Mr. Sinister Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 not curious enough to look? funny thing about that bell tower, back then ya could go to ya truck and get yer rifle and give the shooter a taste of his own medicine. Thats actually, to me, a far more believable situation where a civilian could take out the shooter. Stationary target, clear line of sight, no collateral Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 I'm just curious what exactly this is supposed to solve/address. So far, all I see is "We love America". I also find it surprising that they hold this on the same campus where the bell tower shootings took place. But hey, can't expect some people to show even a little bit of human decency I would assume that the purpose of the exercise is to celebrate the gun nut myth that the solution to being hip deep in guns is more guns. (Well, that, and making the organizers feel important, and maybe get on TV.) not curious enough to look? funny thing about that bell tower, back then ya could go to ya truck and get yer rifle and give the shooter a taste of his own medicine. And it didn't deter him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Also, most conceal carry that I know of carry small sidearms. Most of the mass shootings lately seem to come with semi-auto. Or will the lawful shooters just over come that because of sheer number? It would never happen, but what happens if an innocent gets hit by stray fire from a lawful shooter? Is the LS protected by Good Samaritan laws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 It would never happen, but what happens if an innocent gets hit by stray fire from a lawful shooter? Is the LS protected by Good Samaritan laws? Ssshhhh. The NRA will start passing laws to declare them immune from legal responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Also, most conceal carry that I know of carry small sidearms. Most of the mass shootings lately seem to come with semi-auto. Or will the lawful shooters just over come that because of sheer number? It would never happen, but what happens if an innocent gets hit by stray fire from a lawful shooter? Is the LS protected by Good Samaritan laws? That's what I call the "Rambo mythos". Every person who believes in this "only way to stop a bad guy with guns is a good guy with guns" thing seems to believe that anyone who carries concealed will immediately turn into an unstoppable super-soldier as soon as a mass shooting starts, despite usually having little to zero training in dealing with firefights and high stress situations like that. Its pure nonsense. And this is coming from someone who has a CCW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 That's what I call the "Rambo mythos". Every person who believes in this "only way to stop a bad guy with guns is a good guy with guns" thing seems to believe that anyone who carries concealed will immediately turn into an unstoppable super-soldier as soon as a mass shooting starts, despite usually having little to zero training in dealing with firefights and high stress situations like that. Its pure nonsense. And this is coming from someone who has a CCW. Or, they just think it's a better option than standing there doing nothing. Hoping you're spared because the crazy person has decided to spare you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgundyMalaise Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 That is not pond hockey There's nothing quite like getting out on the pond and skating to your hearts content, and then some neighbors and some strangers show up and next thing you know, you've got an impromptu hockey game going on that lasts 4 hours. Bring out some beers and then hide them when some other nosey neighbors call the cops on you because technically you're not supposed to be on the ice, but then your friend who's playing with you is a cop and he convinces is fellow blues to look the other way. Fortunately there's still ice hockey as apparently the only ice rink within a 50 mile radius is right in the area I'm looking to live. Are you talking about that ice rink/ indoor gold complex off I-10 in San Antonio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Are you talking about that ice rink/ indoor gold complex off I-10 in San Antonio?As far as I am aware, the only ice rink (aside from AT&T center where the Rampage play) is on Henderson Pass. (around 281 and 1604) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Or, they just think it's a better option than standing there doing nothing. Hoping you're spared because the crazy person has decided to spare you. Yet when these shootings wrap up it seems to take a ratio of 3:1, 5:1, 10:1 cops to bad guys to put the shooter down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Yet when these shootings wrap up it seems to take a ratio of 3:1, 5:1, 10:1 cops to bad guys to put the shooter down. Right. But that doesn't really have anything to do with what I said... