This may be one of THE most short-sighted and (hopefully intentionally) asinine attempts at arguing a position I've seen since the last MSNBC clip I saw. Let's use an easy analogy here. You walk out and see your right rear tire sagging on the rim. You think, gee, it may be flat. I have some pretty good circumstantial evidence staring me in the face (that's shooters actions, choices, and even statements), but you know, my tire pressure sensor is busted and I don't have a gauge. So until I have the data to verify that it truly is flat, I'm going to keep driving it. (Knowing full well that you have no intention of ever collecting said data, because that would drive you to do something you don't really want to do).
And only a fool or disingenuous fuckstick would try to argue that CC is the only answer to mass shootings. But I definitely don't want to live in a servailance state with commando-style cops on every corner. Or where they stand by and stand down when kids are being slaughtered and actively impede those that have the will to end it.
Incredibly poor example, dude. And no, I'm willing to bet you (as a private citizen) would NOT be getting into a motorized gun battle on the highway. You'd be jamming the brakes, swerving away and using your availabile horsepower to get out of the danger zone. Unless you're trying to say that you are so Code Red that you drive with your hand on you pistol butt just ready to ice the next random drive-by guy... Who's playing keyboard commando now? But let's say you did...now we have a rolling gun battle down the highway. We're right back to the DA in a courtroom. So, Mr Skunk, why did you engage in a rolling gun battle down a highway, and prevent our brave LEO from monitoring the situation until the shooter was out of ammo so they could safely apprehend him...
Do you not see the duality of your arguments here?
Why is every opposing argument/view on this forum now considered to be disingenuous? If I needed to lie or mislead anyone here I surely would not have told anybody who I work for.
Anyway, I think everyone has taken my original post in this thread the wrong way. Maybe my word choice was poor or something. My sarcastic final sentence definitely struck a chord.
I agree that no reasonable person would argue that CC is the only answer to mass shootings. Again, see my original post.
I think where this went off the rails is in the mixing of meaning/definition of what's being talked about. Deersniper and I were talking about Constitutional Carry. He and others later replied with links to news articles, etc related to civilians as a whole engaging active shooters, broadening the scope of the argument. Are most proponents of Const. Carry also or already possessors of Concealed Carry Wpns,? Probably. Has passage of Const. Carry significantly increased the numbers of people carrying guns? I doubt it. So, it's hard to separate the strictly Const. Carry folks from the CCW's walking around. The data I have access to at the office does not yet separate CC from the rest. That really was the whole point I was trying to make.
The best thing about Constitutional Carry is that people will/can carry if/when they want to without having to anything but make their Constitutionally protected decision. I'm all for it.
And as for my examples re: Midland. I agree, not the best in the world but that is a situation I have personal experience/knowledge of. So, I used that as I would rather speak about that which I know than dig around the internet for supporting arguments. Additionally, there were other people involved who were carrying weapons and did not engage. Some are no longer here and without knowing what the status of that case is, or armchair quarterbacking the actions of the deceased, I'm not going to comment on it further.
Maybe a better example would've been to mention the Walmart shooting in El Paso. Shooter came in the front door and went to work with his rifle. Instead of leaving the check-out line of registers and fleeing to the back of the store (run/hide), or pulling CCW and engaging (fight), people hid behind registers and were shot to death.
Whether Constitutional Carry, Concealed Carry Wpn, License to Carry, whatever the mechanism is, not everyone is going to get involved in a gunfight.
I will add this... Yesterday, I looked at the compiled statics related to Active Shootings, as defined by the fbi(I can't remember the exact verbiage of the definition). There was a 51% increase in the number of events from 2020 to 2021 (2022 not published yet). So, being armed and knowing how to handle yourself and your weapon is becoming increasingly more important.
If you're interested, I'll try to bring some of that info home to share, if I can.
That's it, that's all.
crimeresearch.org 
www.breitbart.com 
