Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Ft. Lauderdale Airport 1-6-17 Another Wackjob Shooting

tinselwolverine

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
35,811
5 dead so far, 13 shot.

Preliminary ID suspect Esteban Santiago in custody.
 
Last edited:
If only all the other people in the airport were carrying guns and started shooting back, this would've turned out better.
 
have there been any instances where armed citizens made a mass shooting worse? There's plenty of evidence that shows armed citizens have prevented bloodshed - anyone with internet access can see that.
 
have there been any instances where armed citizens made a mass shooting worse? There's plenty of evidence that shows armed citizens have prevented bloodshed - anyone with internet access can see that.


If you limit the parameters to "mass shooting" then maybe not. But there are plenty of cases where someone tried to take out a person with a gun and shot a bystander by mistake. - anyone with internet access can see that.

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/264755/carjacking-gone-wrong-houston-texas/

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings

http://www.theadvocate.com/new_orle...cle_e12c55b8-c464-11e6-be7c-5f777abeca8e.html
 
I always think of the Aurora theater massacre and some John Wayne blowing away innocent people in a dark theater.

Sounds like this was another Vet suffering PTSD or another mental illness.

War
 
turns out the FBI knew about this guy and had interviewed him.

I guess since he only posed an obvious danger to the general public, and not state power generally, or anyone in the FBI specifically, they let him go on his merry way, to shoot up some place whenever he finally snapped.
 
turns out the FBI knew about this guy and had interviewed him.

I guess since he only posed an obvious danger to the general public, and not state power generally, or anyone in the FBI specifically, they let him go on his merry way, to shoot up some place whenever he finally snapped.

are you in favor of the FBI detaining everyone they interview?
 
If you limit the parameters to "mass shooting" then maybe not. But there are plenty of cases where someone tried to take out a person with a gun and shot a bystander by mistake. - anyone with internet access can see that.

http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/264755/carjacking-gone-wrong-houston-texas/

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings

http://www.theadvocate.com/new_orle...cle_e12c55b8-c464-11e6-be7c-5f777abeca8e.html

but isn't he talking about turning a mass shooting into more mass carnage? Anyone who read the thread should be able to see that...

and this washington post article would seem to refute the claims of your mother jones link

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...r-stop-mass-shootings/?utm_term=.63e71c3cd094

it's anecdotal, but no moreso than the mother jones piece which also seems to discount the fact that many mass shootings happen in gun free zones, where citizens, even those with CCL aren't permitted to carry their guns.
 
Last edited:
I always think of the Aurora theater massacre and some John Wayne blowing away innocent people in a dark theater.

Sounds like this was another Vet suffering PTSD or another mental illness.

War

but that didn't happen in the Aurora theater massacre and as far as I can tell, it hasn't happened in any of the mass shootings. There have been a number of potential mass shootings that were stopped by armed citizens though.
 
but that didn't happen in the Aurora theater massacre and as far as I can tell, it hasn't happened in any of the mass shootings. There have been a number of potential mass shootings that were stopped by armed citizens though.

in Houston earlier this year, a wannabe Hero just ended up getting himself shot by the gunman, and his presence only added to confusion over whether there were multiple perpetrators. the body count in that one was lower only because the nutcase started shooting in an area without a lot of foot traffic. the thing is, unless your wannabe hero has been training for such an occasion, its likely he's going to be outmatched by the crazed shooter - who has been, or is at least ex-military (like the guy in Ft. Lauderdale or in my example from Houston).

I've read other accounts that say its only a matter of time before some hero gets himself shot by law enforcement when they show up to a heated, emotionally-chared, and chaotic situation looking for a gunman. I will try to find these accounts. I remember that they quoted actual police who were against the idea that more guys with guns would've resulted in better outcomes in these mass shootings.

So, there are ample reasons to doubt very much that more guns around will lead to Hollywood-style outcomes at mass-shootings.

where are your examples of mass shootings ended by a hero citizen?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
oh, never mind. Thumb already posted links about that. we should all read better.
 
in Houston earlier this year, a wannabe Hero just ended up getting himself shot by the gunman, and his presence only added to confusion over whether there were multiple perpetrators. the body count in that one was lower only because the nutcase started shooting in an area without a lot of foot traffic. the thing is, unless your wannabe hero has been training for such an occasion, its likely he's going to be outmatched by the crazed shooter - who has been, or is at least ex-military (like the guy in Ft. Lauderdale or in my example from Houston).

I've read other accounts that say its only a matter of time before some hero gets himself shot by law enforcement when they show up to a heated, emotionally-chared, and chaotic situation looking for a gunman. I will try to find these accounts. I remember that they quoted actual police who were against the idea that more guys with guns would've resulted in better outcomes in these mass shootings.

