So...if you were in that Nightclub in Cali. would you want a gun to stop the shooter?

[elongobardi]

Again.... you are saying that it is better that people are raped, robbed and murdered by those who are stronger than they are, or who attack with more attackers...than the innocent victim be able to save themselves or their families with a gun..... 1.1 million victims according to the Centers for Disease Control, 1.5 million according to the Department of Justice...

And that makes sense to you?

And those people who were murdered by their governments? That is all fine by you too....right?

And you guys wonder why we don't trust your judgement on the gun issue....

No, she is not. You think everything is one polar side or the other. This isn't a zero-sum game, and in fact, the stats say that more often than not, when a woman has a gun as self-defense, she doesn't use it, and the perpetrator takes it and uses it against her. Not to mention, many times it results in death rather than anything else.

And you just made that up, you moron. There is no research that shows that, in fact, studying self defense stories published in the news, the victim disarms the attacker more than they are disarmed.

And actual research... actual research, not you pulling up stories out of your ass, show that a woman with a gun is safer from rape than an unarmed woman...

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

Wrong, no I didn't.

Gun-Rights Advocates Claim Owning a Gun Makes a Woman Safer. The Research Says They're Wrong.

And there is quite the difference between resisting rape, than resisting rape by pulling out a gun.

I just took a Graduate Level course over the summer about violence against women. Hell I still have the book around here somewhere. The biggest thing to helping women avoid being a victim of violence, is if women who use self-defense to avoid being assaulted was more publicized... and no, not with guns.

You seriously need help. It is VERY unhealthy for someone to spend all day, everyday, posting about gun crime and spouting pro-NRA stats that are widely exaggerated.

I showed you actual research that shows they are wrong....

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands

...and I showed you research that is newer than your's. Did you notice the date on your shit? I bet you didn't even click on the link...

Your just to dumb to realize your wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

If I was in that nightclub in Cali, or that kindergarten in Sandyhook, I would want to go back in time and press control alt delete and amend rescind and otherwise obliterate the second amendment. Nobody NEEDS guns anymore. Just hoodlums, thugs or reprobates. And the gun manufactures. Don't leave them out. Lordy, lordy, who the hell do you think funds this mess? Get over it guys.

You should stop taking drugs. It is clouding your brain. Now you want to get rid of the second amendment. Try that and you will have your civil war you liberal assholes want


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

I would have kill the shooter in a heartbeat

No problem.

I like that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lewdog]

"Women are 100 times more likely to be fatally shot by a man with a gun than use one for self defense. Women who are suffering from domestic violence are five times more likely to be killed if there is a gun in their home, regardless of who the gun technically belongs to."

NRA's Dana Loesch Says Guns Prevent Rape But She's Wrong - Why Guns Are Bad for Women

 

[MaryL]

If I was in that nightclub in Cali, or that kindergarten in Sandyhook, I would want to go back in time and press control alt delete and amend rescind and otherwise obliterate the second amendment. Nobody NEEDS guns anymore. Just hoodlums, thugs or reprobates. And the gun manufactures. Don't leave them out. Lordy, lordy, who the hell do you think funds this mess? Get over it guys.

You should stop taking drugs. It is clouding your brain. Now you want to get rid of the second amendment. Try that and you will have your civil war you liberal assholes want


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice. Subtle, suave and sophisticated. Must be a big hit with the ladies. Yes I do want to rid of cancer, too. For the same reason.

 

[elongobardi]

Again.... you are saying that it is better that people are raped, robbed and murdered by those who are stronger than they are, or who attack with more attackers...than the innocent victim be able to save themselves or their families with a gun..... 1.1 million victims according to the Centers for Disease Control, 1.5 million according to the Department of Justice...

And that makes sense to you?

And those people who were murdered by their governments? That is all fine by you too....right?

And you guys wonder why we don't trust your judgement on the gun issue....

No, she is not. You think everything is one polar side or the other. This isn't a zero-sum game, and in fact, the stats say that more often than not, when a woman has a gun as self-defense, she doesn't use it, and the perpetrator takes it and uses it against her. Not to mention, many times it results in death rather than anything else.

And you just made that up, you moron. There is no research that shows that, in fact, studying self defense stories published in the news, the victim disarms the attacker more than they are disarmed.

And actual research... actual research, not you pulling up stories out of your ass, show that a woman with a gun is safer from rape than an unarmed woman...

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

Wrong, no I didn't.

Gun-Rights Advocates Claim Owning a Gun Makes a Woman Safer. The Research Says They're Wrong.

