if guns are so good for self defense why do we never hear of mass shootings stopped with a gun?

[SivaGanesha 2]

People talk about how guns are useful in self defense. But how come in all of these mass shooting scenarios--of which Orlando is the latest and most deadly but hardly the first--there never seems to be a case where the gunman is stopped by someone else (except law enforcement) with a gun?

We never seem to hear the following scenario: a gunman opened fire in a public place. He killed two people, but an armed civilian member of the NRA standing nearby stopped the carnage by shooting him dead. Had it not been for the quick action of this armed citizen, the death toll would surely have been far higher.

If guns are so useful for self defense, how come this alternative scenario never seems to play out? These gunmen often end up getting shot dead, but usually only by either the police or by their own hands.

"It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

It does.

There was one in Colorado at a church. A security guard shot & killed the shooter
There was one in San Diego at a school. A janitor retrieved a pistol from his car and stopped the shooter.
There was one in Paarl MS where the principal of a school retrieved a pistol from his car and stopped the shooter.

That's off the top of my head. There are a lot of others if you search them out.

You don't hear about them because the body counts don't go high enough to make the news.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[peek 21]

SivaGanesha

... But how come in all of these mass shooting scenarios--of which Orlando is the latest and most deadly but hardly the first--there never seems to be a case where the gunman is stopped by someone else (except law enforcement) with a gun? ...

It would seem to me to be because the gunmen usually choose a location that is unlikely to include many people carrying protection.

I don't want to start a big debate not knowing some details myself, but does anyone have any statistics from countries where the government encourages gun ownership and readiness?

[ryoder 1,590]

This work for ya'?

http://www.5280.com/magazine/2012/12/jeanne-assam-still-waiting

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[nickfrey 0]

Often the shooters choose Gun Free Zones, they know there wont be anyone to shoot back.

[BartsDaddy 7]

SivaGanesha

People talk about how guns are useful in self defense. But how come in all of these mass shooting scenarios--of which Orlando is the latest and most deadly but hardly the first--there never seems to be a case where the gunman is stopped by someone else (except law enforcement) with a gun?

We never seem to hear the following scenario: a gunman opened fire in a public place. He killed two people, but an armed civilian member of the NRA standing nearby stopped the carnage by shooting him dead. Had it not been for the quick action of this armed citizen, the death toll would surely have been far higher.

If guns are so useful for self defense, how come this alternative scenario never seems to play out? These gunmen often end up getting shot dead, but usually only by either the police or by their own hands.

Another uninformed poster. It has happened more then once. The news Dosent report it as agresive as the shootings for whatever reasons.
And most people that are concealed carring are also informed about the lawsuits to follow. Yes in a shooting like we had in Orlando the other night, I would hope they would do something instead of worrying about lawsuits. But it is a gun free zone seeing as how they Ser've alchahol.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[Phil1111 1,149]

I don't recall any mass shootings at any NRA conventions

[pchapman 279]

I once came across an article on cases where citizens with guns supposedly did some good for a change:

"12 times mass shootings were stopped by good guys with guns"
http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/

(I didn't get around to reading it yet and can't vouch for the site, or article accuracy in any way.)

[BartsDaddy 7]

pchapman

I once came across an article on cases where citizens with guns supposedly did some good for a change:

"12 times mass shootings were stopped by good guys with guns"
http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/

(I didn't get around to reading it yet and can't vouch for the site, or article accuracy in any way.)

And many many more less then mass shootings have been stoped by good guys with a gun.

Handguns are only used to fight your way to a good rifle

[turtlespeed 221]

BartsDaddy

***I once came across an article on cases where citizens with guns supposedly did some good for a change:

"12 times mass shootings were stopped by good guys with guns"
http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/

(I didn't get around to reading it yet and can't vouch for the site, or article accuracy in any way.)

And many many more less then mass shootings have been stoped by good guys with a gun.

AAAAAAAAnd... . it goes against most of the media's taste for liberalism.

It's really hard to have an anti gun stance and admit that guns stop crime as well.

Ya see, the inverse is never the when talking abut guns.

