Shoot ’em, dig a hole and move on.
I know where you’re coming from, but careful to not try to climb the slippery slope of “Wild West” vigilantism.
Shooting which leads to more shooting and then more after that.
Parts of our society is already degrading in a very bad way.
Not a good direction for folks to start deputizing and then those with grudges self-deputizing so they can “uphold the law”?
It keeps going…”I’ll need more guns and bigger guns” to settle my arguments. 
The-Law.jpg
Crazy talk, media coverage by body count. How about just making it harder for the crazy to get a weapon. This old world is not the same as it was when I was younger. There I said it.
I’ve seen plenty of coverage. I also think not publishing the shooters name will do nothing. I don’t see a crazy person saying they were going to try and massacre people, but since no one will know their name they are going to pass
The more good guys packing, the better. And I think this is an accurate statement.
” Had the death toll been greater and armed citizens not shot the gunman we would have seen 10X the media coverage on this event.”
Yep. The bad guy was dressed in black and the good guys in white so there is never any doubt when the guns come out.
The bad guys are easy to spot. They’re murdering people in church at point blank with a shotgun.
The pastor at my last church encouraged people to carry. He was a retired Marine. We also had a few guys that would roam and watch doors.
DT
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Dutchboy wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>suzuki wrote:</div>
The more good guys packing, the better. And I think this is an accurate statement.” Had the death toll been greater and armed citizens not shot the gunman we would have seen 10X the media coverage on this event.”
Yep. The bad guy was dressed in black and the good guys in white so there is never any doubt when the guns come out.
The bad guys are easy to spot. They’re murdering people in church at point blank with a shotgun.
Sure, in this incident it was obvious regardless of the color of clothes they were wearing.
But Dutchboy still makes a good point as it is not always that black and white.
Change venues here, say a crowded nightclub with the lights dimmed (We know this has already happened)
When the first shots are heard, everyone ducks for cover and panic ensues.
When “permit holding” armed citizen pulls his piece and looks around and see’s 2 or 3 other people holding guns…does he know who the shooter is?
Or another “permit holding” armed citizen? Or an undercover cop?
Shoot first and ask questions later?
All this is so tragic and becoming all too common. 
When “permit holding” armed citizen pulls his piece and looks around and see’s 2 or 3 other people holding guns…does he know who the shooter is?
A trained permit holder can handle this situation.
-J.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Walleyestudent Andy Cox wrote:</div>
When “permit holding” armed citizen pulls his piece and looks around and see’s 2 or 3 other people holding guns…does he know who the shooter is?A trained permit holder can handle this situation.
-J.
Agreed as I am one.
The point was more that a “shooter/mass murderer” may not be easily found or identified once the carnage breaks out.
I have to disagree or at least contest that the majority of permit holders are “trained”. My sister-in-law shoots occasionally and holds a permit (in Texas). God help us if she has to discriminate active shooter from good guys in a stressful situation. Same with my mother-in-law’s 83 year old best friend in suburban Milwaukee. Wonderful lady, shoots at the range twice a year and would be a complete disaster in any crisis involving shooting.
The responders in the Texas church incident were trained and tasked with security duty. Thankfully they were alert and minimized the carnage to the extent possible. The large majority of permit holders would do more harm than good.
The responders in the Texas church incident were trained and tasked with security duty.
Exactly. Totally different situation than simply being an armed permit holder.
-J.
For every theoretical of one side, there is two for the other. Could go back and forth all day of the “what if it happened here or theres”.
Fact is if this situation happened in a liberal state where they may have tried talking to the gunman to open up about his painful childhood while he was blowing people away the carnage would have been significantly higher.
Plenty of time has passed for permit states to have stories on these zealous gun owners shooting people mistakenly, I would like to see them if anyone has links. I can swing both ways in regards to gun laws so I would like to see the pitfalls here, because in this particular case it sure looks like it worked.
I have to disagree or at least contest that the majority of permit holders are “trained”
I dont think you can make such a generalized statement about the majority of permit holders with only your two personal experiences with them.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Jon Jordan wrote:</div>
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>Walleyestudent Andy Cox wrote:</div>
When “permit holding” armed citizen pulls his piece and looks around and see’s 2 or 3 other people holding guns…does he know who the shooter is?A trained permit holder can handle this situation.
-J.
Agreed as I am one.
The point was more that a “shooter/mass murderer” may not be easily found or identified once the carnage breaks out.
The person slaughtering innocent people is not hard to identify. Anyone that just starts blasting is a moron. Yes there are morons with permits but statistically I believe LESS innocents get killed if the bad guy has enemies, even if inept.
The person slaughtering innocent people is not hard to identify. Anyone that just starts blasting is a moron. Yes there are morons with permits but statistically I believe less innocents get killed if the bad guy has enemies, even if inept.
It only takes one rotten apple to spoil the bunch, unfortunately.
As soon as friendly fire kills an innocent bystander, there’s gonna be some recourse.
I agree about the slanted media coverage. There’s no way that the liberal media outlets (like CNN) will highlight a self defense story such as this.
I know many more permit holders that just the two mentioned, they are egregious examples. I am a Minnesota Firearms Safety Instructor, have been around the block a few times. My point is more that having permit holders in the population is not a solution to the active shooter problem. In fact, I am doubtful whether there is a solution or set of solutions to the problem.
My point is more that having permit holders in the population is not a solution to the active shooter problem. In fact, I am doubtful whether there is a solution or set of solutions to the problem.
As an instructor you would be well aware that the permit holder’s first move would be to retreat. Properly trained permit holders would never just pull their pistol and start shooting. That would be illegal in Mn.
-J.
permit holder’s first move would be to retreat.
