shooting in OKC

[PureX]

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.

That wasn't the point. The point is that when someone kills someone that is killing someone else, it's not a "good thing". They are not a "hero". They have killed a human being, and this is not a heroic act. It may sometimes be a necessary act, but it's neither good nor heroic. And we should not be rejoicing in it, as many gun nuts around the country will and are surely doing.

It's our lust for and love of vengeance, masquerading as "justice" that is causing all this killing in the first place. I suspect the murderer in this instance, and in a great many others, imagined himself as a "hero", and his murder spree an act of "justice". They nearly all do. So let's not add to this insanity by pretending that the man that killed him was a "hero" dispensing "justice", as well. It just adds to the insanity of it all. That's my point.

 

[oldbadger]

I listen to the BBC, &
have never heard them cover justifiable self defense.

Yes.... I think that you have.
You and I both made comment about the pensioner released without charge after stabbing a screwdriver wielding burglar to death. I expect that you heard all about it on the Beeb I certainly did.

One incident cannot be the sole guidance of guns awash situations.

 

[Revoltingest]

That wasn't the point. The point is that when someone kills someone that is killing someone else, it's not a "good thing".

To kill one person who is bent upon killing others
is a better outcome than letting the perp continue.
So we'll have to agree to disagree about this.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes.... I think that you have.
You and I both made comment about the pensioner released without charge after stabbing a screwdriver wielding burglar to death. I expect that you heard all about it on the Beeb I certainly did.

One incident cannot be the sole guidance of guns awash situations.

I spoke of BBC coverage of Americastanian events.
Of course, in your country the defender is arrested for wrongdoing.

 

[oldbadger]

This isn't an isolated incident though.
Armed self defense occurs regularly.
But knowing this or not would depend
upon one's favored news sources.

What a pity about the twenty plus mass shootings so far this month, then?
And what happens when folks shoot innocents by mistake, or kill innocents in friendly fire beyond an attacker?

Come over to a few basic controls, like mandatory insurance, courses, licences, criminal and psycho reviews, gun safes, etc

 

[Revoltingest]

And what happens when folks shoot innocents by mistake, or kill innocents in friendly fire beyond an attacker?
Never apply that rationale to (mistake & abuse prone) cops being armed, eh.

Oh, no! A mistake is possible?
Why is it you anti-gun types resort to a worst case hypothetical scenario to portray reality?

Come over to a few basic controls, like mandatory insurance, courses, licences, criminal and psycho reviews, gun safes, etc

I've been arguing for most of those things.
But anti-gun types never approve of my advocacy....or even acknowledge it.
They only want to carp or ban'm all. Realistic measures don't concern them.

 

[David1967]

I agree this is a major win. Hands down, that's the case.

Currently, there averages more than one mass shooting per day in the US. We cannot reasonably expect a competent and level headed armed citizen to be present for every mass shooting, nor even for a significant percentage of them.

"Positive" outcome?

Very positive outcome. Due to a good guy with a conceal carry permit willing to put himself in harms way to stop this potential mass murderer ,no telling how many lives were saved. And he did yell at the perp to drop his gun buty to no avail. So only the bad guy is dead. I call that a win. I would imagine even the most avid anti gun person would be happy with the outcome if they had been dining there last night.

 

[David1967]

We could if we had more gun education. I've proposed in the past that there be a mandatory gun safety and education program all prospective gun owners take. We already do this for cars ect and heavy machinery.

Good point. I am all for firearms education. To carry concealed in my state, a person must undergo extensive background check (no felons or people convicted of domestic abuse) and a firearms training course, and education on laws concerning use of force. I think it very important that a person receive firearms safety training. And you make a good point in the fact that we require this for car and heavy machinery operators. Which brings up another point. Even with that training there are still car accidents and heavy machinery accidents, just like there are with firearms (even among law enforcement officers). But I do believe that it is better than the alternative of making the good people of this country defenseless in the face of these killers. Soft targets are generally the target of choice. The bad guys don't like it when people shoot back.

 

[David1967]

I am happy that the situation got contained. Two folks getting clipped it still two too many.

Yes it is, but the news is that they will be OK. The two that were wounded were a mother and her young daughter.

 

[David1967]

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

Nope ,one person is dead. The criminal. And the one who intervened is not a "killer" in the negative sense, he is a saver of lives. Would you rather that the person did not intervene? In that case we would no doubt have several dead innocents. Surely that outcome is not more appealing to you.

 

[David1967]

From the US we hear that many of these shooters were showing signs before, why were they not taken seriously?

Great point. I just completed a course with the local PD involving mass shooters and surprisingly (or not) they fit a particular profile of personal interests, family life, and entertainment among other things. So yeah, why don't we take it more seriously when some nut is making threats and so on?

 

[David1967]

THIS IS AN OUTLIER, THIS DOESN'T REPRESENT THE MAJORITY OF CASES... etc... yadda yadda... etc.

I respectfully disagree @Quetzal , There are many numerous examples of lawful citizens successfully defending themselves and family against attackers using firearms. (I can name two in my home town in the last year). It just doesn't make to the national news like the ones where the bad guys are successful.