And there is quite the difference between resisting rape, than resisting rape by pulling out a gun.

I just took a Graduate Level course over the summer about violence against women. Hell I still have the book around here somewhere. The biggest thing to helping women avoid being a victim of violence, is if women who use self-defense to avoid being assaulted was more publicized... and no, not with guns.

You seriously need help. It is VERY unhealthy for someone to spend all day, everyday, posting about gun crime and spouting pro-NRA stats that are widely exaggerated.

Ahhh... I see...the Gun Violence Archive cited in The Trace website...... you used two really dumb sources, I used actual research papers....

The Trace cites the National Crime Victimization Survey....which is a victim survey, not a gun self defense research group, or a rape research group....they do not ask the individual if they used a gun for self defense, in fact, the word gun isn't even in their survey....

They can't even get the number of rapes correct...

National Crime Victimization Survey A new report finds that the Justice Department has been undercounting instances of rape and sexual assault.

How helpful, then, that the Justice Department asked the National Research Council (part of the National Academies, which also includes the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine) to study how successfully the federal government measures rape. The answer has just arrived, in a report out Tuesday with the headline from the press release: “The National Crime Victimization Survey Is Likely Undercounting Rape and Sexual Assault.” We’re not talking about small fractions—we’re talking about the kind of potentially massive underestimate that the military and the Justice Department have warned about for years—and that could be throwing a wrench into the effort to do the most effective type of rape prevention.....

But here are the flaws that call the nice-sounding stats into doubt: The NCVS is designed to measure all kinds of crime victimization. The questions it poses about sexual violence are embedded among questions that ask about lots of other types of crime. For example:

----------
There is, in fact, an existing survey that has many of the attributes the NCVS currently lacks. It’s administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and it’s called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. (NISVS is the acronym. Apologies for the alphabet soup.)

NISVS “represents the public health perspective,” as Tuesday’s report puts it, and it asks questions about specific behavior, including whether the survey-taker was unable to consent to sex because he or she had been drinking or taking drugs.

NISVS was first conducted in 2010, so it doesn’t go back in time the way the NCVS numbers do. But here’s the startling direct comparison between the two measures: NISVS counted 1.27 million total sexual acts of forced penetration for women over the past year (including completed, attempted, and alcohol or drug facilitated).

NCVS counted only 188,380 for rape and sexual assault. And the FBI, which collects its data from local law enforcement, and so only counts rapes and attempted rapes that have been reported as crimes, totaled only 85,593 for 2010.

I used a site the referenced SEVERAL articles using NCVS data newer than your's.

NCVS stands for National Crime Victim Survey... and it often gets higher reports of sexual assault because it is anonymous survey, and sexual assault on women is one of the most under-reported crimes in the United States.

Go cry to someone else. Your wrong but like most liberals you can’t handle being wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lewdog]

No, she is not. You think everything is one polar side or the other. This isn't a zero-sum game, and in fact, the stats say that more often than not, when a woman has a gun as self-defense, she doesn't use it, and the perpetrator takes it and uses it against her. Not to mention, many times it results in death rather than anything else.

And you just made that up, you moron. There is no research that shows that, in fact, studying self defense stories published in the news, the victim disarms the attacker more than they are disarmed.

And actual research... actual research, not you pulling up stories out of your ass, show that a woman with a gun is safer from rape than an unarmed woman...

Guns Effective Defense Against Rape


However, most recent studies with improved methodology are consistently showing that the more forceful the resistance, the lower the risk of a completed rape, with no increase in physical injury. Sarah Ullman's original research (Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 1998) and critical review of past studies (Criminal Justice and Behavior, 1997) are especially valuable in solidifying this conclusion.

I wish to single out one particular subtype of physical resistance: Use of a weapon, and especially a firearm, is statistically a woman's best means of resistance, greatly enhancing her odds of escaping both rape and injury, compared to any other strategy of physical or verbal resistance. This conclusion is drawn from four types of information.

First, a 1989 study (Furby, Journal of Interpersonal Violence) found that both male and female survey respondents judged a gun to be the most effective means that a potential rape victim could use to fend off the assault. Rape "experts" considered it a close second, after eye-gouging.

Second, raw data from the 1979-1985 installments of the Justice Department's annual National Crime Victim Survey show that when a woman resists a stranger rape with a gun, the probability of completion was 0.1 percent and of victim injury 0.0 percent, compared to 31 percent and 40 percent, respectively, for all stranger rapes (Kleck, Social Problems, 1990).

