Why Was No One Armed & Shooting Back In El Paso WalMart ?

[RealDave]

I didn't know I suggested that the shooter was dead. I was just reemphasizing the advantage of a rifle over a handgun.

I suggested it.

If handguns are just as good then you shouldn't miss not having an AR-15. So why not ban them. Why do you own them?

 

[RealDave]

I said semi-automatic dumbass.

If you bothered to read the 1994 assault weapon ban, you would find their definition. Did you do it? Oh wait, you're the fucklng expert.

I know what is meant by assault type weapon as to most intelligent people. When you assfucks want an honest discussion instead of hiding behind your bullshit, let me know.

So now you claim a "semi-automatic" is an assault weapon ? For your edification, a semi-automatic is a gun that fires a single round with each pull of the trigger. SAME AS A HANDGUN.

A mass shooter using a semi-automatic rifle would have no advantage over a CCW carrier with a handgun, in terms of the number of shots firing per unit time.

A military assault weapon might be properly defined as one that has "select fire".. whereby you can choose between semi-automatic, burst (3-5 instantaneous shots), or fully automatic (many shots with each pull of the trigger - aka "machine gun"). No charge for the tutoring.

Another ridiculous inaccurate post from Mr. Gun Expert.

I defined an assault type rifle as a semi-automatic with detachable magazine.

I am not defining a military assault rifle.

 

[hunarcy]

Why is one CCW holder expected to be there (per the OP), but two CCW holders an improbable scenario?

The fact is, it is fairly likely. And, having heard shots and seen people running, the other CCW holder would likely shoot anyone he saw with a gun in his hand.

Also, the idea that a 9mm pistol and a 7.62x39 rifle are the same is laughable.

Both have relatively small bullets. Commonly 115 gr for the 9mm and 125 for the 7.62x39. But that is where the similarity ends. The rifle will have a muzzle velocity of 2365 fps. The pistol will have +/- 1100 fps.

And the huge difference is in the energy. The 9mm, even with +P ammunition, will have only 500 ft lbs of energy. The rifle will 1552 ft lbs of energy. In other words, what ever flimsy display rack you are hiding behind, the rifle bullets will reach you.

Who said 2 CCW holders is improbable ? There could be 2 DOZEN.

At close range, the rifles superiority is mitigated down.

Why do you generally respond only to MY posts ? That's a rhetorical question. It's because you have a burr up your ass about me, from the many times I've debated you, and you can't handle being told you're not 100% right.

So now take your little troll stick and go somewhere else. You haven't contributed squat to this thread anyway, and it's pretty base that you put your own ego above the safety and security of Americans, as you appear to be willing to say anything, as long as it contradicts me.

....if there are 2 dozen CCW, most will not know who the real shooter is--and if they don't kill each other, the real shooter will

Your weak imagination is not factual. While you imagine that CCW holders would kill each other, there is no evidence to support that. You are obviously just trolling him.

A very high stress situation, more than one armed but untrained CCW holders trying to move to a shooting position and completely wired up on adrenaline? Shooting anyone else you see with a weapon is not farfetched. I don't troll.

While such incidents are a possibility (a remote one in my opinion, they has yet to occur. Therefore, you are IMAGINING that it might happen and stating it as if it is a probability. That's the kind of thing that trolls do.

UPDATED: Compiling Cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped mass public shootings and other mass attacks - Crime Prevention Research Center

 

[hunarcy]

Why is one CCW holder expected to be there (per the OP), but two CCW holders an improbable scenario?

The fact is, it is fairly likely. And, having heard shots and seen people running, the other CCW holder would likely shoot anyone he saw with a gun in his hand.

Also, the idea that a 9mm pistol and a 7.62x39 rifle are the same is laughable.

Both have relatively small bullets. Commonly 115 gr for the 9mm and 125 for the 7.62x39. But that is where the similarity ends. The rifle will have a muzzle velocity of 2365 fps. The pistol will have +/- 1100 fps.

And the huge difference is in the energy. The 9mm, even with +P ammunition, will have only 500 ft lbs of energy. The rifle will 1552 ft lbs of energy. In other words, what ever flimsy display rack you are hiding behind, the rifle bullets will reach you.

Who said 2 CCW holders is improbable ? There could be 2 DOZEN.

At close range, the rifles superiority is mitigated down.

