Woodruff wrote: Phatscotty wrote: crispybits wrote: Phatscotty wrote:
crispybits wrote:and if Lansa hadn't had a gun, then 18-20 of those children would have been saved by a miracle too
that is not realistic
I wonder about any country where it is "unrealistic" to make damn sure mentally ill people with violent tendencies find it near impossible to get hold of weapons of that effectiveness.
a weapon is a weapon. you just want to cut down the murderers effectiveness, but that does nothing for prevention, while it does make it harder for people to protect themselves
No it doesn't. True that cutting down the murderer's effectiveness is a HUGE part of this discussion (well, it should be, but you seem to want to ignore that part of it). But the fact of the matter is that the teacher who charged Lansa (you know, the one you were declaring a hero a bit ago) would have had a far greater chance of success if Lansa had a non-semi-automatic weapon, perhaps even just a knife, rather than what he had. Then they would have been "a hero who lived", as you said. So no, it DOESN'T make it harder for people to protect themselves in that sort of a situation, necessarily.
Wrong, Woody. It only took ONE bullet to stop her, and it would have only taken ONE bullet from HER gun - if she had had a gun - to stop him!
So yes, it DOES make it harder to protect herself.
Last I heard, teachers can't carry knives at school, either, they're considered a weapon, and if they hide them, they're considered a CONCEALED weapon which can only legally be done with a permit - a concealed weapons permit, the same type of permit that allows people to carry concealed guns. Oh, but wait, the same ban of guns in schools also bans other concealed weapons in schools, so once again, unarmed teacher would've been going up against an armed maniac criminal.
So let's just say, it was a maniac criminal armed with a lethal, cruelly sharp hunting knife, because guns would be banned in your dreams. So, no guns. Just that lethal knife made for taking down big game in a man-vs-animal setting.
Picture it: mr. maniac could still slash unarmed teachers and defenseless little kids, and probably create even more terror doing it, because instead of blood seeping from holes it would be spurting all over the classrooms from severed arteries
. Further, he could probably then have gotten into more classrooms before stopped, because his giant hunting knife wouldn't make a bang-bang noise, and it might take a while for people to realize kids screaming (if they still could, if they weren't shocked into silence after watching the spurting of blood all over the place) wasn't squeals of joy like at recess but squeals of terror.
"Laws" don't stop maniacs, woodruff. Laws merely keep honest people honest.
When confronted with a maniac, people need good defenses. Too bad those 'gun free zones' meant those kids' teachers had no defenses against the maniac.