The whole duty to retreat thing in MN seems like such a gray area. Correct me if im wrong but i have heard that previous rulings seems to show that there isnt one in your home but there is in public? this sort of scenario would be interesting to see if the judge would uphold the duty to retreat in a situation like this.
The duty to retreat exists but is over-ridden by an active threat of imminent bodily harm to the permit holder or others. I am not an attorney but quite sure that a permit holder responding in an active shooter situation in a church, school, mall or other public place would not be prosecuted, if prosecuted would not be convicted.
The duty to retreat exists but is over-ridden by an active threat of imminent bodily harm to the permit holder or others. I am not an attorney but quite sure that a permit holder responding in an active shooter situation in a church, school, mall or other public place would not be prosecuted, if prosecuted would not be convicted.
I totally agree with you on this. If I’m sitting in a public place and someone pulls out a gun and starts shooting people and I feel that my or others lives are in danger I don’t feel like I am required to retreat. I know I would not do so even if a state law required it. At that point I’d take my chances in a court if necessary. As the saying goes ” I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
You would not want to be judged by this jury….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_David_Smith_killings
Don’t get me wrong here. I’m all for taking out the bad guy. However, if you do carry, know the law. And Mn law is different than Tx law.
-J.
I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.
Or maybe better said >>> “The Older I Get the Less Life in Prison Is a Deterrent.”
-J.
In watching the video numerous times and reading the shot was taken somewhere between 40 and 50 feet with only a head shot available….I can say that I almost certainly would not have taken that shot.
(I’m glad he had the experience and practice that made that shot count!)
1) I know my limitations. (I seldom practice at that distance because I figure I can run or at least take cover)
2) Too many other people around.
3) Once I fire and miss, I know I will have a shotgun pointed my way.
<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>fishthumper wrote:</div>
I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.You would not want to be judged by this jury….
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_David_Smith_killings
Don’t get me wrong here. I’m all for taking out the bad guy. However, if you do carry, know the law. And Mn law is different than Tx law.
-J.
Rather familiar with that case – lots of family and friends in little falls. I truly believe had that man only shot each party once he would not have spent a day in Jail. If I recall he was in his basement when he shot them or at least one of them. Not much area to retreat when in a basement and someone is coming down the stairs.
I truly believe had that man only shot each party once he would not have spent a day in Jail.
and maybe not recorded his final words to the girl as he shot her (wounded already) in the head.
I think the jury did good.
OFF Topic. Sorry.
I truly believe had that man only shot each party once he would not have spent a day in Jail.
….or if this shooting happened in Tx, he gets a hand shake and a slap on the back from the Sheriff.
-J.
I know many more permit holders that just the two mentioned, they are egregious examples. I am a Minnesota Firearms Safety Instructor, have been around the block a few times. My point is more that having permit holders in the population is not a solution to the active shooter problem. In fact, I am doubtful whether there is a solution or set of solutions to the problem.
Brad, Agree with your statement about the solution as we don’t know if this shooter’s intentions were to kill only the 2 people he did however it was a solution in this case if the shooter’s intent was to continue the carnage. Maybe a rare case and surely it may or may not stop any easy target scenario for future Baptist Church shootings in Texas or any other state/church that allows permit holders. Never the less, not unlike any dreadful shooting, at least this one appears to be held to a minimum because of a responsible permit holder, maybe a rare story indeed but one that invokes a response of….finally someone was able to stop this idiot. I think the media did cover it very well ( I was stuck on Red Lake in a blizzard but my DirecTV was working) however I think there is a general feeling that permit holder that took down the shooter was treated almost like a side note rather than a hero, maybe because a lot of us feel there is a huge bias in the media and to them 2 wrongs don’t make a right, especially when a number of permit holders had their guns out at the end. It felt like (IMHO) they were reporting…..OMG, look at all the guns drawn. Either way you are right, guns didn’t start or stop the problem, 2 were killed and one low life died by his own methodology.
I was impressed to hear this discussed on NPR in an objective way and not trying to minimize in any way the fact that the shooter was brought down by carrying members of the congregation. Despite what your political beliefs are, give people on the other side some credit. Of course event the anti-gun crowd realizes how this situation would’ve been a lot worse had people not been carrying in the service.
One point to ponder. No matter the carnage caused by drinking and driving. No one is outraged enough to demand the banning of alcohol .
” Gun Free zones ” gives protections to no one. Indeed it creates a safe place for the looney toon to do their dirt. Until the police with guns get there. Anyone hate guns enough to demand that the police leave their guns behind. So as not to violate the gun free zone sign.
Why does anyone care about the motive that drove the idiot to commit such a crime ? Suppose it was racially motivated should the victims somehow change their skin tone. Maybe the study should be how to lessen the impact of such acts. As in this case , the shooter would have had apprx 10 minutes of shooting innocents. The armed security limited that to 6 seconds. How can any sane person want any other outcome ?
Why does an inanimate object generate such hate ? Any tool can be used for good or evil. It is all in the mind of the holder of the tool. Anyone want to ban cars because the criminal drove there ?
When entities want to whip up frenzy about what should be logical thought. Their hidden agenda is what they are promoting. It is not about safety , saving the planet, etc etc. It is about political power.
People are calling the guy a permit holder… his JOB was security ! He was alert, he was watching everyones moves, from the moment they entered the church. Pretty sure he noticed the crazy with the long coat and was on high alert for him. More toward the Last thing a armed security guard is taught is to run away. He did his job and was very practiced and accurate. What some are missing, I don’t “carry” to protect everyone, I carry to protect myself and my family. If I can avoid it all together, thats what I do. Now think, if all 100 people in the church have this same concept, I doubt the guy goes in there in the first place, unless he had a death wish.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
