Sunday, December 16, 2012 12:19:32 PM
The situations aren't really comparable. It wasn`t a vigilante who shot this guy, it was a cop. No one thinks cops shouldn`t be allowed to have weapons. If you want to argue that all schools should have police or security guards, then go ahead and make that argument (I know my high school had armed security guards and someone still brought a gun to school, managed to be found wandering the halls by a teacher before he shot anyone though, and the teacher found it in his bag). But this isn`t proof that everyone should be armed, just that it`s a good idea to have trained police nearby (and even better if the shooter doesn`t start shooting until he sees police).
Sunday, December 16, 2012 12:14:07 PM
"I'm very confused. Why was this man only able to injure 3 people while the school shooter managed to kill 27?"
For one, he was in a hospital. They`d be able to treat anyone he shot right away. Also, it appears he was walking around with his weapon visible for a while before shooting. This gave them the chance to call police over. Also, he didn`t start shooting until the police were already there. Also, police are properly trained to deal with the situation and shoot him when it was necessary.
If the guy at the elementary school had walked around with his weapon visible for a while before shooting and didn`t start shooting until he saw police, I`ll bet not many people (if any) would have died.