| oldraven |
| Holy shit! No bloody hope.:confused: |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
Only in the United States of America...
Jamie |
|
|
| flatboy |
| count is up to around 30 now:( |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
| Up to 32 dead now...tragic. |
|
|
| flatboy |
| 32 good god, what the hell is wrong with people |
|
|
| oldraven |
| Yeah. Gun control. What a foolish idea. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
some interesting stats:
Children and Gun Violence (USA):
In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)
America and Gun Violence
Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)
The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control)
Based on these states, I'm actually quite shocked this type of ramage gun killing isn't more frequent!?!? |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Only in the United States of America...
Jamie
Judging by the stats I've posted, you weren't kidding...Definetely ONLY IN AMERICA... |
|
|
| Bluestreak |
| Death toll now stands at 33... |
|
|
| snugs |
quote:
Originally posted by Bluestreak
Death toll now stands at 33...
....that's like an average wednesday in Baghdad. :blink: |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by snugs
....that's like an average wednesday in Baghdad. :blink:
indeed it is... |
|
|
| Playa |
Yawn...
It seems this happens every second week in the states. Diseases kill more people every year, than some shooter, or car accidents. |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Yawn...
It seems this happens every second week in the states. Diseases kill more people every year, than some shooter, or car accidents.
:rolleyes:
Right... so I guess those people sitting at school deserved to die, eh? |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Yawn...
Diseases kill more people every year, than some shooter, or car accidents.
Not in young people it doesn't. Car accidents are the number one cause of death in young people.
And regardless, this is tragic, none of those people deserved to die.
Jamie |
|
|
| DoubleDown |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Yawn...
It seems this happens every second week in the states. Diseases kill more people every year, than some shooter, or car accidents.
The fact that cancer kills more people than guns doesn't make this any less tragic, dude.
My uncle was at the Dawson college shooting... I feel for all the families. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Only in the United States of America...
Jamie
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
Judging by the stats I've posted, you weren't kidding...Definetely ONLY IN AMERICA...
You guys do realize this type of stuff can and does happen in other countries.....even Canada, right? |
|
|
| oldraven |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Yawn...
It seems this happens every second week in the states. Diseases kill more people every year, than some shooter, or car accidents.
Trolla...
You make me sad, man. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Only in the United States of America...
Jamie
Taber called, they call bullshit. |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
Taber called, they call bullshit.
So did Montreal.
They called twice. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
| Blind Anti-Americanism as it's best. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
You guys do realize this type of stuff can and does happen in other countries.....even Canada, right?
The only thing that kept the bodycounts in the Canadian events less sensational is population density in my opinion. There are wackjobs all over the place. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
You guys do realize this type of stuff can and does happen in other countries.....even Canada, right?
<GASP!!>
Nooooo....you lie! Seriously!?!?:rolleyes: |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
<GASP!!>
Nooooo....you lie! Seriously!?!?:rolleyes:
Maybe you need to visit your good friend dictionary.com to look the definition of the word "only". |
|
|
| liveforspd |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Only in the United States of America...
Jamie
What is it like living in ignorance? |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by DoubleDown
The fact that cancer kills more people than guns doesn't make this any less tragic, dude.
My uncle was at the Dawson college shooting... I feel for all the families.
Perhaps my post was mis interperted.
Let me lay it down this way. I have become desensitized to really care. Everywhere you turn, there is someone being blown up here, these people died there, this person has been shot there. "Terrorist" activities here and there, blah blah, blah.
It is too bad for their families for the people involved, but it is a fact of life. People are born, people live and people die. The world has not stopped. I am sure this will happen again, only with a larger number.
There is nothing I can do. So in the mean time I will watch the media spin into a frenzy over this and eat my popcorn. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Not in young people it doesn't. Car accidents are the number one cause of death in young people.
And regardless, this is tragic, none of those people deserved to die.
Jamie
I did not say they deserved to die. It is just another weekly event in the states. Next week something new will pop up. Shit, maybe even in Canada. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by oldraven
Trolla...
You make me sad, man.
It's not trolla, it is insensitive asshole thank you. :D
I make you sad.... Who cares, I make me happy. |
|
|
| CanuckDave |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
So did Montreal.
They called twice.
I was about to say..
Thats fucked up, RIP all the innocent defenseless people killed by this waste of skin. |
|
|
| SilverZ24 |
So for the people saying 'only in the US', since the gunman was an student from Korea, do you now blame Korea for the shooting?
Joking aside though, RIP to all the innocent. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by SilverZ24
So for the people saying 'only in the US', since the gunman was an student from Korea, do you now blame Korea for the shooting?
Joking aside though, RIP to all the innocent.
And this student brought his guns on a suitcase from Korea into the US right?...I'm just sayen that's all...
And when I said 'only' in the US I was referring to the stats posted as the US is in a league of their own when it comes to the use of firearms.
-In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)
-Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)
-The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
-American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control) |
|
|
| EDISKRAD EHT |
This shit's just sickening.
Stuff like this is why I purposely don't read the paper or watch the news. So much of this shit all over the world.
Including Canada too! |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
And this student brought his guns on a suitcase from Korea into the US right?...I'm just sayen that's all...
And when I said 'only' in the US I was referring to the stats posted as the US is in a league of their own when it comes to the use of firearms.
-In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States, according to the latest national data released in 2002. That is one child every three hours; eight children every day; and more than 50 children every week. And every year, at least 4 to 5 times as many kids and teens suffer from non-fatal firearm injuries. (Children's Defense Fund and National Center for Health Statistics)
-Every day, more than 80 Americans die from gun violence. (Coalition to Stop Gun Violence)
-The rate of firearm deaths among kids under age 15 is almost 12 times higher in the United States than in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention)
-American kids are 16 times more likely to be murdered with a gun, 11 times more likely to commit suicide with a gun, and nine times more likely to die from a firearm accident than children in 25 other industrialized countries combined. (Centers for Disease Control)
Do you know what would have cut the death toll in at least half if not 20% in this Virginia case?
If students and staff were allowed to carry on campus.
One trained and licenced carrier would have ended that situation before the accused/dead got through one clip.
