NRA's argument that ,"good guy with gun saves the day" fails again.

The NRA’s narrative about Maryland school shooting collapses

Just days after the NRA gave credit for a good guy with a gun for stopping a bad guy at the Maryland school shooting, it was revealed that the bad guy shot himself to death, while the good guy missed and only shot him in the hand..
Regardless, we're lucky the kid wasn't armed with an assault rifle
He had an ass-ault rifle....

pri_57536940.jpg
 
The NRA’s narrative about Maryland school shooting collapses

Just days after the NRA gave credit for a good guy with a gun for stopping a bad guy at the Maryland school shooting, it was revealed that the bad guy shot himself to death, while the good guy missed and only shot him in the hand..
Regardless, we're lucky the kid wasn't armed with an assault rifle
He had an ass-ault rifle....

pri_57536940.jpg
This is about the Maryland shooting not Trump and Stormy
 
The idea that 'a good guy with a gun' can reliably save any situation is just schoolboy fantasy.
Even a competent shooter with a hand-gun would be very lucky to win a shootout against an amateur armed with an AR15. And a weekend warrior would be just as likely to kill a bystander, as the perp.
 
The NRA’s narrative about Maryland school shooting collapses

Just days after the NRA gave credit for a good guy with a gun for stopping a bad guy at the Maryland school shooting, it was revealed that the bad guy shot himself to death, while the good guy missed and only shot him in the hand..
Regardless, we're lucky the kid wasn't armed with an assault rifle
He had an ass-ault rifle....

pri_57536940.jpg
OOOOhhh...shiiiiit...duth it vibrate? huhuhuhuh
 
The idea that 'a good guy with a gun' can reliably save any situation is just schoolboy fantasy.
Even a competent shooter with a hand-gun would be very lucky to win a shootout against an amateur armed with an AR15. And a weekend warrior would be just as likely to kill a bystander, as the perp.

Oh, so you're making the argument for why EVERYONE needs to carry an AR15 for much better accuracy and stopping power.

And here I was thinking you were FOR gun control.
 
I think this illustrates the problem with a good guy with a gun. It is hard to hit the target. And there can be a lot of running screaming people in the eay.
 
The idea that 'a good guy with a gun' can reliably save any situation is just schoolboy fantasy.
Even a competent shooter with a hand-gun would be very lucky to win a shootout against an amateur armed with an AR15. And a weekend warrior would be just as likely to kill a bystander, as the perp.

The Lefty's old......
"NBC and CNN didn't report......so therefor it doesn't exit argument"

News for ya peep....good people save FAR more lives with guns than bad people take with them.
And we won't even count the PoPo or military.
 
Last edited:
The NRA’s narrative about Maryland school shooting collapses

Just days after the NRA gave credit for a good guy with a gun for stopping a bad guy at the Maryland school shooting, it was revealed that the bad guy shot himself to death, while the good guy missed and only shot him in the hand..






Fell apart? In what way? Did the asshole die before he could harm anyone else? You see, silly person, law enforcement KNOWS that the sooner you get to the scene and engage the assholes doing the shooting, the sooner they either kill themselves, or get shot. The end result is they are dead, and no one else dies. That's why the failure of the cop in Florida TO DO THE BASICS is so profound. We KNOW that early engagement ends the horror. That chicken shit stayed outside and let those kids be murdered.
 
I think this illustrates the problem with a good guy with a gun. It is hard to hit the target. And there can be a lot of running screaming people in the eay.





That doesn't matter. The fact that the bad guy is getting shot at is enough. They either die at their own hands or get shot by the cops. Either way, the sooner you engage, the sooner they die.
 
I think this illustrates the problem with a good guy with a gun. It is hard to hit the target. And there can be a lot of running screaming people in the eay.





That doesn't matter. The fact that the bad guy is getting shot at is enough. They either die at their own hands or get shot by the cops. Either way, the sooner you engage, the sooner they die.

Depends. He missed. He could have ended up shooting someone else. That's always the flip side of the scenario when it involves non-professionals.

So he was lucky.
 
The idea that 'a good guy with a gun' can reliably save any situation is just schoolboy fantasy.
Even a competent shooter with a hand-gun would be very lucky to win a shootout against an amateur armed with an AR15. And a weekend warrior would be just as likely to kill a bystander, as the perp.

Exactly.

I don't mind professionally trained people engaging. But not a bunch of amateurs. The other thing that professionally trained people can be trained to do is de-escalate situations. What if you have a crazy kid, with a gun, making threats and waving it around, what does some "good guy" with a gun do? What if it's just a kid with a cellphone?
 
I think this illustrates the problem with a good guy with a gun. It is hard to hit the target. And there can be a lot of running screaming people in the eay.





That doesn't matter. The fact that the bad guy is getting shot at is enough. They either die at their own hands or get shot by the cops. Either way, the sooner you engage, the sooner they die.

Depends. He missed. He could have ended up shooting someone else. That's always the flip side of the scenario when it involves non-professionals.

So he was lucky.

In view of the fact that the bad guy was a better shot than the good guy, the only good thing about the entire incident is that the bad guy chose to kill himself, instead of killing the good guy.
 
I think this illustrates the problem with a good guy with a gun. It is hard to hit the target. And there can be a lot of running screaming people in the eay.





That doesn't matter. The fact that the bad guy is getting shot at is enough. They either die at their own hands or get shot by the cops. Either way, the sooner you engage, the sooner they die.

Depends. He missed. He could have ended up shooting someone else. That's always the flip side of the scenario when it involves non-professionals.

So he was lucky.





It doesn't matter. It is well known that merely ENGAGING the mass shooter will cause them to commit suicide. We KNOW this. That is why the law enforcement protocols were changed to get the cops to go in and engage as rapidly as possible. It is not a question, it is a known fact.
 
The NRA’s narrative about Maryland school shooting collapses

Just days after the NRA gave credit for a good guy with a gun for stopping a bad guy at the Maryland school shooting, it was revealed that the bad guy shot himself to death, while the good guy missed and only shot him in the hand..
Regardless, we're lucky the kid wasn't armed with an assault rifle
Where would a kid get an assault rifle? They're not sold in the USA.
 
I think this illustrates the problem with a good guy with a gun. It is hard to hit the target. And there can be a lot of running screaming people in the eay.





That doesn't matter. The fact that the bad guy is getting shot at is enough. They either die at their own hands or get shot by the cops. Either way, the sooner you engage, the sooner they die.

Depends. He missed. He could have ended up shooting someone else. That's always the flip side of the scenario when it involves non-professionals.

So he was lucky.

In view of the fact that the bad guy was a better shot than the good guy, the only good thing about the entire incident is that the bad guy chose to kill himself, instead of killing the good guy.





It's pretty easy to walk up and shoot someone who's unsuspecting of your motive from a foot away. Your statement is asinine.
 

Forum List

Back
Top