Why more guns can’t save lives at a mass shooting

I always hear the argument, “If 1/3rd of the people at that Las Vegas concert had a gun, they could have trained the guns at the window and fired, and sooner or later he would have been hit and died with fewer deaths!”
Not sure if my rebuttals have been pointed out, but if all of the people opened fire on that Las Vegas hotel, just think about how many shots would have missed his window and how many people in that hotel would have died! That’s the main reason the police allegedly did not risk returning fire when they identified the room until they could break through his door.
I have held your position before, but I was honestly just a kid who thought I had grown up and I now consider my old position due to fantasy, ignorance, and a desire to defy any authorities that said I should trust them with my safety when I thought I could just have a gun and protect myself. But people who plan out violence will always be vastly better armed and prepared than you can ever be. When he brandishes his gun and fires, you will not have already mapped out the best places for cover, and you will not be wearing body armor under your clothes that can absorb civilian bullets like he will be.The idea that giving everyone the ability to do a quick draw will level the playing field is nothing but a silly fantasy. What it leads to is more quick escalations that escalate faster into lethality, instead of just some guy getting beat up when two hot heads meet.. Like this case:
https://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/justi…ing/index.html

It also makes it much easier to hold a building hostage. Light a fire or explode a bomb, and then have your gang surround the exits and mow everyone down. That’s how the massacres went down at the Columbine school shooting, or at the Egyptian Mosque with 220 dead to 40 gunmen the other day. There’s no way you can dual wield pistols like you’re playing Halo and shoot your way out when guys are already positioned around the building with their guns trained at the exits, and there’s a raging fire spreading at your back. Especially when the bad guys are probably well prepared with a stockpile of homemade explosives, a high caliber AR with a bump stock, are mentally composed after a dose of valerian, and are wearing heavy body armor like a modern Ned Kelly. You on the other hand were caught off-guard at a concert with your girlfriend and with nothing to protect you except for a T-shirt and a shitty revolver. If you think the odds could ever go in your favor then you’re confusing your world with a make-believe cowboy fiction where the good guys always win.

Banning guns in Japan did reduce the amount of violent crimes dramatically, and deaths to violent crimes, and the same has been proven globally. You’re about as likely to be mugged in London as in New York, but you’re about 4 times less likely to die in London from one because you’ll probably just get smacked with a blunt object, cut or stabbed rather than taking multiple gunshot wounds.

Now if you still want to try for the argument that as civilians can viably fight back against government tanks, cruise missiles and drones with civilian weapons, then use that argument. But don’t bother to pretend that it’s desirable for every person to carry a pistol, at all times or we’d somehow be safer from terrorists. Accidents, misfires, friendly fire, and death due to rapid escalations would greatly surpass any lives saved even if we all took the time to train to be accurate shooters.
Suppose again that everyone at the concert in Vegas had pulled out their guns at once. Well, you can bet there would be trigger-happy friendly fire from people who thought, “Oh shit, that creepy guy in the crowd just pulled out his gun too, he must be one of the shooter’s buddies! I’ll just point my gun at him to be safe-oh, he’s turning his gun at me now-I’ve got to shoot him!” Or something similar would happen when nerves were frayed even after the guy was dead, like if a dark skinned guy happened to suddenly walk around a corner carrying a gun.
Also, if I were to be forced into a once-in-a-lifetime fight to the death, I think I would better enjoy a longer fight. Westworld’s gunfights end before they get good, and don’t fairly reward the guys who worked out at the gym or who studied martial arts for years like a hero just in case they ever needed it. And longer fights are better because someone is more likely to come along and deescalate the situation or help out.


Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s