Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
After he was subdued by three guys, two more knives were found on him.
After he was subdued by three guys, two more knives were found on him.
Thug? Hmmm...reddish hair and fair skin. I am thinking what you have here is a 'hooligan'. Seriously, glad nobody was hurt--except him, hopefully.
I agree. Took the C&C class 2 years ago. Love my S&W 40 cal. Never thought I would ever carry, but things have changed in the last 25 years.This is why I believe strongly in the ability to conceal and carry a gun for all law abiding citizens everywhere as long as they are at the age of 18 and over.
This is why I believe strongly in the ability to conceal and carry a gun for all law abiding citizens everywhere as long as they are at the age of 18 and over.
Yes a gun sure would have helped make this situation an incident where 3 people were mildly annoyed that their study time was interrupted into a situation where some overzealous guy anxious to live out his self-defense fantasy could have finally shot someone. That's definitely the preferable route this situation should have taken.
Yep, feel safer already...This is why I believe strongly in the ability to conceal and carry a gun for all law abiding citizens everywhere as long as they are at the age of 18 and over.
Do you think allowing people to carry concealed guns would have stopped this guy from carrying knives? I don't see any reason for needing a gun in this situation. The guy with the knives was subdued and nobody was hurt as far as I know. Throw in people carrying guns and someone could have easily lost their life. I don't see any positive a gun would have brought to this situation.
Would you like to see how a sample of college students, some with a lot of target shooting experience, perform when faced with an active shooter? (spoiler alert: badly)
Good looking stuff.Hey Sparky, you need my new C & C undergear. Go to www.toolshedusa.com. I have a patent pending. Email me at sales@toolshed-usa.com to reach out.
It doesn't have anything to do with stopping people from carrying [fill in the blank]. It has to do with being able to defend against people carrying [fill in the blank]. Breaking news . . . KNIVES KILL PEOPLE TOO! A gun would have been positive if this guy was knew how to use his knives and started slashing people.Do you think allowing people to carry concealed guns would have stopped this guy from carrying knives? I don't see any reason for needing a gun in this situation. The guy with the knives was subdued and nobody was hurt as far as I know. Throw in people carrying guns and someone could have easily lost their life. I don't see any positive a gun would have brought to this situation.
If you don't see a reason a gun would be helpful in a situation where someone is threatening with a knife, I don't really know what to say. In this situation, thankfully nobody was hurt seriously. But that being said, a person with any sharp object, be it a knife or whatever, is a serious threat if you are unarmed.
If you don't agree, try being a correctional officer and try to subdue an inmate with an improvised knife and tell me you wouldn't want SOMETHING so you aren't unarmed. Thankfully I've never had to encounter that situation, but we train for it. Even with training I'm still not comfortable disarming someone.
In reality, chances are someone pulls a concealed pistol, suspect here either runs or drops to the ground, possibly pissing his pants in either case. If he attacks the person with the firearm, that shows he truly has homicidal intent and I see no reason someone wouldn't be justified in opening fire.
Despite what people think, most concealed carriers are not wanna be cowboys with a fantasy to shoot someone. Most are law abiding citizens who prefer to be proactive in defending themselves and their loved ones. 99.9% of people have no desire to shoot anyone, and in this situation most people probably wouldn't have shot, but probably would have at least brandished.
I don't have my CCL yet, in Illinois it isn't cheap to get one. I do plan on getting it soon though.
Are there more people than you that think this way? Of course the presence of guns could make a situation worse, it also could make a situation better. A failure of imagination? Really? You come up with this wonderfully imaginative story, but you can't understand how guns could very much improve a situation? If those who support conceal carry have a real failure of imagination, then it seems fair to say that those who oppose conceal carry have a real failure of common sense?The problem as I see it is that those who support the presence of guns in a situation like this see all of these scenarios as black and white and have a real failure of imagination. Let's say, for the sake of argument, there were four or five well intentioned gun owners who arrive on the scene. We now know that there was only one "bad guy" with a knife. At the time, however, perhaps the second or third person to arrive at the scene sees only the first guy with a gun pointing it at a guy with a knife and shoots the first gun owner out of an incorrect but fair assumption that HE was the "bad guy." Is that really difficult to imagine? In the minds of CCW owners, it's always one good guy--who is always cool under pressure despite ample evidence to the contrary--who shows-up and knows exactly who to take-out. If all of you were armed as you advocate, however, and you have a bunch of different guys who arrive at the scene at different points in time, all pointing guns at one another, haven't we just exacerbated a dangerous but manageable situation into something much more than that?
