|
|
|
|
|
by mmcwilliams
4272 days ago
|
|
No, I actually get the point I just completely disagree with it. The repeated suggestion that guns will make people safer just isn't demonstrated by reality. Not to keep trading anecdotes but here is the case of the Police/Walmart shooting in Las Vegas[1]. Joseph Wilcox was armed, intervened with the thought that his gun would neutralize the situation and wound up becoming another victim. This is your principle put into practice. Gun advocates pushing the line "school shootings wouldn't happen if there were armed people on campus" sounds suspiciously similar to the joke about selling elephant repellent. Keep in mind, I'm providing you with examples of things that actually happened while your view of gun-provided safety exists in the hypothetical. I am happy living in an area where gun ownership is scarce and shootings (especially accidental) are scarcer. [1]http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2014/jun/22/joseph-wilcox-be... |
|
Heck, the Columbine incident is very rare in having two shooters. Per Wikipedia and my memory this only happens every few decades in the US and no other time at a school, and it's equally rare in the rest of the world:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(Ameri...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(schoo...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers_(workp...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rampage_killers#Religi...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_familicides_in_the_Uni...
Whereas we know of tens of incidents stopped, or so we suspect since a spree killer/mass murderer who's stopped early by definition doesn't succeed in killing lots of people.