You asked a valid question, to which I replied. Rereading my post, you’ll find where all this desired kill-r-be-killed documentation is hiding. They are there, throughout this nation’s history, but they are, at best, spurious.

Why?

Well, the NRA commercials seen are not designed for the meek. They are not designed for the crowd mentality. The meek like the crowds, they like the safety of the herd. The shooters are oft-times loners, or keepers of a tight group of like-minded associates. For the most part — I’d guess somewhere around 95 to 98 percent — they are law-abiding citizens. Some, though, are law-abiding, but only up to a certain breaking point. a few don’t even need a breaking point, because they’re already there.

As for my little story, an unarmed security guard, as stipulated, is a professional witness, nothing more. Going through an FBI background check and the three-hour unarmed security orientation does not make a person a cop, no matter how you choose to cut it. The courts system is their only deterrent to crime. The theory holds that anyone who is seen to have shot a cop, or shot anyone else, is to be considered uncaring as to how many others are shot, civilian or otherwise, or who witnesses the event. Armed, he/she is now a very dangerous person, one who has crossed that line of no return. He/she needs to be brought down, hopefully alive to face justice in the courts. In the case I presented, the perpetrator was wounded and then arrested.

That to which I’m referring is an armed civilian who intervened in a mass shooting situation. Now, that person would rightfully be considered a hero, and deserving of the NRA billboard, which would be put up as a ‘community service’. And the NRA uses that scenario as a good reason for continued liberal gun laws.

However, despite those liberal gun ownership laws that situation doesn’t seem to have occurred. Despite an average of 20 mass shooting events each and every year, year in and year out. You’re right, though, the presence of policemen and security guards does seem to have an inhibitory effect upon the more egregious forms of anti-social behaviors.

Two security guards — not the trained armed and dangerous couple one might expect from Hollywood, but of the do the job and go home set — pick up the officer’s weapon and down the gunner.

This was handed me during orientation week at Burns Security, many, many years ago. The unarmed guard is not supposed to do what the above did, but in this case the result was a capture, and no charges filed against the heroes.

This was a local story, and that’s where it remained. The general public, and by that I do mean the media, does not go for the out-of-town hero story, other than for quick headline blurbs. If you want the details, you’ll just have to go to all the libraries and dig.

As for the billboard statement, it might be considered in bad vigilante taste, and not necessarily what the demons at NRA are looking for.

And that may just be their opinion, wishful thinking, maybe simply propaganda, nonsense, bullshit. If it were true, one would think that there would be some heroes out there who have successfully intervened in a mass shooting. I’m just trying to find those individuals

Certainly there are enough mass shootings to have created a sufficient database to test their idea. It’s either demonstrably true, or it isn’t.

Personally, I know of only one deterrent to crime, and that would be a strong, interacting community police force — you know, those guys in the patrol cars.

Well, we have very liberal gun ownership laws. And the shootings have continued. About 20 per year.

Does anyone know of a mass shooting which was terminated by a private citizen carrying a gun? Does liberal gun ownership really act to end mass shootings?