Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Injured Anyway

[Pogo]

This was also in the article.

The law is not enforced, so the Kennesaw gun ownership rate hovers around 50 percent, according to its police chief. That’s still higher than the average rate of gun ownership in the U.S., estimated to be about 34 percent.

Yet it's still on the books. And I'm still waiting for an artful poster to reconcile Kennesaw's law requiring citizens to buy something with the ACA ... requiring citizens to buy something.

There are many laws on the books not all are enforced as far as this law and the ACA go are the people of Kennaesaw being fined, taxed or otherwise punished if they don't have at least one gun as people are under the ACA are if they don't buy health insurance? That would be your difference and I suspect if someone chooses to challenge the Kennaesaw law it would be struck down.

One would hope they both would.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Dead Anyway


Where were there "Plenty of good guys with guns"?

Most FedEx facilities have signs saying "No guns allowed". Which means that law-abiding citizens won't be carrying, inside.

And lo and behold, some self-styed Rambo idiot took advantage of a place where he was sure no one would be able to shoot back, and started blowing people away.

Sounds like little noteapartypleez is doing his usual lying and dissembling.

To expand on this post there were plenty of good guys on the scene. Not one of them had a gun to do anything about it.

Which is why the good guys actually have to be armed to stop this type of thing.

 

[edthecynic]

I can't help but notice no one on the Right objects to the "individual mandate" requiring everyone to buy a commercial product!!!!

 

[Pogo]

Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Dead Anyway


Where were there "Plenty of good guys with guns"?

Most FedEx facilities have signs saying "No guns allowed". Which means that law-abiding citizens won't be carrying, inside.

And lo and behold, some self-styed Rambo idiot took advantage of a place where he was sure no one would be able to shoot back, and started blowing people away.

Sounds like little noteapartypleez is doing his usual lying and dissembling.

To expand on this post there were plenty of good guys on the scene. Not one of them had a gun to do anything about it.

Which is why the good guys actually have to be armed to stop this type of thing.

"stop"?

That's spelled e-s-c-a-l-a-t-e.

Which is why we don't fight fires with gasoline.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Plenty of "Good Guys with Guns" But 6 Dead Anyway


Where were there "Plenty of good guys with guns"?

Most FedEx facilities have signs saying "No guns allowed". Which means that law-abiding citizens won't be carrying, inside.

And lo and behold, some self-styed Rambo idiot took advantage of a place where he was sure no one would be able to shoot back, and started blowing people away.

Sounds like little noteapartypleez is doing his usual lying and dissembling.

To expand on this post there were plenty of good guys on the scene. Not one of them had a gun to do anything about it.

Which is why the good guys actually have to be armed to stop this type of thing.

"stop"?

That's spelled e-s-c-a-l-a-t-e.

Which is why we don't fight fires with gasoline.

A person with a gun stopping an idiot killing people with a gun is not escalation or throwing gas on a fire. It's applying the solution to the problem.

You seem to be stuck on this adding fuel to the fire analogy. What do forest fire fighters do to stop a major fire? They employ burn lines where they use fire under a controlled manner to burn out the fuel for the fire so when the forest fire reaches that point there is no fuel to keep it going and it dies out.

They fight fire with fire. Is that escalation in your mind? Is that adding gas to the situation in your mind?

Armed people in good standing are the same as a fire line. They are what can make the fire stop. In your little world they should just run up with dixie cups of water and chuck them to the wind.

If that were you or a family member in that situation I wonder if you would actually hope nobody came up and shot this guy because you don't want to add any gas to the fire or if you would hope and pray someone did something to stop him, like shoot him in the head. Or would you just crawl into the fetal position, or hope your family member did that, and hope the fire just burns itself out before it gets to you or your family member? Fuck the people that got shot right? As long as nobody else has the firepower to stop him let's just let the death toll rise until he runs out of ammo. We sure wouldn't want to antagonize him with a counter shooter. That would be escalation.

Your entire stance and argument is stupid, illogical and poorly thought out. I suggest you work on that.

 

[Brain357]

To expand on this post there were plenty of good guys on the scene. Not one of them had a gun to do anything about it.

Which is why the good guys actually have to be armed to stop this type of thing.

"stop"?

That's spelled e-s-c-a-l-a-t-e.

Which is why we don't fight fires with gasoline.

A person with a gun stopping an idiot killing people with a gun is not escalation or throwing gas on a fire. It's applying the solution to the problem.

