Would you take matters into your own hands if you were in the middle of a terrorist attack? (Putin, suspect)
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.
Pure Nonsense from an anti-gun citizen. Some clown can write all the BS he wants, and the Sheeple can eat that day but in reality, that theory sure has not worked for anyone that I have seen in Mass shootings. All the "Unarmed" Citizens I have seen in every News Report where dead, running, limping, or being carried out.
I look at it this way. Even if 1% of unarmed Citizens are saved by some one with a Gun, its good enough for me. I also believe that Terrorists and Murdering Criminals can't have any better friends or Assistants than the Anti-Gun Folks. They all have Blood on their hands.
So the FBI statistics are BS? Cause that's exactly where those numbers come from. No mass shooting has ever been stopped by an unarmed civilian.
1% huh? You'll justify any stat to keep your precious gun, even if that means thousands die. Good for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aredhel
Nope, it's precisely true. The overwhelming majority of mass shootings are stopped by ARMED people, namely the police. Most mass shooters only stop when they meet determined armed resistance; then they either surrender (rare), commit suicide (most common) or are killed.
And what is the primary difference between a police officer and a civilian with a CCW permit? Nothing more than training. And yes, CCW holders can train to achieve the level of proficiency of a SWAT Team member if they care to do so (and many of them are in fact more proficient with their weapon than the average beat cop, who doesn't necessarily enjoy shooting as a hobby and doesn't practice much). In a "lone shooter with a gun" situation, a CCW holder who has taken upon himself to learn combat shooting can potentially do some good.
But terrorist attacks generally involve multiple perpetrators, rifles, and bombs. Even a gutsy CCW holder simply doesn't have the right tools for that job (namely a scoped rifle which has been accurately sighted in, and ideally body armor as well). Handguns have limits.
Haha. Firstly when that NRA douchetard and his Republican puppets say that they aren't referring to cops. They are trying to brainwash people into thinking they NEED a gun or else they'll get murdered, when all the facts, studies and mountains of data point to the exact opposite. They are just trying to make money. And it's working. The little gun lovers run out and buy guns every time a mass shooting makes the headlines. While the victims are being buried and their loved ones are mourning, the NRA, gun manufacturers and Republicans are checking their bank accounts.
The only difference is just a bit of training? Lol. Watch the videos for Pete's sake. They interview and train with ALERRT team members. You need your eyes opened. (Also I'd like to see some stats on that "potential good" of a CCW verses a loan shooter, can't wait!).
Police and military professionals are just that PROFESSIONALS. They train for several hundred hours a year in dozens of different scenarios. Being able to take down an active shooter takes a lot more skill than just being able to hit a target at the range. The Average Joe could never obtain that level of skill unless they quit their day job and immersed their self in the training and thus becoming a professional. Shooting for a hobby, even on the regular, doesn't even come close to the training these guys possess.
Haha. Firstly when that NRA douchetard and his Republican puppets say that they aren't referring to cops. They are trying to brainwash people into thinking they NEED a gun or else they'll get murdered...
Sorry, but there are situations where that is true. It's up to you to decide if your personal risk of winding up in one of those situations is high enough to warrant carrying a firearm.
Quote:
The only difference is just a bit of training?
Yes, the only difference is training - specifically COMBAT training. I hate to break it to you, but most police officers and soldiers are just average Joes and Janes - but they have undergone COMBAT training, which most civilian gun owners don't bother to learn (but could if they wished to do so; there are many schools which teach it).
Quote:
Police and military professionals are just that PROFESSIONALS. They train for several hundred hours a year in dozens of different scenarios.
Believe me, you are GROSSLY overestimating the amount of time the average police officer spends at the shooting range! In fact, at many ranges the joke is "Clear out, the police are qualifying this weekend" because their handling of their firearms is often so subpar. I know CCW holders and sports shooting enthusiasts who shoot more rounds in a weekend than the average cop does in an entire year. Many departments require NO ongoing scenario training for the average beat cop, only range qualification 2-4 times a year.
But why should it be any different? Contrary to what TV cop shows suggest, the average police officer spends very little time shooting at suspects.
The SWAT team does get in more practice, but only a minority of the police force will be on the SWAT team, so if something big is going down the SWAT team will make up only a small percentage of the responders.
Quote:
Being able to take down an active shooter takes a lot more skill than just being able to hit a target at the range.
Which is the point I was making to the OP. It takes training. Someone who has a CCW but has only plinked at stationary targets shouldn't fool himself into thinking he's Rambo and take on more than he's going to be able to handle (like the OP was fantasizing about doing).
Quote:
The Average Joe could never obtain that level of skill unless they quit their day job and immersed their self in the training and thus becoming a professional. Shooting for a hobby, even on the regular, doesn't even come close to the training these guys possess.
Wrong again - some of the fastest and most accurate handgun shooters you'll ever see come from IDPA and USPSA backgrounds. They are PLENTY accurate enough with their firearms to take down a mass shooter, provided they have the opportunity and have done the psychological training required to keep cool in a real emergency (which many of them have). (The fastest and most accurate shot I've ever seen with a pistol is not a cop, but a high school science teacher.) But the ones who have a CCW will say the same thing that most of us have been saying: their gun is for their OWN personal defense, not to defend YOU. And frankly, apart from the obvious physical danger there's an unacceptable level of potential legal liability that a person with a CCW permit is exposed to if he/she gets involved which a police officer does not face. Given that, why should they get involved unless they personally are in imminent danger? Most simply won't. They'll use their gun defensively in retreat, and leave killing the shooter to the cops (who won't get there for at least 5 minutes - have fun in the shooting gallery!).
