School Shooting in Connecticut - Multiple Fatalities

[The Joseon Dynasty]

The fact he didn't get shot and lived to insult the Commander and chief of the Nation representing the Military currently occupying it?

I mean sure political shitstorm for executing the fellow but acceptable political shitstorm in my book; Throwing a shoe honestly?

His security detail should have vented his damn head

So if I had said during that time, "Fuck George W. Bush," I should have been shot?

Because I'm pretty sure I said that one or twenty times.

No, you're white. It's okay.

[The Black Forrest]

I was about to say, he did kill two to fifty kids.

Being armed not only ups the situation but provides no protection whatsoever from an assailant one cannot see.

If I might interject.. Not making a case either way, but that's the reasoning behind concealed carry as opposed to open carry, and why many people prefer to carry concealed, even when they don't have to. You don't do anyone any good dead, and if a psycho has cased an area beforehand, he's going to single-out threats first. If you're carrying openly, you're likely to get blindsided right when things start. A concealed carrier is just another member of a startled crowd, instead of a priority target. In theory, that gives them a bit of time to assess the situation, and ensures that the assailant is the one laying their cards on the table first.
Just an interesting bit of info, pertinent to the topic. And, as I said, that's just theory.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: In other words, it makes it more likely that you'll see the bad guy before he sees you.

It won't matter much. How many people are ready to draw down and drop somebody who enters a room shooting?

[Farnhamia]

If I might interject.. Not making a case either way, but that's the reasoning behind concealed carry as opposed to open carry, and why many people prefer to carry concealed, even when they don't have to. You don't do anyone any good dead, and if a psycho has cased an area beforehand, he's going to single-out threats first. If you're carrying openly, you're likely to get blindsided right when things start. A concealed carrier is just another member of a startled crowd, instead of a priority target. In theory, that gives them a bit of time to assess the situation, and ensures that the assailant is the one laying their cards on the table first.
Just an interesting bit of info, pertinent to the topic. And, as I said, that's just theory.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: In other words, it makes it more likely that you'll see the bad guy before he sees you.

It won't matter much. How many people are ready to draw down and drop somebody who enters a room shooting?

If I searched this thread I bet I could find you half a dozen.

[The Zeonic States]

The fact he didn't get shot and lived to insult the Commander and chief of the Nation representing the Military currently occupying it?

I mean sure political shitstorm for executing the fellow but acceptable political shitstorm in my book; Throwing a shoe honestly?

His security detail should have vented his damn head

I would think any form of protest against a head of state is legal.

For the ME the bottom of a shoe is a rather terrible insult.

Protesting or assault; It depends on how you view i view it as some grease ball trying to Harm the Head of State.

[Forsher]

I was about to say, he did kill two to fifty kids.

Being armed not only ups the situation but provides no protection whatsoever from an assailant one cannot see.

If I might interject.. Not making a case either way, but that's the reasoning behind concealed carry as opposed to open carry, and why many people prefer to carry concealed, even when they don't have to. You don't do anyone any good dead, and if a psycho has cased an area beforehand, he's going to single-out threats first. If you're carrying openly, you're likely to get blindsided right when things start. A concealed carrier is just another member of a startled crowd, instead of a priority target. In theory, that gives them a bit of time to assess the situation, and ensures that the assailant is the one laying their cards on the table first.
Just an interesting bit of info, pertinent to the topic. And, as I said, that's just theory.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: In other words, it makes it more likely that you'll see the bad guy before he sees you.

I doubt it. Say he's on a roof and taking pot shots. Now what?

He's hidden himself in a bush, fires a few rounds and walks off.

He's also got a concealed weapon and shoots you in the back as you leave a building and walks off into the night.

Blah, blah, blah there are a lot of scenarios. Plus, even in the States, you need a permit for a concealed weapon. I've seen Boston Legal.

[Farnhamia]

I would think any form of protest against a head of state is legal.

For the ME the bottom of a shoe is a rather terrible insult.

Protesting or assault; It depends on how you view i view it as some grease ball trying to Harm the Head of State.

As an American, I am embarrassed by this ass-hattery.

[Forsher]

It won't matter much. How many people are ready to draw down and drop somebody who enters a room shooting?

If I searched this thread I bet I could find you half a dozen.

What's the phrase, Internet Tough Guys?

[The Joseon Dynasty]

If I searched this thread I bet I could find you half a dozen.

What's the phrase, Internet Tough Guys?

