OK Sup Forums hear me out:

OK Sup Forums hear me out:

I often fantasize about situations like this, and it came to my mind again when Orlando happened.
How hard can it be really for 100+ people to stop one gunman? Of course, there is shock, surprise etc., but realistically, doesn't it just take a small amount of people to stop the gunman?
Especially I hear stories of groups of peoples hiding in bathrooms locking themselves up. If they know he is coming for them, isn't it easy to position yourself in such a way that there is a reasonable chance to get to him and to overpower him?
Please clear this up for me, as I can never understand this, but then again I have 0 experience when it comes to any weapon and/or combat trainng.

The club was filled with a bunch of effeminate gays, you think they lack the courage and fortitude for combat? Notice these shooters never try to shoot up line-dancing clubs in west Texas

I understand your thought process and have felt in similiar ways before, however I think without experiencing the real situation and allowing yourself to be completely taken by surprise would change things. I would imagine they were all normies who don't know much about guns rather trying to stop a gunman whilst unarmed and in a drunken panic.

All it takes is 1-2 guys but they'd have to be willing to sacrifice themselves. Nobody wants to be that guy.

people look from cues from others. when one person runs everyone runs, if one person had rushed him everone would have rushed him.

Do you think this is natural or a cause of our cultural environment?

basic psychology
fight or flight instincts

agent over here trained in reactions.

People are not able to form a coalition with strangers or even with friends at gunpoint moment, nor are they ready to fight at a moment`s notice due to the effect of surprise.

People do not care about the well being of other human beings whilst in imminent danger to oneself, therefore all they want is to flee.

The immediate thought of someone being ready and prepared to kill you makes your thoughts lead to a situation in which he is in obvious advantage and therefore resistance seems futile even if opening for it is clear.


Humans consider themselves to be the apex, when they are hunted, the surprise is all the more shocking.

I mean of course it's natural to not rush into your death, but I mean after the first initial shock most people must realise that the chances of stopping the gunman and preventing a multitude of deaths, including your own are very high if you confront the gunman.

One train of thought I have had relating to this is that, despite terrorism being on the rise and very prominent in the light of ISIS etc, people don't expect their friendly neighborhood muslim to actually shoot up the places they frequent. This being also influenced by the whole #notallmuslims thinking.

Do you think if we instilled people with the realisation that stuff like this is very much possible, they would be more subconsciously 'on guard' and their brains would shift to a more rational thinking in those situations?

Most likely it's a natural response. Your first instinct in case of danger would be to preserve your own life, not the life of others.

When you see soldiers or other people that are under extreme pressure / fire-fights and so on, and they actively ignore the danger so that they can keep on fighting, you are actually seeing someone acting against their own nature. Why? Because they are able to get past their first instinct, that huge amount of adrenaline rush that usually helps you run away from danger, not tackle it head on.

tl;dr: a normal response from a human that finds himself in a dangerous situation would be that of running the fuck away from it, not fighting it.

Nice dubs, Hitler.

Anyway, there's this story my father told me. He was just a nerdy assburgers dude, like me. So one day some of the other kids in school attacked him. They were with more, and he was alone. Normally he would have run. But he got increadibly angry instead, and picked up a rock to throw at them. And they all ran away.

This also happened to my grandfather. He was a planter in dark Africa, and one day the niggers of the plantation decided to negotionate a raise. They did so by coming to his house in the middle of the night with an angry mob. He stood in the doorway with an axe, and they all fucked off.

The moral of the story is, even in a mob no-one wants to be the first to die. This is why we praise heroes. They give up their personal safety for that of the group. And these people were no heroes, just a bunch of drunk faggots intent on having a good time and not much else.

The modifiers are exposure and awareness.

Pulling a gun to random Brazilians will 7/10 times lead up to you being wrestled with, however, to an american, someone who is much less exposed to violence and generally unaware of danger in his daily life, it will result in 4/10 times. To Europeans, 1/10 times.

Because when shit goes down, any combat training you might have goes out the window when you panic.

>How hard can it be really for 100+ people to stop one gunman?

Infinitely hard in the times of today.

99% of Western men are hyperfeminized nu-males manginas. This includes the "high-test Alphas" (aka autistic narcissists) from /fit/ - many of the gayboys who held the doors in the Orlando gay club were your typical "/fit/izens" - lots of muscle but feminine pussy deep down.

Only real men left are a minority of the people serving in military. Which is why the terrorist attack in the French train was stopped by US military servicemen.

/thread

They were all drunk, there was loud music playing, they were all homos.

pretty good summary. have a (you)

Herd mentality.

This. One of the fruits actually blocked the exit from the outside to make his escape - sealing the rest in with the shooter.

