Not allowed to carry at MSU

[Bryce]

Add this to the mix...

A legally armed civilian shot and wounded the suspected gunman in a fatal El Paso mall shooting, police say.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/18/us/el-pa ... index.html

[Rate This]

Add this to the mix...

A legally armed civilian shot and wounded the suspected gunman in a fatal El Paso mall shooting, police say.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/18/us/el-pa ... index.html

One point for legally having a gun and using it correctly.

[bmw]

Add this to the mix...

A legally armed civilian shot and wounded the suspected gunman in a fatal El Paso mall shooting, police say.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/18/us/el-pa ... index.html

One point for legally having a gun and using it correctly.

I want your response to the video I posted. It is a textbook example of a few armed good guys stopping a lot of slaughter.

[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.

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.

On one hand, you have this happen at the hands of a civilian. In a perfect world, all active shooter situations would end as clean as that.

On the other hand, you have a law enforcement officer, an individual who you would assume is better trained for these situations than a civilian, shooting the "hero" in an active shooter situation.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/11/us/color ... index.html
https://chicago.suntimes.com/crime/secu ... -shooting/

I could go on...

This is a real problem because law enforcement will just shoot first and ask questions later, look what happened to this poor guy.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/po ... -rcna22505

So what should we do? Only allow citizens to carry since we have examples of incompetence such as that?

Considering more active shooter situations end by physical restraint than by a civilian hero and that even people with the training and development that a law enforcement officers hold will literally shoot or kill the guy who took out an active shooter, injecting more firearms into the situation seems like a bad idea.

[bmw]

It seems to me that in the 3 examples you cited, the problem was not the legally armed "hero," but rather the responding officer. Are you suggesting disarming John Q. Public in favor of only police and criminals being armed?

[Deleted User 9015]

It seems to me that in the 3 examples you cited, the problem was not the legally armed "hero," but rather the responding officer.

Exactly! And if this is such a problem for law enforcement officers, who are supposedly well-trained, then I believe that an armed citizen, even well-trained, will have even greater trouble with decision-making.

Are you suggesting disarming John Q. Public in favor of only police and criminals being armed?

No. I do believe that guns plus confusion is a recipe for disaster though.

[bmw]

...if this is such a problem for law enforcement officers, who are supposedly well-trained, then I believe that an armed citizen, even well-trained, will have even greater trouble with decision-making...

Do you have actual evidence of this though? You've provided 3 examples of cops shooting citizen heroes. Do you have 3 examples of people acting as citizen heroes accidentally killing innocent people?

[Deleted User 9015]

...if this is such a problem for law enforcement officers, who are supposedly well-trained, then I believe that an armed citizen, even well-trained, will have even greater trouble with decision-making...

Do you have actual evidence of this though? You've provided 3 examples of cops shooting citizen heroes. Do you have 3 examples of people acting as citizen heroes accidentally killing innocent people?

Police officers are, I am assuming, better trained than civilians to make these split-second decisions. I don't understand how that assumption wouldn't be valid.

[TC Talks]

We are up to 69 mass shootings for 2023 and NONE were stopped by an armed civilian.

It was nice you could find a few examples, but that still keeps you near 1% of all mass shootings responded to by civilians. I just don't see the need to ccw permits.

[Deleted User 9015]

We are up to 69 mass shootings for 2023 and NONE were stopped by an armed civilian.

It was nice you could find a few examples, but that still keeps you near 1% of all mass shootings responded to by civilians. I just don't see the need to ccw permits.

As dark as it sounds, it almost seems that self-defense training against an active shooter needs to become a part of not only teacher training, but something done with children. Considering the increasing threat in general, it might be for the best that they understand how to do this either way for when they get out into the world away from school.

[bmw]

Police officers are, I am assuming, better trained than civilians to make these split-second decisions. I don't understand how that assumption wouldn't be valid.

If your assumption is valid, I would think it would be easy to find a few examples.

We are up to 69 mass shootings for 2023 and NONE were stopped by an armed civilian.

It was nice you could find a few examples, but that still keeps you near 1% of all mass shootings responded to by civilians. I just don't see the need to ccw permits.

This is a response to both you and Neckbeard - if your argument is simply that CCW permits aren't effective at stopping mass shootings, I don't see how that in and of itself justifies issuing fewer of them. Put another way: What is the harm in issuing them? There's no justification in banning things simply because they're "ineffective." I'm curious - of those 69 mass shootings, how many of those shooters possessed a CCW?

[Deleted User 9015]

Police officers are, I am assuming, better trained than civilians to make these split-second decisions. I don't understand how that assumption wouldn't be valid.

If your assumption is valid, I would think it would be easy to find a few examples.

No it wouldn't.

Police walk into situations near 1:1 with a gun on their hip. Only like 6% of people have a CCW. Non-domestic violence mass shootings often happen in locations where concealed carry is not permitted. Police receive (I would hope!) more training than the average CCW-permitted citizen on decision-making for these situations, but still kill people who stop mass shootings without the use of a firearm.

[Bryce]

We are up to 69 mass shootings for 2023 and NONE were stopped by an armed civilian.

.

If an armed civilian stopped a mass shooting in progress, it wouldn't count as a mass shooting now would it? The El Paso incident as well as the mall in Indiana were stopped before they could reach said mass shooting status.

I am also circumspect of the number you cite. Reference?

[Deleted User 9015]

This is a response to both you and Neckbeard - if your argument is simply that CCW permits aren't effective at stopping mass shootings, I don't see how that in and of itself justifies issuing fewer of them. Put another way: What is the harm in issuing them? There's no justification in banning things simply because they're "ineffective." I'm curious - of those 69 mass shootings, how many of those shooters possessed a CCW?

Even considering that most guns involved in mass shootings were bought legally and there are literally dozens of CCW holders who have committed mass shootings, I believe that CCWs should be issued. However, if I was in charge, I would want to see research documenting the statistically significant characteristics of individuals that have used guns in violence against other humans, not in self-defense, in the past 50 years. That will likely mean that the only people who are issued a CCW are old rich White women, but it is what it is!

[Bryce]

there are literally dozens of CCW holders who have committed mass shootings,

I don't believe this to be true. CCW (CPL in the State of Michigan) holders have proven out to be more law abiding than law enforcement.

“Among police, firearms violations occur at a rate of 16.5 per 100,000 officers. Among permit holders in Florida and Texas, the rate is only 2.4 per 100,000.10 That is just 1/7th of the rate for police officers. But there’s no need to focus on Texas and Florida — the data are similar in other states.”
Crime Prevention Research Center

Do you have a source citing the "literal dozens?"