ST Alpha - "you could have zero people dead if an armed citizen gets the shooter first." (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 161

In response to "less deaths are better, yes. " by Reagen

you could have zero people dead if an armed citizen gets the shooter first.

Posted by groiny (aka groiny) Jun 12 '14, 11:32

but that is not acceptable.

Responses:

[deleted]
as we've recently seen, that scenario is more likely to end with one more dead citizen. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:33 5
- small sample size. nm -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:35 4
  - You're off in Rambo Fantasy Land. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:36 3
    - if a gunman has to stop to deal with another shooter, doesn't it make sense that - groiny Jun 12, 11:38 2
      - again, experience shows us otherwise. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:41
      - There are hundreds of millions of guns in the US and shooters are *not* being stopped. This argument is fallacy -- nm - zork Jun 12, 11:41
that's a pretty big if. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:33 6
- BUT IT IS POSSIBLE! -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:34 5
  - a lot of things are possible. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:36 4
    - but, you said you are fine with speedbumps! -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:36 3
      - Because speed bumps, by design, mitigate risk by controlling behavior, they don't add to it. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:38 2
        
        no, speed bumps are there to cause something or someone to pause. - groiny Jun 12, 11:40 1
        
        which smaller magazines does accomplish -- nm - zork Jun 12, 11:42
why would he shoot the person if they hadn't shot anyone? -- nm - Beaker Jun 12, 11:33 2
- shot, not killed. the gunmen do not have a 1 to 1 shot to kill ratio. nm -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:34 1
  - neither does a would=be heroic bystander returning fire -- nm - znufrii Jun 12, 11:44

Post a message top

you could have zero people dead if an armed citizen gets the shooter first.

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.