Why do conservatives say if one student had a gun the massacre could have been stopped?

Question

This makes no sense. One student DID have a gun.
If ZERO students had had guns, the massacre would have been stopped.

Answer 1

cons always come back with any excuse----sometimes its a comic one

Answer 2

The truth is, criminals will have guns. Remember Vice Principal Joel Myrick. had to run to his car to get a gun when someone came shooting up a highschool. Several kids were killed and injured. He came back with his gun and placed it to the shooter's head until the police arrived. henever pulled trigger. Many lives would have been saved if that Colt 45 was in the school instead of his car. Va Tech was a gun free area. That's all an evil person has to know. You don't see terrorists shooting up police stations or military bases do you? Like all liberals you have based your question on a false assumption. You assumed that if there was no guns there would be no criminals. The truts is that ONE student had a gun. The Fact is that More should have had one and this might have been averted or at least lessened and some lives may be saved

Answer 3

some have already referred to this element for colleges, parks, places of work and so on. And it is not purely conservatives who've hid carry facilitates and who carry firearms. Liberals do besides, and a few liberals belong to the NRA. Your questions many times mirror which you seem to make certain all themes as being between conservatives and something of the international. one in all those person is referred to as an ideologue. Many ideologues have faith each and every difficulty has an economic foundation, others have faith all themes stem from problems with women human beings's rights, or from a racial foundation. while you're a actual college student, do no longer make your questions propaganda. Be purpose and ask approximately data.

Answer 4

Conservatives say lots of dumb stuff and misspell really easy words too. Some things are better left mysterious for the answer, should you find it, may make you toss your breakfast burrito which would really suck.

Perhaps a better question would be: How much higher would the body-count be if there was another student with a gun who returned fire on the young Korean man? How many more people would have been killed in the cross fire? (The advantage of having only one shooter is that there is no crossfire.....felt I should point that out 'cause cons are kinda slow and they may not get it otherwise)

Most college boys can't accurately aim a stream of p*ss at a urinal, what the hell makes you idiots think any of them are sharpshooters?

Answer 5

Answering you or any other feel good liberals questions regarding guns is useless when you're so set on hating an inanimate object..

Your right a student had a gun it just so happened he was a student who intended to kill mass amounts of people..
Now consider this for a moment had a teacher or a law abiding of age student had a gun this mad man wouldn't have had free roam and the opportunity to slaughter 32 people.

Blaming guns for what mad men and criminals do is absolutely absurd. The gun doesn't make them kill or rob people...They choose to do so of their own free will.

Answer 6

I can only tell you this... If I had a gun at the same time, 32 more people would be alive. Laws do not keep guns out of people's hands any more than they keep illegals out of the country. If someone pulls a gun on you, try stopping him with a piece of paper.

On the other hand, if YOU don't feel comfortable around guns, then don't own one. That's how accidents happen. It's the "unloaded gun" that kills the most.

Answer 7

I haven't personally heard any conservatives say such, but if they have, I would assume that it is because conservatives generally are supporters of the right to gun ownership in this country, and see the massacre as an event that will cause an increase in calls for gun control and stricter gun laws. In essence, these sorts of statements are preemptive damage control.

Answer 8

If a student other than the shooter had a gun then it could have been stopped.

Of course in the scheme of things having a lot of guns means that there will be more deaths even if the big shooting sprees get stopped quicker.

Answer 9

Thank you! That is what I have been saying for two days now.

Can you imagine the bloodbath if several students had had guns? It would have made the Wild West look tame! And, God only knows, how many more innocents would have been caught in the crossfire.

I wish every gun in the world would melt into a molten puddle right now...that is my one wish for the Genie!

Answer 10

They probably say it because it is true. It is impossible to keep every student from having a gun. It is impossible to keep students bent on mass murder from getting guns. Police cannot be there all the time. GUNS ARE PART OF OUR EXISTENCE. Get over it. They cannot be banned and will never be kept out of the hands of criminals. If one person had a gun with them in class, this would have never happened.

By banning the right to carry guns on campus, police have effectively taken away the ability to protect oneself from these and other occurances. They cannot and do not provide adequate protection and providing this sort of protection for rare events would be innefficient and extremely costly. Let the people who are best able to protect themselves, do so. It would be far less costly and far more efficient to allow students the ability to protect themselves and fellow students. By banning the rights of people to carry a gun, they only insure that they will be defenseless against the poeple who will always have guns.

Answer 11

I think the logic behind that is if guns are made legal then something like this would have been stopped by other gun wielding students. The only problem with this logic is that they've outlawed guns on school campuses so the only ones that are carrying guns on campuses and schools are the people who are breaking the law!

Of course allowing everyone to carry guns on campuses or anywhere they please for that matter wouldn't help either since this would also make it easier for those who mean to do harm to walk into buildings armed and unchallenged. Yes they may be brought down quicker but someone is still going to get hurt or killed.

I agree zero students carrying guns would be much nicer.