When mass killers meet armed resistance

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by thomez

how about a guy with a gun on his hip?

Might have been shot before he knew what was going on. Attempting to predict the outcome is pointless really

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Kytro

Might have been shot before he knew what was going on. Attempting to predict the outcome is pointless really

Yes, one might have. But what if there were 10, or 20, or 50... No way he'd shoot more than a few people before other people with guns knew damn well what was going on.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Yes, one might have. But what if there were 10, or 20, or 50... No way he'd shoot more than a few people before other people with guns knew damn well what was going on.

What if he tripped and fell and someone took his gun?


The problem with "what if" is that it requires very specific conditions to be present.

Yeah, if there 50 people carrying that day that happened to be in a position to shoot back, then it may not have happened, but I wonder how realistic that is.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

What if he tripped and fell and someone took his gun?


The problem with "what if" is that it requires very specific conditions to be present.

Yeah, if there 50 people carrying that day that happened to be in a position to shoot back, then it may not have happened, but I wonder how realistic that is.

when you force people not to carry you guarantee what happened....... I don't see how the outcome would have been worse if people were allowed to carry.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

when you force people not to carry you guarantee what happened....... I don't see how the outcome would have been worse if people were allowed to carry.

I'm not claiming it would be worse, just saying that it would have been better is mere speculation and pointless to try and hold up as valid reasoning.

There are reasons why carrying should not be banned, but 'in case there is a mass shooting" isn't one of them

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Kytro

I'm not claiming it would be worse, just saying that it would have been better is mere speculation and pointless to try and hold up as valid reasoning.

There are reasons why carrying should not be banned, but 'in case there is a mass shooting" isn't one of them

"in case of a mass shooting", in general, your chances of survival are greater where someone is quickest able to provide armed resistance - where carry is allowed and taken advantage of

it is a valid reason, and in fact it is a common sense one

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Kytro

There are reasons why carrying should not be banned, but 'in case there is a mass shooting" isn't one of them

See, I think "in case there's a mass shooting" is a good reason to not ban, but not a good reason BY ITSELF to carry. I'm not going to buy a gun and carry it with me at all times if mass shootings is the only thing I'm trying to protect myself from. Some people might, but the chances of being in a mass shooting are VERY low. I'm much more likely to get and carry a gun based on protecting myself from ANY crime.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

I'm much more likely to get and carry a gun based on protecting myself from ANY crime.

Which is somewhat better. The issue is I have is with people trying to present the shooting as good reason to allow carrying.

The only reason needed is that you want to, and so long as you are trained and not an obvious threat, that is all that should be needed.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

Which is somewhat better. The issue is I have is with people trying to present the shooting as good reason to allow carrying.

The issue isn't "in case of mass shooting." The issue is "in case someone is trying to harm me." This case of mass shooting is just one example of someone trying to harm people, and the university's rule is an example of a situation where people were prevented from defending themselves.

So in a way I agree, this mass shooting isn't a good justification for carrying but only because it's too specific. Back up and include ALL the ways someone can harm a person and there's your reason for carrying.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

See, I think "in case there's a mass shooting" is a good reason to not ban, but not a good reason BY ITSELF to carry. I'm not going to buy a gun and carry it with me at all times if mass shootings is the only thing I'm trying to protect myself from. Some people might, but the chances of being in a mass shooting are VERY low. I'm much more likely to get and carry a gun based on protecting myself from ANY crime.

And crime on the average campus is incredibly low

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

And crime on the average campus is incredibly low

awesome ..... but nobody needs to be one of the "few" victims

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by thomez

awesome ..... but nobody needs to be one of the "few" victims

nobody needs terrorists either, there could be another 9/11, you know what would drastically improve the chances of stopping innocent people from dying? Running a fascist government (think gestapo, but without the jew-hating)

However, just like people don't want to trade in their civil rights liberties so some innocent people don't die in the next terrorist attack (which will come)

Some people don't want to deal with all the problems of a bunch of hungover, drama-obsessed, barely mentally stable students all packing guns when they get back their midterms

[thomez]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Some people don't want to deal with all the problems of a bunch of hungover, drama-obsessed, barely mentally stable students all packing guns when they get back their midterms

I can provide evidence that concealed carry permit holders are among the most law-abiding citizens in the nation, do you have anything to backup your absurd statements? Face it, there is no evidence to support such ridiculous predictions.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

So in a way I agree, this mass shooting isn't a good justification for carrying but only because it's too specific. Back up and include ALL the ways someone can harm a person and there's your reason for carrying.

For most people, that risk isn't overly high (though some demographics it can be) and there are circumstances a gun may actually be more harm than good, say if you are attacked by multiple people, some of who are also armed.

My position remains the same, you shouldn't need to justify carrying, people should have to justify denying the ability.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

...there are circumstances a gun may actually be more harm than good, say if you are attacked by multiple people, some of who are also armed.

....... I really don't understand how a gun would make this worse. Without a gun, you're dead. *WITH* a gun at least you have a chance to hold them off until help arrives.

My position remains the same, you shouldn't need to justify carrying, people should have to justify denying the ability.

I agree with this. Carrying is a right as much as freedom of speech, freedom of press, unreasonable search and seizure are. It's not something that should have to be justified.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

....... I really don't understand how a gun would make this worse. Without a gun, you're dead. *WITH* a gun at least you have a chance to hold them off until help arrives.

Maybe they were just gonna steal your wallet / car, but you pull a gun and get shot trying to take them all on. Maybe you get lucky, maybe you don't.

Trying to determine the outcome is like rolling dice. A gun may help, it may hinder. Obviously if you are trained, it will shift odds in your favour.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

Maybe they were just gonna steal your wallet / car, but you pull a gun and get shot trying to take them all on. Maybe you get lucky, maybe you don't.

First rule, if someone pulls a gun on you it's to shoot you. Think any other way and you're as good as dead. But I got a good laugh out of your idea that "if he pulls a gun on you maybe he just wants to take your stuff so you shouldn't try to defend yourself." Nice one

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

First rule, if someone pulls a gun on you it's to shoot you. Think any other way and you're as good as dead. But I got a good laugh out of your idea that "if he pulls a gun on you maybe he just wants to take your stuff so you shouldn't try to defend yourself." Nice one

I didn't mean to say your attacker pulls a gun, but they other way around.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

I didn't mean to say your attacker pulls a gun, but they other way around.

So much about what you've said throughout this thread makes so little sense.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960