The NRA Said "The Only Way To Stop A Bad Guy With A Gun,..

is a good guy with a gun"

It turns out Alexis was armed only with a shotgun. He was able to take down those "good guys with guns" in the building to then use their handguns to kill more people.

What will LaPierre and the gun-nutters say now? :eusa_think:

they will say its the libs fault cause ther didn't pass better gun
laws
 
But that's the problem. The bad guy is ALWAYS going to have the element of surprise.

It's why we have 11,101 gun murders and only 200 self-defense homicides.

Still not a reason to deny me the right to own a firearm. Keep trying Joebutthurt.

No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.



BULL FUCKING SHIT!!

Now judging by just one of your posts I'll give YOU the benefit of the doubt, that you're not interested in complete disarmament, but the people feeding the bed wetting parrots the bullshit they're regurgitating are obviously desperate to confiscate every privately owned weapon they can get their blood soaked hands on.

You might not be a criminally insane authortarian sociopath, but you're an idiot if you think a law will keep assholes like Alexis from getting a gun. He used a shotgun in this case to procure more weapons. Would it be better if he clubbed to death a security guard? You can not stop idiots like these until they act, and if you've disarmed everyone else no one can respond until it's too late.
 
Still not a reason to deny me the right to own a firearm. Keep trying Joebutthurt.

No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.

Then we need to revise the HIPAA laws.

Agreed, whatever it takes to keep guns out of the hands of whackjobs. No one who is a potential danger to others has a "right to privacy" about firearms in my opinion. Too many innocent people have died because of it. The right to privacy stops when it infringes on the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of others.
 
Apparently you are unfamiliar with a concept known as "the element of surprise..."

True, but technically the guys with the guns are not supposed to allow anyone to surprise them because that is what they are paid to do and why they are given guns in the first place.

That doesn't mean that it can't happen but it should never have been possible for a single person to get the drop on all of them.

Most pilots are supposed to be able to land an airplane, sometimes they dont. The problem with security at these places is it becomes pro forma, just another thing you have to do every day, day in, day out. The concept of an actual threat occuring becomes a distant thought. The guard sees his job as basically checking ID's and searching the occasional bag, and looses focus on the fact that someone might actually pull a gun out and do something bad.

Yup, that is where training comes in. Cops do it and so do active duty members of the military. Unless we hold armed guards to the same standards the trite statement about a "good guy with a gun" is meaningless. It has to be a "fully trained and alert good guy with a gun" for it to be effective.
 
True, but technically the guys with the guns are not supposed to allow anyone to surprise them because that is what they are paid to do and why they are given guns in the first place.

That doesn't mean that it can't happen but it should never have been possible for a single person to get the drop on all of them.

Most pilots are supposed to be able to land an airplane, sometimes they dont. The problem with security at these places is it becomes pro forma, just another thing you have to do every day, day in, day out. The concept of an actual threat occuring becomes a distant thought. The guard sees his job as basically checking ID's and searching the occasional bag, and looses focus on the fact that someone might actually pull a gun out and do something bad.

Yup, that is where training comes in. Cops do it and so do active duty members of the military. Unless we hold armed guards to the same standards the trite statement about a "good guy with a gun" is meaningless. It has to be a "fully trained and alert good guy with a gun" for it to be effective.

And there will still be failures of the system. Nothing is risk or failure free, despite what people may believe.

The key is to make failure only possible after multiple steps have occured. Maybe someone with a CCW in the building COULD have stopped this asshole before he finished his rampage, but we won't know because people were banned from being armed, and thus dependent on the guard doing his job perfectly.
 
But that's the problem. The bad guy is ALWAYS going to have the element of surprise.

It's why we have 11,101 gun murders and only 200 self-defense homicides.

Still not a reason to deny me the right to own a firearm. Keep trying Joebutthurt.

No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.


It's been asked over and over, but I'll ask again.

Please present your laws and policies that would have prevented the DC incident.
 
True, but technically the guys with the guns are not supposed to allow anyone to surprise them because that is what they are paid to do and why they are given guns in the first place.

That doesn't mean that it can't happen but it should never have been possible for a single person to get the drop on all of them.

Most pilots are supposed to be able to land an airplane, sometimes they dont. The problem with security at these places is it becomes pro forma, just another thing you have to do every day, day in, day out. The concept of an actual threat occuring becomes a distant thought. The guard sees his job as basically checking ID's and searching the occasional bag, and looses focus on the fact that someone might actually pull a gun out and do something bad.

