Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
You mean like the sheriff's deputy at Parkland, that good guy with the gun, who protected the kids from the bad guy with the gun?
|
Actually the fact that a trained professional did not enter the building to protect the kids (I am by no means saying he was right or wrong as I did not listen to the testimony and there is another thread discussing that issue) is PROOF that the ONLY person you can count on to protect you and your family is YOURSELF. Add in the average response time for a police officer to arrive in response to an emergency call, and a lot of harm can happen in that time frame if unchecked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
Or any of the people who have guns who were good people at the mass shooting in Baltimore recently? Those 30 people who were shot, might have a thought about the good guy with the gun protecting them from the bad guy with a gun. That is SUCH a tired cliche, it isn't true, it makes no sense, and it's dangerous thinking.
|
Here are just three examples that proves the statement above false:
Las Vegas Turnberry Towers Shooting (June 2023) Who here has honestly heard about this shooting prior to this post?
Indiana Mall Shooting July 2022
West Virginia Graduation Party Shooting May 2022
I won't bother to list the many more examples of a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy with a gun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
Good guys with guns can be ineffective. They can be there - and not use their guns. They can be there and wait until they've already failed to protect some people, and then use their guns. They can use their guns and miss. They can THINK they're shooting a bad guy with a gun, but actually they're shooting someone who didn't have any gun at all.
Good guys are not infallible. And in some cases - they can cause more harm than they can prevent.
|
True for a change. NO ONE knows how they will react in a shooting situation until it happens to them. You also don't know the circumstances until you are there. Do you use your gun to protect someone else if your family would be in danger? What if the shooter is holding a child and you did not fire because you were concerned that you would hit the child? Even trained patrol officers who practice regularly might not take that shot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby
When the problem is "people with guns," then giving more guns to more people is not the answer.
|
How about enforcing laws and keeping the bad guys off the streets? How about doing something to help the people with mental illness and not let them roam the streets without help they need?
Owning and carrying a gun is a huge responsibility, and yes, there can be "bad" gun owners who don't take a training class or practice at the range, but then they take a chance that they don't end up in jail. Given that trained professionals don't always (for whatever reason) immediately intercede in a shooting situation, or they are willing to intercede but arrive on scene AFTER a shooting has already occurred it still falls on someone doing what they need to do to protect themselves and their families.