• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A myth deconstructed...

Goshin

Goshin

Burned Out Ex-Mod
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
47,477
Reaction score
53,177
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Many will tell you that no mass shooting has ever been stopped by an armed citizen, or will denigrate the idea by saying any such attempt would be doomed to failure, would only increase the body count, etc and so on.


This is simply not true. Below are a sample of true incidents were armed citizens stopped individuals whose intent was likely to kill many people, and did so before the body count got high enough to result a national-level news frenzy in many cases...





Pearl High School, MS, Oct 1997
High school student had stabbed his mother to death, started shooting at the high school, killing 2, including his ex-girlfriend, and injuring 7.
Was on his way to attack the middle school across the street, when confronted and help at bay by the assistant principal with his personal handgun.
MISSISSIPPI GOTHIC - TIME
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/11/us/witnesses-recount-shooting-at-mississippi-high-school.html

Parker Middle School, PA, April 1998
14 year old student, armed with a handgun, opened fire a school dance, killing 1, injuring 3,
Was confronted and held at bay by the owner of the dance hall with his personal shotgun.
Student Guns Down Science Teacher Chaperoning School Dance - NYTimes.com

Appalachian Law School, VA, Jan 2002
Suspended student killed the dean, a professor, another student, injured 3 others.
Was confronted and subdued by former marine and other students with private firearms.
Ex-Law Student Pleads Guilty to Slayings (washingtonpost.com)
Law Students Tackled Gunman, Held Him Down Until Police Arrived | Fox News\

New Life Church, CO, Dec. 2007
Gunman opened fire at the church during service, killing 2 and injuring 3, before being killed in a shootout with a female parishioner who was a volunteer security guard for the church.
http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/6-shot-at-new-life-church-gunman-2-churchgoers-dead
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/1...-grudge-against-christian-group-cops-say.html


... cut due to length, see Part II following....
 
New York Mills AT&T Store, NY, May 2010
Disgruntled AT&T customer entered the store with a kill list of 6 employees. Began shooting, injuring only 1, when off-duty police officer, who happened to be shopping there, shot and killed the would-be mass shooter with his personal firearm.
(While a law enforcement officer, he was a civilian at the time of the shooting)
Update: AT&T employee in critical condition after shooting | syracuse.com

Free Will Baptist Church, SC, March 2012
Disgruntled church member, armed with a shotgun, kicked in church door during service. The Pastor's grandson used his handgun to hold gunman at bay as other parishioners disarmed him. Nobody was injured in the incident.
Churchgoers subdue gunman at Spartanburg church - FOX Carolina 21

Clackamas Mall, OR, Dec 2013
Masked gunman opened fire on holiday shoppers, killing 2 before a shopper confronted him with his own handgun. Gunman retreated and took his own life.
Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

Mystic Gentlemen’s Club, OR, Jan 2014
Belligerent patron who was kicked out, returned with a gun and started firing, injuring 3 before he was shot and killed by a bouncer.
Mystic strip club shooting suspect identified

Austin Construction Site, TX, April 2014
Recently fired construction worker returned to jobsite and started shooting. Foreman pulled out his own gun and returned fire. Both men were injured, but the gunman was stopped from continuing his assault.
Boss returns fire in West Campus construction-site shootout | KXAN.com

Mercy-Fitzgerald Hospital, PA, July 2014
Psychiatric patient shoots and kills his case worker and injures his doctor, before the doctor returned fire with his own gun, injuring the patient before he could shoot anyone else.
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Mercy-Fitzgerald-Hospital-on-Lockdown-268489642.html




In all these cases there is reasonable evidence that mass murder was the motive, rather than mere robbery or other action.



Armed citizens DO stop mass murders.
 
