Why Weren't Annapolis Victims Armed ?

[Brain357]

If you are scared of mass killing then we need gun control. Countries with strong gun control don't have a mass shooting problem.

Gun control (gun-free zones) is what has CAUSED the killings. Is your brain working right ? If the mass shooting places had not been gun free zones, the killings would have been averted (as they were in THESE places >>>

1. LAX shooting - 2002 Los Angeles International Airport shooting - Wikipedia

2. Garland, TX shooting - Curtis Culwell Center attack - Wikipedia

3. Moore, OK beheading - Vaughan Foods beheading incident - Wikipedia

These guys were all armed.
2016 shooting of Dallas police officers - Wikipedia

 

[Brain357]

I know a lot of people that don't want to ever be armed. It is a sad state when they are considered less safe. The government needs to do something to protect our right to life.

EARTH TO BRAIN: The govt does things in a GENERAL way. It allocates lots of money for programs. things like that. But when the really bad guy starts coming at you, you're on your own. Police (govt) will come by 20 minutes later to pick up your body, if you're unarmed. Don't be.

Earth to protectionist. Because of you that criminal is much more likely to be armed. All these guns and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Bottom line: the Left wants to limit your right to carry, what you can carry, how much ammo you can buy, and how many weapons you can own.

Why?

The UK, Germany, Sweden, France--all these bastions of gun control enforced safety the Left references--they all share a chilling common characteristic: removing the ability to adequately defend self or family whilst making it easier for the criminal--often a group of illegal immigrants--to rape or kill the average citizen.

The Left is calling for castration of Americans' ability to defend themselves so criminals have an easier time doing whatever they like to you.

True story.

All that and our homicide rate is 4-5X those countries. Sounds like their way is working.

Like a broken record. Gonna go turn on CNN now.

Facts are difficult for you?

 

[Dan Stubbs]

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 a crime that they had to die totally helpless, but they died unarmed and this is what they subscribed to but I do hope them RIP and my true respect.

 

[protectionist]

Earth to protectionist. Because of you that criminal is much more likely to be armed. All these guns and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Because of you, the mass shooter victims were UNarmed, and because of you and gun control advocates of gun-fre zones, they're now dead.

Most countries in the western hemisphere have strong gun control compared to the US. They also have astronomical homicide rates compared to us.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

 

[Brain357]

I know a lot of people that don't want to ever be armed. It is a sad state when they are considered less safe. The government needs to do something to protect our right to life.

EARTH TO BRAIN: The govt does things in a GENERAL way. It allocates lots of money for programs. things like that. But when the really bad guy starts coming at you, you're on your own. Police (govt) will come by 20 minutes later to pick up your body, if you're unarmed. Don't be.

Earth to protectionist. Because of you that criminal is much more likely to be armed. All these guns and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Because of you, the mass shooter victims were UNarmed, and because of you and gun control advocates of gun-fre zones, they're now dead.

Most countries in the western hemisphere have strong gun control compared to the US. They also have astronomical homicide rates compared to us.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

US homicide rate: 5.35
Japan: .28
Denmark: .98
UK: 1.2
France: 1.23
Germany: .88

Looks like we have a homicide rate 4-5X countries with strong gun control.

 

[Brain357]

Gun nuts are stuck in the circle of stupid. Gun companies tell them they need guns for protection. That guarantees we have lots of armed criminals which makes us less safe. Our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control. And they don't have a mass shooting problem either.

 

[night_son]

I know a lot of people that don't want to ever be armed. It is a sad state when they are considered less safe. The government needs to do something to protect our right to life.

EARTH TO BRAIN: The govt does things in a GENERAL way. It allocates lots of money for programs. things like that. But when the really bad guy starts coming at you, you're on your own. Police (govt) will come by 20 minutes later to pick up your body, if you're unarmed. Don't be.

Earth to protectionist. Because of you that criminal is much more likely to be armed. All these guns and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Because of you, the mass shooter victims were UNarmed, and because of you and gun control advocates of gun-fre zones, they're now dead.

Most countries in the western hemisphere have strong gun control compared to the US. They also have astronomical homicide rates compared to us.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

US homicide rate: 5.35
Japan: .28
Denmark: .98
UK: 1.2
France: 1.23
Germany: .88

Looks like we have a homicide rate 4-5X countries with strong gun control.

Wikipedia for the win?

And if we had even more guns, just think what we could achieve together. Why, our criminal homicide rate might even go down as more would be victims prevented their own sacrifice at the hands of would be commie legislators.

 

[Brain357]

Those that live by the sword also tend to die by the sword. This sentiment is not synonymous with surreptitiously & selectively carrying. Effectually, banishing firearms will, without fail, result in an increasingly defenseless citizenry and an exclusively armed predatory sub culture. Should we strive for freedom and personal responsibility or shackle ourselves in the constraints of subjection for the illusion of safety ... I choose the former, slippery slope y'all w/ the latter!

We are in the illusion of safety now. Most guns in the world, and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

 

[Sahba]

are you dead?

it would explain a lot.

What explains you talking about being "paranoid" after observing killings ? So you think it couldn't happen to you, huh ? Maybe all the people in all the mass shootings thought that too.

If you are scared of mass killing then we need gun control. Countries with strong gun control don't have a mass shooting problem.

