Unadulterated posted...
Lmao Damn this is a horrible take. You have the right to defend yourself.
Our forefathers secured our right to do so. Don't be a fool.
Which well-regulated militia are you a part of?
Unadulterated posted...
They were cowardly cops. Had someone worth a fuck been there and armed nobody would have died. Again.
That's weird, because...
-Columbine had an armed security guard - two of them, in fact. They were targeted first by the shooters and were helpless to stop the massacre that followed.
-Parkland also had an armed security guard. He also failed to stop the shooting that followed.
-An entire police force showed up to the shooting in Uvalde, yet did nothing to stop the massacre.
Now, if you're good at pattern recognition, you can probably notice a trend here: armed guards generally don't do jack shit against a shooter. And you'd be right! Turns out mass shootings are messy, chaotic events, crammed full of innocent civilians trying not to be shot and featuring shooters packing far more heat than an armed guard would reasonably carry, which makes it an absolute nightmare for security or law enforcement to deal with (for some reason, in real life the bad guys don't have special markers above their head or show up as red dots on the radar the way they do in video games).
Sure enough, this has been studied and it turns out armed guards don't help: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7887654/
"An armed guard was on scene in 23.58% of shootings (29 of 123) (Table 1)."
"Results are presented as incident rate ratios in Table 2 and show armed guards were not associated with significant reduction in rates of injuries; in fact, controlling for the aforementioned factors of location and school characteristics, the rate of deaths was 2.83 times greater in schools with an armed guard present (incidence rate ratio, 2.96; 95% CI = 1.43-6.13;
P
= .003)."