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Or, they just think it's a better option than standing there doing nothing. Hoping you're spared because the crazy person has decided to spare you. If its a choice between pulling your gun out and being more likely to hit an innocent bystander due to adrenaline, confusion, and chaos and running away/helping other people run away then I'd choose the latter. Now, if it were just me and the guy who was about to shoot me in a somewhat isolated area then of course I would try to shoot him first. But that rarely happens with these things. Its usually pandemonium with people running all over the place. Or I guess you could just pull a Ben Carson and tell them to shoot a different person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 If its a choice between pulling your gun out and being more likely to hit an innocent bystander due to adrenaline, confusion, and chaos and running away/helping other people run away then I'd choose the latter. Now, if it were just me and the guy who was about to shoot me in a somewhat isolated area then of course I would try to shoot him first. But that rarely happens with these things. Its usually pandemonium with people running all over the place. Or I guess you could just pull a Ben Carson and tell them to shoot a different person. Yeah I'd rather run too. I really have no desire to find out who's a better shot in that situation. But what I said was it's a better option than just standing there hoping they spare you for some reason. And it is. That doesn't make it a great, or good choice. That doesn't mean public policy to fight gun violence should be: everyone carry a gun. I also like how all you just assume the only option, if you do have a gun, is to be more likely to shoot innocent people. I imagine if you were shooting at the attacker there wouldn't be a whole lot of innocent people near him (I guess we have to start including her now too?), they'll probably all be running away by then. You guys are just way to attached to your ideologies. There's just never room for discussion anymore with these topics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgold Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Seems to me, it's also an unrealistic option. There are how many millions of guns already circulating in America. How many of them have been used to stop a mass shooting previously? How many stop murders? There have been quite a few social psychology studies that show that crowds upon witnessing violence do not rush to help, but most often do nothing or flee. So, increasing the number of guns isn't likely to increase the degree of safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Edit: Never mind, I knew better but did it anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Yeah I'd rather run too. I really have no desire to find out who's a better shot in that situation. But what I said was it's a better option than just standing there hoping they spare you for some reason. And it is. That doesn't make it a great, or good choice. That doesn't mean public policy to fight gun violence should be: everyone carry a gun. I also like how all you just assume the only option, if you do have a gun, is to be more likely to shoot innocent people. I imagine if you were shooting at the attacker there wouldn't be a whole lot of innocent people near him (I guess we have to start including her now too?), they'll probably all be running away by then. You guys are just way to attached to your ideologies. There's just never room for discussion anymore with these topics. It has nothing to do with ideology. Its pure logic in that situation. The person in question most likely has not had the kind of training that would harden them to that sort of situation; very few people outside of special forces have. Adrenaline would be through the roof. They would be shaking, panicking, confused. Unless you're point blank there is a huge chance you will miss, even with multiple shots. Those bullets have to go somewhere. If the person doing the mass shooting is all by his lonesome then sure, take some shots. But its more likely that there will be plenty of other people around trying to run away. What is more likely...you'll get incredibly lucky and make the first shot, or you'll miss and hit one of the people who are running for their lives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 When people say background checks wouldn't stop all of these attacks the response is typically "doesn't mean we should do nothing". When people suggest we close the gun show loophole and gun rights folks point out it would not have stopped a particular incident the gun control side suggests we shouldn't only do things that will work 100% of the time. When the gun rights side says having more non-mass murderers may stop some of these the gun control side says "it probably wouldn't stop all of them". It's interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted December 10, 2015 Share Posted December 10, 2015 Yeah Austin is nice and I liked San Antonio. Also liked El Paso. Kind of had an Old West cowboy feel. As for the rest, I was stationed at Fort Hood. Killeen (also known as "Kill Each and Every N-word" locally, not making it up) is probably the most miserable place I've ever been. I rented a three room single family home with a garage and a backyard for $450 a month. That's how many people DON'T want to live there. Only place to go was Walmart, the dry cleaners or their lame ass clubs. The only time I went to a strip club in my life, some 1st Sgt, in uniform, hooked me up with a lap dance from some chick named Mercedes. I ran into her about a week later at the gas station and started rapping with her. Started telling her where my house was when I noticed she had no teeth. She defintely wasn't the only toothless ho I met there (how you have no teeth in your 20's, I don't know. And I've been dipping for 15 years). I quickly forgot my address. Some fat chick raped me when I passed out drunk--she physically dragged my unconscious ass into my bedroom, stripped me and started doing...ugh...until I woke up and threw her crying ass out--then when I tried to explain it to her cute friend who I actually liked (think Charlize Theron), who was also sporting a black eye from her husband, she smacked the **** out of me and I never saw her again. All anybody did was get drunk and fight. Then Iraq hit and the whole base shipped out. All the businesses, the dry cleaners, shut down and the only people left in the clubs were their lonely wives (so easy it was depressing. Just yuck.) So yeah, I'll drive around Texas before I drive through it. Thank God I escaped. Also I've always told people that Dallas is basically DC with NONE of the cool **** or people. A big airport and crap else. There's a reason the First 48 films there. Are you with the Killeen Chamber of Commerce? