Mass Shooting Shows Need For Guns In Airports, GOP Lawmaker Says - Polidicks

[QUOTE=rulssi;51635846]Somehow you guys think that if everyone was allowed to carry a gun they would, and even if everyone in the airport was armed I bet less than 20% would actually draw their weapon in that situation.[B] And out of those 20% I think less than half would actually be prepared to shoot and kill someone even if their own life was threatened.[/B] I'm okay with people carrying guns but there needs to be more strict rules and training to be able to get one. Some of you make it sound like the whole place instantly turns into war zone after 1 shot is fired and 200 civilians pull out their guns at the same time and start shooting each other.[/QUOTE] Right, but what happens when another armed dude/a cop shoots and killed some other armed dude

[QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51634725]You can tell who the bad guy is because he's shooting indiscriminately into a crowd of people. "domino effect" doesn't happen.[/QUOTE] It mostly doesn't happen because there rarely are situations of mass shootings where bystanders are carrying guns, but still it has happened, so... moot point. If you have a gun and the time and and clarity of head to assess who is shooting and who, then good, you might stop the shooter. However, anyone with a gun is a #1 priority for anyone else with a gun, and from that point onwards it's people with guns trying to shoot people with guns in the area, not "indiscriminately into the crowd", so good luck figuring out by that point who the good guy is. If I were to shoot the perpetrator in that situation, I pretty much expect to be shot in turn by a hapless vigilante. Now, imagine the situation with multiple perpetators. If they know people might be carrying guns and are smart about it, one of them will shoot bystanders and the other will be ready to protect the first from vigilantes. The second will appear as a "good guy" by your standard, but is actually the biggest threat to a good guy with a gun. So then are you supposed to observe that they are not shooting each other, and therefore in on it? What, then of vigilantes who are friends and therefore do not shoot each other? It's a clusterfuck by that point. This is all assuming that nobody panics or makes a false judgement, which is assuming a lot considering the average person's adrenaline will be in full swing and trying to figure out what's going on in a crowd is difficult to begin with.

Even as a non american I can def see where he's coming from, even if I don't really agree that open carrying is a good thing. I'd much rather have a gun than not have a gun if I was being shot at.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51635448][URL="http://pullzonebsd-4705.kxcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/KCPD-Badge-Placement-Study.pdf"]This is actually a bigger problem than what people think.[/URL] [/QUOTE] I'm reading the study and what I'm gathering is that it's a problem if cops are trigger-happy idiots who default to shooting anyone not wearing a badge. They didn't test threat recognition, they stuck badges on a few targets in a kill house scenario and told participants to shoot all the targets that didn't have badges. That's not a useful test. Again, for you and everyone else repeating this bullshit claim that concealed carry will turn any police response into the OK Corral, give me a single example where it has [B]actually happened[/B]. In fact, I'll expand that, give me an example of plainclothes officers responding to a mass shooting being shot by uniformed police. I'll wait. There are over [B]eleven million[/B] concealed carry permits issued in the US and these fears have never materialized. Armchair speculation is completely worthless.

[QUOTE=catbarf;51636381]:snip:[/QUOTE] I can see where you're comong from, but the problem with disproving these claims is the same problem that comes with trying to prove them. As in, there's never been an attack on an airport that allows open carry, so to say whether or not it'd work or even be a good idea is mostly just left up to a guest.

[QUOTE=Blazedol;51636559]I can see where you're comong from, but the problem with disproving these claims is the same problem that comes with trying to prove them. As in, there's never been an attack on an airport that allows open carry, so to say whether or not it'd work or even be a good idea is mostly just left up to a guest.[/QUOTE] Florida is one of only 6 states that prohibit CHL holders from carrying in an airport (minus the secure area). It appears the guy could have done his little rampage in Alaska or somewhere else. Why he chose to wait until Florida is something that is in his head. But when there is a repeating pattern of this crap mainly occurring in gun free zones its not hard to put it together. [t]https://www.floridacarry.org/images/stories/airport_carry_map.gif[/t] [url]https://www.floridacarry.org/issues/concealed-and-unconcealed-carry/40-airport-carry-is-legal-in-44-states-but-florida-will-put-you-in-jail[/url]

[QUOTE=Kigen;51636612]Florida is one of only 6 states that prohibit CHL holders from carrying in an airport (minus the secure area). It appears the guy could have done his little rampage in Alaska or somewhere else. Why he chose to wait until Florida is something that is in his head. But when there is a repeating pattern of this crap mainly occurring in gun free zones its not hard to put it together.[/QUOTE] i'm getting the idea we're not on the same page; i'm not saying that open carry doesn't discourage shootings, instead i'm saying it's harder than people realize to speculate how an airport shooting would go down if other civilians had their guns out.

