Post removed

[alcibiades_mystery]

32. So the shooter 1) wasn't in the act of shooting 2) was not shot at

And this is the great case for stopping the likes of Adam Lanza or James Holmes or Seung-Hui Cho?

Are you even fucking serious?

Gawd, the gun nuts are pathetic!

First they give us a scenario: if teachers or principals or movie theater patrons were armed, they could stop a shooter. The implication, of course, is that they stop the shooter in the fucking act of committing the massacre! OK, show us a single example where a civilian has ever stopped a mass shooting in this manner, we say.

Oh, well here's a case where a guy shot a bunch of people and then was sitting in his car later. But, you know, he was on the way to another shooting so, you know, it's kinda sorta like a civilian stopped him in the middle of the act, like, sorta, you know?

What a fucking joke.

What a monumental fucking joke these gun nuts are. they searched and searched and searched, and the best they could do was this example? It's not even close. It's not even marginally close to the scenario they use for their ridiculous arguments. There's a reason why: their imaginary Rambo scenario is fucking BULLSHIT.