The 'hero with a gun' story is a statistical unicorn

[ThatOwlWoman]

The mall said no guns, but he defied that...so that makes him a bad guy.

In his mind, his entitlement carried more weight than the mall's policy.

Now if that's not indicative of a bad guy, I don't know what is anymore.

By bringing that gun into the mall that day, the message that guy sent to the world was that the rules don't apply to him and he can do whatever the fuck he wants.

BAD GUY.

Then I think most of us will forgive him because he erased the bad with taking out a murderer.

I'm not sure what the penalty is for flouting a private business's right to say "No guns here." At most they could just bar you from ever going there again, probably.

 

[LV426]

Then I think most of us will forgive him because he erased the bad with taking out a murderer.

I don't think that's how society works, or at least how it's supposed to work.

One good action does not erase a bad one, and it's only a good action because he was lucky enough to not shoot anyone else when he played Howdy Doody.

Now if he brought that gun to that mall that day, chances are he's brought it to the mall before.

Would we still be talking about him in these terms if he had hit a bystander? Of course not.

I'm not sure what the penalty is for flouting a private business's right to say "No guns here."

It doesn't matter what the penalty is, the fact is that it was a posted, written rule.

A rule that guy flouted.

When he flouted it, he didn't know that a mass shooter was lurking...he flouted the rule because he didn't think the rule applied to him, which is the entitlement I've been talking about this whole time.

That entitlement is dangerous, because six inches another way, and you have this "hero" shooting an innocent person.

Everyone's gut reaction is to celebrate the guy without asking any questions that might diminish what he "accomplished" because it clouds the narrative that many are running with here.

It looks a lot less impressive when you realize that there were two bad guys with guns, and one shot the other.

 

[martin]

Of course he knew of the policy, it was posted all over the mall, particularly at the entrances.

And I don't really want to put anyone on a scale of badness...if you're bad, you're bad.

I'm not interested in looking into degrees of badness so much as I am interested in determining the root cause of the badness.

I think if he paid to see a psychiatrist on the root cause of his violating a rule at the downtown mall the psychiatrist might suspect he had a different root cause worth looking into.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

I don't think that's how society works, or at least how it's supposed to work.

One good action does not erase a bad one, and it's only a good action because he was lucky enough to not shoot anyone else when he played Howdy Doody.

Now if he brought that gun to that mall that day, chances are he's brought it to the mall before.

Would we still be talking about him in these terms if he had hit a bystander? Of course not.




It doesn't matter what the penalty is, the fact is that it was a posted, written rule.

A rule that guy flouted.

When he flouted it, he didn't know that a mass shooter was lurking...he flouted the rule because he didn't think the rule applied to him, which is the entitlement I've been talking about this whole time.

That entitlement is dangerous, because six inches another way, and you have this "hero" shooting an innocent person.

Everyone's gut reaction is to celebrate the guy without asking any questions that might diminish what he "accomplished" because it clouds the narrative that many are running with here.

It looks a lot less impressive when you realize that there were two bad guys with guns, and one shot the other.

this is why the sane people in this country absolutely reject your insanity. you should get help. Nobody who is rational, logical, and possesses good critical thinking skills thinks like you do.

 

[LV426]

I think if he paid to see a psychiatrist on the root cause of his violating a rule at the downtown mall the psychiatrist might suspect he had a different root cause worth looking into.

I mean, I have a theory as to the root cause: entitlement.

This guy thought he was entitled to do whatever the fuck he wanted to do, just like the mass shooter he shot, and that the rules don't apply to him.

If he brought the gun to the mall that day, chances are he's brought it to that mall many times before.

And every time he brought that gun to the mall, he wasn't doing it because there was a mass shooter lurking -he couldn't have known that unless he was in on it- he was doing it to feel like a big man for thumbing his nose at authority.

That doesn't make him a good guy...it makes him a bad guy.

 

[LV426]

this is why the sane people in this country absolutely reject your insanity. you should get help. Nobody who is rational, logical, and possesses good critical thinking skills thinks like you do.

If you have a rule in your home that says I can't bring weed in there because you think it's a gateway drug, but I still bring the weed to your house and smoke it in front of you, does that make me a good guy or a bad guy?

Or if you don't want to do that thought experiment with weed, then replace it with something you would ban from your home and then ask yourself if I'd be a bad guy for ignoring your rule and bringing it to your home anyway?

 

[leaningright]

Then I think most of us will forgive him because he erased the bad with taking out a murderer.

I'm not sure what the penalty is for flouting a private business's right to say "No guns here." At most they could just bar you from ever going there again, probably.

This is true in most cases.

 

[LV426]

This is true in most cases.

Ok, ask yourself this...

If you have a rule that bans something in your home because you think it's dangerous, and you post that rule and tell everyone about it, but then I show up to your house with the thing you banned and use right in front of you, would you consider me a good guy or a bad guy for flouting your rule?

Because if someone did that to me, I'd consider them a bad guy because they don't think the rules of my house apply to them when they're in my house.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

If you have a rule in your home that says I can't bring weed in there because you think it's a gateway drug, but I still bring the weed to your house and smoke it in front of you, does that make me a good guy or a bad guy?

Or if you don't want to do that thought experiment with weed, then replace it with something you would ban from your home and then ask yourself if I'd be a bad guy for ignoring your rule and bringing it to your home anyway?

not even remotely the same thing. again, we reject all of your bullshit on this. reasonable people do not see things in your black and white world. It's wholly illogical.

