• HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    156
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Still waiting for the good guy with a gun they keep repeating

    EDIT: OK everyone, yes he was the good guy with a gun. Thanks to everyone for pointing this out

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      125
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Apparently, the shooter was a firearms instructor. Aka, good guy with a gun turned bad guy with a gun.

      This crap will never end until the tools they use to kill are off the streets.

      • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        80
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apparently, the shooter was a firearms instructor.

        Every gun owner thinks they’re a responsible gun owner.

        • KneeTitts@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Not my shocked face!!

          …Support for Trump, among other politicians. As shown by the video, Card liked tweets from high-profile conservative figures such as Donald Trump Jnr., Tucker Carlson, Dinesh D’Souza. He also engaged with publications from former house speakers Kevin McCarthy and Jim Jordan, as per the video.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Probably a “Look down the barrel to make sure there is no bullet in there” type.

        • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think that’s the same error in judgement that leads the vast majority of motorists to believe their driving skills are above average. Forgot what it’s called.

      • variaatio@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Which is the key problem. Everyone is a “responsible gun owner” and “good guy with a gun”… until sometimes they suddenly aren’t anymore. At which point your protection is what was person able to keep under normal circumstances aka what they had in their possession on the moment they had a mental snap.

        Was it a semi-auto shoot as fast as your finger pulls rifle with potentially hundreds of rounds in quick swap magazines or do they have a manual action hunting rifle or shotgun with fixed magazine, that need to be manually reloaded.

        Do they have a pistol with again potentially hundreds of rounds of quick reload ammunition or don’t or maybe a target pistol with fixed magazine.

        That is why places around the world have magazine and type restrictions, since they exactly know “checking backgrounds isn’t fool proof and now amount of background checking helps again sudden newly emerging situation after the checks have been done”.

        Sure that 5 round moose hunting rifle will absolutely wreck say those 5 people, but one can’t exactly run amock shooting around endlessly with moose rifle. Damage limitation. 5 dead people is better situation, than 22 dead people. As cold calculating as that is.

        • aesthelete@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Everyone is a “responsible gun owner” and “good guy with a gun”… until sometimes they suddenly aren’t anymore.

          Yeah, and unpopular opinion likely but I think of this similarly to dogs turning on their owners.

          And similarly I’d rather have a Yorkshire terrier go crazy on me than a Pitbull.

    • UnspecificGravity@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      This guy is exactly the kind of person that the GOP considers a “good guy with a gun”. He is a mentally ill veteran firearms instructor. Sounds like a boilerplate Trump supporter. Exactly who they want to have more guns.

      • Snapz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s even worse, GOP would want this guy to be an elementary school teacher as a “solution” to the school shootings. Broken, selfish, heartless cowards

    • Polar@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      There was a study published from data from the last like… 10 years, I believe, that show that people with guns are more likely to run away, and people WITHOUT guns, are more likely to jump in and try to stop the shooter.

      So ya. These good guys with guns are just pussies that never actually use them for good.

        • Polar@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ya. I live in Canada, and I’ve never felt the need to own a gun. We have a TON of hunting guns here, but I think the fact we don’t allow open carry, changes the thought process of gun owners here, and we don’t see them as weapons to point at other people. They are more so seen as a tool for a hobby, like a fishing rod is used for fishing.

          And honestly, if you avoid Toronto, violence in general is really low. Toronto is just… special.

      • SheeEttin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That might be because people who own guns have had training in how not to get killed.

        I’m not sure that saying gun owners should be quicker to shoot people is the right direction.

        • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Mass shootings themselves are a rounding number, rounding numbers are what we’re discussing. Also helps that they almost always choose gun free zones “for no reason” instead of “gun guaranteed zones.” Almost like they don’t want armed people shooting at them.

          And one or two, but just because the cops make an error, doesn’t mean the person was wrong to save all those people. That’s also why you’re told to put the gun away once you’ve secured the situation, and you’re supposed to give a visual description of the shooter when you call it in. You really think it’s better to just let people cause whatever harm they want to than for them to stop the violent attacker? Even if it’s just a guy with a knife who can “only kill less people than a guy with a gun,” “if it even stops just one” right?

    • archonet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      129
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Maybe be the change you want to see in the world instead of removed, then.

      edit: go ahead and keep downvoting me, when the right does finally manage a coup they’ll be the only ones with any guns you stupid motherfuckers. For now, the 2nd amendment is your right – you want to forgo it until they take it away from you (and only you), be my guest.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m pro-gun but anti-2A precisely because of fuckers like you who insist we can’t do anything about this stuff because 2A so we just have to live with mass shootings.

        Nope if 2A is standing in the way of sensible regulation, then get rid of it. Then I’ll fight for reasonable laws around gun ownership. 2A is the problem.

        • Madison420@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Bingo, license (no test just who you are where you live like a DL) register (every firearm) and own a fucking tank of you want, I don’t care. The biggest issue is you can pretty easily get ahold of one without anyone knowing you have one so the thought someone could get away is much more pervasive.

          • boomzilla@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not from the US but isn’t it like that US Citizens do not have to register their current place of living? If true I think they could get a grip of the gun madness by fixing that problem.

