Why Was No One Armed & Shooting Back In El Paso WalMart ?

[RealDave]

Oh fuck you & your "define assault rifle" bullshit.

You sassdfuicks think you are gun experts? Really?

We had an assault rifle ban, they were defined there./ We all know what kind of guns we are talking about so shove this stupid asinine argument up your ass.

You do realize that when they attempt to buy or carry a banned gun, they can be arrested before a shot is fired???

Your use of the word "we" is faulty, since you obviously have no idea what the definition of an "assault type rifle" (your words, not mine) is. You want to ban something, and you don't even know WHAT you're banning. Maybe you should stick to knitting. This thread might be out of your league.

Liberals know nothing about guns.

And you do realize that when they attempt to buy a gun on the street, they can't be arrested, right ?

So you insist to continue with the stupid argument.

We had a law called Assault Rifle Ban What was in it????. There were definitions.

I clearly said assault type weapons just to shit you assfucks up about " OMG OMG OMG the definition OMG OMG OMG"

I want to ban semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

There ya go. Is that good enough? Or will you show me another picture of the Mini?

How about you stfu about your silly definition & address the problem that is killing innocent people, women children?

How about that.

 

[Kilroy2]

Evidently, it did not stop the shooter. lmao He went after what he was after, Mexicans shopping for their kids' school supplies and many were in the WalMart crossed over just to shop.

You're not getting this, and I trust a lot of others aren't either. OF COURSE, it didn't stop the shooter. Quite the contrary, it was an INVITATION to the shooter to come in and shoot. A big green light, telling him that everyone in the mall will be UNARMED EXCEPT HIM.

THIS is why we need to abolish gun free zones, and that's what the president and everyone in this thread should be talking about.

With respect to background checks, while I was hearing Trump talking about them on the radio just a few minutes ago, ABC News was carrying a special report with George Stephanopolous, saying that the president said nothing about background checks.

But background checks are one of the biggest red herrings ever in American politics. When a nutjob shooter is determined enough to go shoot up a mall, you can bet he'll be determined enough to obtain the guns he wants, no matter what the stores are doing. Stores aren't the only ones who sell guns.

Background checks are a legitimate issue, and they should exist (as 2 Republicans sponsored a bill for them ,which was defeated by Democrats), but the far bigger issue is gun free zones, where almost all the mass shootings are occuring.

Gun zones do not stop people from carrying concealed weapons.

There is no body searches or metal detectors at these locations

If anyone carries they are not going to stop carrying because of a sign

Now if shit happens and there are shots fired , he or she may get fined.

if the gun is seen then they may ask that person to leave

The idea that this was a soft target does not take into account that the police will be there real soon and video surveillance is prominent. A soft target is standing on a bridge and shooting away.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

the right to bear arms. The right to be armed. Here is a .22 single shit rifle,, you are now armed. Amendment satisfied.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

using the complete sentence the amendment has nothing to do private gun ownership in the US unless your in the Militia and you have been called on to support the military

and there lies the problem when people pick and choose words that support their position and ignore anything else even when it is not part of the sentence.

Politics of the government either allows you have private guns or they don't

SCOTUS disagrees.

The Supreme Court Has Strengthened Gun Rights and Limited Gun Control - NYTimes.com

Limited gun control. Ban the assault type rifles now.

Why we had 17 mass shootings during the Clinton assault weapon ban
And if by chance of a merical hoe would you stop people from making AR's and AK's?

Body counts?

These stats depend on what you call a mass shooting.

I saw a list where it looked at attacks & it listed 25 under the ten year ban with 80 deaths.

The rest of the 2000's (6 years) had 24 attacks with 200 kills.

the point we had mass shootings during an assault weapon ban
A ban will not work.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

My right is not up to what you deem as acceptable

You're right, it's what the Gov't deems necessary.

As limited by the Tenth Amendment.

And limited by the second amendment.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I can guarantee that nobody says oh I have to leave my gun in the car because I can't go in this store because of the sign

Of course they leave their guns in their car 90% of the time. Are you an idiot? My Gawd!

So if you have a gun you are not worried What the sign says because nobody will be searching you for a gun nor do you have to go thru a metal detector

One doesn't need an X-Ray machine because weapons naturally form an imprint through clothing,

Plus after carrying concealed yourself, you know what to look for and the mall security will have people who can pick out gun carriers as well.

Of course if shit happens and you are involved in a shooting then they may fine you

roflmao, do you h ave any idea what it means to be convicted of a felony trespass?

