Criminals don't give a fukk about gun laws and will still find ways to get their hands on them.
Only thing a ban would do is make it impossible for responsible citizens to have a chance to fight back.
How do you explain that all the cities full of guns have FAR more homicides than the cities in states with real gun control? Does LA not have criminals? Does NYC not have criminals? Then why are their homicide rates a fraction of the red state cities?
I don't think anybody in this thread saying having a gun would be guaranteed 'win' in a situation like this, but even if it gives me just a small chance: a few seconds to distract dude so others can escape, or another breh to line up a better shot, I'm taking it.
So you want the streets flooded with that many more guns, causing that many more guaranteed homicides every year, something we can factually prove is going to happen....so that in the 1 in 100,000 chance that you're ever in a mass shooting, you'll have a 1 in 100 chance of stopping it.
The difference between gun control and no gun control is a difference of tens of thousands fewer guns on the street in every city. It's the difference of hundreds fewer murders each year in each city. But you want to throw it all away for the miniscule chance that a mass shooting will get stopped by an armed citizen even though that almost never happens, not even in the no gun control states.
They posted the victims - there wasn't a single man under 50 in the picture. One of those men was armed, trained, and ready and still couldn't stop him. The others were mostly ambushed, having a gun wouldn't have made a difference anyway. But y'all just screaming "More guns! More guns! More guns!" even though it wouldn't have made a lick of difference. Y'all living in a fantasy.
If Imma die I'd rather go out fighting, even if it's in vain, than cowering in fear doing nothing until my number's called.
You don't have to cower in fear unless you're a coward. Unarmed folk stop mass shooters all the time, far more often than armed civilians do. If you bullrush the shooter then you don't have to waste time getting the gun out, you don't have to waste time getting a clear shot and aiming, you don't have to waste time worrying about innocent bystanders, you just go. IF multiple people bullrush simultaneously the shooter usually goes down. And the body armor stops a bullet but it doesn't stop a tackle. FBI had a study of 160 active shooter incidents and 21 were stopped by unarmed civilians but only 1 were stopped by armed civilians (not counting cops or armed security).
A Study of Active Shooter Incidents in the United States Between 2000 and 2013 — FBI
Most of the time armed folk at mass shootings don't even pull their piece, because they realize they're outgunned and just flee the scene to wait for the professionals. Even the cops flee more often than not if they're alone and outgunned. If you needed a gun to feel brave in the first place, then you're probably not going to be brave with a little pistol going up against an AK-47 and body armor anyway.
'Good Guys With Guns' Can Rarely Stop Mass Shootings, and Texas and Ohio Show Why
The “Good Guy with a Gun” Myth
