Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky
I wager it's a bit more complicated than that.
I have no doubt most of those 51 people could legally have had guns had they wanted them, and simply chose not to. It's my impression the friends and families of the victims likely still choose not to have guns.
If someone took him out before he murdered 51 people, it would have been an international incident, since he was a foreigner. By a group of armed Muslims, no less.
Additionally, you can count on your hands how many mass shootings (more than two people) this country has had since its founding. Last I checked, the US has more than 500 per year.
Also, the police were on scene within 6 minutes.
I've personally been in a mass shooting - in Florida. When the guy came into the library and started firing, in a heavily armed state, it was very clearly not in everyone's mind to shoot back. He was shot dead by the police in minutes. It did not occur to me afterward to start carrying in public. Instead, I later opted to move somewhere with less gun violence.
|
Comfort breeds impotentness. It's a blessing and a curse.
Again, NZ has a population similar to Oregon, a nothing state among 50 in the US. Claiming only a handful of mass shootings in a nothing country is unimpressive.
I have no experience with NZ, so I'll stop short of any cultural values comments. That said, most problems are the result of good people not taking responsibility (or lack of good values), not liberty run amok.
If Brenton Tarrant had been shot dead the moment he wielded weapon by a good person that was armed, I would never have known such a person existed because news wouldn't have talked about it. Those scenarios play out all the time. "news" is the failures and unlikely scenarios, not the successes.