Apparently you don't.

 

[Leo123]

The left in this country has succeeded in scaring law abiding American citizens that 'guns are bad.' Anyone who has the temerity to open-carry will be harassed not only by law enforcement but by loony leftist gun-grabbers. If that were not the case and guns were a part of everyday life being worn conspicuously, these crazy mass murderers would be more likely to be put down as soon as they brandished. Even if the perp is aiming and looking at one person, there would be plenty law abiding citizens with loaded guns that can take advantage and ventilate the asshole.

 

[Leo123]

I can guarantee that nobody says oh I have to leave my gun in the car because I can't go in this store because of the sign

Of course they leave their guns in their car 90% of the time. Are you an idiot? My Gawd!

So if you have a gun you are not worried What the sign says because nobody will be searching you for a gun nor do you have to go thru a metal detector

One doesn't need an X-Ray machine because weapons naturally form an imprint through clothing,

Plus after carrying concealed yourself, you know what to look for and the mall security will have people who can pick out gun carriers as well.

Of course if shit happens and you are involved in a shooting then they may fine you

roflmao, do you h ave any idea what it means to be convicted of a felony trespass?

Apparently you don't.

Yes, they leave their guns in the car because the left in this country has succeeded in making a large portion of the American population that 'guns are bad.' The left and Democrats bear full responsibility for these mass shootings that could have probably been stopped in a fraction of a second if most people were armed. I feel like we are at war with gun-grabbers who have actually supported these shootings by disarming the American public. Democrats are 100% responsible for putting anger and hate America propaganda into the heads of these mentally ill young men as well.

 

[protectionist]

I haven't shot any Keltec guns. But Glock, Springfield, Beretta, and a host of other brands lock the slide back when the last round is fired.

The Walmart in El Paso was crowded with people. But there is a significant amount of space up front.

As for the .380 pocket pistol you carry, the ballistics for the .380 show the heaviest energy is around 300 ft lbs at the muzzle with a 90 gr bullet. Compare that to the energy from the AK, and you will see a significant difference in how hard the bullet hits. He can shoot thru the display you are hiding behind.

And you claim you will not miss when shooting 50 feet or a little more?

I've already conceded that AK47are powerful rifles, and I made no mention of displays (your word not mine). I'm not sure what I would hide behind , if anything at all. I did mention coming up to the shooter from behind, and quickly (1 second) shooting him.

As I said before, I think your comments are more a grudge against me, than anything you think about mass shootings. I see you replying more to me than anyone else here. Maybe you ought to just chill a little bit.

As far as the power of the .380, how strong it is vs an AK47, isn't too important. All that matters is it's powerful enough, at close range (probably 20 feet or less), to kill somebody.

 

[protectionist]

They target areas where lots of people will be there for a purpose other than guns. Schools with armed guards were attacked. Dayton shooter had plenty pf police in the vicinity.

Your argument is stupid & has nothing to back it up.

Sorry but your flimsy response is laughable. Almost every mass shooting has been at a gun free zone. And it's just simple logic.

When somebody wants to do something , and they can choose where to do it, won't they choose those places where they have less or no resistance ? Of course they will, and they do, and you know it, Mr Pretender.

PS - "in the vicinity" is not in the target building. Get real.

 

[protectionist]

As I have shown using the example in Vega in 2014, that can be a deadly mistake.

And other CCW holders may or may not know you are not the shooter.

Are you looking for a PERFECT scenario ? Life isn't that way. But it still is better to stop a mass shooter, than to allow him to massacre people. Is there some risk ? Sure, but cops and military people take those risks every day. Those of us who carry guns can too. Hard to believe anyone would debate this, although in your case, mass shooting may not be your motive for posting.

 

[protectionist]

The organized militia is what people consider the state guard. It doesn't have a need for a second amendment right.

A good point that is rarely heard. I have to go back 50 years, to when I was in the National Guard to recall hearing that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The organized militia is what people consider the state guard. It doesn't have a need for a second amendment right.

A good point that is rarely heard. I have to go back 50 years, to when I was in the National Guard to recall hearing that.

Because it's how leftist try to make changes they ignore the past as if it never happened and what we have now is how it's always been.

 

[WinterBorn]

I haven't shot any Keltec guns. But Glock, Springfield, Beretta, and a host of other brands lock the slide back when the last round is fired.

The Walmart in El Paso was crowded with people. But there is a significant amount of space up front.

