Pol BTFO

Well, Sup Forums?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisis
youtube.com/watch?v=C3gUMdoHJ7o
pulpless.com/gunclock/
breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/09/2nd-amendment-in-action-armed-driver-stops-attempted-mass-shooting/
controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/
liveleak.com/view?i=e9a_1357155001
liveleak.com/view?i=fed_1372467029
liveleak.com/view?i=1e4_1362960011
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

save a life
bin that _______

>(dozens of examples where one gun owner literally did make a difference)

No, the shooter had a shootout with patrol officers. SWAT teams didn't arrive until later.

Probably because they were outside the venue and were treating it as a hostage situation.

The US swat team aren't the fucking spetsnaz, they don't just storm the place with no care for hostages.

SPOON

Sage this thread, it's just more shilling.

Well you see, the average gun owner would be able to react a lot quicker than a police unit. Is that to say a good guy with a gun could stop a bad guy with a gun? I can't say yes or no, but it only took one of those guys to kill that guy, not 11

I thought a private citizen was "no match" for the military or police.

Seems like they might be quite a hefty match after all.

What?

Doesn't that mean 11 SWAT = 1 gun owner?

Then another gun owner could easily have take out Omar

one gun owner inside the club >>>>>>> twenty gun owners stuck outside the club

especially when it's a fucking hostage situation

assault rif(le)

This makes no sense whatsoever.
By that logic, the orlando shooter would have stood no chance against a single armed civilian, and he would have needed a swat team to kill all those people.

>It took 11 of these
So the kebab was a raid boss that one gun owner simply doesn't have enough DPS for?

>you can't overthrow an oppressive government by legally owning a gun. the police is too strong
>you can't kill a guy who legally owns a gun. It took 11 police officers to do so

>The US swat team aren't the fucking spetsnaz, they don't just storm the place with no care for hostages.

Where does that meme even come from? Anglo Propaganda?

An average gun owner wouldn't have waited three hours. Go kill yourself, shill.

>takes a swat squad to take out one civilian with a gun
>guns are useless to fight the government

Some theater where most hostages were killed with a gas if I remember correctly. /k/ should know. I'll go ask them

So I guess it would be impossible then for the Government to use force to take guns from the people, considering the high amount of gun owners I don't think the Government has the troops to take em.

What a waste of taxes

It took 11 of them to take out a gun owner.
It just takes one gun owner for one gun owner.

the gunman knew guns were not allowed inside the club
in a crowd, outside a club, the gunman can be shot from all directions, alone he stands no chance

When you have to save lives , you can't just go full speznatz.

Duh.

If their wasn't a worry of aids blood contaminating the drinking water they would of probably used a predator drone to take out the city block .

Murrica

No. They sit outside with no care for hostages.

>Implying the government wont turn to a state of Martial Law.

>Gunman dead via self inflicted wounds from a random hero that tackled him.
>Gunman dead via police
>Gunman dead killed via SWAT

You still believe anything they tell you?

>1 post

>Doesn't that mean 11 SWAT = 1 gun owner?
Not 1 gun owner, 1 angry homosexual demi-questioning oppressed by the Patriarchy.
1 gun owner would have do shit against 1 oppressed guy getting back to the Patriarchy. Too too many gays and latinos around. Too many people to shoot first. It requires a full team of skilled oppressing policemen of the Patriarchy trained to focus on a single target to oppress.

Not even die hard gunowners would carry while being at a nightclub.

>1 post by this ID

Really stupid of you, /pol. Really fucking stupid.

I think the matriarchy is responsible in that case, the bouncer was a woman, that's insulting to gays and to muslims

Exactly
Why didn't they just drone strike the building?

They're stupid because they can't fucking refute my post.

Gun nuts = eternally BTFO

hard for an average gun owner to step into a military controlled psyop stage set

you haven't replied to anyone

Except they already did you raging faggot.

49 armed gays might have

Religion of peace is mighty crafty.

>(dozens of examples where there was a mass shooting in a non-gun free area)

Move out of America then you mentally crippled faggot. This country was founded on the use of guns. Or is it that you won't get gibs me dats anywhere else you entitled cry baby bitch?

Your average gun owner doesn't even carry.
Your average gun owner just target shoots for fun.
Your average gun owner doesn't deserve to be stripped of his right for your feelings.

Most cops are incompetent.

the worst thing would be if every time you left your home you had to get the gun ready, take a deep breath, and know you'd have to be ready to be in a deadly shoot out.

more civilized countries make it safe to live your life

>HEY GUNFAGS WHY DON'T WE EVER HEAR ABOUT GUN OWNERS STOPPING MASS SHOOTINGS
>because when gun owners stop them they aren't mass shootings

Oh and someone double check for me, but does OP only have ONE POST

It took 1 bullet to the head/any other vital point to stop the shooter

>most hostages

It's memes though... A random US swat team would have literally killed everybody in that theatre. The only typical Russian mishap was the fact that the gas they used was some kind of militairy secret, and thus the doctors didn't know how to treat the people that was under the effects of the gas and weren't provided with any antidotes..

