Texas gun rights group reenacts Paris massacre with ‘armed civilian’ — and everyone still dies

[dcmfox]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/01/texas-gun-rights-group-reenacts-paris-massacre-with-armed-civilian-and-everyone-still-dies/

[boomer55]

1. If only one them had an NRA Scalia approved rocket launcher

[WhoIsNumberNone]

2. Well... I suppose credit where credit is due is in order...

I would have expected any 'simulation' staged by a gun rights group to show what they wanted it to show- i.e. "More Guns = More Safe".

And in this one the 'armed civilian' knew an attack was coming.

[lobodons]

3. Another real life example

Another real life example is the Gabby Giffords incident where 2 Conceal and Carry individuals said they were ready to fire, but if they did would have shot the "good guys" who had taken the gun away from the shooter when he had to stop to reload.

[drray23]

4. predictible

In real life even if you are armed you dont draw like wyatt earp. If somebody gets the drop on you and already have their weapon out you are dead unless they are a bad shot.

[zebonaut]

5. Oh you mean the Wild West is not a viable living strategy?

[blackspade]

6. Well looky there!

I guess the "good guy -bad guy" trope is bullshit.

[Shamash]

7. In what way is this significant?

In the initial massacre, two police officers were killed. An argument of "a couple of lightly armed people would be useless" would be equally applicable for the actual event, but I do not see anyone mocking the notion of armed police. For that matter, a certain group of DUers seem uncharacteristically quiet when it comes to talking about "assault weapon" bans to prevent such crimes, since the weapons used had been completely illegal in France for decades. But if you wish to hold a consistent view on the subject and claim that neither US police or civilians should have guns in public places, then I will politely disagree, but respect your ethical consistency on the matter.

Personally, I have always thought that allowing people to do things that I disagree with so long as those individuals cause no harm is part of what separated liberals from conservatives. The more time I spend here at DU, the more I see liberals who think exactly the same way as conservatives in that regard.