Phatscotty wrote:Whats the question? I think it would have been great if someone there did have a gun, but why you would assume everyone or anyone should be forced to carry a gun is a conclusion I will not be joining with you.
EDITED (original statement was that Phattscotty started the thread on guns in the camp.. in fact, I did it, I had forgotten).
Well, you have made multiple comments to the effect that guns are not legal in Norway and how it would be different if someone had only had a gun, etc. You ignored anything anyone said about both training and pure chance being critical. You gave an example, but it was of someone specifically trained..and in a hostage situation, not a random gun incident.
Apparently you want to use this incident to prove something about guns, but you never really said what that was.
In our country and Norway, people can choose to carry a gun or not. Those who carry a gun in the US are more likely (statistically) to be a victim than victor, for various reasons. Those There is a slight "blip" iin some data because people who live in violent areas are more likely to feel they should have a gun, but are also more likely to be subjected to violance. However, even aside from that, the fact is that more people have guns than have the training to truly use them. Of those who have the training, only a few have the training to use them in direct armed conflict situations..and that even includes many in the military, because using an automatic rifle in a company, with back up is quite a different story than using a pistol against an armed person, particularly with civilians around.