Those guns didn't load themselves and get themselves onto campus. There are always going be wackjobs out there, and some of them use guns. Having, knowing how to use a gun and carry if allowed by law very well may save your life as well as many others.
However, I suspect this is going to turn into a gun control push again. The system is already in place. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
Do you know what would have cut the death toll in at least half if not 20% in this Virginia case?
If students and staff were allowed to carry on campus.
One trained and licenced carrier would have ended that situation before the accused/dead got through one clip.
Those guns didn't load themselves and get themselves onto campus. There are always going be wackjobs out there, and some of them use guns. Having, knowing how to use a gun and carry if allowed by law very well may save your life as well as many others.
However, I suspect this is going to turn into a gun control push again. The system is already in place.
um yeah dead eye. :rolleyes:
Unless any one of the good students were a were a good marksman I highly doubt it it would be successful.
Imagine, lets say 300 students carried guns, one "hero" knocks out the shooter in a hallway. Kudo's for him. Another potential hero hears the shots, comes around in the line of sight and pops the other hero full of lead. How does one distinguish hero/victim from the shooter once the original shooter has been killed. The shooter then looks like another victim.
Or, lets say 5% of them are accurate shooters, the other 95% lick balls. Everyone decides to open fire on the shooter. I wonder what would happen with all the stray bullets. Collateral damage, more death?
I agree, guns don't kill people, people do. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
um yeah dead eye. :rolleyes:
Unless any one of the good students were a were a good marksman I highly doubt it it would be successful.
Imagine, lets say 300 students carried guns, one "hero" knocks out the shooter in a hallway. Kudo's for him. Another potential hero hears the shots, comes around in the line of sight and pops the other hero full of lead. How does one distinguish hero/victim from the shooter.
Or, lets say 5% of them are accurate shooters, the other 95% lick balls. Everyone decides to open fire on the shooter. I wonder what would happen with all the stray bullets. Collateral damage, more death?
I agree, guns don't kill people, people do.
Have you ever taken any firearms training?
Most people who purchase guns, register them, and use them get to be pretty proficient.
How does one distinguish the wackjob on a killing spree who is shooting everybody, from the people who are only shooting the wackjob? Are you serious?
300 students with permits to carry (in this scenario) out of the 25,000 on that campus (a number I heard/saw). I suspect your guesstimated # to be low but we can use it.
The dispersion of those 300 amongst the 25,000 is pretty random, the concentration in any one area is small. I think there was 50+ people wounded on top of the 30+ dead in the second (classroom) shooting. With your # the probability that there would be 1-2 carrying students/staff in the room is likely. I don't think there is going to be much crossfire and stray bullets. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
Do you know what would have cut the death toll in at least half if not 20% in this Virginia case?
If students and staff were allowed to carry on campus.
One trained and licenced carrier would have ended that situation before the accused/dead got through one clip.
Those guns didn't load themselves and get themselves onto campus. There are always going be wackjobs out there, and some of them use guns. Having, knowing how to use a gun and carry if allowed by law very well may save your life as well as many others.
However, I suspect this is going to turn into a gun control push again. The system is already in place.
Allow students to carry on campus :blink:? I'll pretend I didn't hear that...
Allow staff to carry on campus? This I can definetely agree with. I was actually thinking the exact same thing. If select facutly were trained and placed stratically at all ends of the buildings, I think that would help considerably. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
Allow students to carry on campus :blink:? I'll pretend I didn't hear that...
Allow staff to carry on campus? This I can definetely agree with. I was actually thinking the exact same thing. If select facutly were trained and placed stratically at all ends of the buildings, I think that would help considerably.
Why the staff and not the students? They would have to take the same training and get the same permits. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
Have you ever taken any firearms training?
Most people who purchase guns, register them, and use them get to be pretty proficient.
How does one distinguish the wackjob on a killing spree who is shooting everybody, from the people who are only shooting the wackjob? Are you serious?
300 students with permits to carry (in this scenario) out of the 25,000 on that campus (a number I heard/saw). I suspect your guesstimated # to be low but we can use it.
The dispersion of those 300 amongst the 25,000 is pretty random, the concentration in any one area is small. I think there was 50+ people wounded on top of the 30+ dead in the second (classroom) shooting. With your # the probability that there would be 1-2 carrying students/staff in the room is likely. I don't think there is going to be much crossfire and stray bullets.
What you are saying in theory is perfect...However, what are the chances that all 300 would not abuse these power of being allowed to carry a gun on campus. Again, theoritcally it's perfect but realistically it's a nightmare. It would only take 1 of these 300 students to abuse the power once and next thing you know, you'll have 299 Rambo wannabe's running around campus with guns cocked. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
Why the staff and not the students? They would have to take the same training and get the same permits.
Again, the THEORY is perfectly sound...but in reality it's a nightmare waiting to happen. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
Have you ever taken any firearms training?
Most people who purchase guns, register them, and use them get to be pretty proficient.
How does one distinguish the wackjob on a killing spree who is shooting everybody, from the people who are only shooting the wackjob? Are you serious?
300 students with permits to carry (in this scenario) out of the 25,000 on that campus (a number I heard/saw). I suspect your guesstimated # to be low but we can use it.
The dispersion of those 300 amongst the 25,000 is pretty random, the concentration in any one area is small. I think there was 50+ people wounded on top of the 30+ dead in the second (classroom) shooting. With your # the probability that there would be 1-2 carrying students/staff in the room is likely. I don't think there is going to be much crossfire and stray bullets.
Yes I have taken firearms training.
Please provide proof to back up your statement. Firstly I currently do not own a gun, Secondly if I do purchase one I have no plans to register it unless I am forced to. Thirdly, the last time I pulled a trigger was about 10 years ago.
On top of that I am sure most STUDENTS, who are in college can afford a gun, the ammunition and the memberships to gun clubs. I am sure they will have no problem sacraficing a few nights of mac and cheese for gun club membership and ammunition.