Goshin said:
New York Mills AT&T Store, NY, May 2010
Disgruntled AT&T customer entered the store with a kill list of 6 employees. Began shooting, injuring only 1, when off-duty police officer, who happened to be shopping there, shot and killed the would-be mass shooter with his personal firearm.
(While a law enforcement officer, he was a civilian at the time of the shooting)
Update: AT&T employee in critical condition after shooting | syracuse.com

Free Will Baptist Church, SC, March 2012
Disgruntled church member, armed with a shotgun, kicked in church door during service. The Pastor's grandson used his handgun to hold gunman at bay as other parishioners disarmed him. Nobody was injured in the incident.
Churchgoers subdue gunman at Spartanburg church - FOX Carolina 21

Clackamas Mall, OR, Dec 2013
Masked gunman opened fire on holiday shoppers, killing 2 before a shopper confronted him with his own handgun. Gunman retreated and took his own life.
Clackamas mall shooter faced man with concealed weapon

Mystic Gentlemen’s Club, OR, Jan 2014
Belligerent patron who was kicked out, returned with a gun and started firing, injuring 3 before he was shot and killed by a bouncer.
Mystic strip club shooting suspect identified

Austin Construction Site, TX, April 2014
Recently fired construction worker returned to jobsite and started shooting. Foreman pulled out his own gun and returned fire. Both men were injured, but the gunman was stopped from continuing his assault.
Boss returns fire in West Campus construction-site shootout | KXAN.com

Mercy-Fitzgerald Hospital, PA, July 2014
Psychiatric patient shoots and kills his case worker and injures his doctor, before the doctor returned fire with his own gun, injuring the patient before he could shoot anyone else.
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/local/Mercy-Fitzgerald-Hospital-on-Lockdown-268489642.html




In all these cases there is reasonable evidence that mass murder was the motive, rather than mere robbery or other action.



Armed citizens DO stop mass murders.
Click to expand...

in 1994 Maria Olberding was training for the boston Marathon near where I grew up and a nut case with a butcher knife stabbed her fatally. Before he could attack anyone else, a guy driving by saw the murder, grabbed a handgun and stopped the killer from harming anyone else.

a reference to this murder and the passerby is here


http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/05/20/loc_partner_admits.html


t was the first slaying in the quiet, upscale Cincinnati neighborhood since May 1994 when 27-year-old Maria Olberding was stabbed to death with a 13-inch butcher knife as she jogged down a Hyde Park street.

Within minutes, David Kohls was stopped by a passerby at gunpoint.

at the time Ohio did not have CCW so it appeared the passerby had a loaded Browning HP in his car but the cops never made anything of it-rather declaring the passerby a hero for stopping a homicidal nut job
 
This is something I have know for a long time.

But be forewarned, most people do not give a flying fig about facts. They only care about how they feel.

Facts also mean absolutely jack to people who are ends justify the means.
 
Ancient Herald said:
This is something I have know for a long time.

But be forewarned, most people do not give a flying fig about facts. They only care about how they feel.

Facts also mean absolutely jack to people who are ends justify the means.
Click to expand...

facts that gun control doesn't decrease crime is usually something that is meaningless to most gun banners.

why? they only PRETEND crime control is their motivation. its about CONTROLLING GUNS and GUN OWNERS and to punish conservatives and the NRA. so that is why most of the gun banners and restrictionists on this board are so impervious to proof that their schemes won't work (to control crime) because their schemes work as intended-that being to harass gun owners and to pander to the low wattage hysterics who scream SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE
 
No. You're missing the entire point of firearm confiscation.

Petty tyrants of all stripes and creed are all about imposing control over, well, every single aspect of your entire life in any way they can.

They do not like you to defy them in any way. They do not want you to defend yourself in any way. The only thing they want is for you to sit down, shut up, and suffer in silence.

THAT is the entire point to confiscating your firearms, and why they focus on them more than anything else.

What you described is demonization of those who hold different points of view than them. The way all tyrants work is they love to make examples of people by scaring them to death to keep them in line.

By their actions ye shall know them.
 
Anytime someone says that it is a myth that good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns I stop taking them seriously. It means they couldn't be bothered to so much as use a search engine.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Thank you. I look forward to seeing if anyone will attempt to counter the facts and truth you so professionally provided.
Click to expand...

Let me see if I can drag one over here to try to discredit it. I doubt it will produce any posts of any substance however.

Threegoofs said:
That's one. And a bit of a sketchy one, since the guy came back after being shot - seems like everyone would have cleared to safety once the shooting began.

I believe there were something like 250+ mass shootings in the US this year. You found one example. That's a prevention rate of 0.4% Even finding nine more (which you probably can't) would bring the rate up to 4%.

Not real effective.
Click to expand...

