Posted on 11/25/2015 5:11:32 AM PST by rktman
What might have happened if a few of the 1,500 concert attendees in Paris' Bataclan theater had guns? The terrorists had time to kill, reload and kill again. The police unit didn't come for more than a half hour. If a few people in the theater were armed, might they have killed the killers?
We'll never know.
France's guns laws say you may not carry a gun unless police certify that you are "exposed to exceptional risks of harm" to your life. Few people even bother to apply.
Fortunately, in America, laws in every state now allow adults to carry guns. Some predicted this would lead to more crime, but the opposite happened. Crime is down.
Yet some towns, such as Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New York City, where I live, still make it nearly impossible for people to legally carry a gun.
I know because I tried to get a license.
People sometimes threaten me. One made a "Kill John Stossel" website. So I'd like the option of carrying a gun to protect myself.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
In New York City as in the few remaining may-issue jurisdictions in the country, the permitting process is corrupt by design.
The only people who can get a gun permit are the rich and powerful and friends of the police chief and politicians. Every one else is out of luck.
In New York, John Stoessel would have to buy a gun out of state and carry illegally to protect himself and his family. Gun control laws make scofflaws out of honest people.
That’s exactly how liberal politicians want it. They don’t care if terrorists and criminals are armed. They don’t want you to resist them as well as their authority to run your life.
No gun control law on the books has ever prevented a single murder. The entire justification for them is fraudulent and an insult to people’s intelligence.
As illustrated in the byzantine process in NYC that resulted in the arbitrary denial of Stossel’s Second Amendment right all because a bureaucrat can decide whether he could exercise it in the first place.
“The theater was a gun-free zone, therefore there were no guns by law - so this shooting did not happen, it’s all a rightwingnut lie, because tolerance!!”
( /libspeak)
Stores sell wants to carry a gun to a concert he should move somewhere where it’s allowed.
Funny. As I read that, all I could see was my arsehole brother-in-law's gums flapping in the breeze.
:snork:
A great comparison can be found in Arizona, ironically at the Gabrielle Giffords assassination attempt.
While this was a Democrat rally, many AZ Democrats carry guns, and there were several at the rally with concealed carry. When the madman opened fire, two or three were getting ready to shoot him, but hadn’t a clear field of fire. And one of them was moving towards the madman with intent to shoot him.
But right then, the madman needed to pause to reload, so instead of shooting him, that cc holder tackled him.
In the French circumstance, the terrorists were likely firing on full automatic, that empties a magazine very quickly. This would give lots of time for someone with concealed carry firing a semi-automatic pistol, to put one or more aimed rounds in as many terrorists as he had bullets.
Additionally, I've seen and read eyewitness accounts that the shooters were all firing in unison rather than staggering their fire. This was notable to the eyewitness because she said there was a definite gap while they all reloaded. Personally, that's when I'd have made a move, very quickly, and gotten me some muslim a$$ to beat on...and a rifle. What the heck? You're gonna die anyway.
Wow, what a good little serf you are....do you beg big daddy government for your meals too?
Enjoy your stay here, what is your DU handle?
As long as there are any adult male Muslims nearby every citizen is exposed to exceptional risks of harm to his life.
It would have been much better for any armed people to take the stairs to the balcony and carry the fight to the shooters. Thinking tactically is just as important as being armed.
Still and all, this massacre was just one more example of the absurdity of "unarmed is safer."
Good article. John Stossel frequently makes more sense than most of the talking heads on television.
“According to the picture of the Bataclan theater, the shooters were in the balcony and the victims on the main floor.”
One of the Jihadis was on the stage, helping to corral the victims.
Is there something wrong wth serfdom? Middle Ages were fine without all those liberal ideas. The serfs worked the land and raised their families.
You’re on the wrong forum, go back to DU idiot.
No handle on DU, can’t. To go back you had to have gone before. Did you? They probably appreciate your enlightenment views over there.
“Is there something wrong wth serfdom?”
Yea, it’s called slavery. I’m opposed to it but apparently you’re not.
Keep advocating your anti gun and omnipotent big government stances and you’ll hear from the kittes.
Dude is anti gun too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.