Why Weren't Annapolis Victims Armed ?

[skye]

I agree with the OP

Somebody should have been armed in there.

Something close to everyone?

 

[airplanemechanic]

Does anybody know an answer to the question (title) of this OP ?

Because the ability to be secure in public, without walking around armed, is why we have government on the first place. If I have to pack heat just to go to the grocery store, I'm not going to bother paying taxes.

Why not? It's already been stated that the police have absolutely no responsibility to keep you safe. That's on you. Your safety is your responsibility, not the gov't. Paying taxes doesn't prevent bank robberies.

 

[protectionist]

Because the ability to be secure in public, without walking around armed, is why we have government on the first place. If I have to pack heat just to go to the grocery store, I'm not going to bother paying taxes.

The IRS will get after you, if your neighborhood bully/mugger doesn't get to you first.

 

[protectionist]

Why not? It's already been stated that the police have absolutely no responsibility to keep you safe. That's on you. Your safety is your responsibility, not the gov't. Paying taxes doesn't prevent bank robberies.

Correct. And doesn't prevent home invasions, assault & batterys, and mass shootings either.

 

[dblack]

Because the ability to be secure in public, without walking around armed, is why we have government on the first place. If I have to pack heat just to go to the grocery store, I'm not going to bother paying taxes.

The IRS will get after you, if your neighborhood bully/mugger doesn't get to you first.

Do you have a point? No, wait. Never mind.

 

[protectionist]

Do you have a point? No, wait. Never mind.

Point is, if you're going to rely on the govt to keep you safe, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Because the ability to be secure in public, without walking around armed, is why we have government on the first place. If I have to pack heat just to go to the grocery store, I'm not going to bother paying taxes.

The IRS will get after you, if your neighborhood bully/mugger doesn't get to you first.

Do you have a point? No, wait. Never mind.

Did you know 100% of unarmed people killed in a shooting are pretty much fucked? How is that for a point?

 

[dblack]

Do you have a point? No, wait. Never mind.

Point is, if you're going to rely on the govt to keep you safe, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn you might be interested in.

As I said, never mind.

 

[Pilot1]

As I said, never mind.

Head in the sand? Government won't protect you. Not their job.

 

[Pogo]

Who the fuck are you even talking about? Link? Reference? Anything?

You have my pity that you self-imprison to the point where you walk around armed. How pathetic.

What's the matter ? You don't understand plain American English ? What is there in the OP to not understand ?

The lack of reference to whatever the fuck it is you're babbling about.

Or did you not read your own OP?

And you call walking around armed "pathetic" ? And "self-imprison" Uh huh. And so when this guy (or his equivalent) comes at you, you offer him a lollipop, is that right ?

Nope. Because that doesn't happen on my planet in the first place. I happen not to live in Paranoiastan. The only thugs who ever pulled guns on me were cops. And in that case there's nothing you can do.

 

[Moonglow]

they weren't paranoid nutbars like the op

you're welcome

You do know they’re dead right? They took that we ain’t scared and don’t need no guns right to the final resting place under a desk. Unarmed but democrat. They must feel good about that. I’m sure their families are happy they weren’t armed.

Being unarmed has nothing to do with party affiliation in the workplace....99 9/10ths of all businesses will not let you have a firearm while working or while in their facilities..Including cops.

 

[dblack]

Did you know 100% of unarmed people killed in a shooting are pretty much fucked? How is that for a point?

Incoherent and confused.

 

[Moonglow]

Who the fuck are you even talking about? Link? Reference? Anything?

You have my pity that you self-imprison to the point where you walk around armed. How pathetic.

What's the matter ? You don't understand plain American English ? What is there in the OP to not understand ?

The lack of reference to whatever the fuck it is you're babbling about.

Or did you not read your own OP?

And you call walking around armed "pathetic" ? And "self-imprison" Uh huh. And so when this guy (or his equivalent) comes at you, you offer him a lollipop, is that right ?

Nope. Because that doesn't happen on my planet in the first place. I happen not to live in Paranoiastan. The only thugs who ever pulled guns on me were cops. And in that case there's nothing you can do.

Don't you love the whiskey time of night?

 

[dblack]

As I said, never mind.

Head in the sand? Government won't protect you. Not their job.

It is their only justifiable "job". It's the only valid treason to have a government.

 

[airplanemechanic]

As I said, never mind.

Head in the sand? Government won't protect you. Not their job.

It is their only justifiable "job". It's the only valid treason to have a government.

You might want to get a little bit more educated on this. The SCOTUS has ruled police have no duty to protect you. Even if you have a court ordered order of protection against someone.

