Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why good guys with guns are not the answer. Illustration. [View all]treestar
(82,383 posts)118. A President is different from a school room full of kids
But the point is that having others around you armed doesn't mean you won't get shot.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
119 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
They believe the "bad guys" are easily identified by the black masks and striped clothing
Scootaloo
Jan 2013
#3
Years ago we used to call them the "block-thinkers." People that thought in RW blocks and
RKP5637
Jan 2013
#4
And apparently criminals have more of a right to my body and my possessions than I do.
Nuclear Unicorn
Jan 2013
#92
And i say waht should they be able to carry "that many rounds" in the first place.
kmlisle
Jan 2013
#32
But what if the gunman figured out where the armed person was and then started shooting at
JDPriestly
Jan 2013
#40
I was called a gun nut, or something similar, once for attacking a poor argument,
ZombieHorde
Jan 2013
#70
Calling an inconvenient truth a "NRA talking point" is also a popular incantation...
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2013
#89
That may be, but now that the NRA has blamed video games for real-life violence,
ZombieHorde
Jan 2013
#95
LOL! It is, isn't it? And just as accurate as anything else claimed to be one...
friendly_iconoclast
Jan 2013
#97
The mass murderer would attack the person with a gun first and then continue to do what he/she
JDPriestly
Jan 2013
#113
No. You would just insure that the person carrying the gun would be shot if seen by the
JDPriestly
Jan 2013
#114
If you armed the custodians, you might increase the frequency with which armed custodians
JDPriestly
Jan 2013
#115
Then again if you are the shooter it's only logical to eliminate the biggest threat first,
A Simple Game
Jan 2013
#29
And two of those wounded had guns. The idea is preposterous when it comes to protecting kids.
JDPriestly
Jan 2013
#42
Hinkley was quickly subdued. Literally in seconds. Lanza was able to fire, unopposed, until guys
Flatulo
Jan 2013
#48
I never said that arming teachers was the answer. If you're going to attack my post,
Flatulo
Jan 2013
#99
If you really believe this tripe... then let your actions speak louder than words.
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jan 2013
#51
Like i said before, maybe we should fight home intruders with flowers and smiles.
darkangel218
Jan 2013
#59
I fail to see any alternative to most active shootings other than armed response.
OneTenthofOnePercent
Jan 2013
#69
Addressing root cause is fine, but when someone is about to do bodily harm or murder, the best
Flatulo
Jan 2013
#90
While this is perfectly true, it is actually a minor point. If Hinckley had been a few
Flatulo
Jan 2013
#94