As for my comment about the whack job yes, lets say you are the whack job squeezing off rounds into people. I come around the corner see you turning some kid into a garden sprinkler, pull my out my trusty 9 and fire a few rounds into you. In the mean time lets say S2000 rider comes around cause he hears gunshots gun drawn, sees me firing rounds into you. S2000 rider pulls out his gun and starts popping caps into my ass as he thinks I am the gun man. So........yeah, it can happen.
As for posting armed security guards or staff with weapons at locations through out the shool.. Can you honestly see that happening? No and here is why?
1) First of all the expense to train said individuals.
2) The man power cost to put these individuals in schools on an already thin education budget.
3) People will never support placing armed teachers, personell in EVERY school for the image of security.
4) one day a crazy ass mutha fucka teacher loses it and pops a cap in a kids ass. Oh no.. now we are not safe... lets take guns out of the schools.
If you think that there have not been cases of kids being abused by teachers you need to do a search.
I propose no soloution. This I feel is an eventual product of society. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
quote:
Originally posted by liveforspd
What is it like living in ignorance?
Whats it like living gay?
Jamie |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Yes I have taken firearms training.
Please provide proof to back up your statement. Firstly I currently do not own a gun, Secondly if I do purchase one I have no plans to register it unless I am forced to. Thirdly, the last time I pulled a trigger was about 10 years ago.
The only proof I have is the people I know, I don't know you personally and I doubt, based on your statements, that you come from the same background/know the same people. I personally don't own a firearm. Unless you count the .22 rifle that is out on the farm that I use to shoot gophers/target practice. I have been to gun ranges quite a few times and my groupings get slightly better every time.
quote:
On top of that I am sure most STUDENTS, who are in college can afford a gun, the ammunition and the memberships to gun clubs. I am sure they will have no problem sacraficing a few nights of mac and cheese for gun club membership and ammunition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_Seung-Hui
Take it with a grain of salt, but it's probably more accurate than not.
This guy bought TWO guns himself, then filed the #s' off. Not every body who goes to college is broke. For some people having firearms around (especially in the southern states) is a way of life and something you are exposed to a young age. Why wouldn't you carry on-campus if allowed, when you can carry anywhere off-campus?
quote:
As for my comment about the whack job yes, lets say you are the whack job squeezing off rounds into people. I come around the corner see you turning some kid into a garden sprinkler, pull my out my trusty 9 and fire a few rounds into you. In the mean time lets say S2000 rider comes around cause he hears gunshots gun drawn, sees me firing rounds into you. S2000 rider pulls out his gun and starts popping caps into my ass as he thinks I am the gun man. So........yeah, it can happen.
Lets use the real situation and keep the variables as close to reality as possible whenever possible. This guy chained the door shut when he came in, there is nobody to "come around a corner" and seriously mistake the events unfolding before their eyes. Who would even run TOWARDS gunshots when they heard them? People carry in self defence, not looking to be a hero.
quote:
As for posting armed security guards or staff with weapons at locations through out the shool.. Can you honestly see that happening? No and here is why?
1) First of all the expense to train said individuals.
2) The man power cost to put these individuals in schools on an already thin education budget.
3) People will never support placing armed teachers, personell in EVERY school for the image of security.
4) one day a crazy ass mutha fucka teacher loses it and pops a cap in a kids ass. Oh no.. now we are not safe... lets take guns out of the schools.
1)It wouldn't cost anything to anybody other than those who take advantage of being able to carry. In fact with the permit application fees, the government could make money.
2)If the students and teachers are already licenced and permitted, just LET them carry on campus/school property instead of restricting them. No man power cost other than some government paper pushing.
3)Until one of their loved ones becomes a victim of the next wackjob, it's human nature.
4)That's why I think it's important for the students to be able to carry as well as the teachers.
quote:
If you think that there have not been cases of kids being abused by teachers you need to do a search.
I propose no soloution. This I feel is an eventual product of society.
So you want to do nothing to improve the situation, but you will critique those with suggestions.
:thumbup: |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
If a society has no form of firearms control, like most of the US, restricting people in certain situations from carrying guns is a disaster.
If you honestly don't think you could tell the different between a psycho shooting people and a guy who just dropped the psycho that was shooting people, I'm glad you don't carry gun in public.
Some of the arguments here are getting retarded.
My best friend lives in Nevada and is attending college, and he and a bunch of his friends own multiple handguns and rifles and are members of more than gun club. Not to mention the fact that there's always ROTC and JROTC who could be allowed to carry.
Debate it all you want, but US crime statistics speak for themselves: if you want to minimize violent crime in a country where locating and purchasing firearms is very simple and cheap, allow your public to carry guns. They've done a ton of studies down south, and states that allow people to carry generally have MUCH less violent crime than those that don't. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
Obviously people can do this type of stuff in any country around the world. But when you make guns so widely available, imo its more likely to cause problems.
People down in the states are legally allowed to have guns in their cars and even carry them, concealed with a licence.
This is just my opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs.
And my opinion is that the United States of America sucks.
Jamie |
|
|
| DoubleDown |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
when you make guns so widely available, imo its more likely to cause problems
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
This is just my opinion, everyone is entitled to theirs. And my opinion is that the United States of America sucks.
No offence intended here, but you have zero facts to back up your opinions. What you should be saying, is "These are just my uneducated guesses", because that's what they are.
Saying "the US sucks" is like saying "Honda sucks". They've got goods and bads, just like everything else in life. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
quote:
Originally posted by DoubleDown
No offence intended here, but you have zero facts to back up your opinions. What you should be saying, is "These are just my uneducated guesses", because that's what they are.
Saying "the US sucks" is like saying "Honda sucks". They've got goods and bads, just like everything else in life.
Hmm..uneducated guesses eh?
Do you have any idea how many people are murdered with guns in the USA each year? Compare that to other countries and you will see what I'm talking about. The gun related murder rate PER CAPITA in the USA is ten fold compared to any other country around the world.
Places with larger populations like China have NO WHERE near the amount of gun related deaths, when compared to the USA.
Maybe you should do some research;)
Just curious...you say they have goods and bads like everywhere else....what good do they bring? Start wars? Fund terrorist? Lie non-stop? Have a chimpanzee for a President?
