
Should we put to rest the NRA (National Rifle Association) myth, "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"?


It's not really a myth when literally the only things that stop shooters are:
1. Another shooter (good guy with a gun), which according to FBI statistics the low estimate is that this stops about 90% of would-be mass shootings.
2. A cop, security guard, or tactical response team (good guy with a gun), which as Uvalde has shown can't be depended on as a one-stpp solution.
3. The shooter surrenders, which pretty much only happens with politically-motivated domestic terrorists.4. The shooter kills himself (or herself), which happens more often than not in the mass killings, but virtually never in gang violence - a much bigger problem going by numbers but completely ignored by the media. So unless the plan is to just always hope an attacker gets bored or takes their own life and twiddle thumbs in the meantime, it's a very relevant conversation to have. Now in regards to the NRA specifically, I'm not a fan. They are to second amendment advocacy what Wounded Warrior Project is to wounded veterans; they seem remarkably good at doing the bare minimum to be considered a legitimate organization while pocketing or funneling what they raise elsewhere. Because they're the largest and most recognizable interest group on the subject, they get way more attention and credit than they deserve, both good and bad. Now the reality is that simply arming teachers, staff, security, posting more cops, etc isn't going to be an effective one-off permanent solution. Deterrence is very effective and easily proven mitigation strategy, but just like trying to ban guns or specific types of guns, it doesn't address the actual source of the problem. Politicians want simple solutions they can repeat ad nauseum at rallies that energize their base, but that isn't going to work. Ever since school shootings have become a trend in the US, there are several trends in the perpetrators themselves that clearly point toward a combination of mental health decline, the devaluing of human life, and could collectively be summed up with the decimation of society. These kids and young adults almost always grow up without a father figure, get put on some mind-numbing drugs from a young age, live most if not all of their social lives through a screen rather than in the physical company of friends, attend school in an environment that shirks discipline in favor of "letting the children express themselves," and preaches to kids constantly that they should all be categorized into various identity oppressor or victim groups for arbitrary reasons beyond their control, and that angry sometimes violent activism is acceptable. It could and likely will take up the span of an entire generation just to reverse this trend. And let's be honest, this won't be seriously tackled, ever. The biggest benefactor of kids losing their minds is the pharmaceutical industry, which has hands in the pockets of about 80% of the US's elected officials, and outspends the entire gun lobby 25 times over in the course of a year. They ALL know this is a huge factor, but they care more about the funding and the power of their positions than being a public servant, across the board.
I have an example from today in fact. Even posted a question about it earlier.
"This lady was carrying a lawful firearm," Hazelett said. "A law abiding citizen who stopped the threat of probably 20 or 30 people getting killed. She engaged the threat and stopped it. She didn't run from the threat, she engaged it. Preventing a mass casualty event here in Charleston."
Source: https://www.wral.com/woman-credited-with-stopping-mass-shooting-at-apartment-complex-in-west-virginia/20306891/
I hate the saying. But it has actually happened. Recently infact. Except it was a good girl with a gun not a guy lol. Maybe we should just let women have guns lol. Men say we are to emotional. Yet look at most adult men on the Internet getting emotional over politics and politicians that don't truly give a damn about them. They are just pawns to use to get votes. I am talking for both the left and the right too. The government doesn't care about us. They care about lining their own pockets, their families pockets and the pockets of people who give them money.
The whole thing good guy with a gun vs bad buy with a gun is a toss up.
He who gets hit first will most likely die. The whole concept is B. S. being pushed by the NRA.
*guy
Opinion
9Opinion
There have been armed people who have prevented mass shootings by shooting the shooter, but those are not regularly reported (and if they are, not emphasized) because that kind of news doesn't support the liberal media's philosophy that guns are bad.
In addition, there are untold situations where a potential shooter didn't commit the shooting once they recognized some of the people were armed.
It's not reported because no mass random shooter has ever been stop before he murdered like 10 plus people already and wounded about another 20.
@Hispanic-Cool-Guy With all due respect, how do you know that when we rely on media to keep us informed?
Faux news would have reported on it to fit their narrative.
Literally the other god damn week.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61615236
This stuff happens, and it happens all the time, the only reason why you don't hear about it is because the media won't get the reactionary clicks they would have gotten if only the good guy with a gun wasn't there to stop the massacre. Only thing that sells better than sex is fear and feel good stories only ever stay local, if they even get reported at all.
And yeah, the NRA are pointing out that it's the only way, when the cops are so bitchmade that it takes a deserter to do his duty, an hour late at that.
I guess a good woman with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun too!!!
Notice the bad guy with the gun was black.
Is this why this story did not make national news?
Wow. You show one story. How about the several mass shootings that have happened out in the open and the good guy with a gun didn't do ish to stop it from happening?
Are you referring to Texas?
The good guy who shot the murderer was a member of the Border Patrol. What don't you understand about that?
Did it take too long to stop the murderer? Yes!!!
If there was an armed "good guy" at any point of entry 21 people would be alive right now
I was a member of the NRA for over 20 years. I don't recall them ever saying that.
However, what a lot of people don't realize is that citizens with guns DO stop and deter VERY large numbers of crimes.
The president of the NRA.
https://youtu.be/aASfk-ii0BM
I think he's using hyperbole. I think you are also taking it completely out of context. He knows darn well that that is not the only way to stop a shooter, although in the case of an active shooter I bet it's pretty close to being true.
He is also contrasting the good guy and the bad guy. It's not the bad guy who will stop it, it's only the good guy who will stop it.
On top of that he is addressing the stigma a lot of people have about guns. I've noticed a very strong pattern of the anti-gun crowd who have a completely irrational fear of guns.
A gun is not really all that dangerous. It's not completely safe, but there are a heck of a lot of other common things and activities that are more dangerous.
The anti-gun crown is so irrational, stigmatized and ignorant about guns that it's just about impossible to talk sense to them. It always amazes me that so many people are so against something that they know almost nothing about, then refuse to listen to people who do know something about it. It defies all logic.
When was the last time you saw an active shooter situation ended by a good guy without a gun?
Point is the cops stop the shooting and murdering once about 10 people already been slaughtered and dozens more injured.
We should've decades ago; most of the time, what stops a bad guy with a gun is another bad guy with a gun. World War 2, for example.
but it happens all the time, a good guy with a gun regularly stops shootings. it's just that this last one saw the cops refuse to stop it
note that mass shootings only happen in places where guns are illegal
So ending mass violence with force is bad? Or the people who do so aren’t “good guys”? I’m confused here.
Point is the NRA says it's the "only way"
Either that or when they flee the scene and try getting away like Nikolas Cruz
Didn't a good guy with guy kill that Hispanic trans kid?
The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!
You can also add your opinion below!