            They could couple permission for buying guns and ammo to have the buyer have a registered residency and showing their ID which would be checked against a federal database which logs the amount of guns and ammo bought.

            If a buyer is reaching some tresholds they’d have to ask for a permit and give some convincing reasons why they need them. Especially when they want to buy AR’s or other heavy weaponry.

            When set in effect, every US citizen has to register their current weapons. After a grace period, owning unregistered weapons and getting caught will get the buyer a ban for owning weapons and having to re-apply for permissions after some time. Getting caught multilple times is a perma ban.

            Every US citizen should have the right to buy guns and ammo to protect themselves even if they don’t have a permanent residency. Those could be allowed to buy a handgun, also logged in the federal DB with their ID or SSN.

            Everyone who wants a permit to buy guns needs to complete a training from a state agency.

            That long-ass plan for a better world would see the first major roadblock with the refusal to register their residency by at least 50% of the US-population, right? And it could also be that many left leaning, dems or libertarians would give that idea a hard pass.

            So yeah…probably every part of this plan collides with the US idea of individual freedom. Take a look at Switzerland maybe.

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Basically yes.

              That’s the idea. Not on ammo though, reloading is better for the environment so let’s not impede that.

              No. That’s a search, you can’t do that in the United States.

              That’s the idea.

              That’s the idea.

              Nope. You have to offer incentives to businesses so they want to make people do it or they won’t sell it, then it’s a business meeting a business decision not the government imposing it’s will. I mean it still is but most people over here are not huge on critical thinking.

              Probably, so you incentiveize it. Again then it’s people sneaking a couple dollars from the government, not the government imposing it’s will.

              Not really, people are just dumb and there’s a lot of money involved in keeping it controversial. You can literally watch profits of the big ammo manufacturers rise and fall every 4 -8 years they’re not going to let that go easily.

        • cannache@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sensible regulations would be rubber bullets for newly minted firearms owners. Keep it empty, but if the day comes that you think about going on a mass shooting spree, you’ll probably change your mind when you remember that you’ll be loading rubber bullets and have to explain yourself after you’ve shot someone.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        when the right does finally manage a coup they’ll be the only ones with any guns you stupid motherfuckers

        Believe it or not, the US military has many guns.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point here is that civilians aren’t going to defeat the US military, full stop. Whether sane people have guns or fascists have guns, only the military matters

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Might wanna check the actual combat statistics there bud. Shit Vietnam was also a professional, well-supplied army with a decade of combat experience against the French and massive infrastructure advantages.

                This is home turf, not foreign soil that’s attempting to be occupied peacefully. Plus, you’d have 50% of a country, give or take, readily willing to turn you in or attack you themselves, and 0 logistics infrastructure.

                It’s amazing to me this take is still common with people when it’s so easily laughed at.

                If you wanna go hide in the woods with your buddies, you can do that without trying to overthrow the government.

                • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I was responding to your previous point that a standing military is all that matters against an occupied civilian force. I don’t think that really bears up to scrutiny in historical terms.

                  Also, I don’t know where you got off thinking I’m trying to LARP as a militia member, but nice strawman with absolutely zero background to support that conclusion…

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I don’t think that really bears up to scrutiny in historical term

                    Then, frankly, you’re wrong.

                    Also, I don’t know where you got off thinking I’m trying to LARP as a militia member

                    it was a generalized “you”

              • cannache@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think the more important point is that people form militias to protect themselves, and carrying a weapon means considering bad thoughts and being aware of them, the same way that an ex drug user or addict practicing abstinence consistently needs to exert a degree of self discipline.

                If you ask me, owning a gun just makes violent assholes have a shorter fuse. Think about it, have you ever carried a stick or a knife and thought that carrying it meant something? Now you can be more assertive, but the risk of accidentally shooting people or just flying off the handle and shooting someone suddenly becomes a real risk.

                A great test would be to give recent licensed gun owners three rubber bullets to use. When you get around to firing it after losing your shit you’ll know that you really lost your cool.

              • wanderingmagus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                We absolutely had the military capability to wipe Vietnam and Afghanistan off the goddamn map and delete their populations and wildlife from existence if ordered to do so. The politicians back home said no, and made us withdraw. We have thousands of nuclear reentry vehicles standing ready, and we are trained to set condition 1SQ when ordered, no questions asked, without knowing the target package. I challenge you to survive a hundred Hiroshimas per warhead, times several thousand.

                • Riccosuave@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  See my other comments below. I’m not looking to have an argument about nuclear war with a nuclear submariner. When you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail and whatnot.

          • wanderingmagus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Military has equally as many progressives, moderates and centrists who absolutely will not tolerate these people. Source: I’m a submariner who works with nuclear weapons. You try something nutty, we can and will put your face into the concrete, no matter your political affiliation. Basics of the Personnel Reliability Program, the Command Managed Equal Opportunity Program, and Nuclear Weapons Security.

      • JoShmoe@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Who the heck is paying you to preach this crap? They need a better representative.

      • HurlingDurling@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        So… go buy a gun and shoot him myself? No thanks, voting is my weapon of choice and I use it like a machine gun