Why do you generally respond only to MY posts ? That's a rhetorical question. It's because you have a burr up your ass about me, from the many times I've debated you, and you can't handle being told you're not 100% right.

So now take your little troll stick and go somewhere else. You haven't contributed squat to this thread anyway, and it's pretty base that you put your own ego above the safety and security of Americans, as you appear to be willing to say anything, as long as it contradicts me.

....if there are 2 dozen CCW, most will not know who the real shooter is--and if they don't kill each other, the real shooter will

Your weak imagination is not factual. While you imagine that CCW holders would kill each other, there is no evidence to support that. You are obviously just trolling him.

Funny, you singled me out but there were several other poster who said basically the same thing.

Didn't mean to single you out. Yours was the first I read in this thread.

 

[hunarcy]

Walmart said no guns.. I guess they thought criminals would obey the rules

And this filthy leftist creep, this Beto O'Rourke type scumbag, said he picked Walmart because it's a gun free zone.

It's was t a gun free zone darlin, quit watching knees news
Nice foul trump u mouth.
I thought he chose it because it had a lot of military shoppers.
Plus our usual pantywaist armed old white farts

Ah, you must be a Stalinist democrat - since you're just making shit up with zero regard for facts. The Walmart in El Paso is indeed a gun free zone. The vast majority of shoppers at it are hispanic, not the whites you so bitterly hate.

Honestly stupid, if the victims were white, do you really think CNN or MSNBC would be upset about it? Come on.

The Walmart store was "low hanging fruit" as it had no armed security guard, no police presence, and was located in a shopping mall that was a self-proclaimed “gun-free zone.”

 

[harmonica]

Why is one CCW holder expected to be there (per the OP), but two CCW holders an improbable scenario?

The fact is, it is fairly likely. And, having heard shots and seen people running, the other CCW holder would likely shoot anyone he saw with a gun in his hand.

Also, the idea that a 9mm pistol and a 7.62x39 rifle are the same is laughable.

Both have relatively small bullets. Commonly 115 gr for the 9mm and 125 for the 7.62x39. But that is where the similarity ends. The rifle will have a muzzle velocity of 2365 fps. The pistol will have +/- 1100 fps.

And the huge difference is in the energy. The 9mm, even with +P ammunition, will have only 500 ft lbs of energy. The rifle will 1552 ft lbs of energy. In other words, what ever flimsy display rack you are hiding behind, the rifle bullets will reach you.

Who said 2 CCW holders is improbable ? There could be 2 DOZEN.

At close range, the rifles superiority is mitigated down.

Why do you generally respond only to MY posts ? That's a rhetorical question. It's because you have a burr up your ass about me, from the many times I've debated you, and you can't handle being told you're not 100% right.

So now take your little troll stick and go somewhere else. You haven't contributed squat to this thread anyway, and it's pretty base that you put your own ego above the safety and security of Americans, as you appear to be willing to say anything, as long as it contradicts me.

....if there are 2 dozen CCW, most will not know who the real shooter is--and if they don't kill each other, the real shooter will

Your weak imagination is not factual. While you imagine that CCW holders would kill each other, there is no evidence to support that. You are obviously just trolling him.

A very high stress situation, more than one armed but untrained CCW holders trying to move to a shooting position and completely wired up on adrenaline? Shooting anyone else you see with a weapon is not farfetched. I don't troll.

While such incidents are a possibility (a remote one in my opinion, they has yet to occur. Therefore, you are IMAGINING that it might happen and stating it as if it is a probability. That's the kind of thing that trolls do.

UPDATED: Compiling Cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped mass public shootings and other mass attacks - Crime Prevention Research Center

it is not TV or the movies!! or a PC game
cops shoot other cops by mistake
New York City Detective Killed by ‘Friendly Fire’ During Queens Robbery
Police release body cam footage of officer accidentally shooting partner
Off-duty St. Louis police officer accidentally shot and killed by on-duty officer - CNN
etc etc many links

TRAINED soldiers/Marines/etc sometimes freeze under combat!!!!!

Regardless of training, you don’t know how people will respond in life and death situations until the moment comes.

