Why didn't guns protect Chris Kyle, The American Sniper?

reply to post by xedocodex


This is the rub.

You cannot stop someone with intent. I think anyone knows this. Even the law is designed primarily to capture and convict wrong doers. After the fact, that is. Crime means we need the law, as disturbing a reality that is to understand.

It, nor any unaware people armed to the teeth, will stop a person who has resigned to commit such an act.

Only they can change their mind at the last moment, and I wonder how often we luck out when someone doesn't follow through at the last moment, to slip away and remain anonymous.

Much the same with random breakdowns of people in public, who'll grab the nearest pet pooch to throw at you if they are in such a rage.

It comes down to how easy do you want it. So easy that you live in constant fear because everyone who isn't you and who may have completely opposing views to you on fundamental things, is carrying a legal gun? Or so you have to follow the process of the law?

You're not stopping random mcwhacko from picking up his aunts collection of weapons and deciding to play arnold schwarzenegger for a day.

Unless you look at the problem being that as faulty biological organisms we don't all work the same way, but how do you fix that?

reply to post by xedocodex


The same reason vigilant driving doesn't always protect you from car wrecks. People can be unexpected and things ca happen fast. Had he had a second or two to act and had a gun though he would have stood a better chance than someone that had a second or two to act and had no gun. In the latter scenario the second or two wouldn't matter. This guy was caught off guard obviously, but it isn't a good argumet against people that have a warning and can protect themselves. It doesn't make guns less viable protection in other scenarios. Anyone with common sense could answer this themselves though it's just arguing for arguments sake.

The Aurora and Newtown arguments still stand because despite the first victim or maybe the first few had no chance to stop it it doesn't mean one of the many others couldn't have acted. It's a pretty spurious argument.

reply to post by xedocodex


The report doesn't say anything about the shooter having a mental illness like you claimed. He was drunk once which is not the same.

Although he was a vet, he may have seen enough things to believe some of the servicemen like Kyle killed innocent people in cold blood. This happens all the time. They justify it by calling it following orders. Cris Kyle may have had this coming. He may have been guilty of murdering innocent civilians and the shooter may have known this. Knowing Seals, the people who give the orders and what Seals do, I'm quite sure Kyle was guilty of murder at least a few times.

Cris Kyle was one of the worst of these types of people. He hid behind a bullet from hundreds of yards away and never got close to his victim or knew anything about him other than some mafia hit by the US Government was ordered and Kyle was too happy to play the role of hired hit man. If Kyle was the best at this, I'm glad to see him gone.

Its not proof at all that someone couldn't have shortened the attack at the theater. If you were armed and I was armed and you thought I was no danger and I caught you by surprise, you would be dead. If someone was shooting at people in a group I was in and I was armed and he was aiming somewhere else, I might save a number of lives. THAT'S the point of carrying, not claiming to be ready for alllll situations.

reply to post by xedocodex

We have heard over and over that "gun free zones" are the cause of shooters being able to kill people.

I remember people claiming that if there were just ONE person in the Aurora theater, the whole thing would have been prevented. If there was just ONE teacher armed at Newtown, then no kids would have died that day.

The bottom line is that the pro-gun people are delusional when they claim that someone carrying a gun could stop a shooting, this is 100% proof of that.

your trying to quickly capitalize on this incident where a man was killed by someone who he put his trust in, causing him to let his guard down. Had Mr Kyle felt there was a threat before or during & had time to react, this would be a completely different story.. but in your haste your missing the point and not distinguishing the differences between incidences.

If the Colorado shooter was armed to the teeth & had full body armor, why did he give up the very second he had opposition and also reveal his booby trapped apartment immediately to authorities?

In the incident at the Clackamas Mall shooting. Just the glimpse of an armed man ready to fight back inside the mall before the swat team entered caused the shooter to end the attack & take his own life.

There was no resistance at Newtown until police arrived & the damage was done.

What is the deciding factors of locations for these obviously unstable people? surprise, a crowd, and more importantly, no resistance.

If it is common knowledge that people are possibly armed & could pose a defensive risk returning fire, these shooters would have no innocent targets to choose to slaughter in a copycat style killing or in some variation of these events.

Trying to remove the existing laws to bear arms or add more laws to the 20,000 current laws to restrict guns, which have been and are engrained in the very fabric of our system of government based in part on property rights (ie your body) for good reason, does nothing but help criminals & traitors to the USA while hurting citizens rights and disgracing the sacrifices of those Americans, past & present who have stood for these rights against tyrannical rule be it form within or abroad.

No one can dial 911 faster than a bullet.

Militias are by the People, of the People and for the People.

Originally posted by xedocodex
The bottom line is that the pro-gun people are delusional when they claim that someone carrying a gun could stop a shooting, this is 100% proof of that.

Ah, the point of your post, finally.

An anti-gun troll trying to disprove a mountain of statistical data with one isolated event which he knows little to nothing about. It's really hard to argue against FACTS isn't it? I feel for ya.

reply to post by xedocodex


why didn't guns protect more than 100000 us military personell in the pacific theater in world war2? or the 625,000 in the civil war? they got killed didn't they? the total numbers of democide? you whine about gun control when government is the biggest murderer.