[QUOTE=Blazedol;51636678]i'm getting the idea we're not on the same page; i'm not saying that open carry doesn't discourage shootings, instead i'm saying it's harder than people realize to speculate how an airport shooting would go down if other civilians had their guns out.[/QUOTE] We have evidence of attempts at mass shootings in places where armed citizens were allowed. Not an airport. But other places likes malls, etc. For the most part the situations end after the armed citizen engages a mass shooter. [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/[/url]

[QUOTE=Talishmar;51635881]It mostly doesn't happen because there rarely are situations of mass shootings where bystanders are carrying guns, but still it has happened, so... moot point. If you have a gun and the time and and clarity of head to assess who is shooting and who, then good, you might stop the shooter. However, anyone with a gun is a #1 priority for anyone else with a gun, and from that point onwards it's people with guns trying to shoot people with guns in the area, not "indiscriminately into the crowd", so good luck figuring out by that point who the good guy is. If I were to shoot the perpetrator in that situation, I pretty much expect to be shot in turn by a hapless vigilante. Now, imagine the situation with multiple perpetators. If they know people might be carrying guns and are smart about it, one of them will shoot bystanders and the other will be ready to protect the first from vigilantes. The second will appear as a "good guy" by your standard, but is actually the biggest threat to a good guy with a gun. So then are you supposed to observe that they are not shooting each other, and therefore in on it? What, then of vigilantes who are friends and therefore do not shoot each other? It's a clusterfuck by that point. This is all assuming that nobody panics or makes a false judgement, which is assuming a lot considering the average person's adrenaline will be in full swing and trying to figure out what's going on in a crowd is difficult to begin with.[/QUOTE] Like I just said, what you just described literally never happens. The domino effect is some bullshit fantasy that doesnt exist in the real world. You can come up with specific theories and scenarios all day, but it doesnt happen, ever. It doesnt happen. Period. [editline]7th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51635546]how is this even leftist anti-gun propaganda? how are armed guards in an airport going to pick out who is the mass shooter from a crowd of un-uniformed people who are waving guns about?[/QUOTE] The shooter is firing indiscriminately into a crowd of paniciking people. Its pretty simple to discern. Can we please quit bringing up fantasy land bullshit as a reason to not open carry?

[QUOTE=Kigen;51636716]We have evidence of attempts at mass shootings in places where armed citizens were allowed. Not an airport. But other places likes malls, etc. For the most part the situations end after the armed citizen engages a mass shooter. [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/03/do-civilians-with-guns-ever-stop-mass-shootings/[/url][/QUOTE] the key phrase here is "not an airport." airports are different from other places like malls and whatnot, due to the more alerted security. this [I]may[/I] cause problems and confusion if there were armed civilians, but again, nothing i say is really for certain.

[QUOTE=catbarf;51636381]I'm reading the study and what I'm gathering is that it's a problem if cops are trigger-happy idiots who default to shooting anyone not wearing a badge. They didn't test threat recognition, they stuck badges on a few targets in a kill house scenario and told participants to shoot all the targets that didn't have badges. That's not a useful test. Again, for you and everyone else repeating this bullshit claim that concealed carry will turn any police response into the OK Corral, give me a single example where it has [B]actually happened[/B]. In fact, I'll expand that, give me an example of plainclothes officers responding to a mass shooting being shot by uniformed police. I'll wait. There are over [B]eleven million[/B] concealed carry permits issued in the US and these fears have never materialized. Armchair speculation is completely worthless.[/QUOTE] Did you not read where they highlight two incidents of cops shooting other cops because of badge placement? If it happens to cops, it will happen to normal people. We don't need CC's trying to be heroes. These events are statistically improbable to begin with and even more rare when you factor in how.many people fly in the US. Cops responding to these incidents are going in to stop the threat. The only armchair speculation here is fallacy that people need to carry a firearm everywhere. Your fear of being in a situation like this [B] will statistically never materialize.[/B]

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51636950]Did you not read where they highlight two incidents of cops shooting other cops because of badge placement? If it happens to cops, it will happen to normal people. We don't need CC's trying to be heroes. These events are statistically improbable to begin with and even more rare when you factor in how.many people fly in the US. Cops responding to these incidents are going in to stop the threat. The only armchair speculation here is fallacy that people need to carry a firearm everywhere. Your fear of being in a situation like this [B] will statistically never materialize.[/B][/QUOTE] Do you think people should be allowed to concealed carry generally?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;51636978]Do you think people should be allowed to concealed carry generally?[/QUOTE] Yes