Here is a whole thread for you to look at with more than one example.
 
Now,

On top of this ordinary defense with the aid of guns as it is carried out with 2A rights using citizens, installing brain scans in background checks will make 2A right abusers (i.e., psychopaths, sociopaths, impulsive murderers, paranoid-schizophrenics, that are most likely to mass murder) even more difficult to get legal guns. That way with both these solutions mass murder may be an even rarer event comparable to the rest of normal countries (in regards to mass murder that is).
 
Ancient Herald said:
This is something I have know for a long time.

But be forewarned, most people do not give a flying fig about facts. They only care about how they feel.

Facts also mean absolutely jack to people who are ends justify the means.
Click to expand...
The fact of the matter is that statistically gun ownership is more dangerous than non-ownership. A few oddball pieces of anecdotal evidence do not change the overwhelming numbers showing how dangerous guns are, and it is highly fallacious reasoning to trot out a dozen or so incidences as if that somehow disproves the general trend.
 
Guy Incognito said:
The fact of the matter is that statistically gun ownership is more dangerous than non-ownership. A few oddball pieces of anecdotal evidence do not change the overwhelming numbers showing how dangerous guns are, and it is highly fallacious reasoning to trot out a dozen or so incidences as if that somehow disproves the general trend.
Click to expand...

what is really funny, and what destroys your constant nonsense about gun ownership is just about everyone who has to deal with criminals on a constant basis-

Cops

Parole officers

Federal law enforcement agents

bail bondsmen

victim/witness advocates for prosecutors's offices

county prosecutors

federal prosecutors

city prosecutors

Judges

DEFENSE attorneys

I know hundreds of the above. and just about every one I know in those groups carry when they can and have a gun with them most of the time off duty.

why? because they understand criminals

and for the vast majority of them-who know far more what is best for them then some guy who is afraid of guns on a internet board-they believe their safety, and the safety of their families, is increased by them having guns
 
OK, you listed 10 examples, dating back to 1997. 1 was an off-duty police officer.

There are currently 300-350 mass shootings (5 or more people wounded or killed, or combo thereof) in the US per year. Let's lowball it, and say that since 1997, there have been 3600 mass shootings.

10 instances out of 3600 = 0.28% of all shootings.

And of course, we still see mass shootings in states with high rates of gun ownership and relaxed concealed carry laws. This should not be surprising, as a well-armed assailant with high-capacity magazines can easily fire off 30 rounds before anyone nearby has the opportunity or ability to react.

Or, as the old saw goes: "Data" is not the plural of "anecdote."
 
Guy Incognito said:
The fact of the matter is that statistically gun ownership is more dangerous than non-ownership. A few oddball pieces of anecdotal evidence do not change the overwhelming numbers showing how dangerous guns are, and it is highly fallacious reasoning to trot out a dozen or so incidences as if that somehow disproves the general trend.
Click to expand...

Every study I've seen showing how dangerous guns are done with suicide included in the results. That's an incredibly deceptive thing to do since people who want to kill themselves will find a way to do it, guns are just the tool of choice in a lot of cases. Take away the guns from the suicides and they'll simply find another method, so any study that includes suicides should be discounted by one and all.
 
Visbek said:
OK, you listed 10 examples, dating back to 1997. 1 was an off-duty police officer.

There are currently 300-350 mass shootings (5 or more people wounded or killed, or combo thereof) in the US per year. Let's lowball it, and say that since 1997, there have been 3600 mass shootings.

10 instances out of 3600 = 0.28% of all shootings.

And of course, we still see mass shootings in states with high rates of gun ownership and relaxed concealed carry laws. This should not be surprising, as a well-armed assailant with high-capacity magazines can easily fire off 30 rounds before anyone nearby has the opportunity or ability to react.

Or, as the old saw goes: "Data" is not the plural of "anecdote."
Click to expand...

These are all liberal sources ranging from moderate left to far left like Motherjones.Where did you get your numbers from?
Why do some mass shootings make the news and some don't? - BBC News
According to the FBI, the number of "active shooter" incidents rose in frequency between 2000 and 2013. It reported that there were an average of 16.4 active shooter events each year between 2007 to 2013, compared to an average of 6.4 incidents from 2000 to 2006.

