The CBC, like other elitist gun grabbers in Kanada, learned all they know about guns from watching Dirty Harry movies. They take direction from a couple of traumatized women with personal histories of gun tragedy (Kookier and Rathgen) and righteously pronounce themselves Bishops of the New Order. It's all like a Monty Python episode only they're not pretending.
He says that she is assuming at the end.... Well this fellow is making assumptions that if people were there with guns that they could have stopped the crime, and not escalated it. Truth be known, one fellow did have a gun and said it happened so fast, that he could have shot while the criminal was being tackled.
@quedorf what you are missing is that that fellow arrived after the shooting from across the road in a store. that is where he heard the shots. He arrived, ready to pull his gun but did not have to because the shooter was had been tackled. The fact remains that engaging a shooter with counter fire is exactly what the police would do. And it would be assertions that it would "escalate the incident is complete rubbish. I would rather somebody try and kill the shooter than to let the shooter.
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot Making the assertion that it would escalate the conflict, is as reasonable as making the assertion that people with guns would have saved lives. This is pure conjecture by someone who wasn't there. Thus the point that although the fellow in the video claims the host was making assumptions, so is he. And lastly there is alternative C. The shoot out is escalated sue to the chaos of the situation. And D be proactive and try to prevent situations such as these.
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot First we do not know that D wouldn't work. This can happen anywhere, yet the US it is much more prevalent. It is not just one problem, but several working in conjunction. Can it be solved 100 percent.. No. But it can be reduced without a doubt. No one claims gun control will completely fix the problem. No one says dealing with the socioeconomic problems will completely fix the problem. But they will reduce them...........
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot As far as escalation, it is impossible to explain in 500 letters, but more people in a crowd with guns increases the chaos that already exists, and increases the chance for people to be killed, not only by the shooter, but "friendly fire". Confusion can cause many possible scenarios, some more possible than others, yet none impossible. Confusion of who the real shooter is. Stray rounds hitting Innocent bystanders. Etc.
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot No, by my reasoning it is better in these type of situations that nobody was there with guns to escalate the killing. BUT if you read what I wrote earlier, I support proactive attempts to prevent these type of situations. And yes I know you say it is not likely, and I say it is likely. That is just a difference of opinion. We will not change each others opinion, and being Canadian it is really none on my business. I will be content here, and hope the US's ideas work.
@quedorf it is completely foolish to sugest that it is better that people get shot down by a killer than to have a armed citizen engage the killer with counter fire.
I keep hearing this argument, like it is a viable alternative, yet time and time again liberals make this asinine statement about how it would turn into a shoot-out.
Like as if the alternative is better. Either you...A: let the killer continue the Turkey shoot, until the cops arrive later. or B: you shoot and kill the shooter.
The CBC, like other elitist gun grabbers in Kanada, learned all they know about guns from watching Dirty Harry movies. They take direction from a couple of traumatized women with personal histories of gun tragedy (Kookier and Rathgen) and righteously pronounce themselves Bishops of the New Order. It's all like a Monty Python episode only they're not pretending.
Rocky78992 1 year ago
Great interview. This Canadian drone simply can not understand the logic behind protecting each other. I love my Country... Good one Whiskey
tbone714714 1 year ago 3
He says that she is assuming at the end.... Well this fellow is making assumptions that if people were there with guns that they could have stopped the crime, and not escalated it. Truth be known, one fellow did have a gun and said it happened so fast, that he could have shot while the criminal was being tackled.
quedorf 1 year ago
@quedorf what you are missing is that that fellow arrived after the shooting from across the road in a store. that is where he heard the shots. He arrived, ready to pull his gun but did not have to because the shooter was had been tackled. The fact remains that engaging a shooter with counter fire is exactly what the police would do. And it would be assertions that it would "escalate the incident is complete rubbish. I would rather somebody try and kill the shooter than to let the shooter.
aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 1 year ago 4
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot Making the assertion that it would escalate the conflict, is as reasonable as making the assertion that people with guns would have saved lives. This is pure conjecture by someone who wasn't there. Thus the point that although the fellow in the video claims the host was making assumptions, so is he. And lastly there is alternative C. The shoot out is escalated sue to the chaos of the situation. And D be proactive and try to prevent situations such as these.
quedorf 1 year ago
@quedorf Well we know that D does not work.
What do you think the cops are going to do.
And as for "escalation" how do you define "escalation" in which way would this situation have been escalated any more than what it already was?
aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 1 year ago
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot First we do not know that D wouldn't work. This can happen anywhere, yet the US it is much more prevalent. It is not just one problem, but several working in conjunction. Can it be solved 100 percent.. No. But it can be reduced without a doubt. No one claims gun control will completely fix the problem. No one says dealing with the socioeconomic problems will completely fix the problem. But they will reduce them...........
quedorf 1 year ago
@quedorf so hows that working out for us....not too well at all.
"No. But it can be reduced without a doubt."
"No one says dealing with the socioeconomic problems will completely fix the problem. But they will reduce them..........."
there is no proof of this at all.
aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 1 year ago
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot As far as escalation, it is impossible to explain in 500 letters, but more people in a crowd with guns increases the chaos that already exists, and increases the chance for people to be killed, not only by the shooter, but "friendly fire". Confusion can cause many possible scenarios, some more possible than others, yet none impossible. Confusion of who the real shooter is. Stray rounds hitting Innocent bystanders. Etc.
quedorf 1 year ago
@quedorf so by your reasoning of these types of situations. It was better that nobody was there to kill the shooter.
sorry but I would take my chances with someone else shooting back at the killer.
And I think most would agree.
aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 1 year ago
@aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot No, by my reasoning it is better in these type of situations that nobody was there with guns to escalate the killing. BUT if you read what I wrote earlier, I support proactive attempts to prevent these type of situations. And yes I know you say it is not likely, and I say it is likely. That is just a difference of opinion. We will not change each others opinion, and being Canadian it is really none on my business. I will be content here, and hope the US's ideas work.
quedorf 1 year ago
@quedorf it is completely foolish to sugest that it is better that people get shot down by a killer than to have a armed citizen engage the killer with counter fire.
I keep hearing this argument, like it is a viable alternative, yet time and time again liberals make this asinine statement about how it would turn into a shoot-out.
Like as if the alternative is better. Either you...A: let the killer continue the Turkey shoot, until the cops arrive later. or B: you shoot and kill the shooter.
aWhiskeyTangoFoxtrot 1 year ago 2