Jamie |
|
|
| DoubleDown |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
The gun related murder rate PER CAPITA in the USA is ten fold compared to any other country around the world./
Blindly attributing gun related murder rates to the general availability of guns is ignorant. For each source you can find with statistical proof of this correlation, I'll show you three that negate it.
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Start wars? Fund terrorist? Lie non-stop? Have a chimpanzee for a President?
Are you saying Canada doesn't follow them into the wars, that we have squeaky clean politicians, and that we've never elected a retard for prime minister?
Honestly dude, Honda's have no torque and, for the most part, they're cheap inside. Now can I say "Honda sucks"? Yes, US foreign policy sucks. That doesn't make the whole country suck. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by Blaine B.
The only proof I have is the people I know, I don't know you personally and I doubt, based on your statements, that you come from the same background/know the same people. I personally don't own a firearm. Unless you count the .22 rifle that is out on the farm that I use to shoot gophers/target practice. I have been to gun ranges quite a few times and my groupings get slightly better every time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cho_Seung-Hui
Take it with a grain of salt, but it's probably more accurate than not.
This guy bought TWO guns himself, then filed the #s' off. Not every body who goes to college is broke. For some people having firearms around (especially in the southern states) is a way of life and something you are exposed to a young age. Why wouldn't you carry on-campus if allowed, when you can carry anywhere off-campus?
Lets use the real situation and keep the variables as close to reality as possible whenever possible. This guy chained the door shut when he came in, there is nobody to "come around a corner" and seriously mistake the events unfolding before their eyes. Who would even run TOWARDS gunshots when they heard them? People carry in self defence, not looking to be a hero.
1)It wouldn't cost anything to anybody other than those who take advantage of being able to carry. In fact with the permit application fees, the government could make money.
2)If the students and teachers are already licenced and permitted, just LET them carry on campus/school property instead of restricting them. No man power cost other than some government paper pushing.
3)Until one of their loved ones becomes a victim of the next wackjob, it's human nature.
4)That's why I think it's important for the students to be able to carry as well as the teachers.
So you want to do nothing to improve the situation, but you will critique those with suggestions.
:thumbup:
Good post,
Yes, it is very unlikely we know the same people and grew up in the same fashion. However you are making a statement about your friends which I am sure do not represent the majority of gun owners.
So for your real situation, you're right. What was I thinking. Buildings and schools, and dorms do not have corners or hallways that someone can come in at the last moment and make a mistake. They are all one giant open room. What the fuck was I thinking. :rolleyes:
You are right, most people run away from gunfire. Only the heroes run towards it so they can pop a cap in the shooter. So in your case I was using two heroes. Lets say one of the heroes is a student who is "licensed" he makes the kill shot on the original shooter. The other hero is a licensed teacher who sees people running and sees hero number 1 placing shots into the original shooter who appears to be a victim now. Teacher opens fire, shoots and kills hero #1 in error. That is a more likely situation. However using your parameters and guidelines for buildings that will never happen. It has been in a long time since I was in a school shooting, well fuck, I have never been in one.
As for registering a gun, a whole lot of good that did since he filed off the serial numbers.
1) The cost would be these students education. Even if the teachers are taking shifts at certain points in the school, more time is taken out of the day that could be used for more productive measures such as educating the students. There are only so many hours in a day and so many teachers available. Gun toting teachers, great, there is a recipe for disaster. Now correct me if I am wrong, but were the shootings not done in a dorm where teachers usually do not reside unless fucking a student?
2) Any licensed person can flip out and begin shooting. All they have become is a much more accurate killer.
3) Uh.. no. If I had a family member killed by some gun toting maniac, I would still not be pushing for everyone to arm them selves. This only escalates the situation. I would be more focused on how to prevent this through proper education, but then again that only goes so far.
4) So you want to put guns in people who are already strung out. Sure, there would be licensed people to carry guns, but if every once can carry a gun in a college or university, every fucked up Tom, Dick and Jane are now packing heat. That makes me feel a whole lot safer now.
There is not that can be done. Even education. This fellow came from South Korea. Are you going to go to every school in south korea to make sure every child is spoken to about self control and the dangers of guns? |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
quote:
Originally posted by DoubleDown
Blindly attributing gun related murder rates to the general availability of guns is ignorant. For each source you can find with statistical proof of this correlation, I'll show you three that negate it.
Are you saying Canada doesn't follow them into the wars, that we have squeaky clean politicians, and that we've never elected a retard for prime minister?
Honestly dude, Honda's have no torque and, for the most part, they're cheap inside. Now can I say "Honda sucks"? Yes, US foreign policy sucks. That doesn't make the whole country suck.
Canada has its problems just like anywhere else. But the US has always been trying to stay at the top as the world leader. In order to do so, the have cut as many corners as possible and will fuck over whoever tries to stop them.
Canada on the other hand, keeps a more laid back stature. So even if our prime minister makes a mistake, typically hundreds of thousands of innocent people don't die. The same can't be said for the US and their chimpanzee president.
Jamie |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Hmm..uneducated guesses eh?
Do you have any idea how many people are murdered with guns in the USA each year? Compare that to other countries and you will see what I'm talking about. The gun related murder rate PER CAPITA in the USA is ten fold compared to any other country around the world.
Places with larger populations like China have NO WHERE near the amount of gun related deaths, when compared to the USA.
Maybe you should do some research;)
Just curious...you say they have goods and bads like everywhere else....what good do they bring? Start wars? Fund terrorist? Lie non-stop? Have a chimpanzee for a President?
Jamie
Actually, I bet if you look it up, you'll find there aren't 10 times the people murdered in the US by firearms per capita.
Again, the VAST majority of gun-related offences occur in states which DO NOT allow people to conceal-carry firearms. The reason is simple: you drive to a state which allows conceal carry for a long weekend, wait the 3 day period and purchase a firearm, then return to the state which doesn't. You can now freely wreak havoc because there will be no people to stop you.