Are there more people than you that think this way? Of course the presence of guns could make a situation worse, it also could make a situation better. A failure of imagination? Really? You come up with this wonderfully imaginative story, but you can't understand how guns could very much improve a situation? If those who support conceal carry have a real failure of imagination, then it seems fair to say that those who oppose conceal carry have a real failure of common sense?
No and No. What logic and evidence are you referring to? Yours? Well, you haven't given any evidence whatsoever. You have given your theories which, being an attorney, you would understand is not evidence. You have proposed that lots of confused people with lots of guns could cause a problem. I don't disagree with that, but I also don't think the scenario you have set out is one that would be common at all."Wonderfully imaginative story." Really??? It actually seems pretty logical. More people arriving on crime scenes with guns, thus creating more uncertainty as to who are the "bad guys" and who are the "good guys" is simply the logical consequence of what you are advocating for. It just is. Even if I (incredibly graciously) stipulate that you all are tremendous marksmen, even in a high-stress situation, there is nothing you can train for that will tell you with certainty which of the multiple people with guns are the ones you want to go after. The poster prior to you mentioned the Aurora shooting in the movie theatre and argued that, while he may have still killed a couple people, the damage would have minimized had there been more people armed. To me, that is an obvious fallacy. You have a dark theatre and see five or six people all holding-up guns. Honestly, how on earth are you supposed to gather--in an instant--the intentions of all the participants? This may be imaginative but it's also perfectly rational to consider.
Finally, by no means am I saying that I cannot imagine how guns could improve a situation. There are absolutely many scenarios in which they would. That being said, I try to govern my life around logic and evidence and both of those dictate that the presence of more guns is a net negative for public safety.
So you guys think that a guy with a knife would choose to attack an area he knew there would be multiple people armed and able to defend themselves?
The scenarios you anti-gun loons post are so stupid and unrealistic. Obviously an attacker could possibly get 1 or 2 people, but you're not going to have a Virginia tech or Von Maur or Batman Movie level incident if more people exercise their 2nd Amendment right.
I understand that you're incapable of protecting yourselves and unwilling to do so. That's fine. I respect that you've made that decision FOR YOURSELF. But why the hell do you think you get to decide what other law abiding people should do?
You are right, no law abiding citizen would ever kill an unarmed man if they carried a concealed weapon.
http://gawker.com/the-subway-slaying-that-wasnt-a-crime-1697565926
Again, I'm not anti-gun. I also don't believe everyone carrying weapons will make the world safer.
The potential of America will not be seen until all it's citizens are carrying automatic weopanry. Even better if we also would carry a hunting knife, a few hand granades, and wore an american flag bandana with John 3:16 written on the backs of our leather jackets.
So you guys think that a guy with a knife would choose to attack an area he knew there would be multiple people armed and able to defend themselves?
The scenarios you anti-gun loons post are so stupid and unrealistic. Obviously an attacker could possibly get 1 or 2 people, but you're not going to have a Virginia tech or Von Maur or Batman Movie level incident if more people exercise their 2nd Amendment right.
I understand that you're incapable of protecting yourselves and unwilling to do so. That's fine. I respect that you've made that decision FOR YOURSELF. But why the hell do you think you get to decide what other law abiding people should do?
You are right, no law abiding citizen would ever kill an unarmed man if they carried a concealed weapon.
http://gawker.com/the-subway-slaying-that-wasnt-a-crime-1697565926
Again, I'm not anti-gun. I also don't believe everyone carrying weapons will make the world safer.