Quote:
Originally Posted by ZeroJunk
Yeah, it would have been awful if a couple of armed citizens killed somebody accidentally when he first started the crap before they killed the terrorist. Much better to just let him kill 49.
|
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...nap-story.html
I am going to quote the article about the policeman who was moonlighting and probably armed with a pistol:
"An off-duty police officer working as a security guard had traded gunfire with the shooter at the entrance to the club and called for backup.
It’s not clear why the off-duty officer didn’t pursue the gunman into the club, Canty said, but it’s not surprising.
“That officer is by himself and doesn’t know how many people are involved. The guy is obviously armed with more advanced weaponry,” Canty said. Mateen had a handgun and a Sig Sauer MCX assault-style rifle. "
Even if a person in the club had a weapon that does not mean they could automatically fight the attacker. If it is a choice between getting in a firefight and dying and possibly escaping alive I think I would escape. That is human nature. People in the military think the same way in combat. No one is expected to charge machine gun nests in suicide missions.
The good guy with a gun argument is total bullshit. Now the cop in the club probably did the very best he could with his smaller weapon and is a good person and helped out in the situation. But he was not matched in weaponry with the killer and acted accordingly.