Task Force 16 wrote:
Had more law abiding poeple in Alabama been carrying arms, this whacko may not have gotten as far as he did, and the body count would have been much lower.
I might agree if the shooting was confined to a single location. With the description of the event leading me to the conclusion that there were at least 3 locations where people were shot, it may have happened so quickly that there was little time to respond.
Then there is the article's depiction of a car chase with the gunman shooting other vehicles.
I can't be as convinced, with this particular case, that a legally armed citizen would have been able to make a difference.
Uhm, where do you get this as logical?
How many victims were there? 10? Had any one of them, especially the FIRST one, been armed, the whole mess would have come to a halt, and many lives saved.
Color me an @#$%, but I'm getting a bit blase about it. If you refuse to be armed, you get what you deserve. Especially parents who refuse to protect their own children.
Being deliberately helpless in the face of a murderer is stupid. But when you are a PARENT, and you STILL CHOOSE TO BE UNARMED so that you can plead "there was nothing I could do" over the dead body of your own child!?!? Those who choose to be disarmed are planning this in advance! They consciously plan to let their children be killed!
A dead parent like that, deserves to be. A parent that has such disregard for their own children, grrr... Simply being shot is too good for them.