320 people in Orlando night club, more than 100 shot...

That's unfortunate.

- - - Updated - - -

Lots of things become improvised weapons when you realize you need to fight for your life.

 

Did Todd Beamer and his group of passengers stop a group of terrorists? None had super powers. Yes in the process of stopping the terrorists they also died. They each had the option to either stand and fight or cringe and die. The group at the 'Pulse' made the decision to be frightened as a whole. Just one man attempted to stop Omar Mateen. He was killed.

 

Blah blah blah, when the 2nd amendment was written tired excuse. 1st amendment doesn't apply to the internet, microphones, or bull horns I guess in your mind either? Guess what else was available during the 2nd amendment time frame, CANNONS and Grenades. Guess we should be allowed them on our front lawns as the founders did too right?

 

Wooo! Another Rule 3 violation!

 

Just to be clear, how many of the terrorist Beamer was up against had AR-15's?

 

Does it make a difference? You react to the situation, it's either fight or flight. In this case there was no fight by the mass, only cowardly effeminate mass hysteria appears by the number of people shot. Nearly one-third.

 

No. You are right. Terrorists with box cutters and terrorists with rapid fire rifles are totally the same thing and there is no difference and the situations can definitely be compared with each other.

If someone draws an AR-15 on your friends and family and you are unarmed are you going to charge them or are you effeminate and cowardly.

By the way, bigoted (*)(*)(*)(*)ers make me sick.

 

Again it's it fight or flight. A person reacts, adapts and overcomes. If not they quiver, cry and die en masse as they did at "Pulse".

 

And overcoming an AR-15 is the same as overcoming a box cutter?

 

YES! Unarmed people have overcome armed individuals before.

 

Can you name a time when an unarmed, unprepared, and untrained person overcame someone with an AR-15?

 

Leftist, democrat, today it's one and the same.

 

easy to talk when you weren't there, it's disrespectful the victims. You yourself would have probably ran like a little girl, screaming..

Reality is that in a situation like this, it's about survival...instinctively we all want to survive and rushing the shooter is probably not a way to increase chances of survival. Basically only a very brave person willing to die to save others would've rushed the shooter and i don't think anyone on this forum talking big can say for sure they would've done such a heroic act. The shooter could've easily been stopped by a few brave people willing to take a bullet to save others but it takes a lot of courage to pull this off and assures death for the heroes. This is why so many mass shootings occur where just 1 guy kills many and an AR-15 type weapon makes it harder for someone to charge the shooter... I myself would only try and charge the shooter if i'm so close to him that running wouldn't do me any good, i'm talking about a couple of feet away... i would be thinking i'm dead anyway so let me rush this mf'er but easier said than done, in this situation we want to survive and a guy holding an AR-15 is not an easy target

 

The first Amendment has been expanded by "strict constructionalists" to include MONEY. It appears they stretch that document to their liking.

Oh and by the way...the militia at that time had canons. That was what the battles of Lexington and Concord were ABOUT if you bother to read history. The Brits were trying to "confiscate" their powder and canon stored at Concord.

So why don't we allow canons....I wonder

 

Except it's not. I vote Libertarian.

 

And others have made the action of burning a flag as "speech". Whats your point?

What does that have to do with individual citizens owning cannons? The 2nd amendment isn't just about militias if you knew how to read and understand English.

 

Why complain when politicians go to great lengths to collect money?

They claim they need money to get the message out.

 

In your scenario, the dead bodies of the people that rushed him would form a wall around him stopping anyone else rushing him. This is a childish unintelligent internet warrior thread!

 

Yes... with the "warriors" taking the side of the shooter.

 

Still say people didn't need to necessarily rush the guy, but they could have thrown bottles at him and buried him in glass.

 

Or chairs or plates or whatever.
Get him off the trigger and you gain time to act.

 

While the SWAT team spent 3 hours mustering courage to go it, the Muslim murderer was walking about kicking bodies in case any were playing dead or not not yet bleed to death, shooting those point black he thought still alive.

But at least the SWAT team members minimized the possibility of being bruised by a mere .223 hitting their body armor it couldn't penetrate.

 

Why does anyone want to attack seals? They're kinda cute playing with the ball on their nose.

 

Their leather makes awesome seatcovers and assless chaps. Soft, supple and doesn't chafe.