Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleks
You, my friend, have missed the point, and clearly don't understand the language or context of those statements. Let me try again:
Yes, a CCW holder could have ended it right there. COULD have, not WOULD have. Remember, no absolutes. It has been demonstrated in the past that individuals that are CCW holders have intervened very successfully, but I'm not one of those guys who gets blinded by one side, and I KNOW that there are instances that has not been the case, hence my admission that not everyone can be spoken for and some individuals may not execute proper judgement, that can also be demonstrated. I didn't flip flop on anything, sorry about your misinterpretation and allowing me to retype this for you.
Furthermore, my position is anything but absurd. I'm curious as to the reasoning you're so passionate about this? I'm protecting my interests, do you feel unsafe around firearms? Do you get uncomfortable around police officers? Or are you one of the people that see the sensationalism in the media about demonization of firearms and decide your mind is made up without actually educating yourself? I'm truly curious
|
Well a lot of things could have happened. Someone could have thrown a rock from the observation deck and taken the guy out before he killed anyone. I'm not saying it WOULD have happened, but it COULD have. No absolutes.
I'm fine around firearms, actually a pretty decent shot when it comes to clay pigeons. My issue in this thread has nothing to do with my views on firearms, although I'm quite firmly in the camp of less guns (particularly those with no other purpose, not hunting rifles) in existence being a good thing, it has to do with the idiotic idea that armed citizens would have made this particular situation turn out better.