Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is it that during WW2 when the Jews fought back in the famous Warsaw ghetto uprising, history and people tout it as heroic and something to be admired? Or the French resistance for that matter?
Because according to you we all should be dismissing their actions as reckless because "statistically* the Jews who armed themselves and fought back were more likely to shoot their friend or foot off. So according to you it is safer to live like a sheep and take a chance when the lion comes looking for its meal.
Hey, I was showing that you were being speculative yourself by being speculative myself. What happened in WW2 is much different and not comparable. More guns do not make us safer in this situation. I personally do not want to live in a country where we all have to carry guns. That sounds like a warzone. No thanks!!!
If we must be constantly be armed to feel protected than the terrorists have won. The day we live in constant fear is the day we no longer live in a free society. I for one hope we never live in a time where being armed is the only way to ever feel safe.
You have that backwards!
You have the right to bear arms, or not to. The simple fact is these things happen when the perpetrators know the victims have no way to defend themselves.
If these islamist wonks had done this in say... Dallas or Phoenix, they would have been dead in the street within minutes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oakformonday
Hey, I was showing that you were being speculative yourself by being speculative myself. What happened in WW2 is much different and not comparable. More guns do not make us safer in this situation. I personally do not want to live in a country where we all have to carry guns. That sounds like a warzone. No thanks!!!
Again, is it really so hard to differentiate between having the choice? YOU don't have to carry a gun, but it certainly would be welcomed if the guy next to you saves your life because he's packing.
Nobody is telling anyone they have to carry, just don't foist your aversions onto others.
That is the truth plain and simple. Anti gunners might spout but but... *statistically* their guns and freedom to own a gun would have caused more harm than good (a false statistic contrived) but the truth is those employees never stood a chance because they were unable to defend themselves so gun control cost them their lives. It is a clear example of gun restrictions denying a person a chance to survive a attack.
They were in a situation where death threats were real, violence had already been threatened and carried out. While the first few people might have been caught off guard the rest of employees aware to the situation could have fought back possibly saving lives and ending the lives of the terrorists.
Maybe those employees rejected the thought of arming themselves despite real and eminent threat and thought they were courageous displaying their pencils in the face of guns but that assured they had no chance of survival.
Oh you can respond back that but the terrorists had weapon training , had bigger or more guns, had the element of surprise, but the fact is after the first shots rang out the people inside could have fought back and possibly lived if they had even a 9mm pistol to defend themselves with.
It goes back to the saying when seconds count the cops are only minutes away and even if the cops were there in time (which they were in this case) ultimately your own fate is in your own hands.
Maybe those employees wouldn't have been able to save themselves had they been carrying a weapon but one thing is for sure they never had a chance because they weren't or weren't allowed.
But how did citizens being allowed to be armed ever stop a mass shooting in the US? There have been movie theater shootings, mall shootings, workplace shootings, etc. in the US. When did the 2nd amendment ever matter against those?
And the second amendment sure did not matter to anyone killed on 9/11.
Nobody in the rest of the world is clamoring for guns. It is an American obsession.
But how did citizens being allowed to be armed ever stop a mass shooting in the US? There have been movie theater shootings, mall shootings, workplace shootings, etc. in the US. When did the 2nd amendment ever matter against those?
And the second amendment sure did not matter to anyone killed on 9/11.
Nobody in the rest of the world is clamoring for guns. It is an American obsession.
Local mall to me, when the shooter was confronted by someone armed he went around a corner, and shot himself.
Mass shootings often become non-mass shootings when additional armed people are present as well.
Hey, I was showing that you were being speculative yourself by being speculative myself. What happened in WW2 is much different and not comparable. More guns do not make us safer in this situation. I personally do not want to live in a country where we all have to carry guns. That sounds like a warzone. No thanks!!!
The great thing is you don't have to carry or own if you don't want to. I even went out of my way to say that just because you are armed it doesn't guarantee anything, different scenarios play out upon factors. However not being armed or not allowed to be armed guarantees you will never have had a chance to defend yourself.
Given when you know there is a threat taking steps to defend yourself is not giving into fear, if they had stopped making cartoons THAT would have been giving into fear.
Is the Warsaw uprising any different? Whether it is defending yourself and not cowering to a army,or a terrorist, or a psycho ex it is still self defense on a certain scale.
Some have said in this thread "but maybe the guy would have had it stolen instead or shot someone by accident". Well maybe but MAYBE had the 4th or 5th person in the building put a 9mm round through the head of the terrorist he might not only have saved himself but also that terrorist would never have lived to make it to the deli and killed another person there. So maybe can go either way .
You are in a building with a terrorist killing everybody and you know you are next.You knew this could happen specially if you wrote those cartoons. What do you do now? Well if you are unarmed you cower under a desk waiting your fate until he finally finds you. If you are armed you fight back, maybe die anyway but maybe not. Which scenario would you prefer?
But how did citizens being allowed to be armed ever stop a mass shooting in the US? There have been movie theater shootings, mall shootings, workplace shootings, etc. in the US. When did the 2nd amendment ever matter against those?
And the second amendment sure did not matter to anyone killed on 9/11.
Nobody in the rest of the world is clamoring for guns. It is an American obsession.
But how did citizens being allowed to be armed ever stop a mass shooting in the US? There have been movie theater shootings, mall shootings, workplace shootings, etc. in the US. When did the 2nd amendment ever matter against those?
And the second amendment sure did not matter to anyone killed on 9/11.
Nobody in the rest of the world is clamoring for guns. It is an American obsession.
.... ..... ...................
Most of the mass shootings in this country have taken place in GUN-FREE zones. Even USA Today acknowledges this.
Opponents of the Second Amendment and concealed carry laws call the areas created by Cinemark's decision "gun-free zones." They are not. As we discovered to our great horror in the early morning hours of July 20 and as we have discovered in the past, they are free only of the guns owned by law-abiding citizens. 'Gun-free zones' never gun free
As for 911, planes are by definition GUN-FREE zones, so the box cutters won.
I know everything you say sounds right in your head, but to me it's just progressive nonsense.
Local mall to me, when the shooter was confronted by someone armed he went around a corner, and shot himself.
Mass shootings often become non-mass shootings when additional armed people are present as well.
Good for him... he gave himself everything he deserved. I hope he was successful and went to hell.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What happened in WW2 is much different and not comparable. More guns do not make us safer in this situation. I personally do not want to live in a country where we all have to carry guns. That sounds like a warzone. No thanks!!!
.... ..... ...................