That said, there really was no way that siege could have been ended without casualties among the hostages. Chechens don't fuck around.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_theater_hostage_crisis

And you realize one of thoses swat guy almost die?
Imagine if the killer had armor like the swat...
I guess it would be a bloodshed

>no idea of the layout of building
>entrance points
>windows
>no idea if one or multiple guys
>no ideas of the kind of weaponry
>being this stupid and having played not one game of splinter cell

Wasn't the shooter initially stopped by an off duty policeman?

Doesn't help the assault team fucked up the breach royally.
>Set explosive breaching charge on wall
>Don't use a proper charge
>Hole isn't big enough
>SHIT SHIT SHIT FUCK I DON'T KNOW RAM THE ARMORED VEHICLE INTO THE WALL OR SOMETHING!

Three things make for a successful assault on a building surprise, speed, and violence of action. This is doubly important when there are hostages involved. The failed breach undoubtedly cost them both surprise and speed and ultimately cost some hostages their lives.

>be american
>go outside
>get shot

b-but i do

I got to ask, why does American gun control always come down to:
>"You can have it, or not."
It is never:
>"How can we stop these people obtaining these items?"

The best system would be a mix between American and British gun law.
The freedom and ability to purchase the firearms from America and the background and licensing from Britain.
You have to pay a fund for your license at first then it is cheaper to renew each year, background and history check, 1 or 2 representatives to contact you know not related to you (your mates, GP and such) and a visit from a friendly local officer to determine the security (if you are a bit dodgy or if you have the right security for holding the firearm and cartridges).

Try to prove to me this wont work perfectly.
>pro tip: you can't

>be Canadian
>suck off dog dick

You know the reason we implemented these amendments and the bill of rights and the constitution was to get away from your pansy ass government?

There's a reason why the right to own a gun is the 2nd amendment and not the 27th.

>The best system would be a mix between American and British gun law.

No, because British gun law is fucking stupid... If anything, take continental European gun laws like in Germanic countries or Scandinavia.

>Brits ACTUALLY think their gun laws are reasonable
Lel.This is why everybody hates the Eternal Anglo.

>Carrying
>in austria
Enjoy your lifelong weapon ban.

>It took 11 of these guys to stop the Orlando shooter, because of his deadly assault weaponry.
>11 specially armed men with deadly assault weaponry that shouldn't be in the hands of civilians.
>Wait, what?

>police/government tend to be incompentent

No shit stating the obvious

pike(y)

>The freedom to own firearms.
>Just with better background checks.
>"But I want the freedom to own these firearms."
Nice rebuttal.

>11 man SWAT team = 1 gun owner
>1 gun owner =/= 1 gun owner
Ok.

>be Canadian
>go outside
>be a misogynistic shitlord

from police killed our black apes cops are bad to we need more cops nao!

>I state the freedom to purchase and own firearms from America and the background checks from Britain.
>No mass shootings in Britain since Dunblain.
You didn't even read it fully did you?

>11 swat outside an occupied club in a hostage situation is the same as 1 guy inside the club before hostages are taken

they are faggots
she could have soloed them

There was a gun owner inside the club, an off-duty cop serving as security. He and the shooter exchanged fire and he lost.

But they only died because the Gas was used was Top Secret, and the Paramedics didnt know that laying the Hostages on their backs would end in them slowly suffocating.

Spetsnaz dindu nuffin

>The only people who should be permitted to use deadly assault weaponry are people carefully trained to use it to protect the citizenry.

It's not that complicated.

British gun laws are retarded, and your background check system is no exception..
>Relying on random community members/family members rather than official authorities and their documents and databases

Brilliant. Why not just introduce a system that's known to work pretty well, like the Austrian, German, Dutch or Swedish system? British gun laws are literally among the most retarded on the continent..
>No mass shootings since Dunblaim
You sound like Australians and their port Arthur meme. But what exactly does any of that mean if your murder rate has not dropped significantly, in comparison to yourselves or the rest of Europe?

wife

This. Your average officer wouldn't have waited 3 hours either. Columbine changed the way be handle active shooters. If you have an active shooter you enter and engage immediately. It makes no sense they waited that long.

Pol is always right

meant to reply to this

>Columbine changed the way be handle active shooters.
>If you have an active shooter you enter and engage immediately

Literally Dutch police policy since the 2011 Ridderhof shooting.. They rarely wait for SWAT teams anymore in an active shooter/potential shooter situation. If it seems first responders can take action with reasonable regard for everyone's safety, they do.

youtube.com/watch?v=C3gUMdoHJ7o

>somewhat related

Ok. Imagine at least 5 of those faggots were carrying, and had at least some firearm training.

>omar walks into the bar
>starts spraying with his AR
>based fags pull out their guns and start firing back
>omar either shot dead, wounded, or at the very least forced to take cover
>bought the rest of the faggots some time to evacuate

You can't tell me the above is not a plausable scenario. And at the very least it would give these people the chance to defend themselves and fight back.