Mass killings occur in USA once every two weeks
Mass killers target Americans once every two weeks on average,

A Guide to Mass Shootings in America | Mother Jones
Since 1982, there have been at least 72 public mass shootings across the country,
 
jamesrage said:
These are all liberal sources ranging from moderate left to far left like Motherjones.Where did you get your numbers from?
Click to expand...
Mass Shooting Tracker

The definition they use, which I explicitly stated in my post, is "4 or more people wounded and/or killed in the incident." As to your sources....


The FBI is a "liberal source?" Seriously?

If you actually read the FBI document you cited, you'd see that the document is NOT referring to "mass shootings," and that most of what Goshin discussed would not qualify:

Active shooter is a term used by law enforcement to describe a situation in which a shooting
is in progress and an aspect of the crime may affect the protocols used in responding
to and reacting at the scene of the incident. Unlike a defined crime, such as a murder or
mass killing, the active aspect inherently implies that both law enforcement personnel and
citizens have the potential to affect the outcome of the event based upon their responses....

This is not a study of mass killings or mass shootings, but rather a study of a specific type of
shooting situation law enforcement and the public may face. Incidents identified in this study
do not encompass all gun-related situations; therefore caution should be taken when using
this information without placing it in context.

Congratulations! You are doing exactly what the author of the paper said should not be done.


One common definition of "mass shooting" is that used in the USA Today article, which is "4 or more people killed," and does not count the number wounded. If we use this definition, none of the incidents cited by Goshin actually qualifies.

His selections leave a bit to be desired as well, e.g.:

Pearl High (1st link): Shooter was already leaving the scene

Parker Middle School (2nd link): Shooter was already leaving the scene

AT&T Store: 79 year old man, unhappy about customer service, opened fire and only hit 1 person. Off-duty officer fired and killed the shooter.

New Life Church: At 12:30 the previous night, the shooter killed 4 people at a youth center, prompting an evacuation, reverse 911 and lots of public awareness that the shooter was at large. He showed up at the church parking lot, shot several people, started heading inside, when a volunteer security guard fired and wounded him. The shooter committed suicide before being caught.

Austin construction site: 20 yr old Delarca-Reyes was fired, demanded more money, threatened to "cut" the boss, left the site. Cops were called. A few days later, he comes back. The 2 supervisors walk up to the guy, get in an argument. Delarca-Reyes pulls a gun, shoots one guy in the leg, and would have shot the other (Palmer) in the face except his gun jammed. Palmer pulls his gun, shoots Delarca-Reyes in the abdomen. Delarca-Reyes pulls a knife, swings it wildly while Palmer holds him down. Other employees disarm Delarca-Reyes until the cops show up.

(Somehow, being in Texas... where lots of people have guns, and can conceal carry legally... did not prevent the incident in the first place. Hmmmmm.)

The closer your look, the less persuasive they are. What a surprise.
 
Visbek said:
Mass Shooting Tracker

The definition they use, which I explicitly stated in my post, is "4 or more people wounded and/or killed in the incident." As to your sources....


The FBI is a "liberal source?" Seriously?

If you actually read the FBI document you cited, you'd see that the document is NOT referring to "mass shootings," and that most of what Goshin discussed would not qualify:

Active shooter is a term used by law enforcement to describe a situation in which a shooting
is in progress and an aspect of the crime may affect the protocols used in responding
to and reacting at the scene of the incident. Unlike a defined crime, such as a murder or
mass killing, the active aspect inherently implies that both law enforcement personnel and
citizens have the potential to affect the outcome of the event based upon their responses....

This is not a study of mass killings or mass shootings, but rather a study of a specific type of
shooting situation law enforcement and the public may face. Incidents identified in this study
do not encompass all gun-related situations; therefore caution should be taken when using
this information without placing it in context.

Congratulations! You are doing exactly what the author of the paper said should not be done.


One common definition of "mass shooting" is that used in the USA Today article, which is "4 or more people killed," and does not count the number wounded. If we use this definition, none of the incidents cited by Goshin actually qualifies.

His selections leave a bit to be desired as well, e.g.:

Pearl High (1st link): Shooter was already leaving the scene

Parker Middle School (2nd link): Shooter was already leaving the scene

AT&T Store: 79 year old man, unhappy about customer service, opened fire and only hit 1 person. Off-duty officer fired and killed the shooter.