Oh, wow. I've had absolutely no idea what 'ITG' meant until now.

[The Black Forrest]

I would think any form of protest against a head of state is legal.

For the ME the bottom of a shoe is a rather terrible insult.

Protesting or assault; It depends on how you view i view it as some grease ball trying to Harm the Head of State.

*shrugs* A head of state probably shouldn't be in a country he just invaded.

I view it a legitimate protest. At worst, the shrub would have had a booboo.

But let's not go on a tangent......

[Forsher]

What's the phrase, Internet Tough Guys?

Oh, wow. I've had absolutely no idea what 'ITG' meant until now.

They have an acronym for it now? Oh dear, I'm behind the times.

[Farnhamia]

What's the phrase, Internet Tough Guys?

Oh, wow. I've had absolutely no idea what 'ITG' meant until now.

Technically, an ITG threatens you for disagreeing with him, but I believe it applies.

[Norjagen]

If I might interject.. Not making a case either way, but that's the reasoning behind concealed carry as opposed to open carry, and why many people prefer to carry concealed, even when they don't have to. You don't do anyone any good dead, and if a psycho has cased an area beforehand, he's going to single-out threats first. If you're carrying openly, you're likely to get blindsided right when things start. A concealed carrier is just another member of a startled crowd, instead of a priority target. In theory, that gives them a bit of time to assess the situation, and ensures that the assailant is the one laying their cards on the table first.
Just an interesting bit of info, pertinent to the topic. And, as I said, that's just theory.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: In other words, it makes it more likely that you'll see the bad guy before he sees you.

It won't matter much. How many people are ready to draw down and drop somebody who enters a room shooting?

Not the majority, for sure. The same sort of people who will lock the children under their care in a closet, and give their life to misdirect said shooter, like one of the teachers in Connecticut. Believe it or not, there are people who ask those questions every single day; "Do I really have what it takes to carry? Do I have the mindset and the confidence to make that sort of judgement call?"

Every bullet that leaves a gun in those situations has a lawyer attached to it, and the potential to do unnecessary harm. The man who drew down on the Oregon shooter didn't take the shot, because there were people moving in the background that he may have hit, had he fired. He showed remarkable judgement, and didn't take actions that would have constituted an unnecessary risk to innocents. Even though he wasn't able to drop the assailant, his reasons for not doing so were responsible ones, and he made the right choice. (It's also been stated that the shooter offed himself when he saw the CCW holder draw on him, but that's only hearsay)

Cases like that are why I don't get the "Firing wildly, bullets going everywhere" argument against concealed carriers. We're talking about people who are placing their entire future potentially in the hands of lawyers and courts, even if they're justified in pulling the trigger. There's a lot of self-scrutiny involved, and lots of judgement calls, of the same sorts LEOs encounter every day. They're among the most cautious and responsible gun owners you're likely to ever meet, and they take their choice very seriously.

[Tmutarakhan]

Protesting or assault; It depends on how you view i view it as some grease ball trying to Harm the Head of State.

As an American, I am embarrassed by this ass-hattery.

And this guy, with his eagerness to shoot al-Zaidi, and exuberant displays of Nazi fan-boy-ism, wonders why I have an issue with him collecting an arsenal.

[American Nexus]

It seems like there are a lot of school shootings in the US. What's up with that?

there are just plain poor security standards here in America (I will be leaving this wretched land for Melbourne, Australia in a few years)

[Gun Manufacturers]

No. The names and ages are posted on the NY Times site. They were all either six or seven and they were all shot more than once. Merry Christmas.

I wish I could reincarnate him and turn him over to the parents.

If you had the power to resurrect people, why wouldn't you resurrect all the victims? I'm sure the parents would rather have their children back.

[Farnhamia]

I wish I could reincarnate him and turn him over to the parents.

If you had the power to resurrect people, why wouldn't you resurrect all the victims? I'm sure the parents would rather have their children back.

Look back a page.

[Norjagen]

If I might interject.. Not making a case either way, but that's the reasoning behind concealed carry as opposed to open carry, and why many people prefer to carry concealed, even when they don't have to. You don't do anyone any good dead, and if a psycho has cased an area beforehand, he's going to single-out threats first. If you're carrying openly, you're likely to get blindsided right when things start. A concealed carrier is just another member of a startled crowd, instead of a priority target. In theory, that gives them a bit of time to assess the situation, and ensures that the assailant is the one laying their cards on the table first.
Just an interesting bit of info, pertinent to the topic. And, as I said, that's just theory.