Also, the pic in the OP is nonsense.

>Two well known representatives who are not related and have no prior criminal charges.
>Local visit from an officer to see if you have the right security and evaluate your behavior during that time.
You so far have called it retarded, explain why you dumbfuck.

>Britain: Dunblane 13 March 1996
>Austria 2013 Annaberg shooting
>Gemrany Winnenden school shooting 11 March 2009
>Dutch Alphen aan den Rijn shopping mall shooting 9 April 2011
>Sweden 2015 Gothenburg pub shooting
Well shit.

>inb4 "retarded laws on what firearms you can own"
>I am talking about British licensing and background checks.

"I don't know how many bouncers it would take to throw me out, but I did know how many they would use. That is a handy little number to know" -Ron White.

You don't send in 'enough' to deal with it. You send in an overwhelming force to deal with one nut.

But what if there were 5 more gun owners in the club, they would probably have won the gunfight.

So more people should be carrying guns.

One gun owner was able to down 49 people and wound countless others.

He seems to have made a difference.

Yeah, they just allow people to bleed out for 3 hours

This picture is retarded.

Security guards, cops and SWAT are all easily beaten because they're so identifiable. They don't get the guise of concealed carry to aid them, and the element of surprise is huge when it's shot or be shot.

Anyone inside the club with a gun hidden away on their person could've taken it out when the shooter wasn't looking and taken him out with a little aim. The more people with a gun in the club, the better the odds he'll be faced away from you to be taken out.

You're retarded. Go to Canada if you're such a cuck.

How the fuck has nobody shot you yet?

>they used 11 people
>it couldn't have been done with any less
leftists are truly retarded. Unless they know something we don't, it was one guy with 2 guns.

>Sweden 2015 Gothenburg pub shooting

Immigrants using illegally imported weapons from the Balkans, as is the case with 99% of gun violence in Sweden.

At least use an example where legally obtained weapons were used.

Haha, clearly you're a shill. Go home.

U.S swat are pathetic. In the marines I cleared a fucking city of houses in iraqistan.

They can't even breach a door.
Pathetic

Not a sufficient argument for banning guns.

It's more of an argument for increased open and concealed carry.

Over 2 million successful gun defenses per year proves that.

Every 13 seconds, an American firearm owner uses a firearm to defend themselves against a criminal attack.

pulpless.com/gunclock/


breitbart.com/big-government/2015/12/09/2nd-amendment-in-action-armed-driver-stops-attempted-mass-shooting/
controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/

Also this:

40 Reasons For Gun Control

liveleak.com/view?i=e9a_1357155001

Obama Ordered Gun Report Reveals Guns Actually Save Lives

liveleak.com/view?i=fed_1372467029

The Lies That Gun Grabbers Tell

liveleak.com/view?i=1e4_1362960011

He could have. Whether he would have, is indeed the question. But unless you're dealing with some weird theoretical case where the perpetrator is fully clad in bulletproof material, it literally only takes one well-placed bullet to end something like this. That's the beauty of firearms.

>Immigrants using illegally imported weapons from the Balkans
Shit, I thought so. Only thing google came up with was Breivik.

One average gun owner fires one shot to the back of Omar's head. Easy. Average gun owner is inside, not breaking in calling attention to yhemselbes

>You so far have called it retarded, explain why you dumbfuck.

>No semi auto centrefire rifles
>No handguns
>No airrifles with more than 12ft/lbs of force

Completely draconic. Absolutely unnecessary, and a knee jerk reaction to a tragedy.

>Well shit.

Shootings happen. Very sad, but at the same time there's very little you can do to stop these sorts of people. Criminals will get their hands on guns regardless, the mentally ill will not become less ill if you ban guns and unfortunately there are other ways to murder people, even masses of them...

>inb4 "retarded laws on what firearms you can own"
Then don't say a mix between British and US. Just say US with background checks or something..
>I am talking about British licensing and background checks.
I'm not a fan of background checks that require 3rd parties to testify to the sanity or trustworthyness of an idividual applying for a firearm.. The risk of arbitrary results is too large, there should be objective standards.

>it literally only takes one well-placed bullet to end something like this. That's the beauty of firearms.

Shooting is pretty hard though, in my experience.. A rifle isn't too bad, but pistols are really a lot harder to accurately shoot than Hollywood makes it out to be, and on top of that I only have experience with shooting under controlled environments, fully calm and collected.. Something tells me I'd need more than 1 shot to shoot a man potentially firing back at me with a rifle, in a crowd, with loud music playing and what not.

>Well, he's shooting up a gay club
>huh... well we should probably go in. You know, in a bit.
>yeah, in a bit.
>...
>is Wendy's open this late?

>1 post by this ID

Options goes in all fields.

these are the same people who say the 2nd amendment is pointless because you cannot stand up to the government's 11 guys

Are liberals immune to cognitive dissonance?

Rune scimmy

I don't know if OP could ever recover from being BTFO this hard.