It depends. I'd try to take out someone acting alone, but I've no training, so it would have to be a pretty clear-shot situation where, for example, me running headlong to tackle/butt them, wouldn't seem likely to cause a worse scenario (like their gun spraying bullets randomly and everywhere). If it was a multi-gang of evildoers, I don't think I'd have a chance against multiples, so I'd be rooted to the ground then.
1% huh? You'll justify any stat to keep your precious gun, even if that means thousands die. Good for you.
They are just trying to make money. And it's working. The little gun lovers run out and buy guns every time a mass shooting makes the headlines. While the victims are being buried and their loved ones are mourning, the NRA, gun manufacturers and Republicans are checking their bank accounts.
Being able to take down an active shooter takes a lot more skill than just being able to hit a target at the range.
Shooting for a hobby, even on the regular, doesn't even come close to the training these guys possess.
Here you go again, with the "Nonsense."
Yep, 1% would do. Don't need to Justify anything to you or anyone else. At the end of the Day, I still have my Guns, and you haven't saved anyone.
Yes, the NRA and the Gun Manufacturers are in the business of making money. That's why us paying dues, and Manufacturers supporting the NRA works. They make money, we get to buy Guns, they make more money, and protect our rights to buy more guns. Its a working cycle, like its supposed to be.
The NRA has not used "Victims" of shootings as advertising. Its the Anti-GUN whackos who parade the Dead, like heads on Pikes to promote their Agenda, while people are "Mourning."
More BS. Taking down a Shooter is the same thing as taking down a target on a range. The purpose of the range is being able to hit the target your aiming at, in this case, a shooter. Your statement makes no sense at all.
Again, more BS. Hobbyists generally have better shooting skills that Police. They spend more time on ranges, and shoot more often than Police. Also, most Police Training has nothing to do with firing a gun, or Marksmanship. It has to do with Law, and Police procedure, among many other not gun related schooling. They aren't "Combat Troops" who march every day and dive through training courses with loaded Assault Rifles , and engage enemy Troops. Cops spend less time shooting than most Hobbyists. That's a fact. I had a lot of friends that where Cops, and we used to shoot a lot together , so I know that as a fact. I spent more time shooting than they did.
Yes, the only difference is training - specifically COMBAT training. I hate to break it to you, but most police officers and soldiers are just average Joes and Janes - but they have undergone COMBAT training, which most civilian gun owners don't bother to learn (but could if they wished to do so; there are many schools which teach it).
Believe me, you are GROSSLY overestimating the amount of time the average police officer spends at the shooting range! In fact, at many ranges the joke is "Clear out, the police are qualifying this weekend" because their handling of their firearms is often so subpar. I know CCW holders and sports shooting enthusiasts who shoot more rounds in a weekend than the average cop does in an entire year. Many departments require NO ongoing scenario training for the average beat cop, only range qualification 2-4 times a year.
But why should it be any different? Contrary to what TV cop shows suggest, the average police officer spends very little time shooting at suspects.
(The fastest and most accurate shot I've ever seen with a pistol is not a cop, but a high school science teacher.)
Good post, and very true. Some of us, who enjoy guns and shooting also shoot on Combat Courses. Same training Cops get. We just shoot more than Cops do. I have Cops in the Family, so I know how much they shoot.
The fastest and most accurate person I have seen with a handgun is a 16 year old Kid. He was a "Quick Draw " enthusiast, and could draw and fire multiple shots on target too fast to see, with a 45 Colt. All you would see is a "Blur" and the sound of the shots.
For the events where police response times were available, the median was 3 minutes. Half of the events are over before police arrive.
"... of the cases that ended before the police arrived, the potential victims at the scene stopped the shooter themselves. Most commonly they physically subdued the attacker (14 cases), but 3 cases involved people at the scene shooting the perpetrator to end the attack."
So yes, unarmed people have stopped attacks. So have armed people. The fact is that people who stop attacks are more likely to be unarmed, because most of us do not routinely carry a firearm.
See figure 7 for details of how the events resolved:
104 events:
51 were over before the police arrived. In 34, the attacker stopped: 29 suicides, 5 left the scene. Of the 17 attackers who were stopped by people at the scene, 3 were shot and 14 subdued without being shot.
53 were stopped after police arrived: 15 suicides, 6 surrenders, 23 shot, 9 subdued.
I personally do not think I would be able to use a firearm in a mass shooting event. My husband carries and would be able to. He has the training and does carry. I do think I might be able to organize a group to resist and possibly take down a shooter if given a little warning and a place, such as a store or classroom to shelter in for a few minutes. My choice would be to flee if at all possible.
It's hard to say what anyone would do, fear would be a factor, it's easy to talk a good game until bullets start flying....
Flea should be your first option
Fight if flea isn't an option, you see that on airlines now, passengers no longer allow highjackings.
I agree (except I prefer to avoid fleas ) I KNOW WHAT YOU MEAN!!
But do think about it. Know your exits when you're in a building. I've been in Active Shooter Training a couple of times. You really need to know the RIGHT way to act when you know there's a shooter in your building. Get your mind prepared just in case. You never know. I really want to get my concealed carry permit but I do feel better with a longer barrel.
Kudos to the governments who are conducting drills.
I think it's hard for the regular untrained person to know what they will do...sometimes the first most valuable seconds are lost because the untrained eye is trying to process what is happening...I think of myself as a pretty brave person and have been in some situations where either out of stupidity or instinct I did the brave thing...
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.