EDIT TO CLARIFY: In other words, it makes it more likely that you'll see the bad guy before he sees you.

I doubt it. Say he's on a roof and taking pot shots. Now what?

He's hidden himself in a bush, fires a few rounds and walks off.

He's also got a concealed weapon and shoots you in the back as you leave a building and walks off into the night.

Blah, blah, blah there are a lot of scenarios. Plus, even in the States, you need a permit for a concealed weapon. I've seen Boston Legal.

Yes, you do. And there is training involved in receiving said permit, in almost every state. I'm not saying that a carrier will always be in a position to respond. I'm saying that having the weapon concealed means that you can blend in with the crowd and hopefully not be targeted from the get go. Then, if an opportunity to end the situation DOES present itself, you're equipped to deal with it. Say a man breaks into an office building and starts shooting people. You grab your gun out of your desk, and get beneath it. When he reaches your cubicle, you're ready. It's impossible to predict that first shot. All too often, these things go something like this.. "Oh my god! That man just shot that guy!" "Oh my god! he's just going to keep shooting people!" At that point, you're finally able to react. All you can do is hope that you're not being targeted at the outset, and prepare yourself, both practically and mentally, to react in that situation, should (god forbid) you ever find yourself in such a hellish spot. If someone's going to snipe you from a roof, and they're after you specifically, you'll never see it coming. That's a harsh truth, but it's there. That doesn't make carrying useless for defense.

[Forsher]

I doubt it. Say he's on a roof and taking pot shots. Now what?

He's hidden himself in a bush, fires a few rounds and walks off.

He's also got a concealed weapon and shoots you in the back as you leave a building and walks off into the night.

Blah, blah, blah there are a lot of scenarios. Plus, even in the States, you need a permit for a concealed weapon. I've seen Boston Legal.

Yes, you do. And there is training involved in receiving said permit, in almost every state. I'm not saying that a carrier will always be in a position to respond. I'm saying that having the weapon concealed means that you can blend in with the crowd and hopefully not be targeted from the get go. Then, if an opportunity to end the situation DOES present itself, you're equipped to deal with it. Say a man breaks into an office building and starts shooting people. You grab your gun out of your desk, and get beneath it. When he reaches your cubicle, you're ready. It's impossible to predict that first shot. All too often, these things go something like this.. "Oh my god! That man just shot that guy!" "Oh my god! he's just going to keep shooting people!" At that point, you're finally able to react. All you can do is hope that you're not being targeted at the outset, and prepare yourself, both practically and mentally, to react in that situation, should (god forbid) you ever find yourself in such a hellish spot. If someone's going to snipe you from a roof, and they're after you specifically, you'll never see it coming. That's a harsh truth, but it's there. That doesn't make carrying useless for defense.

Again, assumes that the shooter is visible. Also, that the potential hero doesn't get shot as just another member of the panicking crowd. You see, having your own gun when visible make you a target. If the gun isn't visible and you are it's no good to you. And if neither of you are visible to the baddie then that just makes my point.

[The Zeonic States]

Protesting or assault; It depends on how you view i view it as some grease ball trying to Harm the Head of State.

As an American, I am embarrassed by this ass-hattery.

So i throw a Boot at some one else and get locked up for assault but it's not right if this fellow does?

Honestly he was charged with assault; I am just saying that well if in the inital act security drew their firearms and killed him?

I wouldn't shed a tear.

I don't have any love for that president but he shouldn't be mocked by some Journalist little lone assaulted by one.

After the fact executing him? Might have been a tad bit extreme but some say he got tortured for once i hope that was true.

[The Black Forrest]

It won't matter much. How many people are ready to draw down and drop somebody who enters a room shooting?

Not the majority, for sure. The same sort of people who will lock the children under their care in a closet, and give their life to misdirect said shooter, like one of the teachers in Connecticut. Believe it or not, there are people who ask those questions every single day; "Do I really have what it takes to carry? Do I have the mindset and the confidence to make that sort of judgement call?"

