No guns, knives, pepper spray or backpacks were allowed at the event. https://www.foxnews.com/travel/las-vegas-shooting-festival-banned-attendees-from-carrying-firearms SOP these days for virtually all privately owned concert venues.
OK, then it's hardly surprising that no minds were changed since the circumstances regarding people being armed didn't change.
I don't think it would've mattered anyway. People who know guns know theres nothing the govt can reliably do to protect them from others with guns, no matter how much tragedy might make them want it to.
So you're not one of those people who know guns then. Because otherwise, common sense alone should tell you, along with hundreds of examples, that guns are excellent for self defense.
Um... I think you may have misunderstood what I said. Self defense is the most reliable defense. What did I say that made you think I posit otherwise?
he might feel that the NRA should experience some of the angst felt by the victims of Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, etc etc. they were all innocent bystanders too. The NRA has a powerful voice and has powerful backers. It could be a force for change which would reduce massacres by nutcases.
Which brings up an interesting scenario. In the chaos of a shooting event the cops acknowledge that they treat EVERYONE with a gun as a "bad guy". In an NRA convention where firearms are allowed and everyone starts shooting there are significantly greater chances of "collateral damage" i.e. NRA members being shot by "friendly fire" and that escalating into members shooting each other in retaliation. So let's change the hypothetical into a prank instead for the sake of argument. Instead of bringing in an AR-15 the culprit brings in a recording and gains access to the loud speaker system. They set it off together with some smoke in the A/C and what is heard by everyone are gunshots and screams. That would be more than enough to bring about chaos as someone drawing their concealed weapon sees someone else holding a gun and opens fire. There would be no single crazy PERSON with a gun but instead a roomful of paranoid PEOPLE with guns. Now the police arrive and try to CONTAIN the situation. How many NRA members are going to surrender their guns when they are not sure that the suspect has been stopped? That would be a recipe for a disaster IMO and what makes this scenario credible is that it would be possible if the NRA had it's nefarious way and EVERYONE was carrying a gun EVERYWHERE. A car backfiring at a crowded strip mall and this could occur anywhere.
The NRA is just the marketing department of the firearms industry. That's why they push the "gun grabbers" narrative so hard any time further regulations are suggested. "Last chance to buy an AR 15 ladies and gentlemen, everything must go."
The problem is that the market is saturated with guns already. Another serious problem is that half the guns are in the hands of just 3% of the population. What happens to their arsenals of weapons when they are no longer around? That will mean that hire powered weapons will find their way onto the 2nd hand street market where there is no regulation whatsoever.
I read that the majority of Americans want something done about the ceaseless mass shootings. Perhaps at the next election?
Well maintained guns just last too long, generations often. That's why you need to push them so hard. Come up with new reasons to buy more guns like "the government is coming to get them, stock up now" Mass shootings and Democrat governments are good for sales.
The vast majority of gun owners also want something done but the problem is the NRA and the firearms cartel that have a stranglehold on Congress. Moscow Mitch is their puppet and he alone can BLOCK any sane and reasonable regulations from even coming onto the Senate floor. So yes, when the likes of Moscow Mitch and the rest of the NRA puppets are thrown out of Congress there might be some hope of these changes coming to pass.
Your hypothetical is lunacy, responsible gun owners do not fire without a known target. Now such as you are on the other side of the fence and so fearful of guns. Were you part for the NYC times square stampede? https://710wor.iheart.com/content/2...quare-after-motorcycle-mistaken-for-gunshots/ https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...5C03B7EAFA13B5A65E9C5C03B7EAFA13B5A&FORM=VIRE
Opioids kill a lot more people but the government scarcely makes any effort to stop it. But 6 deaths from vaping is a huge deal; they're on it like ticks on a catfish in a severe drought.
Wasn't it one of those mall shootings in which the shooter was confronted by two armed men. When the cops arrived, they didn't know which one was the bad guy. How long before cops shoot the good guy by mistake? How about a situation with crowd full of armed people begin firing at some poor fool who thought it would be funny to set off some fireworks? The assumption that people in the convention are going to have perfect aim, or that a shooter would be outside of the crowd is a bit idealistic. So, yes, the chance of collateral damage is greater.
Handguns are notoriously inaccurate and the news is full of stories of people using guns inappropriately so I have no expectation that those carrying concealed weapons are any different to the rest of the population. That situation would only become significantly worse if everyone was carrying. Sorry officer, I dropped my keys and when I bent down to pick them up my gun fell out and went off killing the infant in the stroller.
I agree. There have been times when I left certain areas because people were carrying (not concealed). I don't know the people, and I don't know that they've had the kinds of experiences they need to have to keep from hurting innocent people.