I've been shot in combat. And as a veteran, I'm telling you: allowing teachers to be armed is an asinine idea
[. '''''He cited a study conducted by the Army after World War II that discovered that in combat only 15 to 20 percent of soldiers fired their weapons and an even smaller percentage fired to kill./''''
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...08e742-ae26-11e7-9b93-b97043e57a22_story.html

I've read and researched war for over 40 years
I distinctly remember reading about fighter pilots/aces in WW2--it said something like:
the aces ''WANTED'' to attack the enemy--and there were very few aces
other fighter pilots would do their duty and help their comrades
and some did not want to tangle with the enemy at all
same with the ground forces
continued in the next post=

 

[harmonica]

Why is one CCW holder expected to be there (per the OP), but two CCW holders an improbable scenario?

The fact is, it is fairly likely. And, having heard shots and seen people running, the other CCW holder would likely shoot anyone he saw with a gun in his hand.

Also, the idea that a 9mm pistol and a 7.62x39 rifle are the same is laughable.

Both have relatively small bullets. Commonly 115 gr for the 9mm and 125 for the 7.62x39. But that is where the similarity ends. The rifle will have a muzzle velocity of 2365 fps. The pistol will have +/- 1100 fps.

And the huge difference is in the energy. The 9mm, even with +P ammunition, will have only 500 ft lbs of energy. The rifle will 1552 ft lbs of energy. In other words, what ever flimsy display rack you are hiding behind, the rifle bullets will reach you.

Who said 2 CCW holders is improbable ? There could be 2 DOZEN.

At close range, the rifles superiority is mitigated down.

Why do you generally respond only to MY posts ? That's a rhetorical question. It's because you have a burr up your ass about me, from the many times I've debated you, and you can't handle being told you're not 100% right.

So now take your little troll stick and go somewhere else. You haven't contributed squat to this thread anyway, and it's pretty base that you put your own ego above the safety and security of Americans, as you appear to be willing to say anything, as long as it contradicts me.

....if there are 2 dozen CCW, most will not know who the real shooter is--and if they don't kill each other, the real shooter will

Your weak imagination is not factual. While you imagine that CCW holders would kill each other, there is no evidence to support that. You are obviously just trolling him.

A very high stress situation, more than one armed but untrained CCW holders trying to move to a shooting position and completely wired up on adrenaline? Shooting anyone else you see with a weapon is not farfetched. I don't troll.

While such incidents are a possibility (a remote one in my opinion, they has yet to occur. Therefore, you are IMAGINING that it might happen and stating it as if it is a probability. That's the kind of thing that trolls do.

UPDATED: Compiling Cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped mass public shootings and other mass attacks - Crime Prevention Research Center

........these are not EVERYDAY events for 99% of the people = very dynamic and there is NO training/guide/normalcy/etc = YES--shooting an innocent person is a very REAL possibility= per my links of friendly fire by cops
...if you are armed and come up to another ''friendly'' armed good guy--you ''HAVE'' to kill him - he could say he's a good guy--but he's really the bad guy, like the Norwegian shooter did
here are some PERFECT examples!

When police arrived after reports of a shooting over the weekend at a bar outside Chicago, witnesses say Jemel Roberson, a 26-year-old security guard who worked there, had already subdued the alleged assailant in the parking lot, pinning him to the ground.

Police Fatally Shoot Black Security Guard Who Detained Shooting Suspect
Black Security Guard Responding to Shooting Is Killed by Police
Alabama police admit killing wrong man
'Friendly fire' death of NYC officer leads to murder charge for suspected robber with fake gun
etc

 

[hunarcy]

Who said 2 CCW holders is improbable ? There could be 2 DOZEN.

At close range, the rifles superiority is mitigated down.

Why do you generally respond only to MY posts ? That's a rhetorical question. It's because you have a burr up your ass about me, from the many times I've debated you, and you can't handle being told you're not 100% right.

So now take your little troll stick and go somewhere else. You haven't contributed squat to this thread anyway, and it's pretty base that you put your own ego above the safety and security of Americans, as you appear to be willing to say anything, as long as it contradicts me.

....if there are 2 dozen CCW, most will not know who the real shooter is--and if they don't kill each other, the real shooter will

Your weak imagination is not factual. While you imagine that CCW holders would kill each other, there is no evidence to support that. You are obviously just trolling him.

A very high stress situation, more than one armed but untrained CCW holders trying to move to a shooting position and completely wired up on adrenaline? Shooting anyone else you see with a weapon is not farfetched. I don't troll.

While such incidents are a possibility (a remote one in my opinion, they has yet to occur. Therefore, you are IMAGINING that it might happen and stating it as if it is a probability. That's the kind of thing that trolls do.

