Shots fired at an Alabama mall (update:gunman killed)

Good guy with a gun and then he get shot by the police. I know if only he could have carried a couple more guns he would have been fine.

 

He was the wrong color for that.

 

Easy solution.

Wear “good guy with gun” logo* T-shirt. Wear it under your main shirt and show it off like how Superman does his transformation. It’s a violent world out there, you don’t want to get caught unprepared.



*logo copyright by GGG inc.

 

Unless the cop knew for certain that he was supposed to legally have that gun? That's exactly the problem. With a right to carry guns, police have to presume the people they see carrying are carrying legally until shown otherwise. The cop can't shoot someone and then find out later if the guy was breaking the law or not.

It probably will scare black people away from exercising their second amendment rights and it probably should. You should stand on your rights and insist on them. But carrying while black is literally gambling with your life.

 

Not just when black, choosing to carry is gambling with your life in certain scenarios no matter who you are. When there is an active shooting situation, cops just see a person with a gun and they treat you the same as they would as if you were the guy shooting the place up....especially if you fit the basic description of the shooter. It's part of the reason why I don't carry and have no interest in doing so. In the past, cops have been nervous enough when I've had to deal with them, I don't want to give them any excuses.

I look at carrying as asking for trouble when there's not a specific threat you are carrying in order to prevent. For example, if you are carrying a large sum of money, maybe then carry. If you are going to the mall to shop....yeah leave your gun at home.

Anyway, that would be my advice.

 

this is exactly why the second amendment, as perversely interpreted by the NRA, needs to be revisited entirely or taken back to its literal wording - meaning only those in well-regulated militias should have firearms. there are no "good/bad guys with guns", just a sh!tload of "guys with guns" that make the world an exponentially more dangerous place. if you're so afraid of your government going tyrannical maybe you shouldn't be electing government officials that feed into our military industrial complex or arm our police forces with heavy artillery (you know, due to the ridiculous amount of guns readily available to anyone with a pulse).

just a thought.

 

I'm not looking to get into a large argument here, but the operative clause of the 2nd amendment says nothing about any kind of militia, it says only "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed". I know people get hung up on the prefatory clause, but it doesn't limit the operative clause, it merely gives one possible reason for it. If we "fall back" to its' literal wording the 2nd amendment still says that keeping and bearing Arms is a right of the people. There's really no way to get around that unless you repeal the whole thing.

 

The preface of the clause provides the reason for the right. That's the point of the preface.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"

The preface is longer than the actual expression of the right. To say that the preface is merely just an example of ONE of multiple reasons for the right is nothing more than wishful thinking.

The authors wouldn't be so explicit in the preface of the clause if it was just one of many reasons. It's THE reason and the reason makes sense for the time period when many citizens were no where near any law enforcement entities or a standing military incase something like a slave revolt occurred.

 

How about we understand that it's not the 18th century anymore and act accordingly.

 

If only some other good guys had some guns to protect this good guy from the police?

Am I doing it right?

**** situation for everybody involved.

 

What good is a right if there's no ability to exercise it? And it's not really a right if we selectively enforce who gets to exercise it.

 

Look at this tough guy.... makes fun of mentally r****ded children and is feared by the police....

 

Cool, that's easy. Ban handguns except for law enforcement level (repetitive training and licensing) carry.

Glad we agree.

 

Just because it's not something I choose to do doesn't mean that I necessarily support not letting anyone do it. I think that's just where we differ, I don't seek to take from the people just because I don't choose to do something or because I don't think something is a good idea. It's just the difference between a more authoritarian world view and a libertarian world view.

 

Do they have any idea who the real shooter was?

 

Yeah they caught him a week ago or so

 

A good guy with a gun is shot in the back did he have his head turned toward the cop with his gun pointed at the cop was that what made him murder this guy.

 

They trying to come up with a credible . . . (loosely credible) story . . .. they just have to make up a narrative . . .scream I fear for my life
and the other folx will believe it .. . no matter how crazy

Rocket River