Super Bowl Sniper - Indianapolis

[EvilBlackGun]

After the 12 vests have gone off ...

... what dies a sniper do? Send in the trash-bag crews to gather evidence, and watch Fox59 for the first claims of responsibility. EBG

 

[J_Wales]

"DID"

we know what resulted from SOMEONE's actions....and you mean to imply that result could have been different had people on the aircraft been armed...and in a general sense I would tend to agree but then you would have no way to know who is boarding a plane armed, is doing so legally and with only good intentions

I am simply stating what DID happen.

How is it that there is no way to know who is boarding a plane armed, is doing so legally and with only good intentions other than to declare it illegal for everybody (save for the state) to board a plane with firearms?

If that were the only way, then one could argue that there is no way to know if one walking down the street with a firearm is doing so legally and with good intentions other than to declare it illegal for everybody (save for the state) to do so.

I wonder where that might lead.

Oh, BTW, you do realize that it was not so long ago that citizens were not prohibited from carrying firearms on their person on commercial airlines, do you not?

 

[J_Wales]

Is it not true that the largest massacre on a military installation on US soil was by a Licensed Gun Owner using an FN FiveSeven?

Just as in your scenario... so what? You are using the same logic that anti's use. Because it HAS happened one way, doesn't mean it is always that way but that didnt stop the antis from using the Ft Hood shooting to demonize Licensed Gun Onwers, and even trying to ban the FiveSeven..

Again, I hate that the People are disarmed in an event like this, but that doesnt mean I want the Cops disarmed TOO, it means I want the People armed..

See the difference?

Those that were shot were forced to be disarmed by the authorities in charge of the base. They were prohibited from being armed and instead forced to rely on others for their security.

Gun free zones have shown themselves again and again to be dangerous; even deadly. This is true even when the gun free zone is a military base.

 

[the1kidd03]

and so how would everyone being armed at the superbowl have at all proved helpful in the event of a terrorist attack?? keep in mind it would be a mass attack, not a lone gunman stupid enough to go in a place with 60k people with only a gun

 

[the1kidd03]

I am simply stating what DID happen.

How is it that there is no way to know who is boarding a plane armed, is doing so legally and with only good intentions other than to declare it illegal for everybody (save for the state) to board a plane with firearms?

If that were the only way, then one could argue that there is no way to know if one walking down the street with a firearm is doing so legally and with good intentions other than to declare it illegal for everybody (save for the state) to do so.

I wonder where that might lead.

Oh, BTW, you do realize that it was not so long ago that citizens were not prohibited from carrying firearms on their person on commercial airlines, do you not?

no I'm only 10

 

[J_Wales]

and so how would everyone being armed at the superbowl have at all proved helpful in the event of a terrorist attack?? keep in mind it would be a mass attack, not a lone gunman stupid enough to go in a place with 60k people with only a gun

Hey wait, are you going to "what if" scenarios now?

If it was a mass attack, then I would prefer to not be in a mass of unarmed people.

 

[J_Wales]

no I'm only 10

LOL!

Well, I was beginning to wonder if you were given your question regarding absent a ban how would one know whom is carrying legally and / or with good intentions.

For a while you had me worried I should depend on a 10 year old to safeguard me!

 

[the1kidd03]

Hey wait, are you going to "what if" scenarios now?

If it was a mass attack, then I would prefer to not be in a mass of unarmed people.

just trying to get back on track with the thread.......and while you might feel better, it would serve no purpose to the situation......so why does it matter either way?

 

[RBrianHarless]

Glad the snipers were there. Glad to hear there were no incidents and all the LEO's kept a safe environment to be enjoyed by the fans. They did a wonderful job providing safety and security for all who participated.

We have a choice to go or not go. If they will not allow me to CC, then I will stay home. No problem and I am not going to complain about it. It is my choice.

 

[the1kidd03]

Glad the snipers were there. Glad to hear there were no incidents and all the LEO's kept a safe environment to be enjoyed by the fans. They did a wonderful job providing safety and security for all who participated.

We have a choice to go or not go. If they will not allow me to CC, then I will stay home. No problem and I am not going to complain about it. It is my choice.

Basically what it all blows down to

 

[the1kidd03]

LOL!

Well, I was beginning to wonder if you were given your question regarding absent a ban how would one know whom is carrying legally and / or with good intentions.

