Interesting 2005 Article about Virginia Tech

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Lemme ask you something; How many guns does the Secret Service carry around the President of the United States?

Follow up question; How many Presidents have been shot at?

I'll admit that once the shooting has started being armed might have some effect on the length the shooting spree continues, but it does absolutely nothing to prevent it in the first place.

How can anyone possibly prove one way or another how many assassination attempts there would have been on the President without his armed Secret Service detail?

Blues,
Dave

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.

Unless you're going to rewrite history and tell me that since its the inception of the Secret Service there have been no attempts.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.

I think the point is that it happens less since they are armed.

[livendive 8]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Lemme ask you something; How many guns does the Secret Service carry around the President of the United States?

Follow up question; How many Presidents have been shot at?

I'll admit that once the shooting has started being armed might have some effect on the length the shooting spree continues, but it does absolutely nothing to prevent it in the first place.

How can anyone possibly prove one way or another how many assassination attempts there would have been on the President without his armed Secret Service detail?

Blues,
Dave

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.

Unless you're going to rewrite history and tell me that since its the inception of the Secret Service there have been no attempts.

So we know the Secret Service doesn't prevent all attempts on the President's life, but that doesn't mean they don't prevent some or most of them.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[faulknerwn 36]

Quote

[
The armed victims should be in contact with the police dispatcher via cellular phone and should be able to drop their weapons before the police enter the room.

Are you kidding me? They're supposed to hold off a crazed gunman while chatting with the cops at the same time? Especially since you probably had hundreds of calls going into 911 all at once? Most people can't talk on their cell phones and drive - I can't imagine trying to shoot and chat!

[Lindsey 0]

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.


Well, there was that woman in the wheelchair a few months ago who shot the son-of-a-bitch who was trying to mug her....preventing at least the mugging.

--
A conservative is just a liberal who's been mugged. A liberal is just a conservative who's been to jail

[rushmc 18]

Quote

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.


Well, there was that woman in the wheelchair a few months ago who shot the son-of-a-bitch who was trying to mug her....preventing at least the mugging.

She my hero

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Likewise, I seriously doubt that people not trained in combat or police tactics would do more good than harm. Further, once police do arrive at the scene, how the hell do they figure out who the "good guys" are from the "bad guys"?

The armed victims should be in contact with the police dispatcher via cellular phone and should be able to drop their weapons before the police enter the room.

Where that's failed, any one who drops their weapon once ordered to is a good guy.

Any one who doesn't isn't.

Some police officers (hopefully wearing body armor) might get shot figuring this out, but the police are being paid to protect the public at some risk to their own personal safety.

What about the people that will only drop the guns from their cold dead hands?

I have a feeling there are a few people that would see the command by the police as an abridgement of their Second Amendment rights. Of course, by your "logic" they probably deserve to be shot by the police.

Seriously, this entire line of reasoning that somehow the masses being armed will prevent or help stop incidents such as this is hilarious.

Even if the "average" gun owner could handle himself, you do realize that by definition half of all gun owners are below average; no? Of course, I'm NOT talking about anyone on this forum. I'm only talking about the other guy.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,406]

>I think the point is that it happens less since they are armed.

And it happens more because so many people _are_ armed. Two sides of the same coin; there are no easy answers.

[DJL 232]

I'm not going to read these anymore because it's a bunch of rubbish. I ask that anyone here who is a private citizen, a Joe Average, as in not employed in the security industry wager me with what I've previously bet. Give me a timeframe and some stipulations. As I've stated, my return is that I'll walk across your state buck naked and wiggling my dick to whatever tune you choose.

My point? That if you even THINK about it for a second you will realize that THIS SHIT WILL NEVER HAPPEN TO YOU. You're not going to save anyone by carrying a gun around with you. I'm not even debating rights because I fully support people's right to carry a gun. You're just not going to use it in one of these BS scenarios you're all dreaming about.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[Douva 0]

Quote

I'm not going to read these anymore because it's a bunch of rubbish. I ask that anyone here who is a private citizen, a Joe Average, as in not employed in the security industry wager me with what I've previously bet. Give me a timeframe and some stipulations. As I've stated, my return is that I'll walk across your state buck naked and wiggling my dick to whatever tune you choose.

