Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Praxis91, Nov 13, 2015.
If only those 35+ victims could have defended themselves against the savage.
As many have rightly pointed out, the original Paris Attacks thread is not the place to discuss the relationship between events in France and the American 2A. I thought a new thread might help relieve that pressure.
My views on the topic are as follows:
1) There is some relationship worth noting between events like this and the 2A. With reports of one by one executions, what would it have hurt to have a CC there? Let's go through the outcomes:
A) CC does nothing. People die as they have here
B) CC shoots and hits someone who is already among the dead while trying to kill the attacker. Tragic, but the net result is the same. Only difference is the CC has to live with that - a choice they made. What the final tally would have been in absentia remains unknown.
C) CC hits someone who would have lived. If some of those who died end up living it becomes a philosophical question. If it is in addition, we still have a CC who has to live with that choice. What it could have been remains unknown.
D) CC accomplishes nothing but enrages the attackers who continue to kill, perhaps more quickly. This a a calculated risk by one person who had an impact on others. I'm not sure how it would be different from a government who refuses to negotiate or a segment of hostages who resist, leading to other deaths.
E) I separate this because it could happen in any circumstance. The government storms the building and kill the CC, thinking there is another attacker. That was a choice made by the person.
2) I'd like to wait until later to sort out how this should impact our behaviors, but is it really any different than those who attacked campus carry in the immediate aftermath of Oregon? It seems illogical to do one and not the other. I expect that there will be calls in the coming days to ban the weapons used there in the US, as if that ban served purposes in France.
3) It is tragic that this happened, but this is part of being a free and open society. Acceptance is painful, but hopefully the French don't follow the path that we and the UK have laid down.
Well, I'm not sure we'd want a bunch of people at a heavy metal concert packing heat, but if they had armed security guards they might have stopped it when it started. We'll never know, though.
If guns worked as defence in this situation they'd work when the US has a school shooting.
Or mall shootings, or theater shootings, or church shootings...
I thought about debating this topic, but instead I'll engage in something more worthwhile, and just bash my head repeatedly against a brick wall.
France can do what ever they wish to do based on their culture and laws, just like we do here .
A nice padded wall would be better for your head. But have fun
How I can make the deaths of 100+ innocent people about me and my love of guns.
Right, its like everybody on facebook posting their support. A post does nothing other than say hey! Don't forget about me.
You will not disarm me.
You WILL be disarmed...just as soon as we can convene a Constitutional Convention and repeal the 2A. Probably happen any century now.
Put your hackles down and calm down this is not about you.
How sounds before we hear how carson and the donald would have delt with it?
Congratulations on a gun ideology so extreme that it precludes yourself from commercial air travel. You're missing out a many great experiences around the world.
Now's not the time to shed tears for the tragically slain! We gotta worry about gun grabbers grabbing our guns!
Mass murders only happen every so often, and yeah, I guess they're sad and all, but our rights are ALWAYS under attack!
Since I knew someone would bring this up I starting to give it some thought.
Lets say that there were some legal gun owners in the theatre when the attacks happened. Who in there would know the difference from a terrorist and a legal gun owner shooting at each other. And lets say we get past that point, when the cops do storm the building are they going to ask, ok who here is legal to carry? I don't see how any good would come out of that.
Alley shootings, military base shootings, gun range shootings...
No one. There would have been a violent firefight which would have killed people, and if the terrorists won the firefight, no one would be any safer for it.
This is why I don't buy the argument for "well if there were other people with guns everyone would be safer" It would be such a blood bath that nobody would come out a hero.
Any reason to talk about the miracle cure that is 2nd Amendment, eh?
Face. Palm. Smack.
Well some people have to show that their penis can't grow One More Inch! So they turn to guns.
This is likely what would have happened. The only difference that this happening somewhere with gun laws like the US might have made is that the terrorists might have gone for the easier to get semi automatics instead of fully automatic weapons. The slower rate of fire and smaller clips might have given people more of a chance to escape. I say that because I'm pretty sure most criminals go with what is easy to get, in the US that is guns bought legally, through a straw purchaser, or stolen from a law abiding gun owner, in Europe on the other hand nothing is easy to get so for the criminals that do manage to get them smuggled in it is just as hard to get an AK-47 from the middle east/eastern europe as it is to get anything else.
Directly? No. Which is why I tried to break this out of the main attack thread. What really gets me entertained is that you can tell who didn't take 30 seconds to read the initial post and see that I already explained this is why I started the thread. That type of knee-jerk illiteracy is a great reminder of why I stopped coming here for years.
Indirectly? An attack anywhere should be discussed in light of how it could or would affect you locally. Are you suggesting that air traffic and sky-jacking shouldn't have been discussed in France from the perspective of the French or mass transit attacks in South Korea from the perspective of the Koreans? Any conversation about how such an attack as today's, taking place in the United States, would necessarily connect closely to the 2A.