As for the .380 pocket pistol you carry, the ballistics for the .380 show the heaviest energy is around 300 ft lbs at the muzzle with a 90 gr bullet. Compare that to the energy from the AK, and you will see a significant difference in how hard the bullet hits. He can shoot thru the display you are hiding behind.

And you claim you will not miss when shooting 50 feet or a little more?

I've already conceded that AK47are powerful rifles, and I made no mention of displays (your word not mine). I'm not sure what I would hide behind , if anything at all. I did mention coming up to the shooter from behind, and quickly (1 second) shooting him.

As I said before, I think your comments are more a grudge against me, than anything you think about mass shootings. I see you replying more to me than anyone else here. Maybe you ought to just chill a little bit.

As far as the power of the .380, how strong it is vs an AK47, isn't too important. All that matters is it's powerful enough, at close range (probably 20 feet or less), to kill somebody.

I saw the mention of coming up behind him. But when he walked in and started shooting, anyone still outside would have decided they would do their shopping at Target.

As far as I know the shooter stayed near the front of the store. So sneaking in would be extremely difficult. Surely he would notice the automatic doors opening.

My replies on this thread have nothing to do with you personally. I don't have a grudge against you. I think you are petty (your threat to have someone arrested for calling you a 'dumbass"), delusional (your desire for the gov't to take over MLB), and only conservative when it suits you (the MLB thing and wanting landlords to be told what they can charge for their properties). But in this thread I have argued against everyone who expects a CCW holder to attack a shooter without knowing the situation fully.

In most Walmarts, the main aisle between the shopping areas and the checkout lines is 20 feet or so. That is a big area to cross. Especially when you stand out by being the only thing moving towards the shooter.

 

[WinterBorn]

As I have shown using the example in Vega in 2014, that can be a deadly mistake.

And other CCW holders may or may not know you are not the shooter.

Are you looking for a PERFECT scenario ? Life isn't that way. But it still is better to stop a mass shooter, than to allow him to massacre people. Is there some risk ? Sure, but cops and military people take those risks every day. Those of us who carry guns can too. Hard to believe anyone would debate this, although in your case, mass shooting may not be your motive for posting.

You are getting paranoid if you think I am responding out of a personal grudge.

I simply know the difference between a hero fantasy and a real life & death situation where you, as a CCW holder, are not aware of the whole situation. You lack the knowledge of the situation, the weapons training or the proper weapons. If I had an AR or my M1A, I would try to stop him. With a .380 pocket pistol the odds are very much in his favor. This shooter was also very different in that he did not plan to go down shooting. Most mass shooters have no intention of leaving alive, which makes them much harder to predict.

 

[RealDave]

They target areas where lots of people will be there for a purpose other than guns. Schools with armed guards were attacked. Dayton shooter had plenty pf police in the vicinity.

Your argument is stupid & has nothing to back it up.

Sorry but your flimsy response is laughable. Almost every mass shooting has been at a gun free zone. And it's just simple logic.

When somebody wants to do something , and they can choose where to do it, won't they choose those places where they have less or no resistance ? Of course they will, and they do, and you know it, Mr Pretender.

PS - "in the vicinity" is not in the target building. Get real.

Look, How many of the school shooters' purpose was tied to those schools. Stoneman Douglas - an expelled student. Columbine - students. Throws your gun free zone theory out the window. I

In El Paso, he went where he thought he could find the most targets, Walmart. Was it really a gun free zone?

The truth is you search for any excuse not to blame access to powerful weapons & not being radicalized by your fat assed orange buddy.

 

[protectionist]

You fail to understand what a no gun zone is. It just means that they have to conceal their weapon and they cannot walk around with a weapon in the open. Texans carry guns under the concealed weapon carry laws.

I can guarantee that nobody says oh I have to leave my gun in the car because I can't go in this store because of the sign

So if you have a gun you are not worried What the sign says because nobody will be searching you for a gun nor do you have to go thru a metal detector

Of course if shit happens and you are involved in a shooting then they may fine you

You are failing to understand what a "no gun zone" or more commonly referred to as a "gun free zone", is. It means you may not have a gun in your possession, period. It is a phrase of NATIONAL usage, not just Texan.

Different states may differ somewhat in their laws, and some buildings may have their own rules too, apart from government.

Then there is also US law, which pertains to all 50 states (including Texas), and generally to all federal property (VA, SSA, IRS, Post Office, etc) One example of this is the VA Hospital system. It is regulated by - 38 CFR 1.218, which can give you 6 months in a federal prison + a $500 fine if they so much as find a gun or any "weapon" in your car.

