Mass Shooting Thread: Waiting on the next one.

Concealed/open carry individuals aren’t cops, nor are they obligated by oath and duty to run towards the “fire”. Also consider this…if you’re a law abiding gun carrier shooting at someone in the open at a mall, how does a cop know whos who when they roll up to an active shooter call?
I agree with everything you said, and everything you said refutes the "good guy with a gun" argument. And yet, the pro-gun crowd has been using this argument for a very long time with no serious pushback.

Arming everybody was meant to make red states safer, and mass shootings have gone up 60% in TX since Abbott relaxed requirements to get guns.
 
I agree with everything you said, and everything you said refutes the "good guy with a gun" argument. And yet, the pro-gun crowd has been using this argument for a very long time with no serious pushback.

Arming everybody was meant to make red states safer, and mass shootings have gone up 60% in TX since Abbott relaxed requirements to get guns.

Don’t worry the goalpost will move 100 yards to make this work soon enough.
 
Don’t worry the goalpost will move 100 yards to make this work soon enough.
Watch the TX legislature make "mass shooting" a protected term by legally requiring a minimum body count, the same way you can't use "champagne" for any sparkling wine made outside the region of the same name.
 
I agree with everything you said, and everything you said refutes the "good guy with a gun" argument. And yet, the pro-gun crowd has been using this argument for a very long time with no serious pushback.

Arming everybody was meant to make red states safer, and mass shootings have gone up 60% in TX since Abbott relaxed requirements to get guns.

It does not refute it. There are many situations where the “good guy with a gun” stopped the “bad guy with a gun”. The “good guy with a gun” statement doesnt mean in every situation lawful gun owners are rambo going head on towards an active shooter. Also, some state laws make it illegal for lawful gun carriers to go towards the threat and engage. They are only lawfully allowed to use their gun in self defense, not in the defense of strangers. Thats why that person made the statement about repercussions and lawsuits.

Im not going to go back and forth, but you shouldn’t be misinformed. Now you know why they made that statement.
 
Last edited:
The “good guy with a gun” statement doesnt mean in every situation lawful gun owners are rambo going head on towards an active shooter.
Goal post move.

That's not what the pro-gun crowd has been saying. There was never any nuance in this statement.

The results of loosening gun laws speak for themselves. You can keep your blinders on.
 
Goal post move.

That's not what the pro-gun crowd has been saying. There was never any nuance in this statement.

The results of loosening gun laws speak for themselves. You can keep your blinders on.
The people who make the statement aren’t responsible for your understanding of any nuances or understanding of state gun laws. But now you have a little more information on why the good guys were “hiding from the fire”. Ironically, alot of good guys with guns are lawfully bound to retreat and not engage because of………stricter gun laws that say you cant legally shoot at someone whos shooting at other people 🤷🏾
 
Last edited:
It does not refute it. There are many situations where the “good guy with a gun” stopped the “bad guy with a gun”. The “good guy with a gun” statement doesnt mean in every situation lawful gun owners are rambo going head on towards an active shooter. Also, some state laws make it illegal for lawful gun carriers to go towards the threat and engage. They are only lawfully allowed to use their gun in self defense, not in the defense of strangers. Thats why that person made the statement about repercussions and lawsuits.

Im not going to go back and forth, but you shouldn’t be misinformed. Now you know why they made that statement.

It's the guns.
 
The people who make the statement aren’t responsible for your understanding of any nuances or understanding of state gun laws. But now you have a little more information on why the good guys were “hiding from the fire”. Ironically, alot of good guys with guns are lawfully bound to retreat and not engage because of………stricter gun laws that say you cant legally shoot at someone whos shooting at other people 🤷🏾
The reality is that the GGG narrative is exactly what the conservatives is pushing for especially if they were so vocal of defunding the police. Rittenmouse even got away with manslaughter after killing an unarmed civilian. also the fact that they were pushing for teachers to have guns and play rambo. the unarmed parents of the Uvalde massacre victims even tried to rescue their children. point is, gun lovers are nothing more than posers trying to justify their guns for self-defense. in most instances, gun use are more often used in massacres and angry disputes. stricter gun laws such as you've mentioned has nothing to do with them being afraid to be held liable of killing other people. they ain't it.
 
The people who make the statement aren’t responsible for your understanding of any nuances or understanding of state gun laws. But now you have a little more information on why the good guys were “hiding from the fire”. Ironically, alot of good guys with guns are lawfully bound to retreat and not engage because of………stricter gun laws that say you cant legally shoot at someone whos shooting at other people 🤷🏾

I've been talking about the logic of the "good guy with a gun" argument, and it's a flawed argument because of everything you keep saying.

And yet, this has been the solution of choice of republican politicians after every mass shooting: arm everybody.


The political talking point of increasing the presence of police and armed teachers to deter mass shootings traces its origins to 2012—having been famously proposed by NRA head Wayne LaPierre following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where 20 children and six staff members were killed. “The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” he said, as the nation debated tougher gun control measures.

See?

No nuances in the logic.
 
Back
Top Bottom