How damaging are Uvalde police actions to the good guy with a gun theory?

[Gateman_Wen]

I think this cuts both ways. But it does damage the credibility of the NRA’s pet theory.

Apparently an AR-15 is so dangerous that multiple trained, armed professionals wouldn’t even go near it.

Frankly sounds irresponsible of society to continue to make them available to its citizens

The good guy with a gun thing is dead. This didn't kill it, it was pretty much stillborn.

 

[Gateman_Wen]

It has no effect on gun nuts.

Nothing has any effect on gun nuts. Their skulls are thicker than the glacis plate on an Abrams.

 

[Ishm]

I strongly agree with this. the cops clearly were not "good guys" in this scenario. The "good buy with a gun" theory isn't a theory. It's just objectively true. You have to have someone who is really good with a gun or some kind of ninjitsu ninja to stop someone with a gun. The argument the "pro gun" side would make is that we need to make sure the "good guys" can still buy guns. The anti gun crowd would argue that it is better to prevent the bad guy from having to be stopped in the first place by implementing gun control.

I think we can do both. I believe we can have gun ownership and prevent "bad guys" from getting guns.

Of course you can. But it will slow down gun sales, so the industry and their supporters would never allow that.

 

[SCrider]

Zero effect, because the idiots who believe in that theory are beyond rational help anyway.

 

[TurtleDude]

The NRA slogan is stupid.

More guns is stupid.

Lots of stupid going on.

stupid is blaming the NRA or the second amendment or honest gun owners for the actions of a clearly psychotic criminal and for police who violated what is the standard protocol for dealing with an active shooter.

 

[TurtleDude]

The "good guy" with a gun theory was idiotic last Saturday and remains so today. What happened in Uvalde has no impact on that assessment.

How the ‘good guy with a gun’ became a deadly American fantasy

The archetype can be traced back to 1920s detective fiction, when gruff, gun-toting, cigarette-smoking mavericks became heroic figures.

www.pbs.org

Breaking down the NRA-backed theory that a good guy with a gun stops a bad guy with a gun

The idea is raised in the wake of many mass shootings.

abcnews.go.com

Opinion | The myth of the "good guy with a gun," debunked by a veteran

I never see a "good guy with a gun:" I see a human more likely to exacerbate a tragedy than to stop it.

www.nbcnews.com

A Good Guy with a Gun?

The claim that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun is clearly and demonstrably false.

www.psychologytoday.com

Police “neutralized” the Dayton shooter in 30 seconds. He still shot 14 people.

The timeline is some of the strongest evidence yet that the “good guy with a gun” myth is just that.

www.vox.com

Guns don’t kill people…: good guys and the legitimization of gun violence - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications

Building on literatures that examine why firearms are appealing and to whom and employing Weber’s concept of “legitimate violence”, this paper utilizes an online concealed carry forum to critically analyze how firearm proliferation is rationalized in the U.S. The analysis focuses on three...

www.nature.com

Then, of course, there is the overlooked problem of the "good guy with the gun" theory.... the good guy that was shot and killed by police last year because the "good guy" had a gun at a shooting.

Police chief hails ‘good guy with a gun’ after officer kills him in tragic mistaken identity

Police say the man who shot the gunman prevented a larger loss of life.

thehill.com

Maybe he should have worn his white hat that day.

Unfortunately, we can not solve this problem without lowering the denominator (fewer guns, or more specifically, making access to hyper lethal weapons more difficult), as mush as the NRA wants to kick and scream. If you are not willing to address guns in our culture, you are not willing to effectively deal with active shooter situations.

why are the anti gun lefties bashing the NRA rather than the shooter or the police who failed to follow the proper protocols? because it is political theater at play here, not any real effort to find out what caused the problem

 

[Gateman_Wen]

1. Police are not necessarily "good guys with guns."

They are supposed to be the epitome of "good guys with guns". The fact that they are not gives lie to the whole stupid idea,

 

[TurtleDude]

Nothing has any effect on gun nuts. Their skulls are thicker than the glacis plate on an Abrams.

yet it is the anti gunners who constantly spew lies on this topic-such as one poster who constantly said the only reason people own AR 15s is to kill lots of people or the idiots who claim you don't need more than 2-6 shots to stop ANY home invasion or attack

 

[TurtleDude]

They are supposed to be the epitome of "good guys with guns". The fact that they are not gives lie to the whole stupid idea,

yet many of the anti gunners want only criminals and police to have guns. Go figure

 

[iguanaman]

I think this cuts both ways. But it does damage the credibility of the NRA’s pet theory.

Apparently an AR-15 is so dangerous that multiple trained, armed professionals wouldn’t even go near it.

Frankly sounds irresponsible of society to continue to make them available to its citizens

The problem is the weaponry of the murderer out classed the police at the scene. Vests are useless against AR's with 5.56 NATO rounds. They feared for their lives.

 

[The Mark]

No, the stupid pigs were afraid. The parents were quite willing to go in.



On the contrary, it's become even more clear that the cops will not protect you, which means you must protect yourself, which in turn means guns should be more accessible, not less.

To me that last part means we need higher standards and training requirements for police.

 

[TurtleDude]

The problem is the weaponry of the murderer out classed the police at the scene. Vests are useless against AR's with 5.56 NATO rounds. They feared for their lives.

there are plenty of vests that will stop a 223 round. And yes they feared for their lives. that is why so many children were killed after the initial attack. Police cowardice

 

[The Mark]

The problem is the weaponry of the murderer out classed the police at the scene. Vests are useless against AR's with 5.56 NATO rounds. They feared for their lives.

