Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (34648)	4/7/2009 11:34:27 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

Mass shootings are the best arguments against gun control. In an individual shooting the gun control advocate might argue that the perp may have gotten the drop on the victim and carrying a gun wouldn't have helped (although often it would have for a number of reasons), or that there would be some sort of shootout which would have killed even more people (although not many innocent bystanders are killed in shootouts with non-criminals defending themselves against attackers) But in a mass killing the usefulness of armed civilians on the scene is obvious. The police take minutes to tens of minutes to arrive on the scene, by that time the situation is often over. And if it isn't over police frequently just isolate the scene and call in SWAT which takes tens of minutes to an hour or more to arrive. If civilians are frequently armed, if they are allowed to carry rather than having "gun free zones", that serve as choice targets for mass killers, then the killing can be stopped early on preventing a number of deaths (or perhaps the attack will be deterred preventing all the deaths)