not to obey gun laws.

[Romulus]

36. yes, just like the UK criminals n/t

[Emoto]

6. If guns caused the murders...

...then spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat.

[Emoto]

7. because spelling errors...

...are caused by pencils.

[CO Liberal]

8. And It Takes Guns To Make a Gun Nut

:-)

[jody]

9. CO, Is it possible that the owner of the business failed to protect

the employees? That has been the decision of many juries for civil suits against quick-shop stores.

[CO Liberal]

10. Jody, Isn't It ALSO Possible......

....that effective, reasonable gun control measures might have kept the killers from obtaining guns?

[jody]

11. Good question, and I'll be glad to give you

a "yes" or "no" answer if you tell me what you mean by "effective, reasonable gun control measures".

Do you mean under current federal laws, see
1. more arrests
2. more prosecutions
3. longer sentences

OR

do you mean more laws, i.e.
4. ban handguns
5. ban long guns
6. What?

[CO Liberal]

13. I Mean Whatever It Takes

...to make society safer while still allowing reasonable gun access to those with no black marks against them.

It may mean enforcing existing laws - it may mean new laws - it may be a combination of both.

[jody]

16. Perhaps you didn't intend it, but I take your answer as evasive

support for banning guns.

If the employees had exercised their inalienable right to defend self by carrying a handgun, they would have had a fighting chance.

I don't know whether the criminals had a record that would have prevented them from owning guns, but experience suggests that it's highly probable.

I don't see how banning guns would have prevented the sad incident, do you?

[CO Liberal]

17. That's Not What I Meant, Jody

Just banning guns from those who should not have them.

[jody]

18. I understand, but current laws already ban a large segment of the

criminal group from owning guns, and that ban doesn't work.

Even if we could predict that a sub group of law abiding citizens will probably commit a criminal act, I don't see how a law prohibiting them from possessing guns is any more effective than current laws banning convicted felons from possessing guns.

Keep on that path and we end up with a total ban on guns and that's unacceptable because it destroys an individual's inalienable right to defend self and property.

The most effective and efficient tool to use in exercising that inalianeble right is a handgun.

In the particular incident, if I were an employee, I would have carried or had access to a gun and at least I would have had a chance.

If a law abiding citizen carries a gun, they still might be killed as was the man in my area who was recently killed outside his rural home, but he had a chance.

[CO Liberal]

19. The Handgun Is Also The Most Effective And Efficient Tool.....

...to commit a crime.

[jody]

20. That's what the FBI stats show, but we can't enforce an existing

ban of guns for convicted criminals.

How can we enforce an expanded ban of guns against those who might become criminals?

If we have a complete ban on guns, criminals will get guns but citizens will be unable to legally exercise their inalienable right to defend self and property.

We have DU participants from Massachuesetts and they claim to be more civilized than the rest of the US. But they ignore the simple fact that Massachuesetts says in its constitution:

A Declaration of the Rights of the Inhabitants of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

QUOTE
Article I. All men are born free and equal, and have certain natural, essential, and unalienable rights; among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying and defending their lives and liberties; that of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property; in fine, that of seeking and obtaining their safety and happiness.
UNQUOTE

If handguns are the tool of choice by law enforcement officers and criminals, why should we deny that same choice to law abiding citizens who wish to exercise an inalienable right?

[demsrule4life]

26. You are right

We don't need new laws, we have enough laws on the books to help take care of the problem, just need to get the DA's to enforce them.

[Lefty48197]

22. How about psychological analysis

for those that want to own guns, to determine whether they are determined to go out and kill people if they purchase a gun?

[Township75]

12. Based on what current gun control proctection has offered, then NO!

!

[Emoto]

14. the sixty-four dollar question, eh?

"Isn't It ALSO Possible...that effective, reasonable gun control measures might have kept the killers from obtaining guns?"

The big question is what does it take to be "effective" (and I do appreciate your comment about allowing access to those of us with no bad stuff)? Let's say we ban all guns entirely in private hands. Do we have reason to believe that it would be any more effective than our ban on heroin or crack? Let's not construct a false either/or from that question. I am not saying that because X doesn't work that we should do nothing.

[CO Liberal]

15. Some Want a Total Ban, Others Want Unfettered Access

The solution lies somewhere in between these extreme positions. It's up to us to find it.

[Pert_UK]

32. Not "caused" - "made unacceptably easy"......

There is a distinct difference.

P.

[Lefty48197]

23. Michigan is a "shall issue" CCW state

So much for the NRA's theory that 'shall issue' laws would prevent this kind of crime.

[jody]

24. That's an interesting assertion. Please provide a source for your

statment that someone said "'shall issue' laws would prevent this kind of crime".

Until you do that, I will believe your statement is a "your facts are wrong".

[MrBenchley]

25. Yeah, but jody, look at the crap you DO believe...

Those kind of statements are common in RKBA gibberish...

"In counties that have "right-to-carry" laws or "shall issue" permits, that is, where a citizen must be issued a gun permit after meeting certain criteria, usually a background check and having taken a gun safety course, violent crime goes down dramatically"

http://www.backwoodshome.com/articles/duffy62.html

(Which is of course, not even close to true...)

From Nutcase Mary Rosh: "The more people obtain permits over time, the more violent crime rates decline."

http://www.tsra.com/Lott11.htm

(Which is a steaming pantload.)

[demsrule4life]

27. CCW give you the right to carry in pulic

It does not give you the right to carry on private property unless you have owners blessing. And most employers have policies that forbid employees to carry even though it is legal in the state.

[SyracuseDemocrat]

29. If one of those employees had

a gun besides the criminals, maybe this wouldn't have happened. Of course that would be far too logical for our friend, Mr. Benchley.

[CO Liberal]

30. Or More People May Be Dead

Ya never know when you play "What If"......

[Pert_UK]

33. That's not logic, it's arse.....

Possibly they might have been able to kill the assailant......but anything else could have happened, including the inadvertant shooting of a bystander.

Compare and contrast:

If MORE people there had got guns FEWER people MIGHT have been shot.
If NO people there had got guns NO people WOULD have been shot.

I'm not proposing a panacea, I'm not offering solutions, I am merely stating my incredulity that your reaction is that guns for self defence are a better solution to removing guns from criminals.

Peace.

P.

[jody]

37. If guns for self defense is a bad solution, then why do criminals and cops

carry guns?

[Spentastic]

38. Depends how you define defence

I'd prefer self defence which doesn't require the death of others.

Criminals can and do use guns offensively as do cops.

What's your point?

[jody]

39. Defense is already defined in each state. If a victim is forced to

use arms of any type in defense and such use results in the death of a criminal, then the legal process determines whether it is justifiable homicide.

ON EDIT ADD
Justifiable Homicide by Private Citizen in 2001, Table 2.17
….. Firearms (176)
….. Knives (25)
….. Other Dangerous Weapon (6)
….. Personal Weapon (8)

Justifiable Homicide is the killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony

Does that answer your question?

[Wapsie B]

31. As a side note to all of this,

we should be keeping a close eye on the state of Minnesota now that their new gun law is in place.