You seem to be stuck on this adding fuel to the fire analogy. What do forest fire fighters do to stop a major fire? They employ burn lines where they use fire under a controlled manner to burn out the fuel for the fire so when the forest fire reaches that point there is no fuel to keep it going and it dies out.

They fight fire with fire. Is that escalation in your mind? Is that adding gas to the situation in your mind?

Armed people in good standing are the same as a fire line. They are what can make the fire stop. In your little world they should just run up with dixie cups of water and chuck them to the wind.

If that were you or a family member in that situation I wonder if you would actually hope nobody came up and shot this guy because you don't want to add any gas to the fire or if you would hope and pray someone did something to stop him, like shoot him in the head. Or would you just crawl into the fetal position, or hope your family member did that, and hope the fire just burns itself out before it gets to you or your family member? Fuck the people that got shot right? As long as nobody else has the firepower to stop him let's just let the death toll rise until he runs out of ammo. We sure wouldn't want to antagonize him with a counter shooter. That would be escalation.

Your entire stance and argument is stupid, illogical and poorly thought out. I suggest you work on that.

You people look at it as so simple. Bad guy starts shooting people and good guy stops him. What if bad guy starts shooting people. Several people pull their guns and go to the scene. First guy sees a guy with a gun and shoots him. Did he actually get the bad guy? If he hesitates to make sure it's the bad guy he's gonna be shot if it's the bad guy. The best thing we can do is keep guns from the bad guys. Not get more guns out there. You can't arm children. Companies are never going to let employees walk around with guns.

 

[KNB]

We should hand guns out to homeless people so that they can defend themselves. And then bus them into wealthy suburbs.

 

[Spoonman]

"stop"?

That's spelled e-s-c-a-l-a-t-e.

Which is why we don't fight fires with gasoline.

A person with a gun stopping an idiot killing people with a gun is not escalation or throwing gas on a fire. It's applying the solution to the problem.

You seem to be stuck on this adding fuel to the fire analogy. What do forest fire fighters do to stop a major fire? They employ burn lines where they use fire under a controlled manner to burn out the fuel for the fire so when the forest fire reaches that point there is no fuel to keep it going and it dies out.

They fight fire with fire. Is that escalation in your mind? Is that adding gas to the situation in your mind?

Armed people in good standing are the same as a fire line. They are what can make the fire stop. In your little world they should just run up with dixie cups of water and chuck them to the wind.

If that were you or a family member in that situation I wonder if you would actually hope nobody came up and shot this guy because you don't want to add any gas to the fire or if you would hope and pray someone did something to stop him, like shoot him in the head. Or would you just crawl into the fetal position, or hope your family member did that, and hope the fire just burns itself out before it gets to you or your family member? Fuck the people that got shot right? As long as nobody else has the firepower to stop him let's just let the death toll rise until he runs out of ammo. We sure wouldn't want to antagonize him with a counter shooter. That would be escalation.

Your entire stance and argument is stupid, illogical and poorly thought out. I suggest you work on that.

You people look at it as so simple. Bad guy starts shooting people and good guy stops him. What if bad guy starts shooting people. Several people pull their guns and go to the scene. First guy sees a guy with a gun and shoots him. Did he actually get the bad guy? If he hesitates to make sure it's the bad guy he's gonna be shot if it's the bad guy. The best thing we can do is keep guns from the bad guys. Not get more guns out there. You can't arm children. Companies are never going to let employees walk around with guns.

when you keep guns from bad guys then come talk to us. while your at it, keep drugs from people too

 

[koshergrl]

So a massacre happens at a business that doesn't allow firearms and this somehow proves that people having the ability to defend themselves doesn't stop massacres?

Sometimes I wonder why we bother trying to talk with people so clearly irrational.

No shit. In another fake thread, they're calling for drone attacks on the militia members who are hanging around Bundy. Based on politicking by some dem representative who claims he has caught wind of mean ol militia men stopping innocent people and demanding id from them, lol.

What happened is some idiot journalist was trespassing, and they got escorted off the property, and so they faked a complaint to the politician.

And these idiots think the feds should shoot based on that. They are delusional.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

"stop"?

That's spelled e-s-c-a-l-a-t-e.

Which is why we don't fight fires with gasoline.

A person with a gun stopping an idiot killing people with a gun is not escalation or throwing gas on a fire. It's applying the solution to the problem.

You seem to be stuck on this adding fuel to the fire analogy. What do forest fire fighters do to stop a major fire? They employ burn lines where they use fire under a controlled manner to burn out the fuel for the fire so when the forest fire reaches that point there is no fuel to keep it going and it dies out.

They fight fire with fire. Is that escalation in your mind? Is that adding gas to the situation in your mind?