One criminal shoots and kills 53 people - Ban all guns
One citizen protects a small group of people by killing or wounding a criminal - one that was about to kill 53 people.
Which one makes more headlines?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billeisele 130]

isn't it interesting how the media controls the message

crazed gunman don't go where they can get shot, they go to gun-free zones

the media won't report a message that goes against their agenda

how about the no gun selling law in Chicago, home of the current sitting idiot that can't say the words Islamic terrorism, where black people are killed every day by blacks, and where are the black lives matter peeps on that issue?

way past time to fix this

Give one city to the thugs so they can all live together. I vote for Chicago where they have strict gun laws.

[tkhayes 348]

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/xqleli/the-daily-show-with-trevor-noah-jordan-klepper--good-guy-with-a-gun-pt--1

Part 1 demonstrates the lunacy on how easy it is for any idiot to get and carry guns, even handguns which kill more people every year than any other weapon and (I think) are the primary instrument used in violent death in the USA.

Part 2 you can watch after that which statistically destroys the notion that you are safer with a gun or that anyone carrying a gun is likely to make any difference in any given situation.

Pretty much every 'criminal' involved in a shooting was a good guy right up to the point where they started killing people. Even Omar had nothing stopping him from buying assault rifles and no reason to limit his 2nd amendment rights.

So any solution about keeping guns out of the hands of bad guys will therefore have to affect how 'good guys' buy, obtain, use, carry, and maintain their own access to weapons. it is that simple.

Just like we do with thousands of other things in society every single day. airplanes, cars, alcohol, cigarettes, household cleaners, drugs, fertilizer,

But will America change at all? No it will not because you average American is not willing to move one millimeter on the issue for the betterment of society.

[DanG 1]

Quote

Yes in a shooting like we had in Orlando the other night, I would hope they would do something instead of worrying about lawsuits. But it is a gun free zone seeing as how they Ser've alchahol.

It was not a gun free zone. There was an armed off duty police officer working security. He engaged the shooter, exchanging rounds. It did not stop the mass murder.

I'm not against guns, or against CCW. I just don't understand how this part of the story is getting ignored in this thread.

- Dan G

[tkhayes 348]

not to mention the fact that we have no idea how many armed people were at some of these 'mass shootings' or any shooting for that matter around the country.

Who is going to stand up and say "Yep, had a gun in my belt when that guy started shooting, but I shit my pants and ran, instead of using my gun to save lives".

Given that we have more guns than ever before, more people carrying guns than ever before, I expect this is a relatively common occurrence. People with guns did nothing, - well that is unfair, what they did was run to save their own skin, just like everyone else did. (what might be called a normal reaction)

[turtlespeed 221]

tkhayes

not to mention the fact that we have no idea how many armed people were at some of these 'mass shootings' or any shooting for that matter around the country.

Who is going to stand up and say "Yep, had a gun in my belt when that guy started shooting, but I shit my pants and ran, instead of using my gun to save lives".

Given that we have more guns than ever before, more people carrying guns than ever before, I expect this is a relatively common occurrence. People with guns did nothing, - well that is unfair, what they did was run to save their own skin, just like everyone else did. (what might be called a normal reaction)

OR - like is mentioned up thread - saving lives isn't as drawing of a headline to warrant publication.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[kallend 2,027]

turtlespeed

***not to mention the fact that we have no idea how many armed people were at some of these 'mass shootings' or any shooting for that matter around the country.

Who is going to stand up and say "Yep, had a gun in my belt when that guy started shooting, but I shit my pants and ran, instead of using my gun to save lives".

Given that we have more guns than ever before, more people carrying guns than ever before, I expect this is a relatively common occurrence. People with guns did nothing, - well that is unfair, what they did was run to save their own skin, just like everyone else did. (what might be called a normal reaction)

OR - like is mentioned up thread - saving lives isn't as drawing of a headline to warrant publication.

RUBBISH. Every gun enthusiast trumpets these incidents all over social media.

If it were true, instead of an NRA inspired myth, the USA would have the lowest murder rate in the developed world.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[JerryBaumchen 1,366]

Hi tk,

Quote

Who is going to stand up and say "Yep, had a gun in my belt when that guy started shooting, but I shit my pants and ran, instead of using my gun to save lives".

Yup. We had a mass shooting here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

A guy was there with a CC permit, had his hand gun with him and did nothing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

His claim of not wanting to hit innocent people is Monday morning horse-puckey. I saw him on the local news; yup, he was doing nothing but crapping his pants.

