Not unless that armed person happened to be in that specific building at that specific time and happened to have the weapon on his/her body. So I am challenging the premise that "In reality, gun control is what sealed their doom." I think that is stretching. So while I oppose gun control I also don't appreciate people with agendas playing loose with reason and facts to make their points.
One of the most important effects of a few people carrying concealed in an area (or even just the permission being given to do so) is that it makes the potential attacker hesitate. He knows that everyone is probably not carrying . . . but he doesn't know who is carrying. That element of uncertainty could keep anything from happening in the first place.
It certainly works to prevent "hot" burglaries in the South, as opposed to D.C.
And, of course, if somebody does have a weapon and either happens to be in the building or "rides to the sound of the guns" as students did in the Texas Tower shootings, then the attacker is pinned down, deterred, or eliminated before he can add to his list of victims.
Exactly so.
So I am challenging the premise that "In reality, gun control is what sealed their doom."
To say "it sealed their doom" is overstating it. No one has made such an absolute their argument. But the fact is that gun control is responsible for no one, in that specific building, legally possessing a weapon on their body. (or in a book bag, backpack, etc.) That is a fact.