Third, a recent paper (Southwick, Journal of Criminal Justice, 2000) analyzed victim resistance to violent crimes generally, with robbery, aggravated assault and rape considered together. Women who resisted with a gun were 2.5 times more likely to escape without injury than those who did not resist and 4 times more likely to escape uninjured than those who resisted with any means other than a gun. Similarly, their property losses in a robbery were reduced more than six-fold and almost three-fold, respectively, compared to the other categories of resistance strategy.

Fourth, we have two studies in the last 20 years that directly address the outcomes of women who resist attempted rape with a weapon. (Lizotte, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 1986; Kleck, Social Problems, 1990.) The former concludes,"Further, women who resist rape with a gun or knife dramatically decrease their probability of completion." (Lizotte did not analyze victim injuries apart from the rape itself.) The latter concludes that "resistance with a gun or knife is the most effective form of resistance for preventing completion of a rape"; this is accomplished "without creating any significant additional risk of other injury."

The best conclusion from available scientific data, then, is when avoidance of rape has failed and one must choose between being raped and resisting, a woman's best option is to resist with a gun in her hands.

Wrong, no I didn't.

Gun-Rights Advocates Claim Owning a Gun Makes a Woman Safer. The Research Says They're Wrong.

And there is quite the difference between resisting rape, than resisting rape by pulling out a gun.

I just took a Graduate Level course over the summer about violence against women. Hell I still have the book around here somewhere. The biggest thing to helping women avoid being a victim of violence, is if women who use self-defense to avoid being assaulted was more publicized... and no, not with guns.

You seriously need help. It is VERY unhealthy for someone to spend all day, everyday, posting about gun crime and spouting pro-NRA stats that are widely exaggerated.

Ahhh... I see...the Gun Violence Archive cited in The Trace website...... you used two really dumb sources, I used actual research papers....

The Trace cites the National Crime Victimization Survey....which is a victim survey, not a gun self defense research group, or a rape research group....they do not ask the individual if they used a gun for self defense, in fact, the word gun isn't even in their survey....

They can't even get the number of rapes correct...

National Crime Victimization Survey A new report finds that the Justice Department has been undercounting instances of rape and sexual assault.

How helpful, then, that the Justice Department asked the National Research Council (part of the National Academies, which also includes the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine) to study how successfully the federal government measures rape. The answer has just arrived, in a report out Tuesday with the headline from the press release: “The National Crime Victimization Survey Is Likely Undercounting Rape and Sexual Assault.” We’re not talking about small fractions—we’re talking about the kind of potentially massive underestimate that the military and the Justice Department have warned about for years—and that could be throwing a wrench into the effort to do the most effective type of rape prevention.....

But here are the flaws that call the nice-sounding stats into doubt: The NCVS is designed to measure all kinds of crime victimization. The questions it poses about sexual violence are embedded among questions that ask about lots of other types of crime. For example:

----------
There is, in fact, an existing survey that has many of the attributes the NCVS currently lacks. It’s administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and it’s called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. (NISVS is the acronym. Apologies for the alphabet soup.)

NISVS “represents the public health perspective,” as Tuesday’s report puts it, and it asks questions about specific behavior, including whether the survey-taker was unable to consent to sex because he or she had been drinking or taking drugs.

NISVS was first conducted in 2010, so it doesn’t go back in time the way the NCVS numbers do. But here’s the startling direct comparison between the two measures: NISVS counted 1.27 million total sexual acts of forced penetration for women over the past year (including completed, attempted, and alcohol or drug facilitated).

NCVS counted only 188,380 for rape and sexual assault. And the FBI, which collects its data from local law enforcement, and so only counts rapes and attempted rapes that have been reported as crimes, totaled only 85,593 for 2010.

I used a site the referenced SEVERAL articles using NCVS data newer than your's.

NCVS stands for National Crime Victim Survey... and it often gets higher reports of sexual assault because it is anonymous survey, and sexual assault on women is one of the most under-reported crimes in the United States.

Go cry to someone else. Your wrong but like most liberals you can’t handle being wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"You're"

 

[buttercup]

I no touch feely liberal. Nope far from it. I am a hard headed realist. When I see a problem , bingo bango, I don't shy away from fixing it. When I have a leaky faucet or idiot light on my car, I address it head on and fix it right away. I am sure you do, too. Gun violence is one of those things too. We don't need guns in society anymore. And it's pretty obvious they are the problem. People. Well, people never change. You are always going to have spoilers and trolls. Take away some of their toys, and they will find something else. But Guns? Really?

