Would u have fought Cho when he did the massacre? It was 40 on 1 y not jump him, people need to think?

Question

i would have started my own army and attack Cho with my classmates if it was 40 on 1, instead they all ran

Answer 1

It is nice you say that when you are comfortably sitting behind your computer in your little room it is another when some mad man comes out of nowhere and starts shooting.

Answer 2

You know...I said the same thing about Columbine. Then in the military I had the divine opportunity to face the "Bad guy" who was armed. Me and three other well trained and well armed individuals caught him of guard and rapidly contained him, but not before a split second of "Ow Crap" shot through my brain almost paralyzing me. Mind you that we more than had the upper hand, but the hesitation still occurred.

These students who were not armed, had no training, had no knowledge of what was a bout to happen, and were at a loss to the element of surprise, would have first had to deal with the confusion of how real this threat is. By the time they realized what was happening to them, and formulated a plan as a group, they would all be dead.

Answer 3

Do you know how fast you can unload a clip and reload? Less than 10 seconds, maybe not even. The way his was putting minimum 3 rounds in each victim was crazy. Charging him would mean more dead students. By the tie you got to him, atleast half of you would've been killed or injured.

Being in the military I still freeze up when a sim-round is fired at me, imagine a real 7.62. When a situation occurs, "fight or flight" occurs. Your system will tell you to run.

Answer 4

Cho fired over 150 rounds. A gun gives you a tactical advantage in a fight - distance - he would have killed you before you got close. Nice thought though - I would have tried something if I had thought of it at the time.

Answer 5

I think it is in incredibly poor taste that you make this comment and pass this judgment on the victims of the massacre. Maybe someday you will be shot at and then you can say what you would or would not do. Until then, shut up.

Answer 6

Yeah but there are all kinds of stories from the old west where one desperado with a gun held off a whole mob. Seems no one wanted to be the guy who got shot first!

Answer 7

We are not a people that are accustomed to such random acts of violence, it's still incomprehensible to most of us, at the moment of this rampage, most of the people around it, I can only assume would have gone into shock, not to mention that we are internally prone to protect ourselves, this would ultimately mean to get as far away from the danger as fast as you possibly can, people join the military to learn such combative skills, they don't come naturally. We are taught from a very early age to always take shelter from the storm.

Answer 8

Would you have been willing to take the first bullet? Who would have taken the next and the next until he emptied his clips or until someone got to him? Going up against a loaded gun isn't as easy as you pretend. Someone will take the first few bullets....would you have lead the way, unarmed, against a nut with a loaded gun? Get real young man.
Bet you don't have the cajones to email me and answer.

Answer 9

He had a gun, you would have peed yourself, crapped your pants and been looking for the nearest exit. It takes a second for trained people to go into "combat" mode. These were all silly children going to school.

Answer 10

You are thinking like a soldier. They were students, not trained to do anything. You are right, it would have only taken a small group to take him down.