Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff OTMG
This is what happens when an armed private citizen is present during what could have been a mass shooting.
|
That is only what happened in that specific instance. That is what happens in a small percentage of instances.
Longass River of Redundancy/
There is no such thing as "this is what happens when..." unless you are willing to acknowledge what is more likely to happen in a majority of instances. There is a greater probability that an armed LAW ABIDING citizen will have the weapon taken or will be too (depending on the circumstances) afraid/cautious/apprehensive/wise to use the weapon in the first place. It is similar to what happens in the average home invasion in which the law abiding home owner has an accessible weapon either hidden or in her/her hands. There is a greater likelihood that the law abiding citizen cannot or chooses not to access the weapon OR the weapon is stolen by the motivated offender. That is one of the differences between a law abiding citizen (who are not law enforcement officers or military) and a motivated offender. I laugh when the average law abiding citizen boasts about having been to gun ranges and being about to "take" a motivated offender. That makes the law abiding citizen sound delirious or too anxious to shoot an actual person. The small percentage of gun owners who actually can access their gun and can effectively take down an offender aside, there is a greater probability the law abiding citizen is (1) full of crap and will do what most gun toting law abiding citizens would do if the time comes to shoot a person; (2) the law abiding citizen is too excited over the possibility and is therefore crossing the line into becoming a motivated offender her/himself; and/or (3) the law abiding citizen has a mental health condition that fuels the excitement over potentially shooting an offender.
Law enforcement officers can have their guns taken from them or can opt out of using their guns for whatever reasons. Why can't people grasp this happening for other law abiding citizens, most of whom do not have extensive training? Law enforcement officers can be cautious about having to shoot a person (especially for the first time) and traumatized after having to do so. Why can't people grasp this happening for other law abiding citizens, most of whom do not have extensive training? People need to stop the silly pro-gun versus anti-gun as though this issue is that simple.
There are years of news articles and scholarly journal articles on this issue but I think this former
law enforcement officer did quite well. If people are pro-gun access, that is fine as long as the proper training and precautions are required. But, that still does not mean that these gun toting law abiding citizens will be willing and able to take down motivated offenders. As for the law abiding citizens who complain that their gun training and precautions should not be greater than what offenders have to do in order to access and carry guns--there are reasons why THEY are the offenders and YOU are the law abiding citizens.
/Longass River or Redundancy