Problem is, if cops arrive on scene and see 2 people in a gunfight, how do they know who the good guy is? This isn't call of duty where the bad guys have a red mark over their head.
Not only that - anyone that's been the gun range and shot with a handgun at more than 15 ft knows it is not easy. Add stress and other random factors ??? To me it's a potential recipe for disaster depending on the situation and environment. All my gun loving friends lock their guns away, they take training classes, they shoot regularly. I do not think that is necessarily the norm for most people that own a gun.
Let me help you understand FrankZ - seeing as you want to fight and you are either deliberately misrepresenting a post or can't comprehend.
Squires post is in response to your comment about a good guy with a gun being a good solution. Squires comment highlights a potential issue with that solution.
My response adds other context and challenges to that solution. Namely people not trained to be in that situation. We have trained police officers sometimes shooting innocent bystanders ... what are the odds of a less well trained individual doing the same thing or worse? Higher or lower? What are the odds of a good guy with a gun with no training doing the same - much higher or much lower?
My original comment on the story: "I saw that story - and I'm glad lives appear to be saved."
So your comment -
"Ye, I see your point. Allowing someone to shoot at innocent people without resistance is a way to lower the body count. She should have minded her own business and let things happen, I am sure it would have deescalated the situation.
No really, the bad guy tried to hurt people. Someone decided to stop it and the only person dead is the bad guy. Disaster averted."
Is a 100% misrepresentation of my posts and my point. Thanks