Good Guy with a gun?

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

LS1 Z28

Territorial Marshal
Oct 30, 2007
5,354
4,200
1,743
#41
So, all small business that does not want guns on their property should have to pay for private security in addition to the tax they pay for policing not because they have a high-risk business but because anywhere can be a target? Our already strapped education system should spend millions of dollars securing schools (recently proven not to work BTW)?

Seems like a big, expensive ask of the innocents to me. I really can't believe that the founding fathers that created this amendment thought this through to a point in the future where people with semi-automatic weapons would go into public places and mow down as many innocents as possible centuries later. If they could come back and see that the amendment they made at that time was being used as it is now I think there is a very strong chance that they would not agree that it meets their intent and purpose.

I don't think that trying to fix the issue by "hardening" all potential victims is in any way a solution. It seems unrealistic to me to think we can make all of society protected against a shooter at all times. It also seems that we are creating a war zone if any public space not protected by armed "soldiers" is a target of attack. While I realize what you are saying sounds like a plan. It would sound horrific to anyone not from modern America or a war zone. Nobody else thinks this way.
You can't really say that hardening targets doesn't work based off what happened in Uvalde. The building and classroom doors were unlocked, and the police refused to confront the shooter for nearly an hour. All this proves is that security measures don't work when you don't follow them.

I don't necessarily think that we should have a law requiring small businesses to provide armed security if they prohibit weapons, but I do think that having adequate security in GFZs would reduce the occurrence and severity of mass shootings.

The 2A exists, and we have roughly 400 million civilian owned firearms in circulation. Neither of those things are going to change anytime soon. I think that we have to attack gun violence in several different ways, but hardening soft targets has to be one of them.
 
Last edited:

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
33,184
33,334
1,743
oklahoma city
#42
You can't really say that hardening targets doesn't work based off what happened in Uvalde. The building and classroom doors were unlocked, and the police refused to confront the shooter for nearly an hour. All this proves is that security measures don't work when you don't follow them.

I don't necessarily think that we should have a law requiring small businesses to provide armed security if they prohibit weapons, but do I think that having adequate security in GFZs would reduce the occurrence and severity of mass shootings.

The 2A exists, and we have roughly 400 million civilian owned firearms in circulation. Neither of those things are going to change anytime soon. I think that we have to attack gun violence in several different ways, but hardening soft targets has to be one of them.
The second amendment wasn’t considered an individual right as recently as a few decades ago. Only the recent courts have interpreted it that way. As abortion and other hit button issues have shown, court interpretation can change.

If all gfz had security that might lower the risk. If some do, then that changes nothing. I think all gfzs having security to the point that it would help is more unrealistic than changing the requirements to obtain weapons as freely as we have now.
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
33,184
33,334
1,743
oklahoma city
#47
You can't go Barney and expect it to all work out.
But, that is what a "good guy with a gun" might be. With the plan being that all these citizens will act as ready-made enforcers of the law if the time comes that they are needed, we are counting on the luck of the draw for enforcement regarding skill, training, and equipment. If our militia has no requirements for entry other than the legal ownership of a gun, this is going to be the result sometimes.
 

andylicious

Territorial Marshal
Nov 16, 2013
7,209
3,101
743
36
tractor
#48
But, that is what a "good guy with a gun" might be. With the plan being that all these citizens will act as ready-made enforcers of the law if the time comes that they are needed, we are counting on the luck of the draw for enforcement regarding skill, training, and equipment. If our militia has no requirements for entry other than the legal ownership of a gun, this is going to be the result sometimes.
I was talking about the Uvalde police force
 

Jostate

Identifies as a Cowboys fan
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
23,118
15,528
1,743
#50
I'm more with the left on this issue, as painful as that is to say.

I'll say it's mostly an academic discussion because there are so many guns in this country and violence is almost part of our national DNA but I jus don't buy the arguments from the pro gun crowd.

Even futile attempts at stopping mass shooting are at least attempts.
 
Jul 5, 2020
2,093
400
213
59
Broken Arrow
#51
I'm more with the left on this issue, as painful as that is to say.

I'll say it's mostly an academic discussion because there are so many guns in this country and violence is almost part of our national DNA but I jus don't buy the arguments from the pro gun crowd.

Even futile attempts at stopping mass shooting are at least attempts.
To which arguments do you refer?
 

