In this post the subject of how anti-gun people view armed people using guns defensively was broached.
The topic naturally lead the question of “What if a good guy had a gun and stopped the Shooter?” came up. The real-life answer is no bodies, no story.
The best example is the New Life Church shooting. An anti-Christian crazy had decided he was going to spree-shoot the mega-church. Only one of the church members had a gun and shot him early in the game. How did the media respond? Well first they did all they could to make the defender look like anything but a normal person with a Colorado Conceal carry permit. She was a former cop, she was “Private Security” for the church, see whatever she did was because of secret ninja-training she had and you could NEVER do what she did. Then comes the belittling of her heroic act. You see she only wounded the shooter…he then shot himself in the head. He had only shot 6 people and killed two, obviously that was all he was going to do despite his multiple arms and large supply of ammo, and his indiscriminate shooting. you see this was different than those other spree shooting, the solution is obviously MORE gun control.
An even more extreme example is the Shooting at the Appalachian School of Law there the shooter was subdued by lawfully armed students and faculty. The media didn’t report it, and in the few cases where they did they reported it wrong, saying Police had subdued the shooter, or even that the students had killed him, when in fact he surrendered. An Inconvenient truth, if you will.
How about Joe Zamudio, the lawfully armed citizen who ran towards the gunshots at the Tuscon shooting. He arrived after the shooter had been subdued so he never unholsted his weapon…except that was him almost shooting innocent people, or almost getting shot himself!
What if Joe Zamudio had actually shot the innocent man who had already helped to subdue Loughner? Imagine that scenario for a minute. What would law enforcement then have done? Would they have thought that Zamudio was Loughner’s partner? I can imagine chaos ensuing here with other folks with their concealed guns getting into the fray. The gun guys only imagine that they would save the day in these situations. Their minds don’t imagine the alternate possiblities.
You see because its impossible for a gun to do ANYTHING good. Jake has this story of a spree shooter being taken out by a lawfully armed citizen, the antis do all they can to marginalize the shooter, he probably didn’t mean it, he probably was just going to run away, he didn’t need to die.
When they aren’t totally ignoring it the Armed Citizen blog is often chalked up as imaginative fabrication, to even covering up of Murder. You see somebody flashing a knife at you and saying “Give me your money”, really has no interest in violence, and if you comply you can totally trust the social contract of money for safety from a street thug. And of you shoot this attacker, well that’s as good as murder, I mean was the $50 in your pocket worth another person’s life? (Of course they ignore any stories where robbery victims are raped, beaten, and murdered AFTER complying with the criminal’s wishes…inconvenient truth)
Oh and if the defensive gun use meshes with statistics, well that person was a racist! I mean the person threatened your life, but only when you saw their skin color did you decide to shoot, right?
You see nobody should carry a gun, or keep a home defense gun, you’re 7,625 times more likely to kill your children and loved ones than to defend your life., and every instance of a massacre being stopped…well that was never a massacre, and every instance of defensive gun use, well that’s a fabrication, or a covered-up murder. No the real solution is more gun control…and just because places with high gun control are REALLY dangerous, well that’s because the criminals go to states with less gun control and get guns, and never once stop to commit crimes along the way.
Really we should just give up our rights now, its for our own good!
“Only one of the church members had a gun and shot him early in the game. ”
Untrue. Several of the church members and security staff were armed. The woman that took the guy out was the only one that essentially charged in gun blazing. The rest realized that they were pretty badly outgunned by the shooter and took cover in defensive positions. There is a good account by a Vietnam Vet who was on the scene that covers all this.
All true, I over-simplified the story a bit.
Also as a gun-friendly church in Colorado, and a big establishment, I’m sure there were more than a few parishioners with loaded holsters there as well who didn’t even know what was happening until it was over.
Yes, the best response to an active shooter is to simply cower under your desk and wait your turn like Brady-darling Collin Goddard.
“Calling number seven! Number seven to the front, please!”
Joan was recently decrying peoples’ inferences that Goddard was a coward… but you know what, there were nineteen people in that room when Cho walked in the door. You can’t shoot everyone at once, so what Joan is saying is that there wasn’t a single person in that room who had the balls to try to do something while their classmates were being murdered in cold blood.
You don’t have to call him a coward, but you certainly cannot call him a man.
Reminds me of this song: “Do anything you want to the Girl, Just don’t Hurt me!”
I can never say for sure but if there was an active shooter here in the office and I had a clear path to the exit, I’d like to think I’d go towards the shots and away from safety. Even tho these are just my coworkers, and not family or close friends, could I live with knowing I was there and had better means than most to stop it and just do nothing?
That is what Goddard did, and now he’s taking a paycheck from Brady to tell us all that what he did (hide and get shot) was the best solution and what we all should do.
You won’t find many humans alive that will agree with that. And of the ones that do agree, you won’t find many who will admit to it.
Don’t forget their constant claims that an armed citizen who does actually get caught in one of these situations is going to start spray-firing from the hip and kill innocents. That one came up in another local editorial discussion today about guns in church.
Never mind the countless documented situations where an armed citizen stopped a killer in a crowd without so much as injuring a single innocent.
Facts mean nothing next to these people’s fears.
Or this story that got NO media play where some innocents did catch friendly fire.
http://www.wsbtv.com/news/19365762/detail.html
Yep innocents got shot, but only one of the bad guys got killed, and countless people were saved from being raped and murdered.
Huge sensational story, but NO national air-time. This is the most damning case that the media has an agenda.
“I mean was the $50 in your pocket worth another person’s life?”
Frame it as if the perp in question should decide whether YOUR $50 is worth HIS life. After all, if he might get shot while trying to take what’s yours by force he might just decide that his well-being is more important than whatever petty cash he means to exact from you.
Whenever someone pulls that BS argument on me I tell them that the moment said person initiated deadly force against me they decided both the value of their life and the value of mine. They’ve shown that they have no respect for the value of my life, so why should I assume the best or assume they have good intentions? I’m sorry, but the “they didn’t really intend to harm you” crap just pisses me off. Fuck that. They’ve just stated their intention to do me bodily harm. Only a complete moron would assume said person doesn’t really mean it.
Somebody with a knife, gun, or just bigger size or numbers asks for your wallet, and you comply they now have your wallet AND a knife, gun, or just bigger size or numbers. Not to mention your Driver’s license which has your home address.
Sorry if somebody asks me for my wallet or other valuables I have Two responses:
#1: “Fuck You! Get Away from me!” Which is my response if I don’t find your threat credible.
Or Option #2: deadly force. I think you can and WILL kill me, so I will kill you or drive you off first, because compliance only takes me from a bad situation to a worse one. If I have a gun I’ll use it, If I don’t have a gun I’ll use the next best option.
“I mean was the $50 in your pocket worth another person’s life?”
The perp has already made that decision – the victim just doesn’t know what he’s already decided. Even worse, he may decide that $50 isn’t enough, and that he’ll kill you if you don’t have more.
Personally, I refuse to trust the social contract of money for safety from a street thug. He’s already shown he can’t be trusted.