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koolblue13 Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 I wanna make more freedoms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 I would assume that the purpose of the exercise is to celebrate the gun nut myth that the solution to being hip deep in guns is more guns. (Well, that, and making the organizers feel important, and maybe get on TV.) And it didn't deter him? which college is hip deep in guns? It sure as hell won't help his aim It has nothing to do with ideology. Its pure logic in that situation. The person in question most likely has not had the kind of training that would harden them to that sort of situation; very few people outside of special forces have. Adrenaline would be through the roof. They would be shaking, panicking, confused. Unless you're point blank there is a huge chance you will miss, even with multiple shots. Those bullets have to go somewhere. If the person doing the mass shooting is all by his lonesome then sure, take some shots. But its more likely that there will be plenty of other people around trying to run away. What is more likely...you'll get incredibly lucky and make the first shot, or you'll miss and hit one of the people who are running for their lives? Doesn't that hold true for most mass shooters? Even if the civilian can only distract or pin down the shooter lives are spared and time made for the police to arrive. If you do not have sense enough to know not to shoot near bystanders ya should not be armed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 It has nothing to do with ideology. Oh yes it does. I guess the problem is you don't actually see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mistertim Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 which college is hip deep in guns? It sure as hell won't help his aim Doesn't that hold true for most mass shooters? Even if the civilian can only distract or pin down the shooter lives are spared and time made for the police to arrive. If you do not have sense enough to know not to shoot near bystanders ya should not be armed. Sure, in any regular situation a person would have the common sense to not shoot near bystanders. But this isn't a regular situation. This is a situation where someone without the specific training to be able to remain calm and rational in that instance is likely to panic and do irrational things. Get tunnel vision and not even think that way. Just pull out the gun and start shooting. Oh yes it does. I guess the problem is you don't actually see it. Please enlighten me then. This is just your MO. Your shtick. You come into threads and whine about everyone being partisan and driven by ideology. Its old and tired. So put up or shut up. Explain to me in specific terms how my logic in that instance is "partisan". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Yes, people being partisan is quite an issue for us right now. As are people pretending to be experts on every subject. It's important to call them out. It happens to me too. You should try to be more graceful about it. Unless you have expertise in active shooting situations? I mean I don't actually know you, maybe you actually know what you're talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Sure, in any regular situation a person would have the common sense to not shoot near bystanders. But this isn't a regular situation. This is a situation where someone without the specific training to be able to remain calm and rational in that instance is likely to panic and do irrational things. Get tunnel vision and not even think that way. Just pull out the gun and start shooting. So you would be fine with them carrying if they had urban combat training? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Yes, people being partisan is quite an issue for us right now. As are people pretending to be experts on every subject. It's important to call them out. It happens to me too. You should try to be more graceful about it. Unless you have expertise in active shooting situations? I mean I don't actually know you, maybe you actually know what you're talking about? Admiring this (apparently new) position that only people with "expertise in active shooting situations" are permitted to post in this thread. Just curious, can you clear the hurdle that you are now trying to retroactively claim you were trying to put, in front of him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted December 11, 2015 Share Posted December 11, 2015 Admiring this (apparently new) position that only people with "expertise in active shooting situations" are permitted to post in this thread. Not what I said. You've become terrible at reading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.