The case for CC

[SLO-BOB]

Am I the only one that's going to say that if someone (other than the shooter) would have had a gun, there would be less dead mall walkers in Salt Lake?

[legion]

You are correct, but the press will play this up as an excuse to ban more types of guns.

[SLO-BOB]

Good luck. Pump action shotgun. The NRA should send a post humus thank you to the 18 year old pos for not using an assault rifle or pistol.

[svandamme]

so is the shooter dead or not? cnn article just says
"saw shooter go down "

considering that these dickweeds really have no message
isn't this a very bad case of "suicide by proxy" ?
if he's killed, then that actually get's hem what he wants, hope he's just incapacitated, and fully good to recover, to spend some quality time with Big Bubba...

[legion]

Originally posted by SLO-BOB
Good luck. Pump action shotgun. The NRA should send a post humus thank you to the 18 year old pos for not using an assault rifle or pistol.

See, and I see this as an excuse by the anti-gun crowd to add another weapon to their list of things they want banned.

(We all know they want all guns banned, but the strategy has been to start less palatable weapons like machine guns, so-called "assault rifles", and handguns and to expand the list from there.)

[Anton]

Shooters dead. TV said so this morning.

As for concealed carry. Back when I used to live there, Utah had one of the highest per capita concealed carry rate. Didn't seem to help much.

[livi]

Originally posted by SLO-BOB
Am I the only one that's going to say that if someone (other than the shooter) would have had a gun, there would be less dead mall walkers in Salt Lake?

Do I understand correctly you would prefer someone (anyone/everyone?) pack a gun with the right to shoot at anyone resembling a law breaker at will ?

Sure, in this particular situation most people possibly would, but where to draw the line ?

I am just asking..

[legion]

Originally posted by livi
Do I understand correctly you would prefer someone (anyone/everyone?) pack a gun with the right to shoot at anyone resembling a law breaker at will ?

Sure, in this particular situation most people possibly would, but where to draw the line ?

I am just asking..

I think we can all agree that this is well within the bounds of any line to be drawn.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I'm sure the neocons will offer a "solution" of having Dep't of Homeland Security to require all shoppers to submit to strip and cavity searches before hitting the local J.C. Penny.

[svandamme]

Originally posted by Anton
Shooters dead. TV said so this morning.

so assuming this is suicide by proxy ( one would not expect to start shooting in a mall, and come out alive, so unless they have a message, it's suicide by proxy),

wouldn't it have been a better outcome to

not go for the head shot, and just severely eff him up ,

2 knee caps and a gutt shot , maybe the nuts too, i'm sure is plenty to make sure he's not doing anything anymore, and still survivable enough to make him pay in other ways then the death he wanted?



i'm thinking deterrant
this goons think that they can go out with a bang, litterally
wouldn't it make them think twice if they knew that SWAT would try as best to feck them up but keep them very alive?

kind of refusing to let them win by dying?

[on-ramp]

you guys really want a mall full of gun carrying teenagers? ha ha

[many944s]

Alot of the malls around here have signs posted at the entrances stating that no-one shall be in possession of a loaded firearm! Which begs the question: What is that bulge on the ankles of the thug wanna-be's that hang out at the mall??

[legion]

Stijn, I think your argument is flawed. I think if people believed that they would not be killed while comitting such an act, a lot more people would do it. Most criminals know all to well that a good lawyer can get nearly any charges dropped or plea-bargained down to significantly lesser charges. The only real deterrent for career criminals is immediate retribution.

[svandamme]

Originally posted by legion
Stijn, I think your argument is flawed. I think if people believed that they would not be killed while comitting such an act, a lot more people would do it. Most criminals know all to well that a good lawyer can get nearly any charges dropped or plea-bargained down to significantly lesser charges. The only real deterrent for career criminals is immediate retribution.

you think they would go on a wild shootout , for no reason other then target practice, if they know that the SWAT team is aiming for the testicles and spinal cord?

no lawyer to this date, has managed to repair a spine, or bring back testicles from the splat they made on the wall...

and SWAT team need not to worry bout lawsuits on cases like this... hell, a shootout with multiple victims, no claim can be made, the SWAT team actually saved the perps live by not shooting him in the head but instead going for non legal areas on the body...

medal time!

[SLO-BOB]

Originally posted by livi
Do I understand correctly you would prefer someone (anyone/everyone?) pack a gun with the right to shoot at anyone resembling a law breaker at will ?

Yes. That's what I'm saying.

[Lothar]

Originally posted by livi
Do I understand correctly you would prefer someone (anyone/everyone?) pack a gun with the right to shoot at anyone resembling a law breaker at will ?

Sure, in this particular situation most people possibly would, but where to draw the line ?

I am just asking..

I'm fine with that too. Private citizens show more responsibility in the use of deadly force than many police do.

The resemblance to a cold blooded murder was striking in this case. He shot his way in the door and began shooting a people randomly. How far wrong can a law abiding citizen go in taking the guy out before he kills 6 people?

[nostatic]

Originally posted by Lothar
I'm fine with that too. Private citizens show more responsibility in the use of deadly force than many police do.

The resemblance to a cold blooded murder was striking in this case. He shot his way in the door and began shooting a people randomly. How far wrong can a law abiding citizen go in taking the guy out before he kills 6 people?

Well, there's a ringing endorsement of your local law enforcement. Sorry, but I'd have to say despite my range time, I'd rather have any LAPD or LA Sherrif dealing with a deadly force time than myself.

How far wrong? Let's say said private citizen, while trying to take out the shooter, instead kills your 12 year old daughter who was cowering behind a bush, not evident to the shooter, but in harms way for the private citizen. So private citizen misses bad guy, kills your daughter.

You gonna give him a medal?

[dhoward]

I guess you're assuming that a private citizen, CCW trained and relatively proficeint with a firearm is just going to spray bullets everywhere.
You're right. Not much point in CCW.

[speeder]

Originally posted by nostatic
Well, there's a ringing endorsement of your local law enforcement. Sorry, but I'd have to say despite my range time, I'd rather have any LAPD or LA Sherrif dealing with a deadly force time than myself.

How far wrong? Let's say said private citizen, while trying to take out the shooter, instead kills your 12 year old daughter who was cowering behind a bush, not evident to the shooter, but in harms way for the private citizen. So private citizen misses bad guy, kills your daughter.

You gonna give him a medal?

Exactly. Everyone seems to be assuming that people with CC permits all shoot pistols like Andy Garcia in "The Untouchables" under intense firefight circumstances that they have never been in before(?)

I'm actually generally in favor of carry laws, but a shoot-out in a crowded mall is not exactly your ideal example of citizen self-defense. Would I try to shoot such a person? Impossible to say; if he was about to open the door that myself and a couple of stroller-pushers were hiding behind, yes. If it was out in the wide open w/ victims behind and to the side of him? Probably not.

The truth is that even if this had been a restaurant full of cops, a nut-case w/ nothing to lose and a shotgun could kill a few people before being taken down. It's the "drop", or element of surprise that he had going for him. No one is expecting to be shot while shopping in a mall.

Sad story, but does not really signify anything to me. No message/new laws needed/coulda-shoulda/etc...

[widebody911]

Originally posted by dhoward
I guess you're assuming that a private citizen, CCW trained and relatively proficeint with a firearm is just going to spray bullets everywhere.

The average citizen is barely proficient with an automobile, much less handling a weapon under duress.