 

[Revoltingest]

Good point. I am all for firearms education. To carry concealed in my state, a person must undergo extensive background check (no felons or people convicted of domestic abuse) and a firearms training course, and education on laws concerning use of force. I think it very important that a person receive firearms safety training. And you make a good point in the fact that we require this for car and heavy machinery operators. Which brings up another point. Even with that training there are still car accidents and heavy machinery accidents, just like there are with firearms (even among law enforcement officers). But I do believe that it is better than the alternative of making the good people of this country defenseless in the face of these killers. Soft targets are generally the target of choice. The bad guys don't like it when people shoot back.

I've had extensive discussions with CCW (aka CPL) license holders, & see that
many are not sufficiently trained for safety, in how to carry, & for violent scenarios.
In the interest of preserving the 2nd Amendment, I believe that upping training
requirements is not only legal, but absolutely necessary.

Parenthetical rant....
I know that many carry in condition one (ie, cocked & locked, the Glock equivalent, etc).
This requires a high level of training to safely carry in this mode because a lapse in
attention can result in accidental discharge
Consider the youtube superstar....

Carrying in condition one is analogous to race car drivers tailgating each other at 150+mph.
Sure, sure, they're highly trained & attentive. But it's a dangerous stunt if done in the ordinary
course of daily commute. Attention will flag at times, & carnage will ensue.
Condition one makes sense in some professions where the tiny fraction of a second in
faster deployment is necessary. But for us civilians who are unlikely to need to shoot anyone
chamber empty (semi-auto) is practical & safer.
And to all, including cops....
Keep your finger off that trigger until you intend to shoot!
Use a secure holster which covers the trigger.
Do not drink & carry.

 

[Quetzal]

I respectfully disagree @Quetzal , There are many numerous examples of lawful citizens successfully defending themselves and family against attackers using firearms. (I can name two in my home town in the last year). It just doesn't make to the national news like the ones where the bad guys are successful.

I was being sarcastic. We are on the same page.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Very positive outcome. Due to a good guy with a conceal carry permit willing to put himself in harms way to stop this potential mass murderer ,no telling how many lives were saved. And he did yell at the perp to drop his gun buty to no avail. So only the bad guy is dead. I call that a win. I would imagine even the most avid anti gun person would be happy with the outcome if they had been dining there last night.

I'm not anti gun, but my idea of a positive outcome would be something like "no one showed up to start shooting people in the first place". Call me crazy...

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm not anti gun, but my idea of a positive outcome would be something like "no one showed up to start shooting people in the first place". Call me crazy...

You're just not viewing things as I am.
Start with the premise that a bad guy intends to kill a bunch of people.
Long before the cops would ever show up, someone stopped the perp.
That's positive compared to the perp shooting even more people.

 

[David1967]

I've had extensive discussions with CCW (aka CPL) license holders, & see that
many are not sufficiently trained for safety, in how to carry, & for violent scenarios.
In the interest of preserving the 2nd Amendment, I believe that upping training
requirements is not only legal, but absolutely necessary.

Parenthetical rant....
I know that many carry in condition one (ie, cocked & locked, the Glock equivalent, etc).
This requires a high level of training to safely carry in this mode because a lapse in
attention can result in accidental discharge
Consider the youtube superstar....

Carrying in condition one is analogous to race car drivers tailgating each other at 150+mph.
Sure, sure, they're highly trained & attentive. But it's a dangerous stunt if done in the ordinary
course of daily commute. Attention will flag at times, & carnage will ensue.
Condition one makes sense in some professions where the tiny fraction of a second in
faster deployment is necessary. But for us civilians who are unlikely to need to shoot anyone
chamber empty (semi-auto) is practical & safer.
And to all, including cops....
Keep your finger off that trigger until you intend to shoot!
Use a secure holster which covers the trigger.
Do not drink & carry.

Good points. even an instructor can make a mistake. As far as carrying cocked and locked? I do not advocate that at all. And yes to more safety training. The more the better. Good sense suggestions Rev.

 

[David1967]

I was being sarcastic. We are on the same page.

Oh, OK. That's the problem with posts. Sarcasm isn't as evident as face to face. Glad we're on the same page.

 

[David1967]

This isn't an isolated incident though.
Armed self defense occurs regularly.
But knowing this or not would depend
upon one's favored news sources.

This

 

[PureX]

To kill one person who is bent upon killing others
is a better outcome than letting the perp continue.
So we'll have to agree to disagree about this.

"Better than" does not equate to "good". An F4 tornado is "better than" and F5, but neither of them is "a good thing". Killing a killer is better than killing a non-killer, but outcome is "a good thing". And I don't think you're really foolish enough to disagree with this, are you?

Also, you missed the point, once again, about the fact that it's our foolish cultural delusion that vengeance equals justice, and so killing people who kill or try to kill others is good and just. (Necessary, perhaps, but necessity is not justification.) When it's exactly this kind of thinking that causes the "bad guys" to kill in the first place.