 

[LV426]

not even remotely the same thing. again, we reject all of your bullshit on this. reasonable people do not see things in your black and white world. It's wholly illogical.

Totally the same thing because the guy had no idea that there was a mass shooter lurking when he brought the gun to the mall that day.

So it's the same thing...if you have a rule that says I'm not allowed to bring X into your home because you think X is dangerous, but I bring X into your home anyway and use X in front of you despite your rules, you call me an asshole, wouldn't you?

So how is this any different? Again, that guy had no idea there was a mass shooter there, so he didn't bring the gun to stop a mass shooting.

 

[LV426]

reasonable people do not see things in your black and white world. It's wholly illogical.

What is illogical is celebrating someone who doesn't think the rules apply to them.

Had he shot six inches to the left or right, he would have killed an innocent person and none of you assholes would even be talking about this.

What this guy did after flouting the rules and becoming a bad guy doesn't erase flouting the rules and becoming a bad guy.

 

[LV426]

not even remotely the same thing.

How? How is it not the same thing?

Was there not a rule set by the mall that banned guns from the mall?

Was there not a guy who saw that rule and ignored it and brought a gun into the mall?

Was there not ANOTHER GUY who saw that rule and ignored it and brought a gun into the mall?

When they brought those guns into the mall, which one of those guys above was the good guy and which one was the bad guy?

Was it the guy who brought the gun into the mall, or the other guy who brought the gun into the mall? Because they both brought guns into the mall and you didn't know which one was the bad guy and which one was the good guy when they did.

That is the whole fuckin' point.

 

[leaningright]

Totally the same thing because the guy had no idea that there was a mass shooter lurking when he brought the gun to the mall that day.

So it's the same thing...if you have a rule that says I'm not allowed to bring X into your home because you think X is dangerous, but I bring X into your home anyway and use X in front of you despite your rules, you call me an @#$&%#$, wouldn't you?

So how is this any different? Again, that guy had no idea there was a mass shooter there, so he didn't bring the gun to stop a mass shooting.

No, he didn’t take the gun into the mall to stop a mass shooting. But he did.

 

[LV426]

No, he didn’t take the gun into the mall to stop a mass shooting. But he did.

OK, so the mall had a policy that banned guns.

A guy saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

Another guy also saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

So which of those guys was the bad guy and which was the good guy?

Was it the guy who brought the gun into the mall, or the other guy who brought the gun into the mall?

Because when they both brought guns into the mall, no one knew which was which...AND THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT.

 

[Shoresy]

When an armed bystander fatally shot an assailant at an Indiana mall, the country again debated the wisdom of easier access to guns.

Only 22 of 433 incidents ended this way.

Now show us the stats when the assailant of an average crime was stopped by a good guy with a gun you retarded faggot. Guns are used more than 2 million times a year in self defense.

 

[Shoresy]

OK, so the mall had a policy that banned guns.

A guy saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

Another guy also saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

So which of those guys was the bad guy and which was the good guy?

Was it the guy who brought the gun into the mall, or the other guy who brought the gun into the mall?

Because when they both brought guns into the mall, no one knew which was which...AND THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT.

That's because guns don't commit crimes people do dipshit.

 

[Shoresy]

What is illogical is celebrating someone who doesn't think the rules apply to them.

Had he shot six inches to the left or right, he would have killed an innocent person and none of you assholes would even be talking about this.

What this guy did after flouting the rules and becoming a bad guy doesn't erase flouting the rules and becoming a bad guy.

The only bad guy in this scenario aside from the active shooter are those who attempt to eliminate the inalienable right of self defense in a public spaces and places of public accommodation and they should all be rounded up and put in unmarked mass graves for crimes against the people.

 

[volsrock]

OK, so the mall had a policy that banned guns.

A guy saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

Another guy also saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

So which of those guys was the bad guy and which was the good guy?

Was it the guy who brought the gun into the mall, or the other guy who brought the gun into the mall?

Because when they both brought guns into the mall, no one knew which was which...AND THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT.

Link that says he saw it...u got a pic of the sign at the door that says No Guns?

 

[volsrock]

OK, so the mall had a policy that banned guns.

A guy saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

Another guy also saw that rule and brought a gun into the mall anyway.

So which of those guys was the bad guy and which was the good guy?

Was it the guy who brought the gun into the mall, or the other guy who brought the gun into the mall?

Because when they both brought guns into the mall, no one knew which was which...AND THAT IS THE WHOLE FUCKING POINT.

The Mall praised Dicken’s heroic actions. Didn't say a word about the gun ban...not against the law to ignore a “no firearms” sign




We grieve for the victims of yesterday’s horrific tragedy in Greenwood. Violence has no place in this or any other community. We are grateful for the strong response of the first responders, including the heroic actions of the Good Samaritan who stopped the suspect.

GREENWOOD PARK MALL REPRESENTATIVE

 

[Callinectes]

It has never worked that way idiot


It’s why we ended the Wild West ass mind

Suck on this, ass lips:

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/20...gun-laws-were-actually-stricter-then-than-now

https://origins.osu.edu/history-news/gun-control-and-old-west?language_content_entity=en

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/did-the-wild-west-have-mo_b_956035