After the Orlando shooting, President Obama said that the notion that armed clubgoers could have defended themselves and others “defies common sense.”
(The notion that police should be armed when confronting a terrorist does not similarly defy common sense because SHUT UP).
Back in the world of actual reality, where those of us without lifetime taxpayer-funded armed security reside…Concealed carrier takes down shooter at South Carolina nightclub.
The attacker has been charged with attempted murder, the defender won’t be charged. Loretta Lynch is investigating to see if Reality itself can be charged with lèse-majesté.
stoneslinger
Police officers are often forced to rush into ambiguous situations, while an armed citizen has the knowledge of who the aggressor is and tend to shoot better because of short range/high hit percentage of a close proximity self defense action. Couple that with the notion that police do not have the legal duty to guard individual citizens and the conclusion should be the public must be their own first line of defense. However, there are many who still deny facts even though they know it is truth.
Interesting article by Officer Mike McDaniel:
http://bearingarms.com/mike-m/2016/06/02/individual-safety-whos-responsible/
Rob Lyman
I find the opposition to self-defense completely baffling. OK, if you don’t want to defend yourself, fine, but why is anyone opposed to others defending themselves?