Armed people in good standing are the same as a fire line. They are what can make the fire stop. In your little world they should just run up with dixie cups of water and chuck them to the wind.

If that were you or a family member in that situation I wonder if you would actually hope nobody came up and shot this guy because you don't want to add any gas to the fire or if you would hope and pray someone did something to stop him, like shoot him in the head. Or would you just crawl into the fetal position, or hope your family member did that, and hope the fire just burns itself out before it gets to you or your family member? Fuck the people that got shot right? As long as nobody else has the firepower to stop him let's just let the death toll rise until he runs out of ammo. We sure wouldn't want to antagonize him with a counter shooter. That would be escalation.

Your entire stance and argument is stupid, illogical and poorly thought out. I suggest you work on that.

You people look at it as so simple. Bad guy starts shooting people and good guy stops him. What if bad guy starts shooting people. Several people pull their guns and go to the scene. First guy sees a guy with a gun and shoots him. Did he actually get the bad guy? If he hesitates to make sure it's the bad guy he's gonna be shot if it's the bad guy. The best thing we can do is keep guns from the bad guys. Not get more guns out there. You can't arm children. Companies are never going to let employees walk around with guns.

We've already established the bad guy here right? According to your own post the bad guy started shooting and the good guy took him out. But in your next line you claim what if the bad guy started shooting people, he already did. It's pretty fucking easy to differentiate between the guy shooting innocent people and the guy or gal moving to get a shot on this asshole.

You seem to be confused as to what random shooters do versus people trying to stop them. It's not that hard to figure out who is shooting just to shoot and who is trying to stop that.

 

[Spoonman]

So a massacre happens at a business that doesn't allow firearms and this somehow proves that people having the ability to defend themselves doesn't stop massacres?

Sometimes I wonder why we bother trying to talk with people so clearly irrational.

No shit. In another fake thread, they're calling for drone attacks on the militia members who are hanging around Bundy. Based on politicking by some dem representative who claims he has caught wind of mean ol militia men stopping innocent people and demanding id from them, lol.

What happened is some idiot journalist was trespassing, and they got escorted off the property, and so they faked a complaint to the politician.

And these idiots think the feds should shoot based on that. They are delusional.

that is really sick. people should be outraged at that. how long before our government is nuking us?

 

[koshergrl]

If jillian and liewinger had their way, they'd be doing it to nevada now...

 

[KNB]

What's next? Inbred hilljack redneck Republicans driving from other states and forcing an armed stand-off with Federal agents to protect a criminal for reasons that the rednecks don't understand?

 

[koshergrl]

See what I mean?

yeah, I'm sure the people who live there and who are actually dealing with this garbage don't understand the issues.

They need statist people from the big cities to set them straight.

We need to stop your food supply.

 

[Brain357]

A person with a gun stopping an idiot killing people with a gun is not escalation or throwing gas on a fire. It's applying the solution to the problem.

You seem to be stuck on this adding fuel to the fire analogy. What do forest fire fighters do to stop a major fire? They employ burn lines where they use fire under a controlled manner to burn out the fuel for the fire so when the forest fire reaches that point there is no fuel to keep it going and it dies out.

They fight fire with fire. Is that escalation in your mind? Is that adding gas to the situation in your mind?

Armed people in good standing are the same as a fire line. They are what can make the fire stop. In your little world they should just run up with dixie cups of water and chuck them to the wind.

If that were you or a family member in that situation I wonder if you would actually hope nobody came up and shot this guy because you don't want to add any gas to the fire or if you would hope and pray someone did something to stop him, like shoot him in the head. Or would you just crawl into the fetal position, or hope your family member did that, and hope the fire just burns itself out before it gets to you or your family member? Fuck the people that got shot right? As long as nobody else has the firepower to stop him let's just let the death toll rise until he runs out of ammo. We sure wouldn't want to antagonize him with a counter shooter. That would be escalation.

Your entire stance and argument is stupid, illogical and poorly thought out. I suggest you work on that.

You people look at it as so simple. Bad guy starts shooting people and good guy stops him. What if bad guy starts shooting people. Several people pull their guns and go to the scene. First guy sees a guy with a gun and shoots him. Did he actually get the bad guy? If he hesitates to make sure it's the bad guy he's gonna be shot if it's the bad guy. The best thing we can do is keep guns from the bad guys. Not get more guns out there. You can't arm children. Companies are never going to let employees walk around with guns.