How can you stop someone who basically ambushes you at a gun range. At a gun range logically there's going to be a lot of gunshots, so therefore I'm sure by the time they realized what was happening it was too late. You can't differentiate between the sounds of shots fired into a target vs. shots fired into a person.

reply to post by xedocodex


Element of surprise will give you a huge advantage. Do you think i am just going to draw down on you when you are pointing a gun at me? No, ill be dead before i can even pull my weapon most likely.

Use your head.

-----

If the United States is to dangerous for you, please, by all means, we have borders that aren't even protected. I heard Mexico was nice this time of year.

reply to post by milkyway12


north korea has some interesting architecture

reply to post by Tardacus


I totally agree with your sentiment.But take a wee bit of exception to your use of the word crazy.The man Chris was killed by was a vetran with PTSD.Not trying to defend the guy,but,from all accounts he was not "crazy",just having trouble adjusting to life after the atrocities of war.But,like you,I wonder about the thought process behind Chris' actions.I am sure he thought he was helping the guy,but...

reply to post by mardukiscoming


kinda makes me feel that the guy could have used a service dog for people with things like ptsd or similar mental trauma. my dad is a vietnam veteran and he always has dogs. granted they do keep the blood pressure on an even keel, they are also great listeners

Why would this guy shoot only Kyle ? did Kyle provoke him by saying something he found offensive ?

a reply to: xedocodex

You unfortunately are fighting a losing battle.

The pro gun crowds celebrate these shootings. In their minds it reinforces their belief that absolutely everyone should be armed at all times.

The fact is, the majority of mass shootings in this nation are committed by people with a legally obtained firearm.

But they do not want them to stop, they will fight tooth and nail against anyone who wants to do anything about this culture of gun violence.

Then, after you give up, they celebrate their win over the bodies of the many many dead. They vanquished their real threat, someone that warrants to end the culture of violence.

i have a feeling this guy is provoking the killer by telling war stories on how he murdered so many people so easily without any remorse and any oversight. Maybe this bragging flipped a switch in that PSTD guy and he did what he have to do , kill evil.

originally posted by: HauntWok

The pro gun crowds celebrate these shootings. .

Care to provide some sort of quoted proof of this???

Or is this just another post of yours filled with BS?

Nice try but you failed...

The point is that if somebody had a gun it would not prevent it, but would reduce it plain and simple. One armed teacher might have stopped the whole Sandy Hook disaster, but chances are it would have reduced the amount of carnage, and that is worth it, if even one more child was saved in my mind.

No not every situation will having a gun save you, dont be stupid. But more times than not, it would help. Its fine, dont carry we get it, you would rather be saved by the police or somebody else. Not everyone is cut from the same cloth so dont worry about it. But just because your scared of guns and wish they would all just magically disappear, its not going to happen, bad guys WILL always find a way to get a gun, there are hundreds of laws already trying to stop it, but damnit bad guys will be bad guys and are breaking the law. Stop trying to force those that would prefer to protect themselves to depend on the not so stellar performance of the local PD. That will get you killed a whole lot faster and if you cant see that these days, you need to pay more attention.

originally posted by: xedocodex


The bottom line is that the pro-gun people are delusional when they claim that someone carrying a gun could stop a shooting, this is 100% proof of that. I would think that a trained Marine sniper can handle a gun better than the internet Rambos that claim they would have stopped any of the recent shootings if only they were there with their gun. And this incident also proves that not everyone should have the right to bear arms, and yes this includes a lot of veterans who are trying to get their heads right after coming home.

Could doesn't mean would. Because of that your argument is fallacious.

Truth is, insane people will kill. Murderous people will kill. Guns are a convenient tool used by them, whether obtained legally or illegally.

Guns don't protect people. They also don't kill people. They are an inanimate object incapable of thinking or taking action by themselves.

This is stupid. I go to the same range where this happened and asking why guns did not save Chris Kyle is just stupid. These guys were out there at a part of the range with no other people on it at the time.

Guns (as it has been pointed out a million times) do not stop bad things from happening 100% of the time. The FACT is Chris Kyle was helping the person who shot him recover from PTSD. He was trying to reach this guy and help him cope with his disorder. They had guns in common and going to the range with him was a form of therapy. If someone standing right in front of you "snaps" for whatever reason then you will most likely die before you can draw and shoot or even pick up your gun from the table. It is that simple. Sometimes bad things happen to great people no matter what they do. People die, people do bad things.....it is how we are wired, we have been killing each other for thousands of years and it is not going to stop anytime soon. Carry a gun or don't, it is your choice. Have a gun at home or don't, it is your choice.

I served and I carry everyday. I do not think for a minute that even though I carry I will make it home everyday and I can save the day or whatever. I carry to give myself and possibly YOU a chance to make it home each day. I carry because I can and I MIGHT be able to make a difference. We have a mental health crisis in this country that is being ignored for the most part. Own a gun or don't, it is your choice. Just don't tell me either way what I should do, I am a grown man just living the best I can like Chris Kyle was doing. He was trying to help soldiers with issues and he paid with his life. I don't care if you own a gun or not and it is not my business what you choose to do with your life or how you choose to live it.

Luckily I had the fortune to shoot with Chris Kyle a couple of times at the range and he was a GREAT AMERICAN that died trying to help someone. It happens.

Carry on America......