For a while you had me worried I should depend on a 10 year old to safeguard me!

LOL

I'm up past my curfew

 

[J_Wales]

just trying to get back on track with the thread.......and while you might feel better, it would serve no purpose to the situation......so why does it matter either way?

So you know that my being armed would serve no purpose, other than making me feel better, to the situation of my individual protection and that of my family?

Talk about "what ifs"!

No doubt you are a noble, well intended man.

Let not your sight be blinded!

pax tecum

 

[the1kidd03]

So you know that my being armed would serve no purpose, other than making me feel better, to the situation of my individual protection and that of my family?

Talk about "what ifs"!

No doubt you are a noble, well intended man.

Let not your sight be blinded!

pax tecum

I understand your point of view entirely, and I feel the same way. I don't go anywhere I can't be armed to some extent. But I also understand the reasons behind security procedures and do not find a reason to criticize them unless they REALLY overstep the boundaries. With all of the extra security, although I wouldn't attend, I'm glad they provided it if they wish to disarm everyone. On the other hand, if they didn't disarm everyone no problem would have came up with other adequate security measures.

 

[J_Wales]

I understand your point of view entirely, and I feel the same way. I don't go anywhere I can't be armed to some extent. But I also understand the reasons behind security procedures and do not find a reason to criticize them unless they REALLY overstep the boundaries. With all of the extra security, although I wouldn't attend, I'm glad they provided it if they wish to disarm everyone. On the other hand, if they didn't disarm everyone no problem would have came up with other adequate security measures.

I doubt you feel the same way just as I doubt you appreciate the point.

That said, there is no need for us to agree. We can agree to disagree... Well, until that is legislated or ordered away!

pax tecum

 

[the1kidd03]

I doubt you feel the same way just as I doubt you appreciate the point.

That said, there is no need for us to agree. We can agree to disagree... Well, until that is legislated or ordered away!

pax tecum

Trust me ...I feel no need to agree with anyone, make friends, etc....I stand for what I believe in no matter what....probably why I don't make many close friends...LOL......I could go on for days about what our government does wrong and how we need to abolish and replace it....but that's entirely off topic and I don't think security measures at the superbowl were indicative of a corrupt government's future intentions...and think that is where we disagree...but probably not much else

 

[Tin Cup]

First couple pages of this thread were good. Pics were cool. Everything else was eh. I am just glad I drive places instead of flying, cause I am in control then. And if there is a place where someone tells me what I can/cant do... I dont go there.

 

[GhostofWinter]

 

[thompal]

They strip citizens of arms in these events to be able to identify a threat faster. If an attack occurred and you had 3-4 citizens pull their weapons to engage, it's going to make the sniper's job MUCH more difficult to identify who the real threat is and those citizens would be dramatically increasing the likelihood of innocent bystanders to get hurt. This is also ASSUMING that the armed citizen is going to be in the area that such an attack would be occurring. Who has a better chance of spotting/preventing the attack: average joe armed citizen who's there to have fun, or a large team of organized security who are being fed intelligence updates via radio communications?

Your premise makes SOME sense, if you assume that the total number of armed citizens were low among the game-goers (let's say 1%).

However, consider if the percentage of armed game-goers were closer to 50%. Who then better to quickly observe a terrorist about to commit some sort of rampage: 1 sniper 150 yards away who is trying to simultaneously watch 60,000 people, or ten armed citizens seated within feet of the bad guy?

I dare say that the armed citizens seated close to the bad guy could have the threat eliminated in one way or another before a sniper a hundred yards away would be aware that something was amiss.

 

[J_Wales]

Your premise makes SOME sense, if you assume that the total number of armed citizens were low among the game-goers (let's say 1%).

However, consider if the percentage of armed game-goers were closer to 50%. Who then better to quickly observe a terrorist about to commit some sort of rampage: 1 sniper 150 yards away who is trying to simultaneously watch 60,000 people, or ten armed citizens seated within feet of the bad guy?

I dare say that the armed citizens seated close to the bad guy could have the threat eliminated in one way or another before a sniper a hundred yards away would be aware that something was amiss.

I will take the armed citizens, thank you... All 60,000 of them.

 

[the1kidd03]

yeah they'll work....if the attacker were a gunman....if not...hey, at least they didn't take your rights, just your life