Yup, that is where training comes in. Cops do it and so do active duty members of the military. Unless we hold armed guards to the same standards the trite statement about a "good guy with a gun" is meaningless. It has to be a "fully trained and alert good guy with a gun" for it to be effective.

Soldiers in combat theater get complacent. They have to be rotated frequently to keep from falling into a lull. On security patrols I've seen guys sleeping in their turrets behind machine guns on MSR Tampa. No matter how alert you are, if you don't see they guy with a plan before he starts an attack you're severely disadvantaged.

Security should not be limited to a couple fat guys near the front door behind a metal detector. If just a few people in that building had their CCW on them, a lot of lives could have been saved.
 
Apparently you are unfamiliar with a concept known as "the element of surprise..."

True, but technically the guys with the guns are not supposed to allow anyone to surprise them because that is what they are paid to do and why they are given guns in the first place.

That doesn't mean that it can't happen but it should never have been possible for a single person to get the drop on all of them.

Most pilots are supposed to be able to land an airplane, sometimes they dont. The problem with security at these places is it becomes pro forma, just another thing you have to do every day, day in, day out. The concept of an actual threat occuring becomes a distant thought. The guard sees his job as basically checking ID's and searching the occasional bag, and looses focus on the fact that someone might actually pull a gun out and do something bad.


Good God, a gun nutter has admitted that the NRA plan of armed guards in schools would be just as ineffective as armed guards at the Naval Yards.

Did you really mean to be that honest?

Probably be better to put the guards in a bullet proof bunker and give em a cell phone to call the police.

Or is it the goal of the NRA and other gun nutters that EVERYONE I America should be carrying a weapon? And I mean everyone. We would be so SAFE. Right nutters?
 
concealed carry by an armed citizenry prevents

the element of a shooter taking out an armed individual by surprise

in this case it was easy for the shooter to pick out the armed guy walk up to him pull his shotgun out

put it to the temple of the guards head and fire
 
Still not a reason to deny me the right to own a firearm. Keep trying Joebutthurt.

No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.


It's been asked over and over, but I'll ask again.

Please present your laws and policies that would have prevented the DC incident.

The left has made their intentions quite clear. Incrimental gun control leading to confiscation.

Everytime their ideas fail, and they always do regardless of the issue, they want to keep going in the collectivist authortarian direction. They never roll back the stupid, they always double down.
 
No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.

Then we need to revise the HIPAA laws.

Agreed, whatever it takes to keep guns out of the hands of whackjobs. No one who is a potential danger to others has a "right to privacy" about firearms in my opinion. Too many innocent people have died because of it. The right to privacy stops when it infringes on the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of others.

Then the first thing we need to do is to certify who the whack jobs are.

I doubt you're old enough to remember but the DISGUSTING FILTH in the LSM and Hollywood (same thing) got all up in arms a few decades ago about people being incorrectly and arbitrarily put away for being nuts.

I can understand it. Especially when you consider that women made up a significant, and I'm talking around 90% or more, of the patients in Asylums.

Some of them were just having a bad time with hormonal issues and some were put there by dirtbag husbands and some were just whacko.

In any case, that was the impetus. Had it been 90% men, there would have never been a big deal about it (Men make up 95% of Prison Inmates and nobody cares).

So anyway, to get someone certified as nuts today is a long and hard process.

And even if you do, they'll keep them for 24 hours under observation and release them.

Most of these nutbags have been through the system so many times that they know exactly what to say to get released.

Plus the fact that State Facilities are under-funded and under-manned.

Then there's the problem with scumbag lawyers.

Can you imagine the lawsuits that would happen if a Doctor certifies somebody as nuts and he goes and gets a fucking dirtbag lawyer?

I can hear the commercials now, "Hah, I'm Dewey Cheatum of Dewey Cheatum and Howe. If you've been thrown in a padded room because a Doctor certified you as nuts, call us at 1-800-MONEYGRUBBINBITCHES. There is not fee unless we cheat, er, er, recover damages"

We need the State to take over certifying these nut jobs.

Will they do it?

No, they won't.

And there you have it, folks. Some people on the left may mean well :lmao: but even those very few who honestly do have no idea how badly this society is fucked up and how little chance there is of fixing it.

At least with dimocraps in office. With dimocraps in office, there's NO chance of fixing our society.

Ever
 
Most pilots are supposed to be able to land an airplane, sometimes they dont. The problem with security at these places is it becomes pro forma, just another thing you have to do every day, day in, day out. The concept of an actual threat occuring becomes a distant thought. The guard sees his job as basically checking ID's and searching the occasional bag, and looses focus on the fact that someone might actually pull a gun out and do something bad.