I'd imagine that if all citizens were armed, the shooter could just shoot since a few seconds later you'd have a bunch of other armed people, you don't even need to run away as you can get confused in the crowd and hide in plain sight

[QUOTE=SebiWarrior;51637145]I'd imagine that if all citizens were armed, the shooter could just shoot since a few seconds later you'd have a bunch of other armed people, you don't even need to run away as you can get confused in the crowd and hide in plain sight[/QUOTE] You are assuming in a large crowd that no one would see the guy who started shooting. That wouldn't be the case if you're in a group large enough to otherwise melt away into anonymously.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51637088]Yes[/QUOTE] Generally people conceal carry for self defense, so I was wondering what you meant by "We don't need CC's trying to be heroes". [editline]7th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;51635299]Florida already has enormous numbers of concealed carriers and these scenarios of police mistaking law-abiding citizens for criminals or multiple concealed carriers causing a wild shootout just don't happen.[B] Intuitively I would assume they would, but they don't.[/B] That's just the fact of it.[/QUOTE] I agree with this, particularly bolded. It seems like a legitimate concern until you look into places that have allowed concealed carry for years and discovered that it never happens.

[QUOTE=Talishmar;51634381]I would get like, armed guards, but aren't people legally carrying concealed weapons a recipe for disaster in a mass shooting situation?[/QUOTE] In most states you have to take not only a safety class but a class specifically about carrying a weapon that teaches both when it's safe to fire and how you're responsible for every bullet that comes out your gun as well as a number of other important factors.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51636950]Did you not read where they highlight two incidents of cops shooting other cops because of badge placement? [/QUOTE] Where in the article you linked is this? I see no mention of real-world examples. [QUOTE=Code3Response;51636950]If it happens to cops, it will happen to normal people.[/QUOTE] But it [b]doesn't[/b]. This is not a matter of subjective opinion. It simply does not happen. If you can't give examples of this happening in any of the other multitudes of places that already allow CC and simultaneously have police presence, then your fears are completely unsubstantiated. Hey, here's a facetious idea- I think regular police officers need to be unarmed, because in a mass shooting they'll panic and randomly shoot civilians. Never mind that this isn't what actually happens in real life, I've seen cops accidentally shoot the no-shoot targets on their course of fire so I think this is a real problem. If you're going to make empty speculation then I can do it too.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;51635546]how is this even leftist anti-gun propaganda? how are armed guards in an airport going to pick out who is the mass shooter from a crowd of un-uniformed people who are waving guns about?[/QUOTE] Or at the very least, how about he provide some statistics instead of some dumb "Hay! Imagine you get gunned down!" bullshit.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51636950] The only armchair speculation here is fallacy that people need to carry a firearm everywhere. Your fear of being in a situation like this [B] will statistically never materialize.[/B][/QUOTE] It's materialized for me and a couple other friends I know, but thats purely anecdotal. It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;51636950] The only armchair speculation here is fallacy that people need to carry a firearm everywhere. Your fear of being in a situation like this [B] will statistically never materialize.[/B][/QUOTE] I do carry my firearm every day, and I have had to use it to stop a situation (that thankfully ended without anyone harmed). If we're talking statistics sure, [b]statistically[/b] across the entire country it never materializes. But what goes on in bumfuck Kansas is vastly different than south side Chicago. Hell the University I go to practically has armed robberies every night, and every few weeks someone gets kidnapped/raped or beat damn near to death. So yeah, I'm going to carry my gun every day because I'd rather have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

I don't understand this action movie logic of giving guns to strangers in the hopes that they'll eliminate the threat. I also find these anecdotes of "I carry a gun and it's never been a problem before" absolutely worthless.You weren't in the same situation and even if you were, and you acted like the power fantasy that these people expect you to, there are countless other people who wouldn't do that. Cops make mistakes, and they're literally trained to deal with these high stress situations. Why the hell would you want to put a gun in the hands of somebody else, somebody less trained, in plain clothes and completely not on the lookout for any potential developing situations (as airport security/law enforcement would be), someone who by the way, is also much more likely to be taken by surprise and disarmed? Then the shooter has another fully loaded weapon to inflict even more damage on those around him. But nah, just add more guns to the problem because somebody thinks they're John Wayne, and if THEY were there with their guns, they'd coolly and calmly take out the shooter no problem.