We've already established the bad guy here right? According to your own post the bad guy started shooting and the good guy took him out. But in your next line you claim what if the bad guy started shooting people, he already did. It's pretty fucking easy to differentiate between the guy shooting innocent people and the guy or gal moving to get a shot on this asshole.

You seem to be confused as to what random shooters do versus people trying to stop them. It's not that hard to figure out who is shooting just to shoot and who is trying to stop that.

Oh it's easy? How many times have you been in this situation? Often times the shooter is a coworker. How many examples can you give of the good guy stopping the shooter?

 

[Little-Acorn]

We should hand guns out to homeless people so that they can defend themselves. And then bus them into wealthy suburbs.

This is an example of the hysterical ranting liberals spew out when they can't win a debate. We're getting more and more of it as time goes on.

In another fake thread, they're calling for drone attacks on the militia members who are hanging around Bundy.

And these idiots think the feds should shoot based on that. They are delusional.

That's another.

 

[Spoonman]

What's next? Inbred hilljack redneck Republicans driving from other states and forcing an armed stand-off with Federal agents to protect a criminal for reasons that the rednecks don't understand?

that's the role of the liberal lawyers. they already have that market cornered

 

[Brain357]

A person with a gun stopping an idiot killing people with a gun is not escalation or throwing gas on a fire. It's applying the solution to the problem.

You seem to be stuck on this adding fuel to the fire analogy. What do forest fire fighters do to stop a major fire? They employ burn lines where they use fire under a controlled manner to burn out the fuel for the fire so when the forest fire reaches that point there is no fuel to keep it going and it dies out.

They fight fire with fire. Is that escalation in your mind? Is that adding gas to the situation in your mind?

Armed people in good standing are the same as a fire line. They are what can make the fire stop. In your little world they should just run up with dixie cups of water and chuck them to the wind.

If that were you or a family member in that situation I wonder if you would actually hope nobody came up and shot this guy because you don't want to add any gas to the fire or if you would hope and pray someone did something to stop him, like shoot him in the head. Or would you just crawl into the fetal position, or hope your family member did that, and hope the fire just burns itself out before it gets to you or your family member? Fuck the people that got shot right? As long as nobody else has the firepower to stop him let's just let the death toll rise until he runs out of ammo. We sure wouldn't want to antagonize him with a counter shooter. That would be escalation.

Your entire stance and argument is stupid, illogical and poorly thought out. I suggest you work on that.

You people look at it as so simple. Bad guy starts shooting people and good guy stops him. What if bad guy starts shooting people. Several people pull their guns and go to the scene. First guy sees a guy with a gun and shoots him. Did he actually get the bad guy? If he hesitates to make sure it's the bad guy he's gonna be shot if it's the bad guy. The best thing we can do is keep guns from the bad guys. Not get more guns out there. You can't arm children. Companies are never going to let employees walk around with guns.

when you keep guns from bad guys then come talk to us. while your at it, keep drugs from people too

Ok lets register all guns and require universal background checks.

 

[whitehall]

The shooter didn't try to escape with so many legal guns in town so he blew his brains out with a shotgun. Imagine what that looked like.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

You people look at it as so simple. Bad guy starts shooting people and good guy stops him. What if bad guy starts shooting people. Several people pull their guns and go to the scene. First guy sees a guy with a gun and shoots him. Did he actually get the bad guy? If he hesitates to make sure it's the bad guy he's gonna be shot if it's the bad guy. The best thing we can do is keep guns from the bad guys. Not get more guns out there. You can't arm children. Companies are never going to let employees walk around with guns.

We've already established the bad guy here right? According to your own post the bad guy started shooting and the good guy took him out. But in your next line you claim what if the bad guy started shooting people, he already did. It's pretty fucking easy to differentiate between the guy shooting innocent people and the guy or gal moving to get a shot on this asshole.

You seem to be confused as to what random shooters do versus people trying to stop them. It's not that hard to figure out who is shooting just to shoot and who is trying to stop that.

Oh it's easy? How many times have you been in this situation? Often times the shooter is a coworker. How many examples can you give of the good guy stopping the shooter?

Umm, every fucking time? The good guys with guns always stop the shooter. He may put a bullet in his own head but he only does so after his shooting spree is over with and there's nowhere else to go. And as the guns enclose on them they commit suicide. Not one single shooter ever committed suicide because they were just done and called it a day. It's when they are cornered and can do no more damage to innocents they take their own lives.

The good guys always stop the shooter, if not for them what would stop the shooter?

The only question I need to ask of you is how long do you want to wait for one of the good guys to show up? Maybe the CCW guy next to you can save your life, do you want him to do that or not?