Of those on here who advocate that they have their guns to protect them & their family, I want to know if they have ever, even once, needed their guns to do so.

Statistically that is zero.

Jerry Baumchen

[nolhtairt 0]

JerryBaumchen

Hi tk,

Quote

Who is going to stand up and say "Yep, had a gun in my belt when that guy started shooting, but I shit my pants and ran, instead of using my gun to save lives".

Yup. We had a mass shooting here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

A guy was there with a CC permit, had his hand gun with him and did nothing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

His claim of not wanting to hit innocent people is Monday morning horse-puckey. I saw him on the local news; yup, he was doing nothing but crapping his pants.

Of those on here who advocate that they have their guns to protect them & their family, I want to know if they have ever, even once, needed their guns to do so.

Statistically that is zero.

Jerry Baumchen

Twardo's too busy these days to be on here but he's pointed his gun at intruders in his home before.

IIRC, he may actually have shot and wounded one, who then sued him. Cop told him it's better to shoot to kill.

[mirage62 0]

Quote

Of those on here who advocate that they have their guns to protect them & their family, I want to know if they have ever, even once, needed their guns to do so.

Statistically that is zero.

Jerry Baumchen

Hey Jerry I'd like to know how many times you have been killed in a mass shooting - I'd bet statistically that is zero. For MOST Americans the odds of them even seeing a gun used is close to statistically zero. How many CC people have killed someone with there weapon - HELL I bet that number is close to statistically zero.

You have a lot larger chance to die falling in your house than being killed in a mass shooting.

Don't start with stat's - BOTH sides of this argument are full of shit when you look at the numbers.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little

[kallend 2,027]

billeisele

how about the no gun selling law in Chicago, home of the current sitting idiot that can't say the words Islamic terrorism, where black people are killed every day by blacks, and where are the black lives matter peeps on that issue?

Factually INCORRECT. That law was repealed in 2014. CCW was allowed in Chicago in 2014.

Since then the murder rate has gone UP.

Try again, this time using truth instead of fiction.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

Twardo's too busy these days to be on here but he's pointed his gun at intruders in his home before.

which is fine and is his experience and that is called an anecdotal story, not statistical evidence. Anecdotal stories should not be used to make policy.

Lots of people as well have chased away armed intruders by doing nothing more that getting out of bed and confronting them. http://www.wect.com/story/31073442/homeowner-spots-armed-intruders-in-garage-runs-to-neighbors-house

[kallend 2,027]

billeisele

crazed gunman don't go where they can get shot, they go to gun-free zones

The Orlando shooting took place in a "zone" with an armed ex-marine security guard.

Try again.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[turtlespeed 221]

JerryBaumchen

Hi tk,

Quote

Who is going to stand up and say "Yep, had a gun in my belt when that guy started shooting, but I shit my pants and ran, instead of using my gun to save lives".

Yup. We had a mass shooting here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

A guy was there with a CC permit, had his hand gun with him and did nothing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clackamas_Town_Center_shooting

His claim of not wanting to hit innocent people is Monday morning horse-puckey. I saw him on the local news; yup, he was doing nothing but crapping his pants.

Of those on here who advocate that they have their guns to protect them & their family, I want to know if they have ever, even once, needed their guns to do so.

Statistically that is zero.

Jerry Baumchen

And then some have seen military action.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[normiss 801]

Why is gay hatred equal to radical islamic terrorism?
What world do you get your information from?
By your logic, christianity is also radical islamic terrorism.

[mirage62 0]

Thought these numbers were interesting:

"Firearm deaths, however, include suicides, and there are a lot of them. In 2013, there were a total of 33,636 firearm deaths, and 21,175, or 63 percent, were suicides, according to the CDC. Homicides made up 11,208, or 33 percent, of those firearm deaths. The rest were unintentional discharges (505), legal intervention/war (467) and undetermined (281)."

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/10/gun-laws-deaths-and-crimes/


So spending money on mental health here in America could certainly help lower deaths by gun.

Homicides which would include "mass shootings" 11,208. I don't know how you stop thugs from killing thugs - a total ban on guns and a very strong prison sentence would eventually do it......

Still if half the homicides are crime related(?) you odds are somewhere around .000020339 to be killed by a gun.

Of course a lot depends on where you live and HOW you live.

Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little