 

[RealDave]

I can guarantee that nobody says oh I have to leave my gun in the car because I can't go in this store because of the sign

Of course they leave their guns in their car 90% of the time. Are you an idiot? My Gawd!

So if you have a gun you are not worried What the sign says because nobody will be searching you for a gun nor do you have to go thru a metal detector

One doesn't need an X-Ray machine because weapons naturally form an imprint through clothing,

Plus after carrying concealed yourself, you know what to look for and the mall security will have people who can pick out gun carriers as well.

Of course if shit happens and you are involved in a shooting then they may fine you

roflmao, do you h ave any idea what it means to be convicted of a felony trespass?

Apparently you don't.

Yes, they leave their guns in the car because the left in this country has succeeded in making a large portion of the American population that 'guns are bad.' The left and Democrats bear full responsibility for these mass shootings that could have probably been stopped in a fraction of a second if most people were armed. I feel like we are at war with gun-grabbers who have actually supported these shootings by disarming the American public. Democrats are 100% responsible for putting anger and hate America propaganda into the heads of these mentally ill young men as well.

So, your plan is to pass out guns at the door?

Most ccw carriers have little training in gun safety & no training in handling an active shooter situation.

Quit pretending you are all qualified

And who the fuck is stopping you from being armed? Who is stopping you from getring proper training?

 

[protectionist]

So you insist to continue with the stupid argument.

We had a law called Assault Rifle Ban What was in it????. There were definitions.

I clearly said assault type weapons just to shit you assfucks up about " OMG OMG OMG the definition OMG OMG OMG"

I want to ban semi-automatic rifles that accept detachable magazines.

There ya go. Is that good enough? Or will you show me another picture of the Mini?

How about you stfu about your silly definition & address the problem that is killing innocent people, women children?

How about that.

Oh, detachable magazines. That's nice. So THAT is your definition of an assault type weapon, huh ? LOL. Well here we are hours later, after I first asked you for a definition, and the best you could come up with is "detachable magazines" and "Assault Rifle Ban What was in it????"

Well, since you are asking the question (complete with 4 question marks) it's obvious you have no clue what was in that ban, if it would even matter now, 25 years later.

What this all comes down to, is you (same as many other gun-clueless liberals) are calling for a ban on "assault type weapons", and you don't have the foggiest idea what those words mean.

 

[protectionist]

Gun zones do not stop people from carrying concealed weapons.

There is no body searches or metal detectors at these locations

If anyone carries they are not going to stop carrying because of a sign

Now if shit happens and there are shots fired , he or she may get fined.

if the gun is seen then they may ask that person to leave

The idea that this was a soft target does not take into account that the police will be there real soon and video surveillance is prominent. A soft target is standing on a bridge and shooting away.

FALSE! I stop carrying because of a sign, AND A LAW that could put me in jail, and fine me $500, to boot. Everyone I know who has a CCW license says the same thing.

All these gun-free zones are not just "soft targets", they are beacons, calling mass shooters to come to them, and do their dirty work.

 

[Agit8r]

The El Paso Walmart shooter killed 20 people (so far) and wounded 26 more. He may well have fired some shots missing people also. It's pretty fair to say this nut fired at least 50 shots, and very possibly well more than that.

It takes quite some time to fire that many shots individually, as this guy did, walking aisle to aisle, through the store. If there had been an armed security guard, or any armed citizen with a CCW license, this guy could have (and should have) been stopped cold after the first 2 or 3 shots.

As someone who has a CCW license, and is armed 99% of the time, when I'm walking around outside, it is amazing to me that there could have been that many people walking around unarmed and defenseless. Why? Don't they know something like this could happen at any time ?

In contrast, in 2002, a Muslim terrorist (Hesham Mohamed Hadayet) walked into Los Angeles Airport (LAX) armed with 2 handguns, plus magazines loaded with dozens of bullets. He shot and killed 2 people, and wounded 4. The airport was filled with people. The terrorist was shot dead right on the spot, by a security guard who was armed and ready to deal. Without that good guy with a gun, the airport would have been a bloodbath, just like this WalMart, and probably even worse.

This ARMED DEFENSE is what should have been the case in El Paso. How this guy could pull off what he did without getting shot, by a guard or CCW carrying citizen is mind boggling.

2002 Los Angeles International Airport shooting - Wikipedia

I suppose there is the possibility that those whose citizenship status allowed them to be armed simply chose not to act... due to whatever motive.