What's handicapped is you putting political assassination in the context of gun-free zones. The concept of a 0 gun tolerance policy in a gay bar in Orlando is a lot different than armed bodyguards in a government building. You're talking about making it impossible for a single man to commit a murder during a Self Delete mission. That's handicapped.
I was directly responding to Planr, who stated that a heavily armed crowd would stop murders. I stated that it's easy to pull out a gun and fire before anyone knows what's going on. Keep in mind--this is a hypothetical world in which everyone has a gun and there are no gun-free zones, as he suggested.
I guarantee you a man who's willing to die trying to kill a senator in a room full of armed bodyguards isn't going to give the slightest forget about your gun-free zones or firearm regulation. He's going to go down the road to the nearest gun-show, walk outside into the parking lot where there are bunch of people selling unaccountable weapons, and make an illegal purchase for one of the +330,000,000 firearms in the streets of America.
Except he doesn't need to a buy a gun, he already has one. And he
wont give a forget about gun-free zones, because they don't exist.
If it 'exclusively applies to civilians' why are you spouting stuff about local senators and bodyguards? The reason why gun-free zones works in government buildings is because there's generally 3 armed men within 5ft of the doorman checking for guns.
Yea, never disagreed with this. Don't quite know what you think said here. You don't need bodyguards to detect guns, just a metal detector. You'll need trained guns to get rid of shooting guns though.
Expecting every public establishment to hire armed security is handicapped. As a matter of fact in the context of a gay-bar in Orlando, it's against federal law to have an armed bodyguard inside the establishment (where alcohol is being sold). A "gun free zone" is just some stuff that makes people feel safe, it's security theater, it doesn't actually do anything besides disarm the people who actually didn't plan on walking through the door shooting.
Yea, I never said that. I said that while an armed crowd wouldn't stop a killer with a plan, a gun-free free zone could.
You've completely misinterpreted my argument and responded to it through an incredible strawman fallacy.