[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51638332]Cops make mistakes, and they're literally trained to deal with these high stress situations. Why the hell would you want to put a gun in the hands of somebody else, somebody less trained[/QUOTE] Statistically concealed carriers commit firearm-related offenses at a rate far lower than police officers and there are numerous examples of concealed carriers responsibly, effectively ending a mass shooting threat. This whole 'untrained risky wannabe!!!' meme is completely unfounded. I've worked with police officers and most of them have minimal training for this sort of thing at best. [QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51638332]someone who by the way, is also much more likely to be taken by surprise and disarmed?[/QUOTE] How do you assert that licensed concealed carriers are just a risk because they might be taken by surprise and disarmed, and conclude that instead we should rely on [i]uniformed police[/i] instead? If you think those guys are constantly alert 24/7 for active threats, I've got some bad news for you. Once again, completely baseless assertions that fly in the face of real-world history. Find me an example of a mass shooter disarming a concealed carrier.

[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51638332], someone who by the way, is also much more likely to be taken by surprise and disarmed? [/QUOTE] What the hell are you basing this on? You are pulling this straight out of your goddamn ass. To get a CC license, you have to already be proficient with a firearm and then go through a course to prove that proficiency and build on it. Unless you're concealing your firearm without a holster in your waistband, you're at no more risk of being "easily" disarmed than a police officer is with a retention holster. I've heard some insanely stupid shit from people trying to discredit concealed carriers but this tops it.

Why don't you cut out the middle man and just make it illegal to not have a gun on you at all times. Seems to be the direction you're going in anyway.

[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51638332]I don't understand this action movie logic of giving guns to strangers in the hopes that they'll eliminate the threat. I also find these anecdotes of "I carry a gun and it's never been a problem before" absolutely worthless.You weren't in the same situation and even if you were, and you acted like the power fantasy that these people expect you to, there are countless other people who wouldn't do that. Cops make mistakes, and they're literally trained to deal with these high stress situations. Why the hell would you want to put a gun in the hands of somebody else, somebody less trained, in plain clothes and completely not on the lookout for any potential developing situations (as airport security/law enforcement would be), someone who by the way, is also much more likely to be taken by surprise and disarmed? Then the shooter has another fully loaded weapon to inflict even more damage on those around him. But nah, just add more guns to the problem because somebody thinks they're John Wayne, and if THEY were there with their guns, they'd coolly and calmly take out the shooter no problem.[/QUOTE] Do you get all your facts from watching action movies? If so, seek help. [QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51635241]How is people CC'ing in a non-secured area of an airport bogging down airport security at all?[/QUOTE] Sorry forgot about that part. If there is a place at or near the security stations which allows them to safely disarm, then there shouldn't be any issues. The main thing I was concerned about was if in an unlikely situation the airport security notices someone carrying a weapon, they may divert security or resources to focus on a false threat. [QUOTE=Code3Response;51636950]Did you not read where they highlight two incidents of cops shooting other cops because of badge placement? If it happens to cops, it will happen to normal people. We don't need CC's trying to be heroes. These events are statistically improbable to begin with and even more rare when you factor in how.many people fly in the US. Cops responding to these incidents are going in to stop the threat. The only armchair speculation here is fallacy that people need to carry a firearm everywhere. Your fear of being in a situation like this will statistically never materialize.[/QUOTE] Ok, if everyone wants to keep arguing that cops have this magical training that makes them far more qualified than CCW holders, then explain why police officers have literally over 20 times more weapons violation convictions than CCW holders.

[QUOTE=RainbowStalin;51640343]Why don't you cut out the middle man and just make it illegal to not have a gun on you at all times. Seems to be the direction you're going in anyway.[/QUOTE] Because not everyone should be carrying a gun, but that doesn't mean that we should outright disallow everyone to have a gun.

Some of you are acting like every 4 out of 5 people at the airport are gonna be packing heat. As well as even if SWAT had to deal with the civvies with guns, don't they follow a protocol of giving the suspect a chance to surrender? Isn't that why they go in groups, and wear protective gear? Don't they also make civvies put their guns down? So it's not like the suspect can be "oh ya im a gud guy" and swats gonna be all "uhuhyup he said he a gud guy, let him by" and then he kills em all. And airports have tons of security? Couldn't they identify who they were looking for? I'm seriously curious, not trying to be an smartass. By security at airports I mean cameras, monitoring tv, etc etc. Big brother shit. I guess.