New Life Church: At 12:30 the previous night, the shooter killed 4 people at a youth center, prompting an evacuation, reverse 911 and lots of public awareness that the shooter was at large. He showed up at the church parking lot, shot several people, started heading inside, when a volunteer security guard fired and wounded him. The shooter committed suicide before being caught.

Austin construction site: 20 yr old Delarca-Reyes was fired, demanded more money, threatened to "cut" the boss, left the site. Cops were called. A few days later, he comes back. The 2 supervisors walk up to the guy, get in an argument. Delarca-Reyes pulls a gun, shoots one guy in the leg, and would have shot the other (Palmer) in the face except his gun jammed. Palmer pulls his gun, shoots Delarca-Reyes in the abdomen. Delarca-Reyes pulls a knife, swings it wildly while Palmer holds him down. Other employees disarm Delarca-Reyes until the cops show up.

(Somehow, being in Texas... where lots of people have guns, and can conceal carry legally... did not prevent the incident in the first place. Hmmmmm.)

The closer your look, the less persuasive they are. What a surprise.
Click to expand...

none of this matters given disarming potential victims will make things worse and that is the only solution gun banners want to do
 
Visbek said:
Mass Shooting Tracker

The definition they use, which I explicitly stated in my post, is "4 or more people wounded and/or killed in the incident." As to your sources....


The FBI is a "liberal source?" Seriously?

If you actually read the FBI document you cited, you'd see that the document is NOT referring to "mass shootings," and that most of what Goshin discussed would not qualify:

Active shooter is a term used by law enforcement to describe a situation in which a shooting
is in progress and an aspect of the crime may affect the protocols used in responding
to and reacting at the scene of the incident. Unlike a defined crime, such as a murder or
mass killing, the active aspect inherently implies that both law enforcement personnel and
citizens have the potential to affect the outcome of the event based upon their responses....

This is not a study of mass killings or mass shootings, but rather a study of a specific type of
shooting situation law enforcement and the public may face. Incidents identified in this study
do not encompass all gun-related situations; therefore caution should be taken when using
this information without placing it in context.

Congratulations! You are doing exactly what the author of the paper said should not be done.


One common definition of "mass shooting" is that used in the USA Today article, which is "4 or more people killed," and does not count the number wounded. If we use this definition, none of the incidents cited by Goshin actually qualifies.

His selections leave a bit to be desired as well, e.g.:

Pearl High (1st link): Shooter was already leaving the scene

Parker Middle School (2nd link): Shooter was already leaving the scene

AT&T Store: 79 year old man, unhappy about customer service, opened fire and only hit 1 person. Off-duty officer fired and killed the shooter.

New Life Church: At 12:30 the previous night, the shooter killed 4 people at a youth center, prompting an evacuation, reverse 911 and lots of public awareness that the shooter was at large. He showed up at the church parking lot, shot several people, started heading inside, when a volunteer security guard fired and wounded him. The shooter committed suicide before being caught.

Austin construction site: 20 yr old Delarca-Reyes was fired, demanded more money, threatened to "cut" the boss, left the site. Cops were called. A few days later, he comes back. The 2 supervisors walk up to the guy, get in an argument. Delarca-Reyes pulls a gun, shoots one guy in the leg, and would have shot the other (Palmer) in the face except his gun jammed. Palmer pulls his gun, shoots Delarca-Reyes in the abdomen. Delarca-Reyes pulls a knife, swings it wildly while Palmer holds him down. Other employees disarm Delarca-Reyes until the cops show up.

(Somehow, being in Texas... where lots of people have guns, and can conceal carry legally... did not prevent the incident in the first place. Hmmmmm.)

The closer your look, the less persuasive they are. What a surprise.
Click to expand...

In all his cited cases, the shootings could have easily escalated to 4 or more victims had the shooter not been stopped. So your litmus test is the defensive shooter had to have only fired after 4 or more victims had been shot....nice dodge. Realistically, the only way to support your argument was that weak sauce?
 