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

 

[Stormy Daniels]

I don't understand how it can be that 5 good people are shot dead by some lunatic, and all of them were walking around in public unarmed. I rarely go anywhere unarmed, and have my gun with me 99% of the time. If they had been armed (or even just 1 of them), the following scenario would have played out. Either >>>

1. The shooter would have been deterred and never would have showed up.

2. The shooter would have ran away as soon as he realized he had firearm resistance.

3. The shooter would have been shot dead, thereby saving at least some (if not all) of the lives that were lost.

I have heard that Maryland (blue state) is an entire, statewide gun-free zone. Not sure about that, but I do know that gun-free zones are getting people killed like flies, so I wouldn't doubt if that was part of the scenario here.

Does anybody know an answer to the question (title) of this OP ?

This argument is not going to fly this time. Police were on site within 60 seconds. Obviously such an extremely fast response is not typical, but it does cut the legs out of the "If someone had been armed" speculations in this instance.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I don't understand how it can be that 5 good people are shot dead by some lunatic, and all of them were walking around in public unarmed. I rarely go anywhere unarmed, and have my gun with me 99% of the time. If they had been armed (or even just 1 of them), the following scenario would have played out. Either >>>

1. The shooter would have been deterred and never would have showed up.

2. The shooter would have ran away as soon as he realized he had firearm resistance.

3. The shooter would have been shot dead, thereby saving at least some (if not all) of the lives that were lost.

I have heard that Maryland (blue state) is an entire, statewide gun-free zone. Not sure about that, but I do know that gun-free zones are getting people killed like flies, so I wouldn't doubt if that was part of the scenario here.

Does anybody know an answer to the question (title) of this OP ?

This argument is not going to fly this time. Police were on site within 60 seconds. Obviously such an extremely fast response is not typical, but it does cut the legs out of the "If someone had been armed" speculations in this instance.

Drawing a concealed firearm takes less than 3 seconds.

60 seconds is enough to wipe out an entire office.

 

[Pogo]

You're saying you're "dead"?

That does explain a hell of a lot of your posts actually.

It doesn't do you a service, just being silly snarky. Even kind of shows you have nothing to contribute to the discussion.

Reading lesson #94386. Here's what the exchange was actually about. Roll tape.

they weren't paranoid nutbars like the op

you're welcome

Wow. Is anything dumber than this ? Hey dum dum, you know the definition of "paranoid" ? It means fearing something without a good reason. How is now being DEAD, for a good reason ? God, you're stupid.

The comment wasn't about "the dead" -- it was about YOU. You and your knee-knocking paranoia.

Go get some reading lessons. And don't forget to go armed in case your English teacher hurls a split infinitive at you, snowflake.

 

[Brain357]

I don't understand how it can be that 5 good people are shot dead by some lunatic, and all of them were walking around in public unarmed. I rarely go anywhere unarmed, and have my gun with me 99% of the time. If they had been armed (or even just 1 of them), the following scenario would have played out. Either >>>

1. The shooter would have been deterred and never would have showed up.

2. The shooter would have ran away as soon as he realized he had firearm resistance.

3. The shooter would have been shot dead, thereby saving at least some (if not all) of the lives that were lost.

I have heard that Maryland (blue state) is an entire, statewide gun-free zone. Not sure about that, but I do know that gun-free zones are getting people killed like flies, so I wouldn't doubt if that was part of the scenario here.

Does anybody know an answer to the question (title) of this OP ?

It is sad that our country is so unsafe that you think people need to run around with guns. Countries with strong gun control have homicide rates a fraction of ours and don't carry guns around.

 

[Moonglow]

I don't understand how it can be that 5 good people are shot dead by some lunatic, and all of them were walking around in public unarmed. I rarely go anywhere unarmed, and have my gun with me 99% of the time. If they had been armed (or even just 1 of them), the following scenario would have played out. Either >>>

1. The shooter would have been deterred and never would have showed up.

2. The shooter would have ran away as soon as he realized he had firearm resistance.

3. The shooter would have been shot dead, thereby saving at least some (if not all) of the lives that were lost.

I have heard that Maryland (blue state) is an entire, statewide gun-free zone. Not sure about that, but I do know that gun-free zones are getting people killed like flies, so I wouldn't doubt if that was part of the scenario here.

Does anybody know an answer to the question (title) of this OP ?

This argument is not going to fly this time. Police were on site within 60 seconds. Obviously such an extremely fast response is not typical, but it does cut the legs out of the "If someone had been armed" speculations in this instance.

It only takes a few seconds to kill several people in an enclosed area with a shotgun.