UPDATED: Compiling Cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped mass public shootings and other mass attacks - Crime Prevention Research Center

........these are not EVERYDAY events for 99% of the people = very dynamic and there is NO training/guide/normalcy/etc = YES--shooting an innocent person is a very REAL possibility= per my links of friendly fire by cops
...if you are armed and come up to another ''friendly'' armed good guy--you ''HAVE'' to kill him - he could say he's a good guy--but he's really the bad guy, like the Norwegian shooter did
here are some PERFECT examples!

When police arrived after reports of a shooting over the weekend at a bar outside Chicago, witnesses say Jemel Roberson, a 26-year-old security guard who worked there, had already subdued the alleged assailant in the parking lot, pinning him to the ground.

Police Fatally Shoot Black Security Guard Who Detained Shooting Suspect
Black Security Guard Responding to Shooting Is Killed by Police
Alabama police admit killing wrong man
'Friendly fire' death of NYC officer leads to murder charge for suspected robber with fake gun
etc

None of those examples involved armed citizens who shot the wrong people. All you've really proven is that being able to protect yourself is better than depending on the police who enter a situation without knowledge of the circumstances.

 

[Uncensored2008]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

True because Conservs don't want anything do they.

And what is it that fat Jewish kids like you want? Other than to end the United States Constitution?

 

[Uncensored2008]

I didn't know I suggested that the shooter was dead. I was just reemphasizing the advantage of a rifle over a handgun.

I suggested it.

If handguns are just as good then you shouldn't miss not having an AR-15. So why not ban them. Why do you own them?

Realdunce, are more people killed by AR-15's than by hand guns?

As to why not ban them, for the same reason we don't ban hate speech by you - we have civil rights - despite your desire to end them.

 

[protectionist]

Shot by someone with a 9mm pocket pistol after sneaking up behind the shooter. Yeah, I remember.

Try not to forget.

 

[WinterBorn]

Shot by someone with a 9mm pocket pistol after sneaking up behind the shooter. Yeah, I remember.

Try not to forget.

It was amusing enough to remember, that is for sure.

 

[Superbadbrutha]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

True because Conservs don't want anything do they.

And what is it that fat Jewish kids like you want? Other than to end the United States Constitution?

What is it fat Asian kids like you want?

 

[Uncensored2008]

More guns and more guns and more guns is not going to help ... and I think it is obvious. So what is the alternative? Of course - raise the standard of living for all Americans, improve their quality of life. Yes! But the U.S. has taken the idea of corrupt Capitalism (as opposed to one that is not corrupt) and driven it through the wall.

The scale seems to be ...... give the gazillionaires anything they want and toss the left-over crumbs to the rest of the population to fight it out amongst themselves. Would that be OK? Sure, if there was enough to go around. There isn't. The proper way to do it would be to start at the bottom instead. A really fair minimum wage to begin with, an unemployment system that a family can survive on, and an abundance of skilled and non-skilled jobs with lucrative incentives to choose from. Let the gazillionaires fight over the gigantic left-overs and scrape by with one or two gazillion dollars annually. Now if you want to clean up the guns you won't have such resistance and the citizenry will even lend a hand because the need to survive won't require a criminal lifestyle.

If all of that sounds crazy or impossible to achieve just realize that there are nations that have succeeded in doing exactly that and are living good lives. They are at the very top of the World's Democracies and enjoy more Freedom than the average American has never dreamed of.

At the end of the day, America's violence in crime is due to the destitution of a large portion of the population. As it stands today crime in the U.S. is a necessity for many and an act of greed for only a few. If you eliminate the necessity then you are very close to being "home free" and you can kiss mass shootings goodbye.
.

Ok, I have no idea why you switched from the topic to the rant against our economic woes.

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

I agree that the 1%ers are shafting the rest of us. I would love to see any suggestions you have for fixing that. Personally I think term limits and to abolish the lobbying groups would be a good start. The problem is, the people who have to pass that law never will.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

True because Conservs don't want anything do they.

And what is it that fat Jewish kids like you want? Other than to end the United States Constitution?

What is it fat Asian kids like you want?

What make you ask that?

I'm not the one running around calling myself "superbad"

 

[hunarcy]

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

True because Conservs don't want anything do they.

And what is it that fat Jewish kids like you want? Other than to end the United States Constitution?