My point? That if you even THINK about it for a second you will realize that THIS SHIT WILL NEVER HAPPEN TO YOU. You're not going to save anyone by carrying a gun around with you. I'm not even debating rights because I fully support people's right to carry a gun. You're just not going to use it in one of these BS scenarios you're all dreaming about.

It happened to this man:

Associated Press, 07/21/06
State: TN

Chris Cope said it was "like something in a serial killer movie," at a Memphis, Tenn., shopping center where he manages a financial services office. According to police, a store employee began stabbing co-workers after a work dispute. The attacker had already stabbed eight people and was chasing a ninth when Cope ran to his truck to retrieve his 9 mm pistol. "[The suspect] just kept saying, 'I'm insane. I wish I was never born,' and all that stuff," Cope said. But apparently the crazed man valued his life more than he let on. "When he turned around and saw my pistol, he threw the knife away, put his hands up and got on the ground," Cope said. "He saw my gun and that was pretty much it."

It happened to Suzanna Gratia Hupp, and her parents died because she'd chosen to leave her gun in the car, rather than risk criminal prosecution for carrying it.

The use of a citizen's concealed handgun is never Plan "A." Plan "A" is for the system to protect us against this type of violence. But when Plan "A" fails, a concealed handgun makes for a reasonable Plan "B."

I don't expect to get in a car wreck, when I get in my car each day, but I still wear my seatbelt. And I don't expect to be attacked by an armed assailant, when I leave my house each day, but I still carry my gun. There's nothing wrong with being prepared.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[billvon 2,406]

>I don't expect to get in a car wreck, when I get in my car each day, but I
>still wear my seatbelt. And I don't expect to be attacked by an armed
>assailant, when I leave my house each day, but I still carry my gun.
>There's nothing wrong with being prepared.

Quite true. However, you are much more likely to need your seatbelt than your gun in the course of your life. Heck, if you had to choose between carrying a gun and wearing a helmet whenever you went outside, the helmet would be far more likely to save your life, and far, far, far less likely to injure you accidentally or be used against you. (Needless to say, wearing a helmet is not cool at all.)

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Arming civilians won't ensure that nobody dies, but it will help prevent the type of MASS shooting we saw on Monday.

The type of arming of civilians you're contemplating would have to be a mass arming of civilians. That may be an interesting abstraction for the sake of discussion, but on a practical level, that simply will never happen. Thus, what you propose will never be a viable Plan A.

Just as it only takes one person to START a shooting spree, it only takes one to stop it - your argument has no merit.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Douva 0]

Quote

>I don't expect to get in a car wreck, when I get in my car each day, but I
>still wear my seatbelt. And I don't expect to be attacked by an armed
>assailant, when I leave my house each day, but I still carry my gun.
>There's nothing wrong with being prepared.

Quite true. However, you are much more likely to need your seatbelt than your gun in the course of your life. Heck, if you had to choose between carrying a gun and wearing a helmet whenever you went outside, the helmet would be far more likely to save your life, and far, far, far less likely to injure you accidentally or be used against you. (Needless to say, wearing a helmet is not cool at all.)

I can't argue with that. I don't claim to carry a gun because I think the chance of needing it is so great. I carry a gun because it's not much of an inconvenience, and I know that as long as I have it, I won't ever be thinking, "Man, I wish I had a gun right now." I may still be killed by a deranged mass murderer, but at least I won't die thinking, "Man, I wish I had a gun."

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

There is NO reason to carry a gun to class.

I can think of 32 people who might disagree.

