LogFAQs > #979517536

RaptorLC posted...

That's actually a really good point. There was one of those fabled "good guys with a gun" at that event. It was Gaige Grosskreutz. He responded to the active shooter and had the shooter in his sights, then froze. Fair play, it should be really hard to take a human life, so I definitely can't fault him for being unable to do so. He came to that realization at the absolute worst possible time though, right after having announced himself as a threat to the active shooter who had already proven that he was very willing to end a human life.

Yeah, it drives me crazy how his defenders always want us to think about the situation from his perspective, however never talk about considering it from the perspective of the crowd.

I still remember the initial reporting on Twitter talking about how it was an "active mass shooting situation" after he took the first life. From the crowd's perspective, they saw a guy with a gun standing over a body and assumed he had just murdered someone. In response to that, they charged him so they could disarm him and he shot more people in "legal self-defense".

His defenders pretend as though there's a 30mi telepathic message sent whenever someone justifiably shoots someone that lets everyone in the vicinity know that it was a legally justified shooting.

No, that's not how it works. The crowd thought they were doing a noble thing by trying to charge and disarm him. The law might be on this side due to the actual circumstances, however it's not like they were trying to murder him just cause he was a right-winger with a gun, as I've seen other people posit.