It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gun Control-What would of happened?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Many have said recently, certain components of our government would call for gun control after the Fort Hood incident. Sure enough, out comes Senator Chuck Schumer for more gun controls.

What would of happened?



Just think about this, we are at war. What would of happened if the base had the same laws as many states, where people could carry? Or, hell, the government required our military to carry. Wow, maybe things would have turned out different.

What do you think? We are at war are we not?

Reminds of the reports that we have heard in the past where are soldiers in guard duty, are not even given bullets.




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:32 AM
link   
They sure would have turned out different.

After the first shot, everyone would have drawn his weapon, unsure of who actually fired that first shot.

Someone else will then fire, then five others, then thirty more people will all be firing at anything they can see moving.

The result................
Far more death, and crippling gunshot wounds than actually occurred.

Try shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre, and watch everyone slowly file out through the only fire exit in perfect order.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Silver Shadow
 


That MIGHT make sense if it wasn't for the fact that we're talking about highly trained military personnel in this example.

I think the perp would have been put down rather quickly.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:09 AM
link   
Yes, but who is the perp ?

*bang* *bang*, you look around and see who fired those shots.
You are absolutely certain, so you nail the guy.

Everyone else hears three shots and sees you fire the last shot, and they then open up on you.

Next they all turn on the guys that nailed you, pretty soon everyone is really confused, everyone is firing..................

But you know none of this.
You are dead.

[edit on 17/11/2009 by Silver Shadow]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   
With all the people outside of that base in Texas that have CCWs and carry you don't have mass shoot outs so why would on the base be any different.

People in that type situation don't just fire indescribably up would draw and look for who was doing the shooting.

Remember these are military with combat training and many have been in firefights and the first thing they would do is identify friend from foe.

Plus there are a high number of law enforcement officers in the reserves.
I would like to see the military allow them to go armed when active and on base.

I always had a problem with when i was a reserve after my 4 years in the active duty navy and i was working as a security officer on a navy base.
I was armed when working as a security officer on the base i worked at.
But i could not carry on other navy bases when i was doing my reserve weekends unless i was standing watch and even then the weapon was empty.

But i did carry a weapon in my car and i carried it loaded out in town.
The only people i had to worry about was the base cops and if they had stopped me and tried to search my car they would have seen my navy badge first so that was unlikely.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED
But i could not carry on other navy bases when i was doing my reserve weekends unless i was standing watch and even then the weapon was empty.


What were you supposed to do if a bad guy decided to kill some people? Throw the weapon at him and hope it knocked him out?

[edit on 17-11-2009 by Raverous]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:40 AM
link   
It is an easy bet that whenever this type of gun violence happens the gun grabbers come out in full force.

OP, read your title again. It should say, What would have happened....



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:23 AM
link   
Reply to post by Silver Shadow
 


I'm guessing you've never seen a lunatic on a rampage. Between the Columbine kids, the Hollywood bank robbers, Nebraska mall footage, and a Nut crashing into a restaraunt and jumpng out of his truck to shoo a few of the customers there isn't much subtlety withthese nuts.

It's not like there's a crowd and a guy shoots another the. Hides his gun in his coat or ditches it in a river like some idioti spy movie.

If you can't tell thatthe guy waving a gun and screaming "allah Akbar" while everyone around him scatters is the perp than the chance that you are about to die is really the least if your problems.




 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Silver Shadow
They sure would have turned out different.

After the first shot, everyone would have drawn his weapon, unsure of who actually fired that first shot.

Someone else will then fire, then five others, then thirty more people will all be firing at anything they can see moving.

-This sounds like a movie script. The Police and Military encounter similar scenarios daily, armed citizen also encounter these types of encounters. This simply does not happen. You have been effectively brainwashed into gun fearing.-

The result................
Far more death, and crippling gunshot wounds than actually occurred.

Try shouting "fire" in a crowded theatre, and watch everyone slowly file out through the only fire exit in perfect order.

-People, who carry a gun, be they Police, Military or citizens have a great respect for their safety and the safety of others around them. Armed people do not behave like you describe. You are trying to perpetuate the gun fear mongering. Can you give any examples of such a scenario as you describe of ever having occurred. I doubt it. I can give a staggering amount of instances of the opposite actually happening.-

Guns save lives.




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Silver Shadow
 


If the soldiers on base had been armed, its actually much more likely that the idiot wouldn't have even tried it and would have found some other 'gun-free' zone instead. Still, on that small chance otherwise, you're falling into the old anti-gun rhetoric that says all gun owners are trigger happy idiots when the fact is, they know what the consequences are of discharging that weapon and they know they have to be right about it when they pull the trigger...that's why the first rule of firearm usage is to positively identify the target before you shoot. As someone else said earlier, that probably isn't going to be particularly difficult, either. Most of the time, these idiots are *very* easy to ID as the perpetrator.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:08 AM
link   
As an ex military person and a gun carrier the out come would have been different for sure. I’m so tired of the anti-gunners, but as soon as they get in trouble the first thought they have is I wish I had a gun. Political correctness is killing this country. The government fear few things the truth being the number one. Because of security clearance I can not say much. But I can direct you to three sights for truth and insight. But as this is my first post to this sight I’m not sure if I’m allowed. So please let me know if I can post web address here.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:17 AM
link   
For anyone to suggest that victims being armed would cause more of a problem has got to be them dumbest thing I've ever heard. Being helplessly slaughtered can not be a better option, can it? The crazy f'r standing out in the open, with the crazy (i'm gonna be humpin virgins shortly look in his eyes) is the one you shoot at. Not the ones with the terrified look of WTF, hiding behind anything available.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join