I can think of a few problems with this. Notice comes in that a college age kid is walking around with a handgun killing other students...the info on this shooter is limited but he might be male and tall. How does any member of the assault team know who the kid is? Now they start looking in windows and see nothing but college men with handguns in the entire building....while looking around they see some shooting from inside classroom out into the hallway at something. Meanwhile reports of students getting killed are still coming out from the students that got out of the building (who will all spend the next few days in jail because they had handguns and the need to figure out who was killing and who was doing it in self defence). Meanwhile the order to shoot the killer comes in.....and friendly fire happens to some students. Also, the killer could actually escape alive in this scenario if he kept his face covered and acted like he was only shooting in self defence. Don't forget that there was a lot of panic from these students and they didn't know who the killer was....so on the way out of the building they see another kid with a gun so they shoot first and ask questions later....another friendly fire death.

This is really a big 'what if' scenario but for every person that says more guns would have meant less bodies I tend not to agree with them.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[willard 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There is NO reason to carry a gun to class.

I can think of 32 people who might disagree.

I can think of a few problems with this. Notice comes in that a college age kid is walking around with a handgun killing other students...the info on this shooter is limited but he might be male and tall. How does any member of the assault team know who the kid is? Now they start looking in windows and see nothing but college men with handguns in the entire building....while looking around they see some shooting from inside classroom out into the hallway at something. Meanwhile reports of students getting killed are still coming out from the students that got out of the building (who will all spend the next few days in jail because they had handguns and the need to figure out who was killing and who was doing it in self defence). Meanwhile the order to shoot the killer comes in.....and friendly fire happens to some students. Also, the killer could actually escape alive in this scenario if he kept his face covered and acted like he was only shooting in self defence. Don't forget that there was a lot of panic from these students and they didn't know who the killer was....so on the way out of the building they see another kid with a gun so they shoot first and ask questions later....another friendly fire death.

This is really a big 'what if' scenario but for every person that says more guns would have meant less bodies I tend not to agree with them.

So we just ban possession of any weapon and trust in the mercy of a madman to stop his killing in a timely manner. The only thing that stopped the death toll at VT from reaching triple digits was the gunman taking his own life.

[Douva 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

There is NO reason to carry a gun to class.

I can think of 32 people who might disagree.

I can think of a few problems with this. Notice comes in that a college age kid is walking around with a handgun killing other students...the info on this shooter is limited but he might be male and tall. How does any member of the assault team know who the kid is? Now they start looking in windows and see nothing but college men with handguns in the entire building....while looking around they see some shooting from inside classroom out into the hallway at something. Meanwhile reports of students getting killed are still coming out from the students that got out of the building (who will all spend the next few days in jail because they had handguns and the need to figure out who was killing and who was doing it in self defence). Meanwhile the order to shoot the killer comes in.....and friendly fire happens to some students. Also, the killer could actually escape alive in this scenario if he kept his face covered and acted like he was only shooting in self defence. Don't forget that there was a lot of panic from these students and they didn't know who the killer was....so on the way out of the building they see another kid with a gun so they shoot first and ask questions later....another friendly fire death.

This is really a big 'what if' scenario but for every person that says more guns would have meant less bodies I tend not to agree with them.

This isn't a movie. Real world "shoot outs" are relatively quick. If there was a shooting by an armed citizen, it would most likely be over by the time the police got there.

I don't have an M.D. or a law degree. I have bachelor's in kicking ass and taking names.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

>I think the point is that it happens less since they are armed.

And it happens more because so many people _are_ armed. Two sides of the same coin; there are no easy answers.

True, but it has been shown that even outlaws can get guns...Or that any person that REALLY wants to kill, will be able to find a method to do it.

So we do have both sides here....I don't think that just because people can get guns they decide to try and shoot the President. However, I do think that people who want to hurt the President don't since they know they will have to face the Secret Service and they are armed.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

My point? That if you even THINK about it for a second you will realize that THIS SHIT WILL NEVER HAPPEN TO YOU. You're not going to save anyone by carrying a gun around with you. I'm not even debating rights because I fully support people's right to carry a gun. You're just not going to use it in one of these BS scenarios you're all dreaming about.

