Thats just none of your fukin business josephine. If he wanted to make a run at the dude with a Bible and holy water, thats his prerogative. People in this fukin country aint about to have some cunt like you hold our civil rights hostage while you determine how much training we need.Exactly. The devil is always in the details. If the poor bastard went at him with anything less than a rifle, which seems most plausible, then he didnt stand much of a chance.Thank god this confused already on LEO radar for his widely known psychotically fuckedupness, this patriot was able to freely access guns. But hey, GUNS! amirite?
You are delusional if you think making guns harder to get or banning them would stop things like this.
Dont you guys say you want drugs decriminalized? How is the war on drugs going?
The government has no business infringing on our rights or telling us what we can put it our bodies. More people die from drug use and drug related crimes than shootings.
Its gross how hard you guys work to cling onto tragic events only to push your tyrannical political beliefs and try to act like it's a pass to take away peoples rights.....and how hard you work to ignore everything you cant use.
...but that isn't realy the point.
I'm just pointing out that a challenger who tried to kill the shooter with his gun was himself killed.
So...it's not just about possessing a gun in those istuations, it's also knowing how to use it & being sufficiently trained to prevent one's own death.
And most responsible gun owners know how to do that.
But you definitely can still get shot and killed.
The point is that if you have your own fire arm you have a much better chance to save not just your life, but other innocent peoples lives. A chance that is given to us as constitutional right that should not be infringed on.
Well, given the challenger's death, evidently they don't.
It's one thing to fire as a larget range hobbyist or shoot at a defenseless animal.
It's another when it's an assailant who's trying to kill you.
It's a completely different game, Dovey.
I know, because I've been there.
What about all the challengers in similar situations that took down a violent threat?
How does this ONE guy suddenly represent everyone?
That guy had a right to have his gun to defend himself in a situation just like that. He knew the risk and chose to take it. It's sad he lost that one, absolutely. But that doesnt mean that's ALWAYS how it goes down and that none of us should ever bother because we will just die a few minutes sooner than we would have if we didnt have one.
No, I'm not arguing about the challenger's right to own a gun.
I'm just saying it's somewhat obvious he made the wrong move.
I think he made a mistake.
He must have exposed himself when he went to his car to get the gun.
Otherwise the shooter wouldn't have seen him had he concealed his movements better.
Y'know when someone or something is trying to kill you, you don't give a shit who's right or wrong.
Your first thought is, "How can I make it out of this alive?"
In the end, it doesn't matter who was right or wrong.
Just who came out alive.
Did the person who went to the car to grab his gun actually have his weapon in his hand when he was shot and killed? Or was he going for his gun when he was shot and killed? Being in possession of and attempting to are two completely different things. Of course, if he was seen "going" for his gun and got shot, we can't say that it was a "fair" shootout between him and the assailant. In that manner, you can't say whether or not the person that went for his gun knew how to use it. There are a lot of people that "know" how to use guns that get killed by other shooters. Happens all the time. I do agree with you that in this situation, knowing how to use a firearm is way more relevant than actually just "owning" one. At least the guy tried.....rest his soul.
Well, in which case, that still denotes a lack of training on how to use the proper procedures under such circumstances. Guy would have been better of hiding behind a car instead of trying to play hero, Lokmeer.
But if a person is properly trainied in knowing how to react in those situations, how would he know that? Guy obviously got suckered into the marketing/advertising that the mere presence of a gun would make him invincible.
Even if he had the proper firearmrs he probably wouldn't have knkown how to use it or react quickly enough.
No. it is my business.
Because if I were in the same or similar situation, I'd want to know what to do.
Incidently, these life and death situations don't just crop up in the US.
I think I posted this story before, but in my own city, a realtor got killed by somebody who was trying to break into his home aka a home invasion.
...so it's quite possible in this instance, a gun could have saved his life. But under this supposition, he would have still had to known how to react and what to do to defend himself and his family.
What do you think this Canadian real estate agent should have done in this situation to save himself?
Yeah. And he would have had to be close to his gun when it happened. You can't walk around with a gun in your hand 24/7. I laughed when they suggested teachers arm themselves. It would not be possible to teach with a gun in your hand.
Really Lotus?
They would keep the gun holstered and concealed until they needed it.
No one was suggested they keep it in their hand....wtf lol
Leftists are dumb. Everything they need to know is in a TV cop series.