Diffusion of responsibility is real when in a large group everyone assumes one of the of the other people will do something until eventually it's all over and no one did anything just like kitty genovese god rest her soul

natural instinct, fight or flight.

but yeah, after the inital shock, an individual or group of people could indeed decide to fight the threat, however i think that this fighting attitude needs some degree of mental preparation, e.g the mere acknowledgement that u might end up in a dangerous situation

>How hard can it be really for 100+ people to stop one gunman?

It's a gay bar.
Think of it as 100 screaming emotional women.

You'd think they could have pelted him with dildos and martini glasses at the very least.

Watched the interview with him this morning. I couldn't believe how easy that reporter went on him after he essentially said that he blocked the fucking door and shitloads of gays were still trapped inside.

Dunno about the US, but here in Europe, you would definitely go to jail for that. Can't remember the actual law, but it goes something like if you see someone in danger, you are required by law to help that individual, or else you can get prosecuted for not getting involved.

What that guy did was straight up complicity to murder in my opinion. He should be lined up and executed on the spot, but nah, we'll just give him some coverage on the news, cry with him and move on.

Fucking leftists

How easy would it have been to ambush him in the doorway to the bathroom or something. Or when he's reloading?

>Pulling a gun to random Brazilians will 7/10 times lead up to you being wrestled with

You should never pull a gun when your target is already close enough to wrestle you. Either pull it before you get that close, pull it after you regain range, or use something else.

I saw that too. Fscking idiot.

Having people in there who were NOT completely disarmed would have helped too.

What kind of bar doesn't have a shotgun hidden somewhere? In America??

Yep, that's about the extent of it. High powered weapons not required either. When a mentally ill college kid stabbed five people to death at a house party in my city a couple years ago, a lot of people asked how that was possible. How could one man with a kitchen knife do so much damage in a house full of other healthy and physically fit people? The answer of course is that everyone ran, the attacker went about it very quickly, and the whole thing was over in minutes.

isn't ar-15 could penetrate a body? or omar using different gun?

it just shows you that those faggots didn't even have proper drugs on them.

Hell, enter a club with 300 people on good-ass coke or pcp and it would be a totally different story.

But nah, they'll stick with mdma - because they're not faggoty enough, they need moar love.

thanks for that BOPEbro

good answers

He may have saved many more because the people in front were being trampled and couldnt get out. What he did is actually an act of courage. He saved the many by sacrificing a few

All in service of the victimhood narrative. I bet if someone stood up, disarmed the gunman, and shot him then and there, we'd now be raging over how this person would be kept in custody awaiting trial.

not true.

t. bachelor of law

This is actually intradesting because I watched a movie called "The Debt" last night, about a doctor in WW2 that carved up thousands of jews for experiment and gets captured to stand trial. He winds his captors up by telling them he saw 4 Nazi's with rifles leading 1000 jews to the gas chambers, they could have completely overwhelmed the guards but none of them wanted to be shot first.

Really makes you think.

TOO MANY DUTCH, CAN NOT HANDLE

If that someone would have been white, the people would actively blame the whitey for not letting the muslim express his feelings, amiright? Should I go check my white privilege?

I'll check the specific law that we have here. You might not have it, but in Romania if you see a crime and you do not intervene, you will get prosecuted if that crime escalates.

Timing it "just right" is the problem.

Your brain will tell you: "CAN WE DO IT? CAN WE DO IT? MAN WE GOT ONE SHOT... IF WE MAKE A MISTAKE WE DIE. COME ON, MOVE!" and while you think of it, you'll miss your chance.

Do you know the thought of being on the ledge of a high place but being frozen when trying to jump?

That's how you will feel when fighting the urge to run or hide, and that's what will kill you.

A premeditated strike, like an ambush has a higher chance of working, but you chances are that you will mess up.

True. And I guess the thought of whether or not someone else would do it, his ammunition count, and police response would all play a factor

>You should never pull a gun when your target is already close enough to wrestle you. Either pull it before you get that close, pull it after you regain range, or use something else.

I know. I was simply talking about the hypothetical immediate exposure to danger.

Assuming they are in range for wrestling, the person who is used to being exposed to danger and aware of it will most likely fight, and the person who is not will most likely flee.

Can't disagree with that. In my mind if someone pulls a weapon on me in wrestling range there's pretty much no possible response but to strike and grab. Anything else is clearly suicide.

But obviously no one next to this guy when he showed up felt the same way. I wouldn't expect that to happen.

What I *would* expect would be some responsible party somewhere behind the bar or in an office with a weapon who would have heard the first shots and immediately started stalking the shooter.

I'd go so far as to say it sounds like something that should be qualified as criminal negligence on the part of the club.

Okay on a similar vein about hypotheticals.

Lets say a government (ours or foreign) is coming to kill citizens and it's full on war in the United States.


How will the uprising/resistance be organized? Groups of people who own guns joining militia? What will normies without guns be doing?