Yup, that is where training comes in. Cops do it and so do active duty members of the military. Unless we hold armed guards to the same standards the trite statement about a "good guy with a gun" is meaningless. It has to be a "fully trained and alert good guy with a gun" for it to be effective.

And there will still be failures of the system. Nothing is risk or failure free, despite what people may believe.

The key is to make failure only possible after multiple steps have occured. Maybe someone with a CCW in the building COULD have stopped this asshole before he finished his rampage, but we won't know because people were banned from being armed, and thus dependent on the guard doing his job perfectly.

Yup, nothing is foolproof. We need multi layered systems to be effective.
 
never let a tragedy or dancing on the graves of the dead go to waste, for their hate agenda ON the NRA...

are these the most pathetic shameless people ever?
no you republicans are the most pathetic shameless people ever ...

why is it when we libs point out a situation where there are armed guards to protect people, where they ended up getting killed themselves, and the guards were killed by the gunman using their guns... that they're supposed to protect us with ... why is it now we are the bad guys for pointing it out... we on the left said we need to have all felons, along with the mentally ill on a data vase ... we libs said, "that all guns sold in the united states must go through this data base before you as a gun shop owner, or a gun show, or a private individual can sell a person a gun, they have to see if you are on this data base" ... that's the law we wanted on the books... but you republicans squealed "they're taking our guns away from us ... they're haters of gun owners and the NRA ... just because we don't want regulations on guns, where these librons are making it harder for us to buy a gun ... mean while another 12 die cause of your ignorance here ... if anyone is the shameless ones here its you republicans....
 
Still not a reason to deny me the right to own a firearm. Keep trying Joebutthurt.

No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.


It's been asked over and over, but I'll ask again.

Please present your laws and policies that would have prevented the DC incident.

Confiscation.

It works every time
 
True, but technically the guys with the guns are not supposed to allow anyone to surprise them because that is what they are paid to do and why they are given guns in the first place.

That doesn't mean that it can't happen but it should never have been possible for a single person to get the drop on all of them.

Most pilots are supposed to be able to land an airplane, sometimes they dont. The problem with security at these places is it becomes pro forma, just another thing you have to do every day, day in, day out. The concept of an actual threat occuring becomes a distant thought. The guard sees his job as basically checking ID's and searching the occasional bag, and looses focus on the fact that someone might actually pull a gun out and do something bad.


Good God, a gun nutter has admitted that the NRA plan of armed guards in schools would be just as ineffective as armed guards at the Naval Yards.

Did you really mean to be that honest?

Probably be better to put the guards in a bullet proof bunker and give em a cell phone to call the police.

Or is it the goal of the NRA and other gun nutters that EVERYONE I America should be carrying a weapon? And I mean everyone. We would be so SAFE. Right nutters?

The armed guard in a school gives the CHANCE of ending a shooting spree quicker. The shooter has to take into account taking out the guard, giving him another step where something can go wrong. Again, it depends on the guard being vigilant, but everything depends on the person on the job being vigilant.

Armed guards at schools could be an effective deterrent against some shooters, who choose loactions based on them KNOWING there are no armed people there, thus giving them the time to do what they want to do.

Here the shooter had a specific target, however he knew that once he popped the bubble of the armed perimeter then it was open season.
 
Still not a reason to deny me the right to own a firearm. Keep trying Joebutthurt.

No one wants to deny you the right to own a firearm. What We the People need to do instead is make sure that whackjobs like Alexis don't have access to guns.


It's been asked over and over, but I'll ask again.

Please present your laws and policies that would have prevented the DC incident.

Already done so in other posts but to summarize;

The "good guys with guns" need regular proficiency training.
HIPAA laws need revising so that there is no right to privacy if you are being treated for mental disorders that make you a danger to others.
If you need armed security then it needs to be done properly with redundant layers.
 
is a good guy with a gun"

It turns out Alexis was armed only with a shotgun. He was able to take down those "good guys with guns" in the building to then use their handguns to kill more people.

What will LaPierre and the gun-nutters say now? :eusa_think:

That can't be right. The shipyard was a gun free zone, as is all of the District of Columbia. A Gun Free Zone. They have signs and everything!

There were armed guards, which he obtained the pistol from. Nice job lying again,..

well they're repub-lie-tards ...what can one expect ... the truth????
BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
that will never happen
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top