shooting in OKC

[Cacotopia]

According to several studies, about 40% have no training whatsoever, 60% have fire arms training and 7% of that 60% have advanced training that includes suicide prevention. What are the odds that the guy that might save your life in an event of a mass shooter is trained. not very good. But accidentally end yours? higher than you would like.

 

[Revoltingest]

Worse case scenarios design laws that is why we take preventative measures. Again every so-called good guy do not have the same intentions and because they don’t why even think it’s okay to have shootouts in the open?

The problem with worst case scenario analysis is that one can prove anything.
It isn't even clear what you're advocating.

 

[PureX]

This happened earlier this evening. A man walked into a restaurant at Lake Hefner in Oklahoma city around 6:00 pm and opened fire wounding two that I know of at this point. Before he could do more damage he was confronted by an armed citizen who shot him dead. Thank God for this hero or it may well have been worse. So far the only dead is the bad guy. Friends and relatives are thanking the individual for saving lives of their loved ones that were in the restaurant. Any shooting is bad but it's good to have a positive outcome this time.

This was not a "positive outcome". Three people are dead, and two have become killers.

 

[Revoltingest]

If you plan on going out to consume alcohol even as a CCW holder.....

I'd never do that.
(MI law and good judgement.)

 

[Epic Beard Man]

The problem with worst case scenario analysis is that one can prove anything.
It isn't even clear what you're advocating.

I am advocating that people should not have pistols in public unless they are CCW holders and even then I am sketchy on that. After watching a CCW holder and racist guy pull a pistol on a guy in Subway I am iffy on people lawfully carrying guns.

 

[Revoltingest]

This was not a "positive outcome". Three people are dead, and two have become killers.

It's positive compared to the alternative had the murderer not been stopped at the scene.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I'd never do that.
(MI law and good judgement.)

You are not the rest of the 7 billion people on the planet. Take you out of the equation.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am advocating that people should not have pistols unless they are CCW holders and even then I am sketchy on that. After watching a CCW holder and racist guy pull a pistol on a guy in Subway I am iffy on people lawfully carrying guns.

In the vast majority of states, a license is required for concealed carry.
I'd prefer that all states require this, & appropriate training.

 

[Cacotopia]

Power corrupts and it always does every time. a gun is power, and eventually someone is gonna do something stupid with it like brandishing a firearm, or discharging their firearm when they are emotionally compromised. Best to not have them at all.

 

[Revoltingest]

You are not the rest of the 7 billion people on the planet. Take you out of the equation.

I'm only addressing public policy in Americastan, not the entire world.
Other countries have different fundamental laws, values & cultures.
There is no one size fits all solution.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I'm only addressing public policy in Americastan, not the entire world.
Other countries have different fundamental laws, values & cultures.
There is no one size fits all solution.

Again every holder of concealed carry does not have the same intent and because of that I am sketchy.

 

[Revoltingest]

Again every holder of concealed carry does not have the same intent and because of that I am sketchy.

Would trust having only cops (whose intentions are always good) armed?
Whatever your answer, gun rights aren't going away during our lifetime,
so any measures to mitigate violence must comport with the Constitution.

 

[Cacotopia]

But I think it is far too late to take people's guns away. You are asking for civil disorder, but it is not an impossible task they speak so highly that it is their constitutional right to have firearms. Constitution has been changed before, remember that bit about slavery? Right...Also the 2nd amendment was in my view made because the youthful America was poor and could not field an army, that in an event of tyranny or invasion they could form a militia quickly and need not arm and equip their impromptu army. There was also the frontier, which no longer exists...Now I don't see a problem owning a firearm if you live in bear country or an area of animals might ruin your day by killing you area. No problems there. But in a giant city full of people that are definitely not going to agree with you on everything, not a good idea especially since historically humans have killed each other for thousands of years because of a lack of understanding and respect for differences.

There are some folks saying if the civilian population were disarmed we would be slaves, really? That's nutjob conspiracy level. Or we would be invaded and would stand no chance, we wouldn't stand a chance if each person had 30 guns. Most of ya'll aren't even trained properly to use them in the first place, but expect to offer some kind of real resistance to a trained specifically for invasion army. get tf outta here with that noise.

 

[Revoltingest]

But I think it is far too late to take people's guns away. You are asking for civil disorder, but it is not an impossible task they speak so highly that it is their constitutional right to have firearms. Constitution has been changed before, remember that bit about slavery? Right...Also the 2nd amendment was in my view made because the youthful America was poor and could not field an army, that in an event of tyranny or invasion they could form a militia quickly and need not arm and equip their impromptu army. There was also the frontier, which no longer exists...Now I don't see a problem owning a firearm if you live in bear country or an area of animals might ruin your day by killing you area. No problems there. But in a giant city full of people that are definitely not going to agree with you on everything, not a good idea especially since historically humans have killed each other for thousands of years because of a lack of understanding and respect for differences.

There are some folks saying if the civilian population were disarmed we would be slaves, really? That's nutjob conspiracy level. Or we would be invaded and would stand no chance, we wouldn't stand a chance if each person had 30 guns. Most of ya'll aren't even trained properly to use them in the first place.

Some useful advice.....
It appears that you're addressing someone's post.
But without quoting one, or otherwise alerting one,
one might not know.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Would trust having only cops (whose intentions are always good) armed?
Whatever your answer, gun rights aren't going away during our lifetime,
so any measures to mitigate violence must comport with the Constitution.

I don’t trust people period that includes cops...I’ve lived long enough to believe that humans with the power to take life is dangerous itself.

 

[PureX]

It's positive compared to the alternative had the murderer not been stopped at the scene.

How do you know the killer planned to kill more? How is it "positive" for ANYONE involved in this? It's certainly not positive for the dead, or for those who loved them. It's certainly not positive for the killers, the dead or the living. It's not positive for anyone else in the restaurant, that witnessed a multiple killing. Of for the community that now lives in greater fear.

It's only a "positive" for those who imagine in their minds that killing a "bad guy" is heroic. That killing three people is better than killing four.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don’t trust people period that includes cops...I’ve lived long enough to believe that humans with the power to take life is dangerous itself.

I favor designing public policy for humans as they are,
not for an idealized vision of what they should be.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I favor designing public policy for humans as they are,
not for an idealized vision of what they should be.

And I favor laws that mitigate the ill-intent.

 

[Revoltingest]

How do you know the killer planned to kill more? How is it "positive" for ANYONE involved in this? It's certainly not positive for the dead, or for those who loved them. It's certainly not positive for the killers, the dead or the living. It's not positive for anyone else in the restaurant, that witnessed a multiple killing. Of for the community that now lives in greater fear.

It's only a "positive" for those who imagine in their minds that killing a "bad guy" is heroic. That killing three people is better than killing four.

If some malefactor is shooting people, the one who would be there
to stop the carnage would apply one's judgement. The same would
be true of any government authority type in the same position.

 

[Revoltingest]

And I favor laws that mitigate the ill-intent.

I wish you good luck legislating people's values & intentions.