> I completely agree with this. People who respect the four rules of firearm ownership > should absolutely be able to carry in order to quickly shut down what would otherwise > become a mass shooting. If everyone in those classrooms were armed and trained in the > use of said firearms, I believe there would be far fewer than 10 people dead and 20 > people injured.
While that's a nice theory, even trained professionals shoot badly in stress situations. NYPD, for example, only hits a human target with 34% of shots fired (although they do hit dogs with about 55% of shots fired).
Also: if a trained professional is at a situation where multiple civilians draw "to quickly shut down what would otherwise become a mass shooting", how does that trained professional tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys"?
As a gun owner in Maryland, I recently had to take a 4-hour class (including range time) to get a "Handgun Qualifying License", to be able to buy/sell handguns (new law, which I support). At our class, after 45 minutes of "this is the barrel, this is the grip" and a number of repetitions of basic safety rules, the students were invited to come to the front of the class to "handle" the guns that had been displayed there throughout (a couple of 9 semis, a couple of .38 revolvers). Fully 7 of the 20, having just been told not to, picked up one of the guns, pointed it at another person, and pulled the trigger.
Problem is, they were not automatically disqualified for doing that.
I don't want anyone else in that class, with the exception of my wife, to ever get the idea that their drawing in public would be the least bit helpful.
|