[QUOTE=catbarf;51638895]Statistically concealed carriers commit firearm-related offenses at a rate far lower than police officers and there are numerous examples of concealed carriers responsibly, effectively ending a mass shooting threat. This whole 'untrained risky wannabe!!!' meme is completely unfounded. I've worked with police officers and most of them have minimal training for this sort of thing at best. [/QUOTE] So, statistically concealed carriers commit firearm-related offenses less than police officers. Say I believe this without any source or information offered. This is believable if you accept that concealed carry people aren't involved in as many firearm related incidents as police officers, because why would they? Unless they're deliberately looking for trouble. I would still take a 'minimally' trained police officer over just some guy. [editline]8th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Cyke Lon bee;51638901]What the hell are you basing this on? You are pulling this straight out of your goddamn ass. To get a CC license, you have to already be proficient with a firearm and then go through a course to prove that proficiency and build on it. Unless you're concealing your firearm without a holster in your waistband, you're at no more risk of being "easily" disarmed than a police officer is with a retention holster. I've heard some insanely stupid shit from people trying to discredit concealed carriers but this tops it.[/QUOTE] If this tops it, then I must be mistaken, and concealed carry people must be on the lookout for terrorists and mass shooters all the time, in which case, I'm sorry my perspective of your country was so mistaken. I didn't realise that everybody was constantly on alert for the next big incident, even more so than the police And before you get into the details of how retention holsters work, I didn't mean that the guy would literally take his gun, but rather that he would disarm him by threatening to shoot him, which could happen anytime. Unless of course, you're saying that these specific individuals are constantly wary. Shit life if so many of your populace need to be on the lookout for shooters then.

[QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51641981] I would still take a 'minimally' trained police officer over just some guy.[/quote] Hate to break it to you, but that "minimally" trained cop is probably going to have just as much, if not less, training than "some guy" who has a concealed carry [b]LICENSE[/B]. Let me break this down for you since you clearly don't understand. For the state of North Dakota, which I reside, to get a concealed carry permit you must take a training course. In this training course, you are subjected to a class that teaches you basic handling of a pistol and the laws regarding firearms in the state of North Dakota and federal firearms laws. Then you go out into a firing range where your proficiency with a pistol is tested. If you have never handled a pistol before, you will fail this test. First round is 12 shots over 2 magazines; you start with the pistol holstered on your hip and from 15 yards away, you must shoot a standard size piece of construction paper. Once your mag is empty, you drop the mag, put a new one home and release the slide, then switch to your off-hand grip and repeat the process with another 6 rounds. You have 45 seconds total to get 12 rounds down range with a reload involved. Round 2 requires you to put 12 rounds over 2 mags into a piece of construction paper 25 yards away. First magazine must be done standing, second magazine must be done from the kneeling position and you can not brace yourself against a wall or the bench. Over these 2 rounds of firing, you fire 24 shots and if you do not land 75% of the rounds on paper, then you do not pass. You get 3 attempts total to pass. If you know anything about handguns, this is a very tough test. You have to already be extremely proficient with a pistol to begin with to even score a 50% on this test. After the testing with the firearm, you have to score a 100% on a written exam, and after passing both of these, you submit this paperwork to the state NDCIS to undergo an extensive background check before you're issued a license. This is just for the state of North Dakota, but most states are as rigorous, or more so, when it comes to get a concealed carry license. [QUOTE=Menien Goneld;51641981] If this tops it, then I must be mistaken, and concealed carry people must be on the lookout for terrorists and mass shooters all the time, in which case, I'm sorry my perspective of your country was so mistaken. I didn't realise that everybody was constantly on alert for the next big incident, even more so than the police. And before you get into the details of how retention holsters work, I didn't mean that the guy would literally take his gun, but rather that he would disarm him by threatening to shoot him, which could happen anytime. Unless of course, you're saying that these specific individuals are constantly wary. Shit life if so many of your populace need to be on the lookout for shooters then.[/QUOTE] I appreciate you degrading the standard of living in my country but it's not as bad as you describe it. You don't have to be a prick just because you blatantly don't understand what you're talking about. To your last comment, first of all, how are you going to discern who is and isn't a concealed carrier? We don't have to wear a armband stating that we are, we look just like any other person in a crowd. Theres a million and one ways to conceal a firearm and you will never notice who is and isn't. A would-be terrorist isn't going to be able to discern that from an average individual. Secondly, being held at gunpoint isn't the end of a confrontation. The videos I'm about to link you involve a shooting so keep that in mind as you watch them. [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhFpRS9csXw"]1[/URL] [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhW0BtEyH5M"]2[/URL] [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwrgvqlc8DA"]3[/URL] [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKioGV6YG1s"]4[/URL] I could really go on and on with this. I don't mean to be a dick, but you literally have no idea what the hell you're talking about. You're making assumptions about a country you know very little about, making assumptions about guns which you know very little about, and making assumptions about concealed carry which you also know very little about.