The pro-gun argument is that more guns in the hands of good people would make us all safer. The problem is we make so little effort to know of a person is "good."
When school officials are armed, the gun-rights folks tell us, they'll be able to stop a mass shooting. But as we've seen time after time, even armed and trained people can't do that unless they get very lucky. On the other hand, by arming more people, you increase the chances of the kind of unexpected violence that this story talks about.
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
Let's see, how many laws did the shooter break not including the one against murder?
ReplyDeleteAnd you want to compare this criminal's actions to that of peaceably armed citizens? There's no comparison. This guy broke the law and abused the right to keep and bear arms by harming an innocent person. Peaceably armed citizens overwhelmingly OBEY the law and exercise their rights responsibly.
I won't suggest that allowing concealed carry can STOP this sort of thing, or even have any effect whatsoever on a targeted attack such as this one where it appears the attack was over in a split second (1 shot). Where it CAN absolutely make a huge difference is in the rare, extended mass shootings like VT, Columbine, and even in Tuscon if the right person is in the right place at the right time.
Plus, being armed against an unarmed attacker or an attacker with other weapons (knives, bats, etc.) gives the victim a much larger advantage over their attacker. Most violent crime is perpetrated WITHOUT firearms.
Allowing lawful concealed carry can't be expected to stop or curb every instance of violence, but it has more proven advantages than disadvantages.
...Orygunner...
I'd say allowing more guns would do next to nothing in prevention and would increase the incidents in which a gun owner goes off the deep end. This janitor may be one of the many who, up until the moment of his murderous actions, was one of the good guys.
ReplyDelete