Those that live by the sword also tend to die by the sword. This sentiment is not synonymous with surreptitiously & selectively carrying. Effectually, banishing firearms will, without fail, result in an increasingly defenseless citizenry and an exclusively armed predatory sub culture. Should we strive for freedom and personal responsibility or shackle ourselves in the constraints of subjugation for the illusion of safety ... I choose the former, slippery slope y'all w/ the latter!

 

[Brain357]

I know a lot of people that don't want to ever be armed. It is a sad state when they are considered less safe. The government needs to do something to protect our right to life.

EARTH TO BRAIN: The govt does things in a GENERAL way. It allocates lots of money for programs. things like that. But when the really bad guy starts coming at you, you're on your own. Police (govt) will come by 20 minutes later to pick up your body, if you're unarmed. Don't be.

Earth to protectionist. Because of you that criminal is much more likely to be armed. All these guns and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Because of you, the mass shooter victims were UNarmed, and because of you and gun control advocates of gun-fre zones, they're now dead.

Most countries in the western hemisphere have strong gun control compared to the US. They also have astronomical homicide rates compared to us.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

US homicide rate: 5.35
Japan: .28
Denmark: .98
UK: 1.2
France: 1.23
Germany: .88

Looks like we have a homicide rate 4-5X countries with strong gun control.

Wikipedia for the win?

And if we had even more guns, just think what we could achieve together. Why, our criminal homicide rate might even go down as more would be victims prevented their own sacrifice at the hands of would be commie legislators.

With more concealed carry than ever, violent crime went up.
Violent Crime in U.S. Rises for Second Consecutive Year

 

[protectionist]

Facts are difficult for you?

Like these ? List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

Homicide rates --

US - 5.3

El Salvador - 82.8

Jamaica - 47.0

Honduras - 56.5

Venezuela - 56.3

Brazil - 29.5

Belize - 37.6

US Virgin Islands - 49.3

Antigulla (UK) - 27.7

 

[Sahba]

Those that live by the sword also tend to die by the sword. This sentiment is not synonymous with surreptitiously & selectively carrying. Effectually, banishing firearms will, without fail, result in an increasingly defenseless citizenry and an exclusively armed predatory sub culture. Should we strive for freedom and personal responsibility or shackle ourselves in the constraints of subjection for the illusion of safety ... I choose the former, slippery slope y'all w/ the latter!

We are in the illusion of safety now. Most guns in the world, and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Let's strive to bring that down... But, I'll take that any day over the alternative! Ya, know why.. cus no one can protect me like myself. Provide me with 24/7 security and perhaps I'll reconsider. Even then, someone is ARMED.

 

[protectionist]

[QUO
With more concealed carry than ever, violent crime went up.
Violent Crime in U.S. Rises for Second Consecutive Year

Nice try.

Report: Concealed Carry Permit Holders Are The Most Law-Abiding People In The Country

 

[frigidweirdo]

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 ?

The US police suffer far more deaths in the line of duty armed than the British police suffer unarmed.

Can anyone explain why this is the case?

 

[protectionist]

if you were in person with me right now, i'd laugh at you and walk away.

and you wouldn't do fuck all about it, would you?

Just smack your faggot little face that's all.

But I have no need to educate you about guns and self-defense. Your neighborhood mugger will do that for you. And you have nothing to laugh about, because you've made a fool out of yourself in this thread - talking like an idiot.

 

[Markle]

they weren't paranoid nutbars like the op

you're welcome

How did that work out for them?

The shooter had sued that newspaper, made threats, someone there even said this guy is crazy, he's going come in here shooting. Yet they had no security, whatsoever.

 

[BertramN]

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 ?

.
The employees weren't armed because they forgot they are living in an old western movie.

Wait a minute, they aren't, but that isn't what Second Amendment fanatics want Americans to believe.

.

 

[protectionist]

The US police suffer far more deaths in the line of duty armed than the British police suffer unarmed.

Can anyone explain why this is the case?

Obama/Sharpton/Jackson police-hating rhetoric, for one.

 

[night_son]

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 ?

The US police suffer far more deaths in the line of duty armed than the British police suffer unarmed.

Can anyone explain why this is the case?

Provided that is the case, can you explain how criminal homicide of US police officers is relevant to discussion of armed, law abiding citizens who do not shoot policemen? Perhaps arm more citizens to protect our police? That is what you're saying?

 

[Sahba]

I know a lot of people that don't want to ever be armed. It is a sad state when they are considered less safe. The government needs to do something to protect our right to life.

EARTH TO BRAIN: The govt does things in a GENERAL way. It allocates lots of money for programs. things like that. But when the really bad guy starts coming at you, you're on your own. Police (govt) will come by 20 minutes later to pick up your body, if you're unarmed. Don't be.

Earth to protectionist. Because of you that criminal is much more likely to be armed. All these guns and our homicide rate is 4-5X that of countries with strong gun control.

Because of you, the mass shooter victims were UNarmed, and because of you and gun control advocates of gun-fre zones, they're now dead.

Most countries in the western hemisphere have strong gun control compared to the US. They also have astronomical homicide rates compared to us.

List of countries by intentional homicide rate - Wikipedia

US homicide rate: 5.35
Japan: .28
Denmark: .98
UK: 1.2
France: 1.23
Germany: .88

Looks like we have a homicide rate 4-5X countries with strong gun control.

Surely U've been at this racket long enough to know all the ways the stats can be 'stacked'. School shooting stats to include the discharge of a pellet gun after hours adjacent lot. A gang hit off campus in vicinity midnight etc. Go to homicide rate & you get suicide, hunting accidents etc. Lol are you Pinky or the Brain as you purport...