11 Examples of gun owners stopping mass shootings

[libra8]

Legal gun owners stop mass shootings.

http://libertycrier.com/11-examples-...2849-284990557

[jerkin]

Legal gun owners stop mass shootings.

http://libertycrier.com/11-examples-...2849-284990557

Half of those were off duty police officers.

[Deleted]

Half of those were off duty police officers.

who are gun owners...

[ShooterInPA1]

Half of those were off duty police officers.

I think the point is to show what can happen when guns are in the hands of the good guys.

[iamtommyboy]

I think the point is to show what can happen when guns are in the hands of the good guys.

Now look what you did? You know you can get hanged around these parts for calling the police "the good guys", right?

[donotknowme]

Everyone knows that cops aren't people.

[BestDefense=StrongOffense]

Don't talk to the police

[sgreen10]

so i am glad the OP posted up this link, earlier today i posted a status just to try and get some discussion going on my fb between friends about their positions on if they are against guns or gun crimes, then go one to say myself why not be against all crimes not just gun crimes, it turned into a better debate then i expected only two of my friends seemed to be against guns themselves and thanks to this post i was able to pretty much shoot down the bigger "anti" out of the two who we will call NYC seeing as i do live in NY and he lives in the city (may explain his thougth prosses)

NYC "While on the subject, lets make this clear - guns don't act as a deterrent. They act to escalate the stakes of violent interaction - which is the whole reason why a criminal would prefer to use one over a dagger. Take, for example, beat cops in the UK,who generally do not carry a firearm. The likelihood of them dying in the line of service is significantly lower than American beat cops. Hell, the majority of guns used in crimes in the UK are airsoft replicas, and those guns used that are real are much more likely to be used as a club than to actually be fired. The solution isn't more guns - thats a ridiculous sentiment. The US has one of the highest rates of gun ownership anywhere in the world, and the highest rates of gun violence to boot. Though, compare that to Switzerland, which too has a very high frequency of gun ownership, yet significantly less gun crime. In the US, the cities with the highest rate of gun violence are St Louis and New Orleans - major cities in traditionally conservative states with moderate legislation on gun control. Gun ownership isnt the significant factor in deterring gun violence, and the evidence supports this. It has more to do with rates of poverty, population density and cost of living - all of which escalate the stakes criminals live by. Its a complex issue, made all the more complicated by the ignorance of both sides of the issue treating it so simply. More guns, less guns, more regulation, less regulation - all of then miss the issue completely. The problem is criminality, and giving people options to live by that dont involve violence and crime"

granted some of his argument is valid but its really the first part of his argument that i am glad that i saw this post the other day and was able to do a quick ref. vs. trying to find supporting evidence on the fly

[harold63]

The problem is criminality, and giving people options to live by that dont involve violence and crime"

To the rat-fuck politicians we have in big cities, this is a necessary evil. It creates a lot of jobs.....having thugs, that is. If we wanted to get rid of thugs, we could do it. We don't. We slap their hand and send them back to the street to 'thug' on.

Because of freedom, we have a lot of animals in the US. Freedom is good as long as you lock the animals up. Leave them out of their cage and all hell breaks loose. IMO, that is where a lot of gun crime comes from.

We have homeless people living in the woods behind the Walmart I work at. They don't go around shooting people because they have no money.