Not allowed to carry at MSU

[Round Six]

I may of mentioned before. Every Thursday morning we have a safety meeting. While waiting for the bosses to put on the show, we sit around and expound on the issues of the day. Someone threw this out for discussion:

A lawsuit arguing that if the school campus hadn't of been a gun free zone, someone may of disabled the shooter.

Not sure if it's a winnable argument. But I've been sitting here thinking about it while I babysit contractors.

[km1125]

Was there actually a lawsuit filed, or was someone speculating "if there was"?

But it's true in many, many situations. And not just from the perspective that there might be a "good guy with a gun" to be able to respond, it's eliminating the soft targets that perps consider "easy" and "defenseless". Not knowing that there even MIGHT be somebody who can stop them in an instant would likely eliminate many of those locations from even being considered.

Would it eliminate them all? Probably not. But it definitely would make a big dent in the problem.

And, we should really consider..... "if it just saved one kid" it would be worth it!!!

[TC Talks]

Was there actually a lawsuit filed, or was someone speculating "if there was"?

But it's true in many, many situations. And not just from the perspective that there might be a "good guy with a gun" to be able to respond, it's eliminating the soft targets that perps consider "easy" and "defenseless". Not knowing that there even MIGHT be somebody who can stop them in an instant would likely eliminate many of those locations from even being considered.

Would it eliminate them all? Probably not. But it definitely would make a big dent in the problem.

And, we should really consider..... "if it just saved one kid" it would be worth it!!!

Show us proof of your idea. It's not how it's been working. This is a big lie that gun nuts use to refute sensible gun laws.

[craig11152]

Show us proof of your idea. It's not how it's been working. This is a big lie that gun nuts use to refute sensible gun laws.

Not sure he can prove it but it doesn't mean it's a lie. And to say thats "not how it's been working" is in itself a bit of a lie since its not exactly how its been tried.
You can't say with certainty it doesn't work because very few people are armed in public and in the case of these events nobody is asking after the fact who had a gun and didn't use it.
I have a handgun at home. I have yet to get a CPL and likely won't ever do so. But if I was ever in a store where an active shooter began his carnage I would feel less helpless if I had my gun.
Not that I would actively go look for him, I'm not that brave, but if he found my hiding place I'd like my chances a lot more with my gun than without.

[craig11152]

I was looking up some data and to put a little perspective on things.
The United States has more guns per capita than any other country by a long shot.
Yet our intentional homicide rate is about 60th worldwide.

[km1125]

Show us proof of your idea. It's not how it's been working. This is a big lie that gun nuts use to refute sensible gun laws.

I think there's another thread you're on where another member posted that data (and you ignored it there too).

I was looking up some data and to put a little perspective on things.
The United States has more guns per capita than any other country by a long shot.
Yet our intentional homicide rate is about 60th worldwide.

And the homicide rate would drop through the floor in comparison if you just eliminated a couple of our largest cities where the criminals run amok.

[Round Six]

Was there actually a lawsuit filed, or was someone speculating "if there was?"

No I'm not aware of any lawsuit. Just sitting around laughing and talking before our meeting throwing out thoughts and hot air.

[lidoshuffle]

I may of mentioned before. Every Thursday morning we have a safety meeting. While waiting for the bosses to put on the show, we sit around and expound on the issues of the day. Someone threw this out for discussion:

A lawsuit arguing that if the school campus hadn't of been a gun free zone, someone may of disabled the shooter.

Not sure if it's a winnable argument. But I've been sitting here thinking about it while I babysit contractors.

I guess it's just me, but why do you, and many that think like you do, believe that students, if they are allowed to carry, can suddenly turn into a John McClane, whip out their Glock or whatever piece they are carrying, start yelling "Yippe Ki Yay Mother F*cker" and start shooting at said perp?
Not one of those unfortunate souls who lost their lives, along with the injured, were thinking ....
"Damn I am not armed I hope no one comes into the Hall/Student Union tonight blasting away like Ethan Crumbley"...
Just my opinions and idle thoughts....
RIP to those three souls who's lives were cut short on account of an a**hole who was mad at the world....

[Round Six]

... I guess it's just me, but why do you, and many that think like you do, believe that students, if they are allowed to carry, can suddenly turn into a John McClane, whip out their Glock or whatever piece they are carrying, start yelling "Yippe Ki Yay Mother F*cker" and start shooting at said perp? ....

I'm thinking, like you, there would be few college students interested in carrying a gun. But have we not seen interviews from teachers and staff that seen the shooting?

I don't believe it's credible to say that none of the staff would be interested in carrying if they were allowed.

Like I said in the post that started this thread, just back and forth banter.

[TC Talks]

I was looking up some data and to put a little perspective on things.
The United States has more guns per capita than any other country by a long shot.
Yet our intentional homicide rate is about 60th worldwide.

Our homicide rate is the worse of all first world nations. It's not tough to be nations that have genocide.

[TC Talks]

Show us proof of your idea. It's not how it's been working. This is a big lie that gun nuts use to refute sensible gun laws.

I think there's another thread you're on where another member posted that data (and you ignored it there too).

BMW didn't "prove" anything except how low the incidents of citizen defense.

[Deleted User 9015]

I'll tell you one thing, in an active shooter situation, the best thing to have in all the chaos is more people with guns making split-second decisions. That will definitely solve the problem.

[Rate This]

I'll tell you one thing, in an active shooter situation, the best thing to have in all the chaos is more people with guns making split-second decisions. That will definitely solve the problem.

A gun under every pillow and a chicken in every pot!

[km1125]

It's not about "giving people more guns"... it's about preventing them all from just being defenseless targets while advertising that fact (via a declared "gun-free" zone) to anyone who might want to cause harm.

[bmw]

I'll tell you one thing, in an active shooter situation, the best thing to have in all the chaos is more people with guns making split-second decisions. That will definitely solve the problem.

You are absolutely correct. Case-in-point:

(I would like TC Talks, RT's, and your opinion on this use of self-defense).



Perfect shot and countless live saved. All caught right on video.