So, there are ample reasons to doubt very much that more guns around will lead to Hollywood-style outcomes at mass-shootings.

where are your examples of mass shootings ended by a hero citizen?

you're drawing conclusions based on weak anecdotes here. The Florida shooter was ex-military but the vast majority of mass shooters in the US have no military training whatsoever. I'd actually expect it to be the reverse, where the licensed firearm carrier has more experience handling a firearm - maybe no more likely to have combat training, but they're most likely at least even on that count.

There maybe some reasons to believe more guns will lead to more carnage but that's not the preponderance of evidence. There are plenty of incidents where shooters were stopped by private citizens. According to the CDC report commissioned by Barack Obama in 2013, defensive gun use exponentially outmeasures criminal usage.

As for examples, here's the link I already posted in my response to Thumb:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...r-stop-mass-shootings/?utm_term=.54694f1b063f

It's anecdotal, but this one summarizes the data driven CDC study mentioned above:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc-study-use-firearms-self-defense-important-crime-deterrent

Even Politico published a piece debunking the claim that defensive gun use is a myth:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082
 
Last edited:
you think a typical licensed civilian gun owner - I assume you mean someone with a CCL - has more experience handling guns than someone who is ex- military??? seems like a stretch.

the "cns news" site you cited there is... shall we say "suspect?" they are "less than forthcoming" about the fact that the report allegedly from the CDC is not actually from the CDC. Try clicking on it.

a number of news articles from more reputable cites note that in June 2016 ordered the CDC to study the effects of gun violence, but this was never done because the CDC has no funding for such a thing. and they have no funding for such a thing because in the 90's the Republican-controlled congress, at the behest of the NRA - ordered them to stop studying the effects of gun violence because the NRA believed this promoted an "anti-gun" agenda. I can't imagine that if the statistics showed most firearm use was truly defensive, they would feel this way.

here's a link to the WaPo article explaining this: link.

it looks like Obama ordered a study, no study was done because of the lack of funding and political opposition to it, and then Right Wing & gun nut media sites decided to capitalize on this by making up their own results of the study.

The idea that most firearm use is defensive seems absurd on its face, given the overwhelming use of firearms in suicides, domesic shootings, and urban gang warfare...

and not sure why the politico article is needed. it's clear no one here ever claimed defensive firearm use is a myth. we're all aware of instances where its successful, and obviously security guards, police, armored car drivers, etc wouldnt carry guns it they werent effective at deterring or preventing crimes. No, the point is that guns are not completely effective deterring/preventing crime, and encouraging widespread gun ownership has many negative consequences and outcomes. more guns basically means more shootings, intentional, reckless, or accidental.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
you think a typical licensed civilian gun owner - I assume you mean someone with a CCL - has more experience handling guns than someone who is ex- military??? seems like a stretch.

no, and it's clear from my post I don't think that. What I think is you're wrong that, as you said "its likely he's going to be outmatched by the crazed shooter - who has been, or is at least ex-military (like the guy in Ft. Lauderdale or in my example from Houston)" Most mass shooters are not current or ex-military. Other than Fort Hood, where a non-combat officer opened fire on other military personnel, Ft. Lauderdale is the only example I'm aware of that involved ex-military.

Edit: the Navy Yard shooter was also ex-navy but he wasn't a combat soldier - he worked in logistical support as an Aviation Electrician's Mate.

So 2 of the 3 shooters with military experience attacked military facilities. the overwhelming majority of mass shooting attacks on civilian targets have been committed by civilians with no military training.
 
Last edited:
you think a typical licensed civilian gun owner - I assume you mean someone with a CCL - has more experience handling guns than someone who is ex- military??? seems like a stretch


It might not be a stretch. I was in the Air Force. Most people don't handle guns. I know from my own experience, we had to qualify with a M-16 every other year. To qualify all we had to do is hit a target at a range. I'm sure the Marines are much different. Probably a lot of the people in the army as well. Not sure about the Navy.
 
Well, from the stories presented, it looks to me that intervention against armed perpetrators of crimes by armed standers by has been met with mixed results.
 
even in non-ex military shooters... typically the shooter has prepared and planned it.

not much training and continuing effort goes into getting a CCL or maintaining a license. you need a single class, if that. thank the NRA for it.

my grandpa has one... he's 86 and doesn't ever practice. about 7-8 years ago he took a class, then bought his pistol and got his CCL.

and as noted before, in some of the more notorious cases, Aurora, CO, Sandy Hook elementary, and the FL nightclub, the shooter had an assault rifle and was firing indiscriminately in crowded rooms... outside of a hollywood movie, how reasonable is it to expect a guy with a CCL to do something about it, other than getting shot themselves or shooting an innocent victim?

you still haven't posted your examples.
 
Back
Top