Every bullet that leaves a gun in those situations has a lawyer attached to it, and the potential to do unnecessary harm. The man who drew down on the Oregon shooter didn't take the shot, because there were people moving in the background that he may have hit, had he fired. He showed remarkable judgement, and didn't take actions that would have constituted an unnecessary risk to innocents. Even though he wasn't able to drop the assailant, his reasons for not doing so were responsible ones, and he made the right choice. (It's also been stated that the shooter offed himself when he saw the CCW holder draw on him, but that's only hearsay)

Cases like that are why I don't get the "Firing wildly, bullets going everywhere" argument against concealed carriers. We're talking about people who are placing their entire future potentially in the hands of lawyers and courts, even if they're justified in pulling the trigger. There's a lot of self-scrutiny involved, and lots of judgement calls, of the same sorts LEOs encounter every day. They're among the most cautious and responsible gun owners you're likely to ever meet, and they take their choice very seriously.

I will still say most will fail in the moment. Hesitation and end up being the first shot.

Difference being concealed gun owners still see people. The pig who did this; didn't see people.

Most have to be trained for this. Hell I remember in my martial arts training, I actually hesitated the first time I was told to do round kick drills on one of the targets with a face. I have spared in tournaments and yet I hesitated? Probably because the face was exposed? A couple seconds later I thought this was dumb and started kicking.

People think and talk about actions. How often does it play out when the moment arises?

IConcealed weapons would not have prevented this. It's one thing to crank rounds off at target in a range and another to shoot at somebody shooting at you.

[Norjagen]

Yes, you do. And there is training involved in receiving said permit, in almost every state. I'm not saying that a carrier will always be in a position to respond. I'm saying that having the weapon concealed means that you can blend in with the crowd and hopefully not be targeted from the get go. Then, if an opportunity to end the situation DOES present itself, you're equipped to deal with it. Say a man breaks into an office building and starts shooting people. You grab your gun out of your desk, and get beneath it. When he reaches your cubicle, you're ready. It's impossible to predict that first shot. All too often, these things go something like this.. "Oh my god! That man just shot that guy!" "Oh my god! he's just going to keep shooting people!" At that point, you're finally able to react. All you can do is hope that you're not being targeted at the outset, and prepare yourself, both practically and mentally, to react in that situation, should (god forbid) you ever find yourself in such a hellish spot. If someone's going to snipe you from a roof, and they're after you specifically, you'll never see it coming. That's a harsh truth, but it's there. That doesn't make carrying useless for defense.

Again, assumes that the shooter is visible. Also, that the potential hero doesn't get shot as just another member of the panicking crowd. You see, having your own gun when visible make you a target. If the gun isn't visible and you are it's no good to you. And if neither of you are visible to the baddie then that just makes my point.

Not the point I was making. Nothing will stop him from randomly selecting you from the crowd of people he's targeting. That's bad luck.

Carrying openly will make him target you first, for sure, making it a bad choice.

Carrying concealed will, at worst, make you the target of a random shot, as opposed to his main threat and priority.

That's certainly preferable to not carrying at all. You do what you have to do to survive. Cower, draw, and wait for an opening if you have to. Or, if you have a clean shot at the outset, draw and take it before he beads in on you. I'm not saying it will completely safeguard your life, but with so many random variables already stacked against you, there's no reason to find yourself in such a situation at the willful disadvantage of being unarmed.

[Miss Defied]

Yes, you do. And there is training involved in receiving said permit, in almost every state.

Got a source for that? I don't understand this to be the case at all.

[Farnhamia]

As an American, I am embarrassed by this ass-hattery.

So i throw a Boot at some one else and get locked up for assault but it's not right if this fellow does?

Honestly he was charged with assault; I am just saying that well if in the inital act security drew their firearms and killed him?

I wouldn't shed a tear.

I don't have any love for that president but he shouldn't be mocked by some Journalist little lone assaulted by one.

After the fact executing him? Might have been a tad bit extreme but some say he got tortured for once i hope that was true.

You said someone should have ventilated his head, more than once. That's ass-hattery. Nice little dance around what you said, though.

[The Joseon Dynasty]

As an American, I am embarrassed by this ass-hattery.

So i throw a Boot at some one else and get locked up for assault but it's not right if this fellow does?

Honestly he was charged with assault; I am just saying that well if in the inital act security drew their firearms and killed him?

I wouldn't shed a tear.

I don't have any love for that president but he shouldn't be mocked by some Journalist little lone assaulted by one.

After the fact executing him? Might have been a tad bit extreme but some say he got tortured for once i hope that was true.

Are you bonkers or something?

[Wisconsin9]

As an American, I am embarrassed by this ass-hattery.

he shouldn't be mocked by some Journalist

The First Amendment called; it would like a word with you.