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.
One guy rushed the shooter in the Oregon shooting. All it did was to get him shot 6 or 7 times. He was lucky to live. The myth that 1 person with a gun can stop a mass slaughter is foolish. Most people carrying have no training in high pressure situations and are most likely going to drop and hide or run for their lives. Only highly trained individuals would likely drop, pull their gun, and start shooting back.
The guy who rushed the shooter had the BALLS to rush the guy. UNARMED. I can only imagine how much more effective he could be WITH a gun. You couldn't be more wrong. Not everyone is gonna run scared. I have friends and family in the military. I can outshoot 90% of them. Why? Because I know how to shoot. I've been shooting guns for a long time. I can tell you right now that I would have no problem taking out a active shooter if I had a gun in my hand. Not trying to be mr big. Just stating a fact of what I would do. I have more remorse for stepping on a cockroach than taking out a active shooter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusNexus
There should be a TOTAL ban, absolutely. Severe penalties, even death, for violations.
Time to get serious, you bet.
Ok let's do it but only if we do away with ALL of the bill of rights. You think a person deserve to die for wanting to exercise their rights as a gun owner? And gun owners are the insane ones? I never wished anyone dead for exercising their rights. Who is the insane one here?
Last edited by Electrician4you; 12-04-2015 at 10:11 PM..
AS a retired cop (LAPD) with 30 years on the job, I just love reading the batcrap crazy stuff the lefty wackjobs post in threads like this. LN wants to kill you if you have a gun. You can't make this stuff up as she actually posted that.
Ignorance. Same idiots that listen to the news and think taking out the bullet button makes a gun fully automatic (or thinks they are fully automatic in the first place).
Same people won't look up statistics and see that not only are hammers used more often in crimes but that there have been ZERO (that I can find) mass shootings in the presence of a good guy with a gun.
When semi automatic hunting rifles not slated for a ban function the exact same and use the same cartridges? The only thing that makes a AR, AK, H&K , FAL ect. more "lethal" is extended magazines compared. We can argue the ban for 20 or 30 round magazines but then again reloading 10 round magazines still brings decent firepower to bear on helpless unarmed victims.
So why do certain progressives want to ban the rifle itself?
The only thing a military style rifle has that most hunting rifles don't (besides a bayonet lug) are thicker barrels that keep shot groups less widespread as the barrel heats up but that is only good towards target or long distance shooting something these murder shooters have no use for considering they target their victims close up.
Which brings up another fact, these victims never fight back. 1 or 2 shooters, 10 or 20 hostages, when it becomes apparent they are going to kill you and you can't escape rushing the shooters might save yourself and others.
One guy rushed the shooter in the Oregon shooting. All it did was to get him shot 6 or 7 times. He was lucky to live. The myth that 1 person with a gun can stop a mass slaughter is foolish. Most people carrying have no training in high pressure situations and are most likely going to drop and hide or run for their lives. Only highly trained individuals would likely drop, pull their gun, and start shooting back.
The actual myth is the cops can shoot better than the average gun owner since the average owner practices more and is a better shot than your average Barney Fife with his one bullet that budgets constrain him to.
The guy that rushed the shooter was unarmed as per school policy. The guy was a combat veteran and HAD HE BEEN ALLOWED to carry how can you say he couldn't have been effective? He was a combat soldier.
I guess your reaction would be to curl up in a ball and sing Kumbaya? I suspect you are full of it. Most people with a carry permit would be effective against another individual shooting at them. Are you saying these disturbed individuals shooting up places are better trained than people that went through a concealed carry class and qualified on the range?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Electrician4you
The guy who rushed the shooter had the BALLS to rush the guy. UNARMED. I can only imagine how much more effective he could be WITH a gun. You couldn't be more wrong. Not everyone is gonna run scared. I have friends and family in the military. I can outshoot 90% of them. Why? Because I know how to shoot. I've been shooting guns for a long time. I can tell you right now that I would have no problem taking out a active shooter if I had a gun in my hand. Not trying to be mr big. Just stating a fact of what I would do. I have more remorse for stepping on a cockroach than taking out a active shooter.
Ok let's do it but only if we do away with ALL of the bill of rights. You think a person deserve to die for wanting to exercise their rights as a gun owner? And gun owners are the insane ones? I never wished anyone dead for exercising their rights. Who is the insane one here?
just a reminder the trained policeman killed at PP last week had a gun, not only was he killed but two other people. in san bernadino there was a swat team and more cops with weapons that didn't stop the killers from engaging in a full on gun battle in the streets. there was also an interview with one of the people in the conference room that is a gun owner, he said even if he had his gun he would of be unable to get a shot off.
having a gun on hand is not always gonna stop the bad guys.
just a reminder the trained policeman killed at PP last week had a gun, not only was he killed but two other people. in san bernadino there was a swat team and more cops with weapons that didn't stop the killers from engaging in a full on gun battle in the streets. there was also an interview with one of the people in the conference room that is a gun owner, he said even if he had his gun he would of be unable to get a shot off.
having a gun on hand is not always gonna stop the bad guys.
A fire extinguisher will not always put out a fire but at least you can try. So a cop was shot at planned parenthood? You do realize a gun does not make you invincible right? A gun when confronting a mass shooter just levels the playing field.
Ignorance. Same idiots that listen to the news and think taking out the bullet button makes a gun fully automatic (or thinks they are fully automatic in the first place).
Same people won't look up statistics and see that not only are hammers used more often in crimes but that there have been ZERO (that I can find) mass shootings in the presence of a good guy with a gun.
Isn't it amazing how many times on this forum the AR-15 been called an "assault rifle".
It has been explained as many time that it is NOT an "assault rifle"
The anti's don't care about acts.
The figure if they say it enough, someone will believe them.
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.
The guy that rushed the shooter was unarmed as per school policy. The guy was a combat veteran and HAD HE BEEN ALLOWED to carry how can you say he couldn't have been effective? He was a combat soldier. 
