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.
But the "experts" told us that it wouldn't have made a difference.
Won't call myself an expert, but I have trained fairly extensively with law enforcement in scenarios with armed perpetrators among unarmed bystanders. Uniformed personnel with a high degree of proficiency, entering what they know is a simulation, extensively briefed and with a clear chain of command. And the first many, many times, utter failure and chaos ensued. There's a reason we train special teams for this sort of thing, because it is really seriously goddamn honest-to-God hard to do. The words "control was lost" was heard on many a post-ex.
Armed civilians on the scene could have made a difference, but it sure as all out could also have led to worse chaos, and by that I mean serious losses to friendly fire. Don't presume it's a given either way.
Won't call myself an expert, but I have trained fairly extensively with law enforcement in scenarios with armed perpetrators among unarmed bystanders. Uniformed personnel with a high degree of proficiency, entering what they know is a simulation, extensively briefed and with a clear chain of command. And the first many, many times, utter failure and chaos ensued. There's a reason we train special teams for this sort of thing, because it is really seriously goddamn honest-to-God hard to do. The words "control was lost" was heard on many a post-ex.
Armed civilians on the scene could have made a difference, but it sure as all out could also have led to worse chaos, and by that I mean serious losses to friendly fire. Don't presume it's a given either way.
Ah, watched the 20/20 special on concealed carry did ya?
I, on the other hand do not see the logic of preventing the other 99 law abiding citizens from owning one just to prevent the one.
You don't see the logic? Don't they have 60 or more round magazines, standard 20 rounds for the AR15? Again, where is the need. I understand an attraction, but need?
You don't see the logic? Don't they have 60 or more round magazines, standard 20 rounds for the AR15? Again, where is the need. I understand an attraction, but need?
I'll hold off on the possible rant until we learn if he was on SSRIs, but I have to respond to the let's ban guns brigade. Banning guns won't stop these acts of terror. They'll find other methods to carry out their atrocious delusions. Motive> Means....
It's tragic, but I can already hear gun nuts screaming. WE NEED MORE GUNS!!!!
or 'If more people had guns with them, someone would've shot the SOB, before killing so many people'
Ever wonder why this kind shootings where there's mass killings, never (or at least rarely) happen where gun laws are more strict?
When was the last time there was a mass shooting like this in NYS for example?
If more people actually carried guns, then this guy would have been stopped at lot sooner, is right. You can't rely on the government to be there to save/help you. You have to help yourself.
Evil people existed before guns. People still kill with items other than guns. Guns are not the problem. Bad people are the problem.
Yeah, Chicago has really strict gun laws and look at how many shooting deaths there are. NY too. Taking away people's gun rights will not stop bad people from getting them, and using them. It just leaves the innocent unable to protect themselves.
Mass shootings or several different shootings in one day, who cares. Murder is murder. Guns are a right. You don't like it, don't own a gun!
I'll hold off on the possible rant until we learn if he was on SSRIs, but I have to respond to the let's ban guns brigade. Banning guns won't stop these acts of terror. They'll find other methods to carry out their atrocious delusions. Motive> Means....
I'll hold off on the possible rant until we learn if he was on SSRIs, but I have to respond to the let's ban guns brigade. Banning guns won't stop these acts of terror. They'll find other methods to carry out their atrocious delusions. Motive> Means....
C'mon, jump on the emotional bandwagon. Repeat after me:
You must have a small appendage
Gun-nut
Why do you need THAT?
Psychological screening (don't know how, but just do SOMETHING)
Greedy doctor (sorry, couldn't resist)
You don't see the logic? Don't they have 60 or more round magazines, standard 20 rounds for the AR15? Again, where is the need. I understand an attraction, but need?
Quote:
Originally Posted by summers73
Ban Porsches and Ferraris!
from here on out, all rights shall be apportioned on the basis of 'need,' as adjudicated by poster florida dot bob.
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.