BretJ said:
In all his cited cases, the shootings could have easily escalated to 4 or more victims had the shooter not been stopped. So your litmus test is the defensive shooter had to have only fired after 4 or more victims had been shot....nice dodge. Realistically, the only way to support your argument was that weak sauce?
Click to expand...

you are getting a passive-aggressive attack on gun ownership but you won't really get any position you can attack. rather it will be more comments that gun ownership really doesn't help anything and makes things worse.
 
faithful_servant said:
Every study I've seen showing how dangerous guns are done with suicide included in the results. That's an incredibly deceptive thing to do since people who want to kill themselves will find a way to do it, guns are just the tool of choice in a lot of cases. Take away the guns from the suicides and they'll simply find another method, so any study that includes suicides should be discounted by one and all.
Click to expand...

It's not deceptive at all. A gun is a much more efficient and irrevocable method of suicide than most other means. A persona who takes a bottle of pills could be saved by timely intervention. This is not true of a person who shoots themselves.

What is deceptive in a conversation about gun violence is steering it towards gun suicides, as you have done, to dodge the other issues such as intentional shootings and accidental discharges. Guns are an public health menace.
 
Visbek said:
OK, you listed 10 examples, dating back to 1997. 1 was an off-duty police officer.

There are currently 300-350 mass shootings (5 or more people wounded or killed, or combo thereof) in the US per year. Let's lowball it, and say that since 1997, there have been 3600 mass shootings.

10 instances out of 3600 = 0.28% of all shootings.

And of course, we still see mass shootings in states with high rates of gun ownership and relaxed concealed carry laws. This should not be surprising, as a well-armed assailant with high-capacity magazines can easily fire off 30 rounds before anyone nearby has the opportunity or ability to react.

Or, as the old saw goes: "Data" is not the plural of "anecdote."
Click to expand...

Where does that 350/year or 3600 since 1997 number come from?

That bastion of conservatism, Mother Jones, was only to come up with 83 since 1982.

US Mass Shootings, 1982-2015: Data From Mother Jones' Investigation | Mother Jones
 
jimbo said:
Where does that 350/year or 3600 since 1997 number come from?
Click to expand...
I've already explained the source.

A "mass shooting" is one where 4 or more people are either wounded or killed.


Mass Shootings in 2015 - Mass Shooting Tracker

Oregon shooting: Statistics behind 'routine' US gun violence - BBC News

We’re now averaging more than one mass shooting per day in 2015 - The Washington Post

994 mass shootings in 1,004 days: this is what America's gun crisis looks like | US news | The Guardian


Some other definitions include "4 or more people killed." (Mother Jones typically uses this one.) But again, almost none of Goshin's examples fit that definition; the expanded version fits it much better. Many of them were highly unlikely to fit that definition either -- e.g. the 79 year old outraged AT&T customer, and the guy who would have murdered his boss if his gun had not jammed, probably weren't going to run off and kill a dozen more people.

And again, in many cases the intervener was an off-duty cop, a trained security guard, in the Army Reserve, and so on.

More examination of many of the alleged examples, for those of you who like Mother Jones... Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. | Mother Jones

Or, consider this week's example. A couple of guys shoplifted from Home Depot, and were running through a parking lot and got into a van. Security guards were chasing them. An untrained civilian, who was not in any way threatened by the thieves, drew a concealed weapon and opened fire on the vehicle. Unsurprisingly, the suspects escaped. Law enforcement and many firearms experts and trainers alike all point out that her actions were unjustified and highly dangerous. She had no training, she was not in any danger, she could have easily injured or killed an innocent bystander. She is likely to face criminal charges. This is NOT what we want citizens to do.

I.e. what should be properly identified as a myth is the idea that untrained armed civilians stop mass shooters. It rarely works out that way, and when it does, the intervener is usually trained.
 
Visbek said:
I've already explained the source.

A "mass shooting" is one where 4 or more people are either wounded or killed.


Mass Shootings in 2015 - Mass Shooting Tracker

Oregon shooting: Statistics behind 'routine' US gun violence - BBC News

We’re now averaging more than one mass shooting per day in 2015 - The Washington Post

994 mass shootings in 1,004 days: this is what America's gun crisis looks like | US news | The Guardian


Some other definitions include "4 or more people killed." (Mother Jones typically uses this one.) But again, almost none of Goshin's examples fit that definition; the expanded version fits it much better. Many of them were highly unlikely to fit that definition either -- e.g. the 79 year old outraged AT&T customer, and the guy who would have murdered his boss if his gun had not jammed, probably weren't going to run off and kill a dozen more people.