But that’s just it. Do you really think criminals are going to hand over their “toys”? What do you want to do, send government jackbooted thugs into everyone’s houses searching and confiscating weapons? Do you want to live in a totalitarian police state? The world you want is not going to happen (at least not in this age, but that’s a different topic) and if you try to make it happen, the only people armed will be criminals and the corrupt government. Everyone else will be sitting ducks. That is a recipe for disaster, as history has shown time and time again.

Besides, many of these high profile mass shootings are false flags, purposely designed to create your very reaction. You are being manipulated, do not fall for it.

 

[Andylusion]

"Women are 100 times more likely to be fatally shot by a man with a gun than use one for self defense. Women who are suffering from domestic violence are five times more likely to be killed if there is a gun in their home, regardless of who the gun technically belongs to."

NRA's Dana Loesch Says Guns Prevent Rape But She's Wrong - Why Guns Are Bad for Women

Oh bull crap.

Yeah, they are 100 times more likely to be fatally shot by a man, than using one in self defense, because women are less likely to own, use, or defend themselves with a gun.

Having a gun in your home, doens't help, if you don't use it.

I had a female friend, who was beaten by her husband. The first thing she did was take his gun away, keep it for herself, and was willing to shoot him. The beatings stopped.

I had another, long time ago, that her husband would beat her constantly. After she left, he got with another women to beat her, and she bought a gun and shot him with it. My friend admitted that she was too scared to do what the other women did. That's why women are more likely to be killed, than defending themselves, because they are too scared to defend themselves.

If they do.... then they do. Duh. Idiotic left-wing crap. Dana Loesch is dead on right.

 

[depotoo]

Oh, boy. You have never been confronted by someone wanting to kill you, have you?

I would not like a gun to help me, Sam I am. I would not like that at all. I would rather not have anyone have a gun at all, Sam I am. Nope, nada. Nyet. Negatori senori. Nill. Zed , goose eggs. This is a totally self defeating argument. I have a vicious saber-toothed weasel. So you have to go out and get a bigger venomous guinea pig. It's like a mini arms race. It's completely artificial. That is the road we are going down. Lets be Americans and human beings and end this silly vicious cycle.

Again.... you are saying that it is better that people are raped, robbed and murdered by those who are stronger than they are, or who attack with more attackers...than the innocent victim be able to save themselves or their families with a gun..... 1.1 million victims according to the Centers for Disease Control, 1.5 million according to the Department of Justice...

And that makes sense to you?

And those people who were murdered by their governments? That is all fine by you too....right?

And you guys wonder why we don't trust your judgement on the gun issue....

Nope not saying that at all. You make this sound like a either/or proposition. We don't need firearms anymore. we just don't need firearms anymore. They are a throwback and a anachronism.

 

[elongobardi]

I no touch feely liberal. Nope far from it. I am a hard headed realist. When I see a problem , bingo bango, I don't shy away from fixing it. When I have a leaky faucet or idiot light on my car, I address it head on and fix it right away. I am sure you do, too. Gun violence is one of those things too. We don't need guns in society anymore. And it's pretty obvious they are the problem. People. Well, people never change. You are always going to have spoilers and trolls. Take away some of their toys, and they will find something else. But Guns? Really?

But that’s just it. Do you really think criminals are going to hand over their “toys”? What do you want to do, send government jackbooted thugs into everyone’s houses searching and confiscating weapons? Do you want to live in a totalitarian police state? The world you want is not going to happen (at least not in this age, but that’s a different topic) and if you try to make it happen, the only people armed will be criminals and the corrupt government. Everyone else will be sitting ducks. That is a recipe for disaster, as history has shown time and time again.

Besides, many of these high profile mass shootings are false flags, purposely designed to create your very reaction. You are being manipulated, do not fall for it.

Criminals don’t get there guns legally so know one knows they have it and then they pass it on to one of there buddies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lewdog]

I no touch feely liberal. Nope far from it. I am a hard headed realist. When I see a problem , bingo bango, I don't shy away from fixing it. When I have a leaky faucet or idiot light on my car, I address it head on and fix it right away. I am sure you do, too. Gun violence is one of those things too. We don't need guns in society anymore. And it's pretty obvious they are the problem. People. Well, people never change. You are always going to have spoilers and trolls. Take away some of their toys, and they will find something else. But Guns? Really?

But that’s just it. Do you really think criminals are going to hand over their “toys”? What do you want to do, send government jackbooted thugs into everyone’s houses searching and confiscating weapons? Do you want to live in a totalitarian police state? The world you want is not going to happen (at least not in this age, but that’s a different topic) and if you try to make it happen, the only people armed will be criminals and the corrupt government. Everyone else will be sitting ducks. That is a recipe for disaster, as history has shown time and time again.