Do those of us that have already had a gun pulled on us get to play?

Simple fact....Crime does happen. YOU may not want to be armed to protect yourself, but others do. They have that right, just like you have the right not to be armed.

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

So we just ban possession of any weapon and trust in the mercy of a madman to stop his killing in a timely manner. The only thing that stopped the death toll at VT from reaching triple digits was the gunman taking his own life.

First off, people were going to die on Monday and I'm not sure there was much anyone could have done about it. From there all arguments are hypothetical.

I did here this perspective on removing personal freedoms associated with the 2nd.....The Bush admin had no problems pushing thru the Patriot Act with a lot of tag ons to help reduce your personal freedom in the name of saving lives. Around 3000 people died in 2001 from terrorist attacks. I believe the number of gun related deaths in 2001 was over 29000 (I'm sure John Rich or Douva will correct that number if it is off).

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

This isn't a movie. Real world "shoot outs" are relatively quick. If there was a shooting by an armed citizen, it would most likely be over by the time the police got there.

Agreed. This isn't a movie. Shoot outs get ugly, crossfire and friendly fire will happen. Despite the close combat scenario good aiming would still be an issue as well. Communication was poor and those untrained armed students would have been shooting anyone that had a gun in defense of their own life.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[ChasingBlueSky 0]

Quote

Quote

My point? That if you even THINK about it for a second you will realize that THIS SHIT WILL NEVER HAPPEN TO YOU. You're not going to save anyone by carrying a gun around with you. I'm not even debating rights because I fully support people's right to carry a gun. You're just not going to use it in one of these BS scenarios you're all dreaming about.

Do those of us that have already had a gun pulled on us get to play?

Simple fact....Crime does happen. YOU may not want to be armed to protect yourself, but others do. They have that right, just like you have the right not to be armed.

I've had a gun pulled on me and pointed at me. I don't own a gun and my FOID is now expired by choice. I didn't lose money, I didn't get hurt, I'm still here.

_________________________________________
you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me....
I WILL fly again.....

[billvon 2,406]

>However, I do think that people who want to hurt the President don't
>since they know they will have to face the Secret Service and they are armed.

Unfortunately, some people who want to hurt the president do in fact try to do so. Of the 43 presidents, 13 have been the victims of assassinations or assassination attempts, or a 30% failure rate when it comes to deterrence. Not a very good record.

[quade 3]

Quote

>However, I do think that people who want to hurt the President don't
>since they know they will have to face the Secret Service and they are armed.

Unfortunately, some people who want to hurt the president do in fact try to do so. Of the 43 presidents, 13 have been the victims of assassinations or assassination attempts, or a 30% failure rate when it comes to deterrence. Not a very good record.

Especially when you consider that he is, in all likelihood, the most heavily armed guarded human on the planet.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.

Unless you're going to rewrite history and tell me that since its the inception of the Secret Service there have been no attempts.

Actually, concealed carry DOES have a deterrent effect on criminals, based on prison interviews by criminologists.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

The point was it doesn't prevent them from happening.

Unless you're going to rewrite history and tell me that since its the inception of the Secret Service there have been no attempts.

Actually, concealed carry DOES have a deterrent effect on criminals, based on prison interviews by criminologists.

Ok, but let's make a distiction here; criminal includes a wide range of crimes from muggings to serial killers.

I will admit that I would have second thoughts about mugging a guy walking out of a gun store.

But I'd like YOU to admit that it probably wasn't a deterent in the minds of;

John Wilkes Booth
Charles J. Guiteau
Leon Czolgosz
Lee Harvey Oswald
Jack Ruby
Richard Lawrence
Giuseppe Zangara
Oscar Collazo
Griselio Torresola
Richard Paul Pavlick
Samuel Byck
Squeaky Fromme
Sara Jane Moore
Raymond Lee Harvey
John Hinckley, Jr.
Francisco Martin Duran
Vladimir Arutinian

All of these people had to know that their victims or intended victims where heavily guarded by armed professionals.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver