What if someone was armed?

Question

All these shootings lately.We (rightfully) complain that if a law abiding citizen was armed it could have been prevented.But what would happen if it was?The person who shoots the assailant could be percieved as the assailant in all the chaos and get shot themself by the police.The person could get sued by the "victim"'s family.Sure people would be saved,but what about the person who saved them?I'm not saying I know the answers to these questions,I'm just asking what you think

I'm not implying playing the hero.I'm just talking about pulling out the gun in self defense and shooting to save your own life.

H,are you saying That If I stop a madman from continuing his rampage,The victim's families will actually side with me? I'm worried because if it ever happened,you are basicly getting the same consequences thrown at you as if you went out and shot someone for no reason.

H,are you saying That If I stop a madman from continuing his rampage,The victim's families will actually side with me? I'm worried because if it ever happened,you are basicly getting the same consequences thrown at you as if you went out and shot someone for no reason.

Answer 1

in this politically correct world noone is safe...especially
from lawyers

Answer 2

I personaly think that we who carry have a moral obligation to stop anybody that is using dealy force on anybody or showing iminent intent to do so. yeah, the laws differ from state to state. Make sure you know what is justified where you live...legaly. You're on pretty solid ground if you are stopping the used of deadly force. The arguments can go on and on. Sure you will be suited. That's life. My point is for those that choose to carry, I believe you have an obligation to know the law, to be very proficient with your gun. and yes...you are accountable for every bullet you launch. Why carry in the first place if you are going to hide under a table while a mad man shoots inocent people
PS, as mentioned try to be on the phone with the cops. Have your hands up and gun holstered when they show up. Tell them what happened, point out the whitnesses and the perp. location of perps gun....then nothing more untill you call a lawyer, probably from jail. But you will sleep better at night than if you hide from the bad guys, the good guys and the lawyers

Answer 3

I think that if people were allowed to carry whereever they go, anyone planning a shooting wouldn't be willing to be remembered as 'that one guy who got shot before he hit anyone'. Really. Most people that carry also make a point of practicing often enough that they're fairly proficient with their firearm. The most recent shootings were made with unfamiliar firearms.

One law I've heard about that I do really like places the liability for forcing civilians to be unarmed on the owner of the property that's been marked as a 'gun free zone'. Therefore, if someone designated their convenience store gun free, and someone who would normally carry gets shot, it places the blame not only on the shooter, but also on the owner for not allowing the victim to defend himself.

But if the mall was not a 'gun free zone' and someone nearby was carrying, it probably wouldn't have made the news. It's rare that something that's not exciting or tragic makes it on the news.

Answer 4

This is a situation that all CCW holders worry about. I don't have a CCW permit yet, but am about to take the class soon. I would like to think that instructors cover this scenario and what should be done.

The general public has the false belief that CCW permit holders are all about carrying a gun and shooting people at the first opportunity. The truth is that most of them hope they never have to draw their firearm ever. They want to be prepared in case the situation comes up.

Answer 5

If I'd been in that mall, I'd probably have been arrested, and sent to prison, because I'd have done my best to shoot that a$$hole.

Unfortunately, Malls are generally off limits to firearms, even if the shopper holds a Concealed Weapons Permit.

The do-gooders think that the way to prevent violence is to provide a target rich environment where the potential victims are supposed to be unarmed. Makes plenty of sense doesn't it?

The only high school shooting to end with the shooter captured was near here in Pearl, MS. The kid started by killing his mother at home, then going to school to continue his shooting spree. When he finished at school, he got in a car to go to another location to continue his rampage. An assistant principal went to his car, retrieved and loaded his Colt M-1911 pistol, stepped in front of the shooter's car, and stopped the punk right there. The shooter meekly raised his hands in surrender at the first sign of armed resistance.

The assistant principal was not censured for having a gun in his car on that ocassion.

Doc

Answer 6

Those whom perpetrate the "irrational" shootings, in schools, malls, streets, or where ever, are practically impossible to stop. They are "terrorists", and are seeking to shock and intimidate us....All the security in the land could not stop them, short of a 100% search and seizure of every person entering a mall or school, or street.........The gun...gets the blame...but I could leave my 9 mm, locked and loaded, on the floor of a crowed mall, and the gun would not hurt anyone, until someone picked it up, and used it....The people who perpetrate the shootings, do not just wake up one morning, and decided it is time for war....For weeks, months, even years, they exhibit the signs of mental illness, or abnormal behavior, and the people who know them should recognize that something is wrong...A person whom is a little "depressed", or a little "angry" is not going to to take their wrath out on innocent people. The person who does these things, is very disturbed, and there is no way, someone did not know that there was a real possibility of the person becoming a danger to society....The armed citizen may make a difference in the number of fatalities, by shooting the perpetrator, but the real problem, is the people who could have prevented the shooting.........didn't.......

Answer 7

Police officers tend to arrive on scene after everything has already happened. Look at Omaha. Took the police only 6 minutes to get on scene, and in that amount of time 8 were killed and he had killed himself. In a gunfight, every second counts.

Recently in texas on I35 there was a major shooting between cops and gunmen. The cops were wounded on the ground and a man with a shotgun kicked the assailants ***. He definitely saved those cops lives.

Answer 8

I understand where you're coming from, but I agree with H on this one. You can't worry about lawsuits (and like H said, you can always countersue), and as long as you are aware of your rights and self defense laws, then the matters with the police will work itself out. Personally, if I feel I have the means to prevent senseless violence (no matter where it occurs...my home, a mall, a school, etc.) then I'm going to try to stop it, otherwise, what's the point in training for self defense (whether you use a firearm, a knife, or your fist).

Answer 9

There was once a sense of civic responsibility in that if you could act to save the lives of others, then you are compelled to do so. Now, it seems, the only lives worth saving are those of the troubled and mentally disturbed, the rest of us are just fodder for the machine.

I am sure that if you had to explained to your God that you had to let 30 people die so you wouldn't get sued, He/She would understand.

In the case of the Omaha shooting, it took 6 minutes for the police to show up. You would have had enough time to dispatch the shooter, order a Big Mac, and have time to finish it off before the first officer showed up.

John

Answer 10

Yes, that is one concern due to Police policy in Texas is radical to a degree.
We had some new laws and one is the Castle Law here. If I shoot in self defense, no one will be able to sue me. Not like it has been in the past. I have taken the CCW courses. I do have the right to defend a 3rd party, with the use of deadly force. Know your laws. Know your weapons (proficiency). Common sense and the Law will prevail.

Answer 11

You will have much less trouble with the law if you sit tight and defend your corner of the office, mall, wherever, rather than actively "playing hero" and taking offensive action against a rampaging gunman. However repugnant it may seem to let a killer go his merry way in the opposite direction, trying to put an end to his rampage may well be distorted into putting more lives in greater danger.

Also, whereas an off-duty police officer will clarify and legitemise his intervention by identifying himself as one authorised to act in the defence of the general public, the armed private citizen has no such accepted means of announcing his good intentions, and will thus risk being shot by other well-intentioned citizens, as well as by law officers.

Beyond preventing lunatics with guns from shooting up malls, or even preventing lunatics (and criminals) from obtaining guns, we need to prevent them from getting anywhere near society at large. I don't care to understand them and their problems, I want them locked away, deported to Antarctica, or just plain exterminated.