Answer to Mass Shootings: Less Guns, or More Guns ?

[kaz]

Liberals, including Obama and Hillary Clinton, are saying LESS guns, coming from more background checks, would stop mass shootings. Donald Trump, Ben Carson, and Conservatives in general, are calling for MORE guns as the answer to stop these awful massacres.

Who do you think is right ? More guns, or less guns ?

We're calling for the freedom to defend yourself, not "more guns"

 

[kaz]

And if you look further in those countries, armed robbery, assault and rape increased in most cases. How could it not? People there are not able to protect themselves.

So are you conceding that fewer handguns in circulation leads to fewer mass shooting events?

It leads to MORE mass shooting events, by giving the nutty shooter the confidence that there will be no guns present to interrupt and stop his shooting spree. Banning the gun-free zone policies would deter the shooters, by making him know he will be stopped.

Correct. Many news outlets discussing this situation are refusing to use the name of the shooter just like the Sheriff. They realize that kooks get off on the sensation of the attention and horror our media brings.

However, if most of these mass shootings ended up with a citizen gunning down the shooter before he could complete any large scale killing, that would take away the excitement for the next potential killer.

But kooks know what works. They find a place where nobody is armed, everybody is their victim, and they kill as many people as they can before somebody gets there with a gun to polish them off. Afterwards it's the national main story for the next couple of weeks.

Exactly, that's why they keep targeting schools, they are maximum assured no one will shoot back

 

[protectionist]

We're calling for the freedom to defend yourself, not "more guns"

And defending yourself means having a gun in what is now a gun-free zone. That would then amount to more guns, out and about.

 

[kaz]

We're calling for the freedom to defend yourself, not "more guns"

And defending yourself means having a gun in what is now a gun-free zone. That would then amount to more guns, out and about.

So you're more comfortable with only the shooter having a gun, figures

 

[protectionist]

"Answer to Mass Shootings: Less Guns, or More Guns ?"

This fails as a false dilemma fallacy.

Part of the solution is comprehensive mental health treatment, access to such treatment, and the funding to ensure mental health treatment is available to all Americans.

There are no simple solutions, there is no one single solution. It's a complex problem that requires a pragmatic, multifaceted approach, not blind adherence to failed, errant conservative dogma.

Nobody said there WAS any simple solution, But it is simple common sense that gun-free zones are causing people to die in mass shootings, by removing the deterrent that would have stopped the mass shooter from appearing at his location for mass shooting.

And even if he still did appear, despite the deterrent, with CCW permit holder(s) in the group (church, school, military base, etc), the killer would be shot before he cold inflict complete damage.

Example: July 4, 2002. Egyptian terrorist Hesham Mohamed Hadayet, entered LAX Intl airport with 2 handguns, and enough bullets to kill dozens of people. The airport was crowded with people. Hadayet shot & killed 2 people, and wounded 4 others, seriously. The toll could have been far worse. And why wasn't it ? Because a security guard shot him dead right on the spot.

That is what CCW permit holders are. They are armed (free of charge) security guards, ready to do just what the guard at LAX did (except where gun-free zone do-gooders prevent them from providing that helpful security)

 

[protectionist]

So you're more comfortable with only the shooter having a gun, figures

No. I'm comfortable with my .380 and my CCW permit in my pocket, and others like me who can/will eliminate that shooter the second he starts shooting (or prevent him from ever showing up in the first place)

I think you misunderstood me. When I said "more guns out and about", I meant that as a GOOD thing (more guns of law-abiding, licensed gun owners)

 

[Little-Acorn]

Answer to Mass Shootings: Less Guns, or More Guns ?
People should be free to own and carry the guns they have. If they feel they need more, they are free to buy or build them.

Hmm, looks like the gun-rights-haters aren't interested in a solution where law-abiding people do what they want.

That doesn't expand government nearly enough to suit them.