What would the outcome have been if one or two of the law abiding citizens on that island were armed? http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/oslo-...assive-vehicle-bomb-sources/story?id=14134197 Would he have been able to walk around calmly killing those 69 young people?
Over many years I sent all my kids to summer camp in North Carolina.. My boys belonged to Greenwing, but they NEVER took their guns to camp.
RRRRiiight, but these young people were YOUNG ADULTS. I am not suggesting that they all walk around strapped with AK47s, I am merely asking what the outcome would have been if only two designated campers were armed? Care to answer the question without trying to derail the thread?
Sure.. ages 13 to 19 with no law enforcement or military training.. Kids. Armed designated campers is a dumb idea.. Better to employ security guards with either military or police training. Second guessing the Norwegians is pretty insulting. You know they have a peaceful and prosperous country.
Sure.. ages 13 to 19 with no law enforcement or military training.. Kids. Armed designated campers is a dumb idea.. Better to employ security guards with either military or police training. Second guessing the Norwegians is pretty insulting. You know they have a peaceful and prosperous country.
Sure.. ages 13 to 19 with no law enforcement or military training.. Kids. Armed designated campers is a dumb idea.. Better to employ security guards with either military or police training. Second guessing the Norwegians is pretty insulting. You know they have a peaceful and prosperous country.
Yeah dozens DEAD is a much better idea People need to take responsibility for their own security. Where did I suggest no training? Where did I suggest arming 13 to 19 year olds. You are frothing at the mouth about nothing. Really? We shouldn't examine a horrific tragedy like this? We shouldn't try to learn why this happened and what could have prevented it? What idiocy!!!
Nobody knows. Maybe they would have been able to stop the gun man earlier, maybe not. Maybe they would have just been the first victims and provided the gunman with a little more ammunition. Maybe they would have accidentally shot more innocent people. Maybe they would have led to greater confusion by the police and prolonged the situation. Adding more armed people doesn't automatically make any situation better.
Agreed, it doesn't automatically do anything, but it dramatically increases the chances that fewer than 69 people would have been killed IMHO.
Do large scale shootings like this regularly get nipped in the bud in places were guns are more freely available to the public? I'd suggest you're thinking far to simplistically about the inclusion or more guns in to a society. For every armed individual who is willing and able to positively influence such relatively rare incidents you add, you're also introducing dozens of other factors than can have even more common and significant impacts on society.
Prove it to me. I would suggest that YES more armed citizens do lessen the frequency and severity of these incidents. Prove me wrong.
I can't but then neither can you - that's my point. That said, it does seem that a lot of mass shootings, even in places with armed civilians, are ended by either police officers or suicide. You also need to address how many of these killers obtain their guns via legal means (or at least obtain guns that were initially legally held by a civilian). The nature of gun control laws (if any) in a given region has the potential to impact a whole range of different things in all sorts of different ways. Large scale shootings is just one of them and, given the relative rarity of such incidents, not necessarily the most significant - it's certainly not the only consideration.
I have to disagree as do most studies on the subject. The states with the most liberal gun ownership rules are not where shootings are taking place. How many mass shooting have we had in Alabama and Texas? The combination of the hate filled rhetoric of the blue state politicians and the fact that they are tyrannical about gun ownership creates these desperate nutjobs who shoot up the blue states.
A lot of people in Arizona own guns...it didn't help Gabby. And what about Fort Hood I am sure there were plenty of guns there? People have the right to own guns...but it doesn't stop insanity.
Over 200 students have lost their lives since 1966 in US areas of learning. In Norway, over the same period - 69
What is their population relative to ours (the U.S.)? I'll help you out here: Norway in 2000 population-4,481,162 U.S. in 2000 population - 281,421,906 So do the math, who had a larger percentage of the population killed this way?
Oh! It's all about population now and not about gun control. Norway: Intelligent population 99% USA: Intelligent population 1%
Your post itself proves that wrong, You lost a dramatically larger percentage of your young population to gun violence than the U.S. did, despite your tyrannical "gun control" laws Einstein!
I'm not surprised that over 200 dead American students means nothing to you. Thanks for the acknowledgement by the way. I'm flattered.
True enough, it will not stop the shootings from happening, but would they lessen the severity? How many would have been killed at Ft Hood if he was the only armed man there?
It is truly astonishing that your nation lost an exponentially larger percentage of its young people to gun violence and you think your system is more effective than ours.
How many would have been killed if he hadn't been able to freely purchase an pistol and a whole load of ammunition? He was, prior to the shooting, a law-abiding private gun owner.
The same number. Guns are so easily purchased illegally, that gun control is silly. The evidence shows that he had planned this for a very long time, so quick access to a gun, or slow acces, would not have mattered at all anyway.
Yes, but how much is the large legal market a factor in the similarly large criminal market (plus the huge grey area in-between)? I don't know exactly how easy it is for the average person to obtain a gun illegally in the US (and if it's as easy as you suggest, thatÂ’s a whole different issue) but I do know that if I wanted to get a gun in the UK, I wouldn't know where to start. Again, we can't know that for certain. Would he have access to a source of illegal weapons? Would his seeking one attract attention of friends, family, colleagues or the authorities? Would he have been able to access the same quality of weapon or amount of ammunition?
