2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,365
- 52,611
- 2,290
this is a piece by Larry Corriea, firearm trainer, successful author and pretty much knowledgable about guns and gun self defense.....
He pretty much gives the best answer to the left wing anti self defense response to the Orlando shooting and to mass shootings in general......
If you are an anti gunner, you will learn valuable things from this piece....he explains the theory of armed self defense and how it works in the real world...and how what you have made up in your head is silly....
Self Defense is a Human Right
Carrying a gun isn’t for everybody. Those who decide to don’t need to be Navy SEALs, just speed bumps.
No one is naïve enough to think that merely having a regular person nearby with a gun is a perfect solution. This last event had a lone security guard present, but the attacker still got inside and killed people. Guards have a purpose. They keep the riff raff out, but when you are dealing with a motivated mass killer, a lone posted guard is just an obvious first target. This is where the concept of defense in depth comes into play.
Defense in depth is a military term. You don’t just arm your troops on the front line, because the enemy is going to try and go around where you are strongest, to get to the vulnerable areas behind them. So you also arm your support troops, so no matter where the enemy strikes, they meet resistance.
For us, it is awesome if the Feds nab a terror cell, or somebody tells the local cops about a psycho building a bomb and the cops arrest him before he can use it. But the government can’t stop everything. Evil will inevitably get through those lines and launch attacks. Then the next line of defenders is whichever unlucky bastard happened to be in the way.
Even then, nuts and bolts, once the attacker is past the guards a permit holder may or may not be in a position to help. Gun fights are chaotic. Every one unfolds differently. You can do everything right and still die. You can screw up, get lucky, and survive. However, guns are a tool that provides options you would not otherwise have. When regular people do fight back during one of these events, they become an obstacle and a complication for the killer. At minimum they are slowed down. At best, the threat is neutralized.
Orlando is yet another example that Gun Free Zones are vile, stupid ideas. The intent is to prevent people from getting hurt. The reality is the opposite. Your feelings on the matter don’t change the results. The vast majority of mass shootings have taken place in areas where regular citizens are not allowed to carry guns.
I’ve seen a lot of people over the last few days saying that the “random good guy with a gun” is a myth. That is foolish simply because we have plenty of examples where a mass shooter was derailed or stopped by the intervention of a random person who happened to be near. Just in my home state alone, which is relatively peaceful, with low crime, a low population, and above average police response time in our urban areas, I can think of several instances where a killer was interrupted or stopped entirely by somebody other than the responding officers.
Sometimes these were regular citizens with concealed weapons permits (KSL shooting, mass stabbing at Smiths) and others they were off duty police officers in regular clothing going about their daily lives who responded first (Trolley Square, Salt Lake Library hostage situation) or even a parole officer who just happened to be at a hospital (Cache) for unrelated reasons, and ended up saving lives.
He pretty much gives the best answer to the left wing anti self defense response to the Orlando shooting and to mass shootings in general......
If you are an anti gunner, you will learn valuable things from this piece....he explains the theory of armed self defense and how it works in the real world...and how what you have made up in your head is silly....
Self Defense is a Human Right
Carrying a gun isn’t for everybody. Those who decide to don’t need to be Navy SEALs, just speed bumps.
No one is naïve enough to think that merely having a regular person nearby with a gun is a perfect solution. This last event had a lone security guard present, but the attacker still got inside and killed people. Guards have a purpose. They keep the riff raff out, but when you are dealing with a motivated mass killer, a lone posted guard is just an obvious first target. This is where the concept of defense in depth comes into play.
Defense in depth is a military term. You don’t just arm your troops on the front line, because the enemy is going to try and go around where you are strongest, to get to the vulnerable areas behind them. So you also arm your support troops, so no matter where the enemy strikes, they meet resistance.
For us, it is awesome if the Feds nab a terror cell, or somebody tells the local cops about a psycho building a bomb and the cops arrest him before he can use it. But the government can’t stop everything. Evil will inevitably get through those lines and launch attacks. Then the next line of defenders is whichever unlucky bastard happened to be in the way.
Even then, nuts and bolts, once the attacker is past the guards a permit holder may or may not be in a position to help. Gun fights are chaotic. Every one unfolds differently. You can do everything right and still die. You can screw up, get lucky, and survive. However, guns are a tool that provides options you would not otherwise have. When regular people do fight back during one of these events, they become an obstacle and a complication for the killer. At minimum they are slowed down. At best, the threat is neutralized.
Orlando is yet another example that Gun Free Zones are vile, stupid ideas. The intent is to prevent people from getting hurt. The reality is the opposite. Your feelings on the matter don’t change the results. The vast majority of mass shootings have taken place in areas where regular citizens are not allowed to carry guns.
I’ve seen a lot of people over the last few days saying that the “random good guy with a gun” is a myth. That is foolish simply because we have plenty of examples where a mass shooter was derailed or stopped by the intervention of a random person who happened to be near. Just in my home state alone, which is relatively peaceful, with low crime, a low population, and above average police response time in our urban areas, I can think of several instances where a killer was interrupted or stopped entirely by somebody other than the responding officers.
Sometimes these were regular citizens with concealed weapons permits (KSL shooting, mass stabbing at Smiths) and others they were off duty police officers in regular clothing going about their daily lives who responded first (Trolley Square, Salt Lake Library hostage situation) or even a parole officer who just happened to be at a hospital (Cache) for unrelated reasons, and ended up saving lives.