Louisiana made an EXTREMELY in depth study on the issue. Violent crime DECREASES when you allow conceal-carry. Why? Because no someone can fight back. Usually lots of someone's. Look at states which allow conceal carry and compare their rate of crime vs the ones that don't.
Once you get those facts and figures, you'll realize just how much you're talking out of your ass. A lack of unified policy is the reason for the US problems. It doesn't even matter which policy you employ: make firearms freely available and allow the public to arm themselves or chose the Canadian method where firearms are much harder to get and regulations are more restrictive. The result is the same IF, and the key point here is IF, you have a UNIFIED policy.
Shit like this would be MUCH less likely to happen in Louisiana, Texas, or Nevada, for example.
Doing a cursory study of available information in an effort to support your opinion that the US "sucks", is basically an "uneducated guess". You can't take half the facts and suppose that's a fair representation. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
Actually, I bet if you look it up, you'll find there aren't 10 times the people murdered in the US by firearms per capita.
Again, the VAST majority of gun-related offences occur in states which DO NOT allow people to conceal-carry firearms.
Can you provide some proof via an internet link to verify what you're stating here? |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Good post,
Yes, it is very unlikely we know the same people and grew up in the same fashion. However you are making a statement about your friends which I am sure do not represent the majority of gun owners.
I think it does. personally, based on my experience with firearms owners.
quote:
So for your real situation, you're right. What was I thinking. Buildings and schools, and dorms do not have corners or hallways that someone can come in at the last moment and make a mistake. They are all one giant open room. What the fuck was I thinking. :rolleyes:
Again, are you sure you're trained in how to handle firearms? Because very few people would make this mistake. And MOST people would ask the guy they encountered to drop his weapon before shooting. Yes, civilians. No one who's sane wants to take the life of another human. At which point the person would identify himself, claim he shot the shooter, and holster his weapon. A non-threatening person is a good reason to at least lower yours. People won't shoot at someone who isn't acting threateningly. Whether they come around a blind corner or not.
quote:
You are right, most people run away from gunfire. Only the heroes run towards it so they can pop a cap in the shooter. So in your case I was using two heroes. Lets say one of the heroes is a student who is "licensed" he makes the kill shot on the original shooter. The other hero is a licensed teacher who sees people running and sees hero number 1 placing shots into the original shooter who appears to be a victim now. Teacher opens fire, shoots and kills hero #1 in error. That is a more likely situation. However using your parameters and guidelines for buildings that will never happen. It has been in a long time since I was in a school shooting, well fuck, I have never been in one.
Yes, and that would be tragic. But compare your scenario: 3 or 4 dead, vs what happened, 32 dead. Yeah, geez. Not a very good solution at all. Only 1/10th as many people dead. Nope, not good enough. Back to square one.
Please. Your scenario is so unlikely, and yet even if it did occur, again, more lives saved. So........what's the problem? |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
people to carry generally have MUCH less violent crime than those that don't.
again, provide a link to back up this statement...I'm curious to see these stats. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
This is the second time you've said this...can you provide some proof via an internet link to verify what you're stating here?
Because the internet is flawless of course and any link I provide you will be guaranteed to be accurate. And naturally, it has to counter the wealth of links and information your side of the argument has posted to defend their side.
Please, I'm not going to defend nothing. If you guys can't give evidence of your side, I have no need to waste time tracking down information for you of the real facts. Go try and find this "deaths caused by firearms are 10 times higher in the US per capita than elsewhere" statistic and I'm sure you'll stumble across the fact that it ISN'T the case.
Try to prove yours, and you'll see your wrong. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
Like I said before, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. My personal opinion is that the United States of America, does indeed suck.
Jamie |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
again, provide a link to back up this statement...I'm curious to see these stats.
;) See above. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Like I said before, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. My personal opinion is that the United States of America, does indeed suck.
Jamie
Saying the US has "10 times more deaths from firearms than anywhere else in the world per capita" isn't an opinion, it's a statement of fact, and one which we both know you'll be unable to back up. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
Saying the US has "10 times more deaths from firearms than anywhere else in the world per capita" isn't an opinion, it's a statement of fact, and one which we both know you'll be unable to back up.
Want a cookie?
Jamie |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
again, provide a link to back up this statement...I'm curious to see these stats.
I was talking to my buddy about this just now, the one who lives in Nevada and owns an entire arsenal, and he gave me this. Go read a book and educate yourself.
quote:
John Lott's book, More Guns, Less Crime, reinforces that study. Lott writes:
"Criminals as a group tend to behave rationally. When crimes become more difficult because of the obstacle of a gun, less crime is committed. Carrying concealed handguns appears to make all kinds of murders less attractive."
Mr. Lott's book details crime statistics showing that violent crime declined rapidly in states that have enacted concealed weapons laws
He also made sure to mention that some studies indicate homocide to be 60% higher in homes that have weapons vs those that don't, but that 3/4 of these studies have been divided into 4 subgroups, with 2 subgroups being ignored. Those subgroups and how they effect the studies are detailed in the book noted above. THe basically cut out all homes that have weapons but where there is at least 1 family member trained in their use, or where at least 1 family member is in the police/military. In other words, in the groups where you would expect gun-crime to be low, the groups are ignored. And it's significant enough to show a 60% increase in gun-crime as opposed to a more accurate figure of a 36% decrease in gun-crime when you consider 100% of the population and not just those untrained in firearm use and have firearms vs those who do not have firearms. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
Want a cookie?
Jamie
Yup, 'cause I enjoy cookies.
See, that's an opinion. |
|
|
| EK9Hatch |
I have chocolate chip or oatmeal.
Jamie |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
I have chocolate chip or oatmeal.
Jamie
That's too bad. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by EK9Hatch
I have chocolate chip or oatmeal.
Jamie
just be grateful he didn't post 200 word essay about his SOB story of a life as he has in the past. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
just be grateful he didn't post 200 word essay about his SOB story of a life as he has in the past.
haha Good job addressing the issues!
You're the real winner at that. You take personal pot shots at people, like you think it'll hurt them or something, but can never seem to defend your point of view.