Jostate

Identifies as a Cowboys fan
A/V Subscriber
Jun 24, 2005
23,118
15,528
1,743
#52
To which arguments do you refer?
I stepped right in that one didn't I?

Mostly the good guy with a gun point. Which is valid but it's always a lot easier for bad guys with guns to do harm than it is for good guys to stop them.

And I don't really think your guns keep the government in line. I think politicians are more afraid of your vote than your gun.
 
May 4, 2011
3,704
1,661
1,743
Charleston, SC
#53
I stepped right in that one didn't I?

Mostly the good guy with a gun point. Which is valid but it's always a lot easier for bad guys with guns to do harm than it is for good guys to stop them.

And I don't really think your guns keep the government in line. I think politicians are more afraid of your vote than your gun.
And dollars to the other side
 

ramases2112

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Jun 28, 2008
11,499
5,601
1,743
30
Inside the Basket of Deplorables
www.reddit.com
#54
Apparently the good guy with a gun in the latest attempted mass shooting put 10 rounds down range and hit 8 within 15 seconds of the shooter walking out of the bathroom. He did that at 40 yards! Though I'm more inclined to believe it's 40 ft rather than yards, that would be incredibly accurate under the circumstances. This story needs to be drilled into the skull of gun control loonies as much as possible. This story needs to be continually ran.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk
 

Birry

Federal Marshal
Feb 6, 2007
13,687
7,342
1,743
Landlocked
#55
Apparently the good guy with a gun in the latest attempted mass shooting put 10 rounds down range and hit 8 within 15 seconds of the shooter walking out of the bathroom. He did that at 40 yards! Though I'm more inclined to believe it's 40 ft rather than yards, that would be incredibly accurate under the circumstances. This story needs to be drilled into the skull of gun control loonies as much as possible. This story needs to be continually ran.
Dude obviously trained a lot to have that kind of accuracy. That's impressive.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
8,987
3,896
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#56
The idea that more guns out in our society will make us safer is just wrong headed.
I concur.
Really wish it was never a thing.

Being an Okie, I’ve debated the issue from every side.

I just don’t have an viable answer that doesn’t include technology that’s not invented yet. I do have one option. Last paragraph.

A). We could write more legislation and make all guns illegal. Including the governments.

Knowing there are over 300,000,000 of them makes me very dubious they would all be turned in.

Furthermore, we already have legislation that forbids some individuals from possessing guns but for one reason or another, that legislation didn’t stop them from possession of a gun.

Lastly, we already know 13 year old uneducated Filipinos can reproduce exact replicas of Smith and Wesson’s 1911 .45. And they make it out of scrap refuse as well as the ammo.

The best we can do here, is stop production. Let time kill off the last of the gun owners and confiscate the weapons. Then only outlaws will continue to be outlaws.

B) We could go the opposite direction and promote more guns for all.

From women having gun parties, to the high school skeet team. Televised shooting games. Armed society and all.

C) New Tech. Highly magnetized personal zones that warp any metal bullets’ path. Plasma shield tshirts. Btw, they have bullet proof blouses and suits now that aren’t much heavier than their normal counterparts.

D). My best solution. A 3 way communication between schools (early childhood development) families (most knowledge on mental health status of potential shooter) and local law enforcement.

Identifying future shooters doesn’t seem too difficult lately after numerous instances of LE knowing about the suspect from previous episodes. Buffalo store shooter was known as many others were known.

That knowledge should be enough to trigger a plan of intervention. Depending on lots of variables, too many to name here, the plan goes into activation let’s say if 2/3 of the communication triangle feel it’s needed. Parents suddenly clam up and stop talking could be a trigger. Buying a gun could be a trigger. Once triggered, a heightened sense of concern should be obvious to the potential suspect. Constantly being showed empathy and not being left alone. Etc.


None of it is easy but who knows? Maybe plasma tshirts will be a thing?
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
8,987
3,896
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
#57
I stepped right in that one didn't I?

Mostly the good guy with a gun point. Which is valid but it's always a lot easier for bad guys with guns to do harm than it is for good guys to stop them.

And I don't really think your guns keep the government in line. I think politicians are more afraid of your vote than your gun.
https://orangepower.com/threads/active-shooter-at-texas-elementary-school.282610/post-4409393



In complete agreement with you until this.

Ulvalde.