Besides, many of these high profile mass shootings are false flags, purposely designed to create your very reaction. You are being manipulated, do not fall for it.

Criminals don’t get there guns legally so know one knows they have it and then they pass it on to one of there buddies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"No one"

 

[Aurora Woman]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

 

[Lewdog]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

Not to mention it is a crowded club, dark lights, people running for cover, and the guy threw smoke bombs. What's the chances of shooting the gunman and not someone who just happens to be running for cover?

Or... when the cops were called out because he was acting like a nut, they should have taken his guns for his safety and that of the public. Guess what, no mass shooting.

 

[leftwinger]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

Get enough Good guys-gals with guns maybe some of these shooters will be stopped? Not just lay down on the floor? Maybe a guy in the back will fire back and at least distract the shooter.

Anything is better than a turkey shoot.

 

[Lewdog]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

Get enough Good guys-gals with guns maybe some of these shooters will be stopped? Not just lay down on the floor? Maybe a guy in the back will fire back and at least distract the shooter.

Anything is better than a turkey shoot.

Maybe? In the Parkland shooting we saw a 20+ year vet too scared to enter. In this shooting we saw a 29 year old vet go in and get shot and killed. These are people with advanced training with firearms.

 

[elongobardi]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

Bullshit. Just because your a chicken shit doesn’t mean we are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elongobardi]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

Get enough Good guys-gals with guns maybe some of these shooters will be stopped? Not just lay down on the floor? Maybe a guy in the back will fire back and at least distract the shooter.

Anything is better than a turkey shoot.

Maybe? In the Parkland shooting we saw a 20+ year vet too scared to enter. In this shooting we saw a 29 year old vet go in and get shot and killed. These are people with advanced training with firearms.

Parkland should have never happened. There was only one armed cop working that massive school. They had security but they didn’t have guns. FBI, Sheriff’s Dept, the shooters family, the school and the kids in the school dropped the ball. They all fucked up and that’s why it happened. There were 4 cops outside while shots were being fired. They are chicken shit pieces of garbage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[leftwinger]

Another gun free zone, and another question for our anti-gunners....if you were in that NightClub when the shooter came in.....violating the gun control laws of California, the gun free zone, and the laws against murder.....

Would you want a gun to save your life with? How about to save your wife, or other family members?

That police officer lost his life in that night club. He was obviously armed, well-trained.... and yet he is dead.

Let's pretend we're all in that night club. There's you, an obvious gun fan. There's me, who loathes guns yet I unfortunately own several because of inheritance, and know how to shoot them... and am a good shot. I'm there just having fun but because I'm a female and concerned about being assaulted while out having fun drinking and stuff, I have my .357 in my purse. As always, I have my purse draped over my chair. Music is throbbing, ppl are having fun, I'm just hanging with my buds and drinking. OH CRAP. The Shooter comes in blazing. Suddenly chairs are overturned, ppl are rushing around in all directions, there's screaming and chaos. It's dark. There are flashing lights. I can't see shit except for the table I dived under. I suspect that the shooter is coming closer to my location. My choice is now to stay low, or play hero, find my gun in my purse, and pop up and cap him. I'm a good shot... but would my survival instinct tell me to save others by shooting him? Probably not. And in almost all mass-shooting events in this country, armed citizens have felt exactly the same and failed to take out the murderer.

Get enough Good guys-gals with guns maybe some of these shooters will be stopped? Not just lay down on the floor? Maybe a guy in the back will fire back and at least distract the shooter.

Anything is better than a turkey shoot.

Maybe? In the Parkland shooting we saw a 20+ year vet too scared to enter. In this shooting we saw a 29 year old vet go in and get shot and killed. These are people with advanced training with firearms.

Parkland should have never happened. There was only one armed cop working that massive school. They had security but they didn’t have guns. FBI, Sheriff’s Dept, the shooters family, the school and the kids in the school dropped the ball. They all fucked up and that’s why it happened. There were 4 cops outside while shots were being fired. They are chicken shit pieces of garbage.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most shooters are known to authorities. Some like Fort Hood, Pulse nightclub are ignored due to PC. They don't stop many? On mental drugs too? Or skipping doses? Early release?

It could be they are encouraged to go shoot to enable gun control incrementally.

 

[WillMunny]

Of course I'd want a gun. Ideally, I'd want one of those Star Trek phasers so I could simply vaporize the motherfucker where he stood in a flare of energy.