Enjoy reading that book! It has all the facts you'll ever need abour firearms and firearms control. |
|
|
| DoubleDown |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
haha Good job addressing the issues!
lol, I tried to be friendly in hopes it wouldn't turn into this... but there ya have it. Some people just can't handle being told they're wrong. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
I think it does. personally, based on my experience with firearms owners.
Again, are you sure you're trained in how to handle firearms? Because very few people would make this mistake. And MOST people would ask the guy they encountered to drop his weapon before shooting. Yes, civilians. No one who's sane wants to take the life of another human. At which point the person would identify himself, claim he shot the shooter, and holster his weapon. A non-threatening person is a good reason to at least lower yours. People won't shoot at someone who isn't acting threateningly. Whether they come around a blind corner or not.
Yes, and that would be tragic. But compare your scenario: 3 or 4 dead, vs what happened, 32 dead. Yeah, geez. Not a very good solution at all. Only 1/10th as many people dead. Nope, not good enough. Back to square one.
Please. Your scenario is so unlikely, and yet even if it did occur, again, more lives saved. So........what's the problem?
I also happen to know quite a few gun owners that come from a different school of thought. I am not pro gun, nor against it. Yet, I do not claim to make a comment that the "majority of gun owners think". Like I said, back it up. Show me the info.
I suppose I misinterpreted the version of trained to handle firearms. I did not realize it meant trained in combat as to which you two are eluding to. So I suppose for someone "trained in firearms" aka combat, then my situation would be unlikely.
Now I pose this question, why would someone "Trained in firearms" still be a teacher working for a school patrolling the hallways with a side arm, when they can be in law enforcement, or the military?
3 dead vs 34 dead? Here is a new stat for you. 10 out of 10 people eventually die. There is no guarantee that he would only kill 3 vs 34. He could easily come in with a nice automatic weapon and take out many more before the beloved armed hallway patrol agents take him out.
By placing weapons with students and teachers is a disaster waiting to happen. Why escalate the situation.
Best way to handle it would be to diffuse the situation long before it has a chance to reach that level. By arming teachers with guns, makes the next wanna be think more. Ie) Bullet proof vests, and all sorts of nice gear. It is not hard to acquire under this illusion of security. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
I also happen to know quite a few gun owners that come from a different school of thought. I am not pro gun, nor against it. Yet, I do not claim to make a comment that the "majority of gun owners think". Like I said, back it up. Show me the info.
Sure. See the tidbit I posted for S2000_rider about the book with all the facts.
quote:
I suppose I misinterpreted the version of trained to handle firearms. I did not realize it meant trained in combat as to which you two are eluding to. So I suppose for someone "trained in firearms" aka combat, then my situation would be unlikely.
No, anyone trained to handle a weapon. That's why I said "civilians". At what point did I say anything about combat? If any normal person came around the corner and found a guy with a gun at the low-ready, even if they didn't know what that meant, they'd automatically ask them to put it down. Even someone untrained probably would, it's the reaction of someone trained vs someone untrained that would change. But no one will just shoot someone because if there's no threat.
quote:
Now I pose this question, why would someone "Trained in firearms" still be a teacher working for a school patrolling the hallways with a side arm, when they can be in law enforcement, or the military?
Well, if you interpret someone who knows how to use a gun and who'd ask someone to surrender before killing them as someone trained in combat, i guess no one. But that's your own warped definition, not mine. Lots of people trained in firearms are teachers in the states.
quote:
3 dead vs 34 dead? Here is a new stat for you. 10 out of 10 people eventually die. There is no guarantee that he would only kill 3 vs 34. He could easily come in with a nice automatic weapon and take out many more before the beloved armed hallway patrol agents take him out.
Well, I took the situation that YOU presented. Crazy guy shows up with a handgun, kills 1 person. A "hero" shows up and kills him. Another "hero" shows up and kills that one. That's 3 dead. Your scenario, your body count. Or maybe he kills a dozen before the "hero" takes him out, and then is taken out in return. The fact remains in your situation, it's the psycho's bodycount before intervention +2. That's YOUR situation on WHY armed "heroes" won't work. But my point is that's STILL a lower body count than psycho's bodycount with NO intervention.
quote:
By placing weapons with students and teachers is a disaster waiting to happen. Why escalate the situation.
Again, read the quote and the book. I think you'll find statistics back up the opposite - that having armed intervention will PREVENT or end these types of situations earlier, with less dead bodies.
quote:
Best way to handle it would be to diffuse the situation long before it has a chance to reach that level.
Well hey, I don't think anyone denies preventing the situation is the best way to go about it. THe argument was you can't prevent them 100% of the time, and in a society where owning a gun is legal, the best scenario is probably not to restrict the innocent from defending themselves. Again, see the book I mentioned.
quote:
By arming teachers with guns, makes the next wanna be think more. Ie) Bullet proof vests, and all sorts of nice gear. It is not hard to acquire under this illusion of security.
I agree 100% that security is an illusion. There is no such thing as real security. Bullet proof vests are much harder to come by in the US, and much more expensive, then firearms. Not to mention most vests aren't really that good. And most people trained in firearms know how to shoot for the head if they see a vest. Although once a guy takes 3 or 4 rounds to the chest he'll have enough broken ribs and be in enough pain he won't be so good at executing people. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
haha Good job addressing the issues!
You're the real winner at that. You take personal pot shots at people, like you think it'll hurt them or something, but can never seem to defend your point of view.
Enjoy reading that book! It has all the facts you'll ever need abour firearms and firearms control.
Actually, I have defended my point it quite well...tell me exactly what I have said that is incorrect? Were the stats I posted made up?
Do tell... |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
Actually, I have defended my point it quite well...tell me exactly what I have said that is incorrect? Were the stats I posted made up?
Do tell...
Regardless of what you may or may not have posted, attacking someone personally is not "addressing the issue" or "defending your point". It shows a lack of maturity and a lack of ability to defend the refutations that have been made SINCE you posted a few random stats. |
|
|
| S2000_rider |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
Regardless of what you may or may not have posted, attacking someone personally is not "addressing the issue" or "defending your point". It shows a lack of maturity and a lack of ability to defend the refutations that have been made SINCE you posted a few random stats.
Okay then, what I have said that you have refuted? |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
Okay then, what I have said that you have refuted?
Gun control does not reduce crime, in fact allowing citizens to carry guns shows a marked reduction in gun crimes. But you'd actually have to read the book or do some research to see those facts first hand since I don't have a link. Though I did directly refuse how the stats you presented were gathered.
Afterall, as you're probably well aware, the result of a study is only half the story: the method with which it was conducted often presents a much better image. |
|
|
| Playa |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
Sure. See the tidbit I posted for S2000_rider about the book with all the facts.
No, anyone trained to handle a weapon. That's why I said "civilians". At what point did I say anything about combat? If any normal person came around the corner and found a guy with a gun at the low-ready, even if they didn't know what that meant, they'd automatically ask them to put it down. Even someone untrained probably would, it's the reaction of someone trained vs someone untrained that would change. But no one will just shoot someone because if there's no threat.
Well, if you interpret someone who knows how to use a gun and who'd ask someone to surrender before killing them as someone trained in combat, i guess no one. But that's your own warped definition, not mine. Lots of people trained in firearms are teachers in the states.
Well, I took the situation that YOU presented. Crazy guy shows up with a handgun, kills 1 person. A "hero" shows up and kills him. Another "hero" shows up and kills that one. That's 3 dead. Your scenario, your body count. Or maybe he kills a dozen before the "hero" takes him out, and then is taken out in return. The fact remains in your situation, it's the psycho's bodycount before intervention +2. That's YOUR situation on WHY armed "heroes" won't work. But my point is that's STILL a lower body count than psycho's bodycount with NO intervention.
Again, read the quote and the book. I think you'll find statistics back up the opposite - that having armed intervention will PREVENT or end these types of situations earlier, with less dead bodies.
Well hey, I don't think anyone denies preventing the situation is the best way to go about it. THe argument was you can't prevent them 100% of the time, and in a society where owning a gun is legal, the best scenario is probably not to restrict the innocent from defending themselves. Again, see the book I mentioned.
I agree 100% that security is an illusion. There is no such thing as real security. Bullet proof vests are much harder to come by in the US, and much more expensive, then firearms. Not to mention most vests aren't really that good. And most people trained in firearms know how to shoot for the head if they see a vest. Although once a guy takes 3 or 4 rounds to the chest he'll have enough broken ribs and be in enough pain he won't be so good at executing people.
Alright,
I will go back and read the posts. It appears my training of how to use weapons was more in recreational use at which I was quite proficient at bullseyes, and grouping. Now havening a better understanding (your explanation helped to clarify a few issues and misconceptions I had), of what the training involved, I can now appreciate what you are saying and makes my situation much less likely.
However with that being said, there is no guarantee these armed teachers would get there in time to prevent fewer deaths. He could have wiped out more than 3 before they came and took him out.
I still feel that by arming people in schools is not a good idea. By doing so you would be furthering a Countries advance into a Totalitarian State all in the name of "security". At the end of the day, any wacko can get a gun. Maybe not from a store, but from a person on the street.
I have no solution for it, and I believe there is no solution for it. It is a fact of life and it will continue to happen. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Alright,
I will go back and read the posts. It appears my training of how to use weapons was more in recreational use at which I was quite proficient at bullseyes, and grouping. Now havening a better understanding (your explanation helped to clarify a few issues and misconceptions I had), of what the training involved, I can now appreciate what you are saying and makes my situation much less likely.
However with that being said, there is no guarantee these armed teachers would get there in time to prevent fewer deaths. He could have wiped out more than 3 before they came and took him out.
I still feel that by arming people in schools is not a good idea. By doing so you would be furthering a Countries advance into a Totalitarian State all in the name of "security". At the end of the day, any wacko can get a gun. Maybe not from a store, but from a person on the street.
I have no solution for it, and I believe there is no solution for it. It is a fact of life and it will continue to happen.
If you want to continue to make up new scenarios, that's fine. But don't lose sight of what the entire debate began as: the CURRENT situation where I guy killed some people, went back to get more ammo, then returned and killed some more. 34 people total.
This is where my numbers are coming from. Not some made up, constantly evolving situation. We could make up an infinite number of situations. I'm not even an advocate of arming teachers, that wasn't my idea, I'm an advocate of allowing people to carry firearms if you live in an environment like they have in the US. I'm not saying we should allow Canadians to do it, I'm saying given the state of firearms in the US and their mish-mash of laws, the easiest and most effective solution, bearing in mind limitations of their constitution, would be to make all states allow conceal-carry in all places. |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
No, anyone trained to handle a weapon. That's why I said "civilians". At what point did I say anything about combat? If any normal person came around the corner and found a guy with a gun at the low-ready, even if they didn't know what that meant, they'd automatically ask them to put it down. Even someone untrained probably would, it's the reaction of someone trained vs someone untrained that would change. But no one will just shoot someone because if there's no threat.
I hope you're not saying that a gun at low-ready presents no threat.
If I walked into a situation where I found someone holding a gun at low or high ready, I'd pop them before they have a chance to point it at me. Why give them the chance? |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
I hope you're not saying that a gun at low-ready presents no threat.
If I walked into a situation where I found someone holding a gun at low or high ready, I'd pop them before they have a chance to point it at me. Why give them the chance?
You hear several shots, with spaces in between, round the corner and see 1 guy with a guy standing overtop of someone lying on the ground bleeding pointing their gun at the person on the ground....
Your first reaction is going to be to shoot them?
This is the scenario that has been laid out by playa. 1 guy gunning down the gunman and him in turn being gunned down by another "hero", and so on until the body count is just as high.
I don't see that as happening. I see people with guns rounding the corner, seeing a guy standing over someone else and asking questions before dozens of people go down in a flurry of bullets. |
|
|
| 95EagleAWD |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
You hear several shots, with spaces in between, round the corner and see 1 guy with a guy standing overtop of someone lying on the ground bleeding pointing their gun at the person on the ground....
Your first reaction is going to be to shoot them?