And again, in many cases the intervener was an off-duty cop, a trained security guard, in the Army Reserve, and so on.

More examination of many of the alleged examples, for those of you who like Mother Jones... Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. | Mother Jones

Or, consider this week's example. A couple of guys shoplifted from Home Depot, and were running through a parking lot and got into a van. Security guards were chasing them. An untrained civilian, who was not in any way threatened by the thieves, drew a concealed weapon and opened fire on the vehicle. Unsurprisingly, the suspects escaped. Law enforcement and many firearms experts and trainers alike all point out that her actions were unjustified and highly dangerous. She had no training, she was not in any danger, she could have easily injured or killed an innocent bystander. She is likely to face criminal charges. This is NOT what we want citizens to do.

I.e. what should be properly identified as a myth is the idea that untrained armed civilians stop mass shooters. It rarely works out that way, and when it does, the intervener is usually trained.
Click to expand...

anyone who owns a gun should train. I sure do. gun bans, waiting periods, magazine limits and other schemes sure don't help that fact

why don't you tell us what you want. I see lots of your posts that take issue at pro gun posts but I don't see you ever stepping up to the plate to make suggestions.

why do "untrained" civilians have lower incidents of shooting the wrong person and higher rates of hitting criminals than those "trained" cops?
 
Visbek said:
I've already explained the source.

A "mass shooting" is one where 4 or more people are either wounded or killed.


Mass Shootings in 2015 - Mass Shooting Tracker
Click to expand...

I guarantee you that at least 98% of those shootings involve inner city African American gang/drug violence where the shooter is probably illegally carrying an illegal gun.

Hell, I bet you most of them are drive-bys.

Placing restrictions on law abiding citizens isn't going to do a damn thing to prevent or even decrease that kind of shooting because those people don't care about laws in the first place.

Placing restrictions on law abiding citizens isn't going to prevent those people from getting guns either.

If we were to attempt something like that we'd have to call it the "War on Guns".

How has a "war on..." anything actually worked out for America?

"War on drugs"

"War on poverty"

"War on terrorism"

Would you call any of those an overwhelming success?

How about even a little bit of a success?
 
Visbek said:
I've already explained the source.

A "mass shooting" is one where 4 or more people are either wounded or killed.


Mass Shootings in 2015 - Mass Shooting Tracker

Oregon shooting: Statistics behind 'routine' US gun violence - BBC News

We’re now averaging more than one mass shooting per day in 2015 - The Washington Post

994 mass shootings in 1,004 days: this is what America's gun crisis looks like | US news | The Guardian


Some other definitions include "4 or more people killed." (Mother Jones typically uses this one.) But again, almost none of Goshin's examples fit that definition; the expanded version fits it much better. Many of them were highly unlikely to fit that definition either -- e.g. the 79 year old outraged AT&T customer, and the guy who would have murdered his boss if his gun had not jammed, probably weren't going to run off and kill a dozen more people.

And again, in many cases the intervener was an off-duty cop, a trained security guard, in the Army Reserve, and so on.

More examination of many of the alleged examples, for those of you who like Mother Jones... Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. | Mother Jones

Or, consider this week's example. A couple of guys shoplifted from Home Depot, and were running through a parking lot and got into a van. Security guards were chasing them. An untrained civilian, who was not in any way threatened by the thieves, drew a concealed weapon and opened fire on the vehicle. Unsurprisingly, the suspects escaped. Law enforcement and many firearms experts and trainers alike all point out that her actions were unjustified and highly dangerous. She had no training, she was not in any danger, she could have easily injured or killed an innocent bystander. She is likely to face criminal charges. This is NOT what we want citizens to do.

I.e. what should be properly identified as a myth is the idea that untrained armed civilians stop mass shooters. It rarely works out that way, and when it does, the intervener is usually trained.
Click to expand...

Mother Jones, following the recognized count, comes up with 758 total deaths and injuries in mass shootings since 1982. 83 of those were deaths. That's the total in 34 years. That's a huge difference. Do you have an explanation? I don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom