• 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!

Trump about Parkland: I really believe I’d run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon

Would you (being unarmed) have confronted someone packing an AR15? And do you believe Trump would?


  • Total voters
    47
No, they are just about the ultimate experts on what damage weapons cause in bodies/human living flesh. Those are 2 physicians who clearly state that AR15 and similar leave damage far worse than other firearms.


Apparently they have not dealt with much firearm damage. Because ballistics gels say otherwise.







I would also think that any rifle firing a .223, 5.56 or similar size and type of hunting round would leave the same or similar size wound regardless of the rifle it's fired out of.
If you can find some ballistics comparison feel free to post them.
 
Last edited:
Where's the "I would if I had a death wish, but Trump would grab the first available body as a shield while he peed himself" option?
 
Apparently they have not dealt with much firearm damage. Because ballistics gels say otherwise.







I would also think that any rifle firing a .223, 5.56 or similar size and type of hunting round would leave the same or similar size wound regardless of the rifle it's fired out of.
If you can find some ballistics comparison feel free to post them.


Great, you think gel trumps (no pun intended) the experience of actual physicians working on actual victims of such shootings.
 
Where's the "I would if I had a death wish, but Trump would grab the first available body as a shield while he peed himself" option?

Wait, are we talking about the same guy? The guy who faced down a potential shooter all by himself while on the campaign?

LiveLeak-dot-com-aac_1519703393-2871_1519703401.webp
 
Apparently they have not dealt with much firearm damage. Because ballistics gels say otherwise.
.

But the worst is a wound from an AR-15 or AK-47 — high-muzzle velocity weapons, which impart a tremendous amount of kinetic energy into the body. Those are much more destructive. You’re looking at a wound that, externally, is two, three, four times bigger than any handgun wound.

And that is reflective of the damage that happens on the inside. When a bullet from a high-muzzle velocity weapon hits the intestines, it’s like an explosion, whereas a low-muzzle velocity can be very similar to a knife going through the intestines; there’s bleeding, but it doesn’t destroy the whole area. A high-muzzle bullet, however, destroys whole areas of body. With a bone that’s been shot with a standard-issue caliber handgun, you’ll see a break, a hole in the bone, and maybe some displacement. But a high-muzzle weapon shatters that bone into hundreds of microscopic pieces, in a way that cannot be repaired. You need to essentially clean out the bone that has been struck and remove it from the body; it’s now a worthless tissue. You can’t believe that a bullet could do this amount of damage.

https://www.thetrace.org/2015/09/bullet-injuries-wounds-trauma-surgery/

Surgeons who have treated the wounds call the weapons perfect killing machines that can tear a body apart and create massive hemorrhaging.

The reason is simple physics. Semiautomatic assault rifles like the AR-15 fire a relatively small round at a high speed. Where tissue damage from a pistol would be confined largely to a bullet's pathway, the shock wave from an assault-style rifle round — like the high bow wave from a speed boat — creates a corridor of damage.

"It's just a wide path of destruction," says Dr. Ernest Moore, a Denver trauma surgeon and editor of the Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/11/09/ar-15-rifle-butchers-human-body-so-why-legal-exactly-our-view-debates-editorial/847868001/
 
I will own up myself, I would not and I doubt Donald Trump would confront an AR15 wielding nut job totally unarmed especially not at this age.

I believe something should have been done by a man WITH body armor and a gun.

I would like to think I would be brave enough to at least distract THE SOB.
 
Great, you think gel trumps (no pun intended) the experience of actual physicians working on actual victims of such shootings.

Ballistics gel is used to simulate the density and viscosity of human animal tissue. They are used to demonstrate what certain rounds do to the human body. The physicians must not have much experience dealing with gun shot wounds if they think rounds coming out of an AR15 are somehow more different than those same rounds and similar size rounds and types of rounds coming out of other rifles.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on political lean) human shields only work in the movies..

Oh, you've got to be kidding!

:lol:

Take a break; take a chill pill. Trump would NEVER put himself in danger to save anyone else. He is a lying, denying, piece of crap manipulating con artist.
 


Like I said in my other post ballistics gel is used to simulate human flesh. How a round does damage is determined by the size,construction, what the round is supposed to do upon impact and how fast the round is going. .223 round and 5.56 rounds coming out of some other hunting rifle is no less dangerous than it coming out of an AR15. Similar sized and constructed bullets will cause the same damage when fired out of rifles. Apparently those doctors have not treated hat many bullet bullet wounds or not get a large variety of bullet wounds to treat.


This for example will cause a **** load of damage.
 
During a White House event with the nations governors, POTUS 45 said that he would have run in there without a weapon and would have confronted the shooter.

Now I do not know if he meant to imply that he would do that in this day and age or when he was "younger" but it is a bold statement to say the least from a man who once said:



Or who said about an event at Mar-a-lago when some person fell of the stage, where he looked away from the man when he started bleeding, saying:



So let us talk about this because he has made this a "thing", would a 70+ puffy moderately obese man with no combat training go in and confront a 19 year old young person with an AR-15 while he was shooting it wildly around?

Because I do not believe that is something Trump, a man who got deferred several times on the grounds of bone-spurs would be a person that would run into the path of a AR-15 wielding mad man. How about you?

Considering how much weight he has put on since being elected, the only place Trump is running into is the fast food drive thru. What would Trump have done, deflect bullets with his gold Amex card ?
 
During a White House event with the nations governors, POTUS 45 said that he would have run in there without a weapon and would have confronted the shooter.

Now I do not know if he meant to imply that he would do that in this day and age or when he was "younger" but it is a bold statement to say the least from a man who once said:



Or who said about an event at Mar-a-lago when some person fell of the stage, where he looked away from the man when he started bleeding, saying:



So let us talk about this because he has made this a "thing", would a 70+ puffy moderately obese man with no combat training go in and confront a 19 year old young person with an AR-15 while he was shooting it wildly around?

Because I do not believe that is something Trump, a man who got deferred several times on the grounds of bone-spurs would be a person that would run into the path of a AR-15 wielding mad man. How about you?

President Trump was born in 1946. This is when men were men, and not feminized like they are today. Today men are not men, but more like women. Women would prefer stay put with the children and wait for the men to arrive. The men of Trump's father's time, enlisted to fight Nazis and Japs. These were very formidable enemies who were taking over the world. One untrained shooter fighting unarmed civilians, compared to Nazi's, is called basic training.

Today, just words are enough to place the liberal brain on overload, requiring a safe spot to recuperate. The sound of a gun is not a PC sanctioned sound, so it is double scary. Each generation is projecting its own value system. Men of old were not afraid of words, so gun fire was something you could train for.

Running in, without a gun, would still allow one to draw fire away from the unarmed civilians. The shooter does not know if you have a weapon or not, so he will need to take care of that threat. This distraction gives more time for evacuation, before the cavalry arrives. If you lack a weapon, you need to be smart and not corner yourself. Instead, you look around, keep moving and try to set up an ambush with improvised weapons; special forces 1.0.

The word hero has been so watered down by PC, that now breaking a finger nail makes you a hero. Or if you walk a 5K walk for charity, that makes you a hero. Back in the day of men, hero meant valor under fire or duress. The standard was higher so threats were not as threatening.
 
Last edited:
Unarmed inside the building, chances are I would have hidden behind something like most people hoping not to pee my pants. If I could have evaluated the situation and snug up from behind and had a good chance to whack the guy over the head, possibly.
We can't predict how we would react if, God forbid, we ever find ourselves in a situation like that. Bragging about being a hero? No, I just can't do that.
 
If it were my wife or kids or grandkids in that building - perhaps I might be able to do it... I would certainly hope I could. For strangers - no.

Trump would not do it - he cares about nothing except himself and that includes his own family as well.
 
No I could not do it only because I was trained not to. Going up against an armed assailant unarmed is a fool's errand. Shielding the children was a hero's move. Assaulting the assailant with an AR 15 is a stupid move. There is a difference between bravery and stupidity. What Trump said was the latter.
 
If it were my wife or kids or grandkids in that building - perhaps I might be able to do it... I would certainly hope I could. For strangers - no.

Trump would not do it - he cares about nothing except himself and that includes his own family as well.

Loved the first part of your post. Like I said, we don't know how we'd react, and bragging about being a hypothetical hero, like potus did, not good.
Assuming what he would do is nonsense. May be he would, may be he wouldn't.
 
If one of my kids were I there, I would run in armed or not. Otherwise no.
 
Oh, you've got to be kidding!

:lol:

Take a break; take a chill pill. Trump would NEVER put himself in danger to save anyone else. He is a lying, denying, piece of crap manipulating con artist.

I was speaking to the human shields concept. I voted no on trump going in.
 
Without being in that exact situation, and actually having to make that choice, no one really knows what they would do.
 
President Trump was born in 1946. This is when men were men, and not feminized like they are today. Today men are not men, but more like women. Women would prefer stay put with the children and wait for the men to arrive. The men of Trump's father's time, enlisted to fight Nazis and Japs. These were very formidable enemies who were taking over the world. One untrained shooter fighting unarmed civilians, compared to Nazi's, is called basic training.

Today, just words are enough to place the liberal brain on overload, requiring a safe spot to recuperate. The sound of a gun is not a PC sanctioned sound, so it is double scary. Each generation is projecting its own value system. Men of old were not afraid of words, so gun fire was something you could train for.

Running in, without a gun, would still allow one to draw fire away from the unarmed civilians. The shooter does not know if you have a weapon or not, so he will need to take care of that threat. This distraction gives more time for evacuation, before the cavalry arrives. If you lack a weapon, you need to be smart and not corner yourself. Instead, you look around, keep moving and try to set up an ambush with improvised weapons; special forces 1.0.

The word hero has been so watered down by PC, that now breaking a finger nail makes you a hero. Or if you walk a 5K walk for charity, that makes you a hero. Back in the day of men, hero meant valor under fire or duress. The standard was higher so threats were not as threatening.

Trump dodged the draft, disrespects women, and violated his own oath and that to you makes him a man because he was born in 1946? Cowards have been born in every generations, so has bravery. Many men today are more of a man than any other generation. Yetsome ***** can talk big and was born in the 40's so suddenly he is Mr. Manly man tough guy. A lot of people can run their mouths, but show me one time where Donald Trump didn't cower in the face of danger.
 
Wait, are we talking about the same guy? The guy who faced down a potential shooter all by himself while on the campaign?

View attachment 67229242

Would you disobey or Secret Service detail? I don't think Trump would actually go in, but your post is completely unfair.
 
Would you disobey or Secret Service detail? I don't think Trump would actually go in, but your post is completely unfair.

If I were an fearless Ubermensch who gladly charged into danger, didn't fear eagles or sharks or stairs? You bet I would!
 
I believe his comments were in response to the Barney Fyfe brigade of Broward County Deputy Sheriffs that were all armed and cowering behind their cruisers while the kids inside were being murdered. Every day there is more evidence of how government agencies failed these kids. Today there is a report that EMS were told not to enter because Sheriff Israel hadn't given the okay while students laid inside bleeding to death. Trump was very critical of their response.

My hope is this session with the governors produced some good ideas to make our schools safe.
 
So I heard the whole thing, not just the clipped portion and in context, once again, not nearly as bad as the media is leading you to believe.
 
So I heard the whole thing, not just the clipped portion and in context, once again, not nearly as bad as the media is leading you to believe.

He in an interview a while back said he conceals and carries.
 
Back
Top Bottom