What is it fat Asian kids like you want?

What make you ask that?

I'm not the one running around calling myself "superbad"

If I was as childish as he is, I'd say that the only thing "superbad" about him is his body odor.

 

[protectionist]

It was amusing enough to remember, that is for sure.

Even more amusing ("for sure') if YOUR LIFE is one of the ones that gets saved (while you're running for the exit)

 

[Superbadbrutha]

I guess you didn't really read what I wrote. I "switched" nothing. In the quest for ending violence, crime, gun violence, mass shootings, etc. you have to improve the lives of your citizens. Did you honestly think that my suggestion to remove guns from the population is so short-sighted as "Take away all guns!" ..... and that's all there is to it? If that were imposed what would the frustrated and marginalized citizens do to etch out their living by crime? They still have to rob and murder in order to survive. Without guns, they'll just find another way and it might be even more violent than the guns.

"Never". What a word. No one said it would be easy. You've got 6 zillion guns all over the country. You've got a few billion madmen bent on mass murder, rape, and what-have-you. You've got poverty and destitution up the ying-yang. You are losing your civil rights and freedom faster than a time glass can measure. The U.S. has BIG problems and you've had many of them for a long, long, time. There are two choices:
1. Find where to begin and get to work.
2. Wait until civil war breaks out.
Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. roll up its sleeves and start correcting everything that is wrong with it. I lived approximately 20 years in the U.S. and I wish the best for my friends & even relatives there, .... and civil war ain't the best. So, the sooner you get started on repairing the faults the sooner never will reach its ETS. Then, America will have something to be really proud of.

It is about trust. And a lot of people do not trust the political class. Progs do nothing unless they get something. And they want everything.

True because Conservs don't want anything do they.

And what is it that fat Jewish kids like you want? Other than to end the United States Constitution?

What is it fat Asian kids like you want?

What make you ask that?

I'm not the one running around calling myself "superbad"

Watch me, watch me, I got it.

 

[WinterBorn]

It was amusing enough to remember, that is for sure.

Even more amusing ("for sure') if YOUR LIFE is one of the ones that gets saved (while you're running for the exit)

Awww, you are volunteering to create a diversion? You'll get shot while I escape? Thanks, man.

 

[Blues Man]

I didn't know I suggested that the shooter was dead. I was just reemphasizing the advantage of a rifle over a handgun.

I suggested it.

If handguns are just as good then you shouldn't miss not having an AR-15. So why not ban them. Why do you own them?

Rifles and handguns have uses each are better suited for.

Anyone who owns a gun knows that

 

[Blues Man]

....if there are 2 dozen CCW, most will not know who the real shooter is--and if they don't kill each other, the real shooter will

Your weak imagination is not factual. While you imagine that CCW holders would kill each other, there is no evidence to support that. You are obviously just trolling him.

A very high stress situation, more than one armed but untrained CCW holders trying to move to a shooting position and completely wired up on adrenaline? Shooting anyone else you see with a weapon is not farfetched. I don't troll.

While such incidents are a possibility (a remote one in my opinion, they has yet to occur. Therefore, you are IMAGINING that it might happen and stating it as if it is a probability. That's the kind of thing that trolls do.

UPDATED: Compiling Cases where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped mass public shootings and other mass attacks - Crime Prevention Research Center

........these are not EVERYDAY events for 99% of the people = very dynamic and there is NO training/guide/normalcy/etc = YES--shooting an innocent person is a very REAL possibility= per my links of friendly fire by cops
...if you are armed and come up to another ''friendly'' armed good guy--you ''HAVE'' to kill him - he could say he's a good guy--but he's really the bad guy, like the Norwegian shooter did
here are some PERFECT examples!

When police arrived after reports of a shooting over the weekend at a bar outside Chicago, witnesses say Jemel Roberson, a 26-year-old security guard who worked there, had already subdued the alleged assailant in the parking lot, pinning him to the ground.

Police Fatally Shoot Black Security Guard Who Detained Shooting Suspect
Black Security Guard Responding to Shooting Is Killed by Police
Alabama police admit killing wrong man
'Friendly fire' death of NYC officer leads to murder charge for suspected robber with fake gun
etc

None of those examples involved armed citizens who shot the wrong people. All you've really proven is that being able to protect yourself is better than depending on the police who enter a situation without knowledge of the circumstances.

If the police show up at all