It doesn't matter that they feared for their lives, they're supposed to have gone in even with the expectation of death, because their job is to protect the people getting shot inside.

Edit: And weaponry doesn't negate training and numbers, it was one shooter and they were at least several.

 

[iguanaman]

yet many of the anti gunners want only criminals and police to have guns. Go figure

The point of this thread is that "good guys with guns" is a lie. The more guns we have the more gun violence is the result. It is just the way it is,

 

[Gateman_Wen]

yet many of the anti gunners want only criminals and police to have guns. Go figure

Parents need guns. That way they can "encourage" cowardly police officers to do their jobs.

 

[Cordelier]

yet many of the anti gunners want only criminals and police to have guns. Go figure

Haven't seen very many police shoot up schools... have you?

 

[TurtleDude]

The point of this thread is that "good guys with guns" is a lie. The more guns we have the more gun violence is the result. It is just the way it is,

no it isn't Good guys couldn't have guns on the school property so other than the cops, no others could be legal armed. And you are again stating lies or dishonest claims. In the last 30 years there have been 100 million more firearms added to the USA and most are semi autos =often with the magazines that cause major garment soiling among the left. Millions upon millions of people who could not carry guns legally concealed 30 years ago, do so now. What is the overall rate of gun violence over the last ten years compared to the eighties and early nineties?

 

[Cordelier]

there are plenty of vests that will stop a 223 round. And yes they feared for their lives. that is why so many children were killed after the initial attack. Police cowardice

I'd suggest there's a very wide gap between cowardice and foolhardiness, don't you think?

 

[TurtleDude]

Parents need guns. That way they can "encourage" cowardly police officers to do their jobs.

I cannot figure your arguments out-you claim to be pro gun but your posts tend to bash legal gun ownership Parents need guns to protect their children when the police are not around or fail to do their jobs

 

[iguanaman]

there are plenty of vests that will stop a 223 round. And yes they feared for their lives. that is why so many children were killed after the initial attack. Police cowardice

Except he was not using 223 bullets. Like most AR owners he knew that 5.56 NATO rounds are cheaper, far more deadly and go right through most vests. Why would you buy a weapon of war and put wimpy bullets in it?

The gunman in the deadliest school shooting in Texas history bought two AR-style rifles legally just after his 18th birthday — days before his assault on Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.
He legally purchased two AR platform rifles from a federally licensed gun store on two days: May 17 — just a day after his birthday — and May 20, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said, according to a briefing that state Sen. John Whitmire, chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, received from state authorities late Tuesday. The gunman bought 375 rounds of 5.56-caliber ammunition on May 18.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/25/uvalde-shooter-bought-gun-legally/

 

[TurtleDude]

I'd suggest there's a very wide gap between cowardice and foolhardiness, don't you think?

Have you gone through active shooter training?

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

I think this cuts both ways. But it does damage the credibility of the NRA’s pet theory.

Apparently an AR-15 is so dangerous that multiple trained, armed professionals wouldn’t even go near it.

Frankly sounds irresponsible of society to continue to make them available to its citizens

Our young men and women in the military would have took out that shooter. Maybe our police would be less hesitant to go after the bad guys if they didn't get in trouble for doing so.

 

[Cordelier]

Have you gone through active shooter training?

Save it. Nobody believes you have either.

 

[TurtleDude]

Except he was not using 223 bullets. Like most AR owners he knew the 5.56 NATO rounds are cheaper and far more deadly and go right through most vests.

The gunman in the deadliest school shooting in Texas history bought two AR-style rifles legally just after his 18th birthday — days before his assault on Robb Elementary School in Uvalde.
He legally purchased two AR platform rifles from a federally licensed gun store on two days: May 17 — just a day after his birthday — and May 20, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives said, according to a briefing that state Sen. John Whitmire, chair of the Senate Criminal Justice Committee, received from state authorities late Tuesday. The gunman bought 375 rounds of 5.56-caliber ammunition on May 18.

https://www.texastribune.org/2022/05/25/uvalde-shooter-bought-gun-legally/

are you pretending that at 10 feet there is a difference between the two. You again demonstrate you don't know what you talk about. it is the style of projectile that matters not the slight difference between 556 and 223 ammo-and you can shoot both out of the same rifle that the shooter had. You just proved what happens when someone who is completely ignorant about this subject, googles something without understanding the subject matter. I will let others comment on how stupid that claim of yours is

 

[upsideguy]

why are the anti gun lefties bashing the NRA rather than the shooter or the police who failed to follow the proper protocols? because it is political theater at play here, not any real effort to find out what caused the problem

No, because we are focused on the macro problem, not the specific event. There are some consistencies between active shooter situations that need to be addressed. What is political theater is the focus on a particular incident, looking for holes in that incident and wanting to talk about them as a distraction from the over-arching issues.

The police response is an issue of this particular incident, but irrelevant to the overall discussion that needs to be had. If the police did everything perfectly, we would still have an active shooter (2nd this week) at a school, it just would not have been as uncomfortable for certain politicians.

BTW. I am not an anti-gun lefty and I want to speak about this. Its quite distributing as an incident and, more importantly, as part of a 20 year trend that clearly is not being address correctly.