How he got away with it again, two hours later, is a question many will be asking.
He got away with it *both* times because the law emasculates the citizen from carrying a weapon at all times. If there were no restrictions on concealed carry, more people would carry. If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.
Yes, the shooter was clearly out of his mind, and is to blame for t
One nutter starts shooting then half the dorm draws guns and start blazing away unsure as to who the original shooter is and start shooting each other. Cop snipers arrive and see a whole bunch of people running around with their guns blazing. Who should they shoot at?
Civilian firefights are not going to solve the problem unless you get people to wear good guy/bad guy armbands or something.
Sure, there are a few times, like perhaps this one, where a few lives might have been saved if someone had been armed, but there would likely have been more single event shootings (fight over a girl getting out of hand etc). When you work the averages, gun toting adds up to more deaths.
Get most of your gun knowledge from movies and TV?
48 states have CCW laws in effect and legal CCW has been around since the 80s... yet, where's the bloodbath you are promising? Hasn't happened. Stop spreading anti-gun FUD; if you really want to know how this stuff works, log off and go to a range. Shoot some stuff and take some classes. Learn the real reasons why this isn't a likely scenario instead of spouting off at the mouth like the anti-gun version of SCO or the MAFIAA.
I used to live in a gun carrying society. I carried a gun on occasions and even once shot a person in a civilian environment. Maybe, just maybe, I know a little bit more about it than rabid pro-gunners.
In some of the towns I lived in at least 30% of males on the street were carrying. Luckily almost all of those had been through military training and knew a few things about guns, target assesment, risk mitigation etc. Go into the kmart equivalent and the guy helping folk select a tie had a 357 on his hip. Quite a few people got shot by mistake.
In USA there's the problem that so few people with firearms have real firearm training. I am not that opposed to *very* well trained people carrying weapons, but am suggesting that the idea that it should be a citizen's right is broken.
Just touching a gun doesn't cause insanity, and applying for a CCW permit and carrying a concealed weapons does not turn a person into Rambo. Most civilians, whether they have a weapon or not, do not run to the scene of a shooting to try and get their shots in too. Moreover, there is absolutely no reason that allowing CCW holders to carry on-campus should be equated with the school holding an all campus rally giving away guns to everyone who has a student ID card.
Where are you getting this idea that just holding a gun causes instant insanity? Another poster already mentioned that civilian firearms helped control the incident at UT Austin without any of the chaos you're describing. Every once and a while some genius will make headlines by trying to rob a gun show or gun shop and it ends with only the bad guy taking any bullets. There's been several cases of bank robberies ending similarly. In most situations it doesn't take much to decide who's the bad guy or not.
That's nice subjective reasoning. It still doesn't change the fact that this guy's spree would have ended if one guy had a gun (and had been trained) for self defense.
And to give you an answer, when the cops show up, they take control of the situation and detain *everybody*. The ones that don't follow instructions can be shot.
It still doesn't change the fact that this guy's spree would have ended if one guy had a gun (and had been trained) for self defense.
And exactly what sort of omniscient being are you? As many other people of said, what happens when the whole situation turns into a chaotic firefight because 50 students have guns? For that matter, what would happen in your "factual" scenario if the one guy with a gun was the first one killed?
And exactly what sort of omniscient being are you? As many other people of said, what happens when the whole situation turns into a chaotic firefight because 50 students have guns?
I already explained that in these situations, even in Columbine, the cops were keeping an eye on *all* the kids. How did they keep from shooting all the kids that were running right towards them? Of course, I understand your point, and that's really all it's worth, because there is no good data on it.
What about the ones who can't hear the instructions because of the general panic? Or because they're deaf? What about the people that are terrified beyond the capacity for rational thought? Is it OK to shoot them?
One nutter starts shooting then half the dorm draws guns and start blazing away unsure as to who the original shooter is and start shooting each other. Cop snipers arrive and see a whole bunch of people running around with their guns blazing. Who should they shoot at?
What is very interesting is the way the press are reporting it.
The British press are not reporting it as "US is shooting themselves again, guns kill people" or "US School shooting, gun free zone increases death count". It's the fact that the police were inept at dealing with the incident, absolutely nothing is being reported about gun crime comparisons at the moment.
More than 20. . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:0, Flamebait)
He got away with it *both* times because the law emasculates the citizen from carrying a weapon at all times. If there were no restrictions on concealed carry, more people would carry. If V. Tech (like may schools) didn't ban firearms on its grounds, it's probable that some people in either group would have been armed and could have defended themselves.
Yes, the shooter was clearly out of his mind, and is to blame for t
Gun toting just esculates things (Score:4, Insightful)
Civilian firefights are not going to solve the problem unless you get people to wear good guy/bad guy armbands or something.
Sure, there are a few times, like perhaps this one, where a few lives might have been saved if someone had been armed, but there would likely have been more single event shootings (fight over a girl getting out of hand etc). When you work the averages, gun toting adds up to more deaths.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
48 states have CCW laws in effect and legal CCW has been around since the 80s... yet, where's the bloodbath you are promising? Hasn't happened. Stop spreading anti-gun FUD; if you really want to know how this stuff works, log off and go to a range. Shoot some stuff and take some classes. Learn the real reasons why this isn't a likely scenario instead of spouting off at the mouth like the anti-gun version of SCO or the MAFIAA.
From real experience: I shot someone! (Score:5, Insightful)
In some of the towns I lived in at least 30% of males on the street were carrying. Luckily almost all of those had been through military training and knew a few things about guns, target assesment, risk mitigation etc. Go into the kmart equivalent and the guy helping folk select a tie had a 357 on his hip. Quite a few people got shot by mistake.
In USA there's the problem that so few people with firearms have real firearm training. I am not that opposed to *very* well trained people carrying weapons, but am suggesting that the idea that it should be a citizen's right is broken.
Re: (Score:1)
For the record, I fully support the mil
Tens of thousends of deaths in the US (Score:2)
Each year.
And your country is not a war zone.
If you don't class that as a bloodbath then I don't know how much more blood you need.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
And to give you an answer, when the cops show up, they take control of the situation and detain *everybody*. The ones that don't follow instructions can be shot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I already explained that in these situations, even in Columbine, the cops were keeping an eye on *all* the kids. How did they keep from shooting all the kids that were running right towards them? Of course, I understand your point, and that's really all it's worth, because there is no good data on it.
For that matter, what would ha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Has this ever actually happened?
Re: (Score:2)
Um, so all cops and soliders are always the good guys, and who ever they happen to be shooting at are by definition the bad guys?
Re: (Score:2)
The British press are not reporting it as "US is shooting themselves again, guns kill people" or "US School shooting, gun free zone increases death count". It's the fact that the police were inept at dealing with the incident, absolutely nothing is being reported about gun crime comparisons at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh really? Why don't you work those averages for me? Or is this just an "well, everybody *knows* this to be true" statement?
Last time I worked those averages I found the opposite conclusion.