This is the scenario that has been laid out by playa. 1 guy gunning down the gunman and him in turn being gunned down by another "hero", and so on until the body count is just as high.
I don't see that as happening. I see people with guns rounding the corner, seeing a guy standing over someone else and asking questions before dozens of people go down in a flurry of bullets.
Nope!
Gotcha... missed the part about the guy on the ground! I'd be level at his chest and yelling pretty loud for him to drop it. Hopefully he would, or be saying something pretty convincing. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by 95EagleAWD
Nope!
Gotcha... missed the part about the guy on the ground! I'd be level at his chest and yelling pretty loud for him to drop it. Hopefully he would, or be saying something pretty convincing.
If I had just dropped a gunman, I'd probably point out the gun that is now lying on the ground or still in his hand, which would likely be enough to convince you not to shoot me until 3 or 4 guns showed up and got pointed in my face, at which point I'd feel safe enough to drop mine without fear you're in on the match. |
|
|
| stealth |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
If I had just dropped a gunman, I'd probably point out the gun that is now lying on the ground or still in his hand, which would likely be enough to convince you not to shoot me until 3 or 4 guns showed up and got pointed in my face, at which point I'd feel safe enough to drop mine without fear you're in on the match.
Thats all fine and dandy when you are in a perfect situation (if you can call it that).
But adrenaline is pumping, and you do not know who/what to believe. This is where trouble will arise. |
|
|
| dtjohnst |
quote:
Originally posted by stealth
Thats all fine and dandy when you are in a perfect situation (if you can call it that).
But adrenaline is pumping, and you do not know who/what to believe. This is where trouble will arise.
So you also foresee armed civilians killing each other because they think the other is a psycho gunman? |
|
|
| Cyanide Ride |
Why does everyone think that is some schmoe shows up with a machine gun, there will be more kills?.
Have any of you that believe this, ever fired a *real* fully automatic weapon? This isn't hollywood and gun physics are a large fact of life.
In the bigger picture, I'd rather have weapons in the hands of good people than bad people. If there was even one or two armed civilians prepared enagage this level of threat head on, they would've been able to prevent the attacker from advancing and finding more victims. PERIOD.
I think dtjohnst estimate of 3-4 is a little light, but it definitely would not be anywhere close to the 32 if there was some sort of armed security or concealed carry individuals.
People are also forgetting that there are easier ways to kill mass groups of people at once. |
|
|
| Cyanide Ride |
quote:
Originally posted by dtjohnst
You hear several shots, with spaces in between, round the corner and see 1 guy with a guy standing overtop of someone lying on the ground bleeding pointing their gun at the person on the ground....
Your first reaction is going to be to shoot them?
This is the scenario that has been laid out by playa. 1 guy gunning down the gunman and him in turn being gunned down by another "hero", and so on until the body count is just as high.
I don't see that as happening. I see people with guns rounding the corner, seeing a guy standing over someone else and asking questions before dozens of people go down in a flurry of bullets.
It'd be more like:
A group of armed people taking hard cover and from behind cover asking the right questions questions.
Running blindly around every corner in a gun battle is foolhardy.
I'd tend to side with the person who's clear, concise and calm, not on a mad rant of some sort. Even then, I'd be wary until another more serious threat shows up. |
|
|
| Cyanide Ride |
quote:
Originally posted by stealth
Thats all fine and dandy when you are in a perfect situation (if you can call it that).
But adrenaline is pumping, and you do not know who/what to believe. This is where trouble will arise.
Well, you can sort of break the scene down like this:
If a armed person is covering another person he/she has just shot, what are they saying to each other? is it: "IMA KILL YOUR ASS MUFUGGA" or "STAY DOWN, DON'T MOVE"
From behind you cover, when you identify yourself, does the armed gunman/woman spin and point their firearm at you? or do they adress you while remaining focused on covering the injured person?
Thinking with Action will take you farther than anything.
Nothing is perfect and Situational Awareness plays a large part of scenarios like this.
That said, hindsight is always 20/20. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
What you are saying in theory is perfect...However, what are the chances that all 300 would not abuse these power of being allowed to carry a gun on campus. Again, theoritcally it's perfect but realistically it's a nightmare. It would only take 1 of these 300 students to abuse the power once and next thing you know, you'll have 299 Rambo wannabe's running around campus with guns cocked.
The chances are excellent that the 300 would not abuse their power. How do I know? Because they already carry everywhere else but campus. It's not like the Campus boundry line is somehow going to make a person go insane and start shooting people. This guy was off his rocker for a long time as far as I can tell, he was even reported to legal authorities because of his behavior. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by S2000_rider
Again, the THEORY is perfectly sound...but in reality it's a nightmare waiting to happen.
I think congregating 25,000 defenseless people in a couple square miles and a loose deranged gunman is a bigger nightmare and it's already happened. |
|
|
| Blaine B. |
quote:
Originally posted by Playa
Good post,
Yes, it is very unlikely we know the same people and grew up in the same fashion. However you are making a statement about your friends which I am sure do not represent the majority of gun owners.
I beg to differ, as a sample of a much greater population of gun owners, I think they are an accurate representation.
quote:
So for your real situation, you're right. What was I thinking. Buildings and schools, and dorms do not have corners or hallways that someone can come in at the last moment and make a mistake. They are all one giant open room. What the fuck was I thinking. :rolleyes:
How many blind corners have you seen inside classrooms/auditoriums? I haven't seen any.
quote:
You are right, most people run away from gunfire. Only the heroes run towards it so they can pop a cap in the shooter. So in your case I was using two heroes. Lets say one of the heroes is a student who is "licensed" he makes the kill shot on the original shooter. The other hero is a licensed teacher who sees people running and sees hero number 1 placing shots into the original shooter who appears to be a victim now. Teacher opens fire, shoots and kills hero #1 in error. That is a more likely situation. However using your parameters and guidelines for buildings that will never happen. It has been in a long time since I was in a school shooting, well fuck, I have never been in one.
Lets set aside your fantasy hero dying environment and look at a real life case study of what happens if people are allowed to carry in a similar situation.
Appalachian School of Law shooting
Oh snap.
| | | |
