Posted on 12/05/2015 5:23:59 AM PST by rellimpank
I recognize the personal nature of the Sikh Temple tragedy for Oak Creek Mayor Stephen Scaffidi and the emotional response that the San Bernardino mass murders evoke. In his commentary on Thursday, Scaffidi offered:
"I am a gun owner. But I have to believe that one of the popular responses to mass shootings — arm everyone and encourage individual and aggressive action against a mass shooter — is at best naive, and at worst, dangerous. Law enforcement professionals are highly trained and understand through direct experience that carrying a gun is a powerful responsibility and doesn't guarantee that a shooter will be stopped. The shooting at the Sikh Temple was a clear example of that, with one of our most experienced officers coming within an inch of losing his life."
If it wasn't for straw-man arguments and misrepresentation of fact, the gun control crowd would be mute. Those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it. We've tried gun control. We banned guns. We banned certain types of guns. Been there, done that.
And it didn't work.
We have only just begun to arm citizens. Statistically, only 1% to 2% of the population has concealed carry licenses, yet we have thousands of examples nationally (and dozens here in southeastern Wisconsin) that demonstrate right-to-carry works. Unfortunately, obtaining a concealed carry license is virtually impossible in California. On paper, Scaffidi can hypothesize being armed against a mass shooter is "naive and dangerous" and wouldn't be effective, but no data supports that theory. There is only one common denominator in every mass shooting: No one is armed but the bad guy.
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
But having no good guys with a gun at the scene IS an absolute guarantee that a shooter will not be stopped.
The link isn’t working for me.
“Law enforcement professionals are highly trained and understand through direct experience that carrying a gun is a powerful responsibility...”
These things are also true of very many people who are not law enforcement professionals.
Side note: One should never attend a voluntary company gathering if there are Moslem employees in the company and maybe should plead sickness if there is an involuntary non-work gathering.
As a security guard at a shipyard with nearly 2500 employees including a small number of Moslems I discuss this with the company's Safety personnel. Because there are a number of ex convicts working at the yard (it is the best prison-rehab organization in Florida, maybe the nation), the Safety guys are trained to deal with potentially explosive situations and at least a couple are (unofficially) armed. There are employee parties about 9 times a year and crowds for launching of the bigger vessels. The Safety guys mingle as do some other physically capable salaried employees. I wonder if the Moslem employees understand that they are being kept track of.
Apparently 3 Columbian drug industry employees enjoying dinner in Paris took out 2 of the jihadis how tried to bring sharia into the restaurant on the night of the big action.
>>I am a gun owner. But I have to believe that one of the popular responses to mass shootings  arm everyone and encourage individual and aggressive action against a mass shooter  is at best naive, and at worst, dangerous. Law enforcement professionals are highly trained and understand through direct experience that carrying a gun is a powerful responsibility and doesn’t guarantee that a shooter will be stopped. The shooting at the Sikh Temple was a clear example of that, with one of our most experienced officers coming within an inch of losing his life.
The article omits the critical fact: the citizen with the concealed handgun is on the inside. That person is already a victim if the shooter chooses to shoot him. You have nothing to lose and everything to gain by trying.
Most police training is in procedures, not shooting. My brother has been a cop for 25 years. Until he became a firearms instructor a couple years ago, I put more rounds downrange each week than he did.
But that doesn’t even matter in an active shooter event because at close ranges, if you can point your finger, you can shoot a handgun effectively. The key is mindset, and the concealed carry permit holder has had time to think about what he will do in a situation, because he went to the trouble to get a permit and then to strap on a gun that morning.
> Law enforcement professionals are highly trained
Yes, and they’re only minutes away when seconds count.
It would be nice if LEOs were well trained in marksmanship.
A SWAT team was practicing just 4 minutes away in San Bernardino!
***Apparently 3 Columbian drug industry employees enjoying dinner in Paris took out 2 of the jihadis***
HOW did Columbians smuggle guns into France! We need tougher gun laws at airports!
But then, more would be dead in France if these Columbians did not have their smuggled guns.
In California, I have heard numerous times the restricted licensing permit process is extremely corrupt. If you aren’t connected, rich, or famous the process is very difficult if not impossible. That is the purpose, and would have the same result of the IRS scandal. We have a political beef with you so your government will deny your benefits and rights. And it will use your money/resources to do it.
DK
“Apparently 3 Columbian drug industry employees enjoying dinner in Paris took out 2 of the jihadis how tried to bring sharia into the restaurant on the night of the big action.”
Here’s the thread started last night for those who missed it:
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3368532/posts
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.