Good Guy With Gun Stops Shooting
- Thread starter wvkeeper(HN)
- Start date
Just to argue, you went full retard
How did the good guy with a gun stop a shooting if 2 people were shot.
ask the third guy that was about to get shot. You damn idiot.
EG up in here wishing people were dead just to be cantankerous.
So utilizing your brilliant logic, how did Obama's Iran's deal for peace and stopping them getting nukes work if Iran still has nuclear capability and supporting terrorist organizations like Hamas?
This is great even your post says the armed citizen shot the guy outside. The dude went in a restaurant shot some people up then left. He was not in the process of shooting additional people. So there is no third guy Herdman. But continue making shit up.
Sadly a mother and daughter celebrating a birthday were shot
So, you know for sure he was done shooting people? Are you really that damn stupid?
You cons having trouble with another simple question. Here it is again....
"How did the good guy with a gun stop a shooting if 2 people were shot."
"How did the good guy with a gun stop a shooting if 2 people were shot."
You and the preacher are the ones making assumptions here. The guy walks in a restaurant, shoots two people, then leaves the restaurant. If he planned on shooting more, would it not be a hell of a lot easier to stay inside the restaurant plucking people off instead of going outside and leaving them?
Christ, you guys try so hard.
Hint: outside the restaurant.
So he had already left the restaurant. Sounds to me like he had already shot all the people he wanted to shoot.
Or maybe he saw the guy coming at HIM with a gun and ran outside. Most shooters are cowards.
The title of the thread is "Good Guy With Gun Stops Shooting". He stopped shooting after he shot the perp.
So, you know how murderers and nut jobs think? Really? We try hard? You libjobs are saying you know what this guy was going to do. You guys are so smart, just ask you.
I guess some of these folks here knew for certain that the crazed individual wasn't going to go elsewhere and kill additional people. I mean, we've certainly never seen that before, right YAGs, right cunty?
No, never, ever. The guy was probably getting ready to go help feed starving children and help old women cross the street.
We've seen that more than enough. I'm glad someone put lead in his ass.
I know you can't read this, due to being a puss, and having me on ignore...but, you're one dumb sum-da-biotch. Do you think that the 'good guy with a gun' had walked into Louie's, and was waiting for a guy to waltz in and start shooting people? I mean, for nobody to get shot, the 'good guy with a gun' would have had to be sitting in the restaurant, with his gun in hand, fully prepared to shoot the villain, prior to him getting off a few shots. I serious don't know why herdman wastes his time with you. I'm guessing arguing with you is just a way of him passing time.
Wtf are you talking about? 3 people were shot and 2 people shot and killed him.
You're just a pure idiot. You're arguing that a good guy with a gun stopped a shooting in an incident in which 2 people were in fact shot.
Then you're attempting to predict that the shooter wasn't done and would in fact have shot someone else. Not too many people are more stupid than a conservative clairvoyant. moron
Then you're attempting to predict that the shooter wasn't done and would in fact have shot someone else. Not too many people are more stupid than a conservative clairvoyant. moron
I'm still waiting for an answer as to how the good guy with a gun stopped a shooting wherein 2 people were shot with real guns and real bullets.
EG acting in favor of pre-crime not the most shocking thing.
And why reading comprehension is important:
"Police say the two men potentially stopped a deadly assault on the restaurant."
So, even your own source says "potentially." You, and clearly the police, have no idea if the guy was going to continue shooting.
But lets bring some common sense into this - a guy trained in guns starts shooting in a restaurant. He only hits three people. Lets say these two "good guys with guns" were Carl Lewis' identical twin. Pretend they had their sprinting shoes on and were in starting position once the first shot rang out. There was no delay, no looking around to see where the shooting was coming from, no hesitation to get their keys out of their pocket, no pause to try to remember where they were in the restaurant compared with where they parked their cars. Just pretend they sprinted out at the split second the first shot rang out.
They then made it to their cars, were able to unlock their trunk, were able to get their guns, and were able to sprint to the side of the building the shooter was on, and get shots off enough to kill him.
Even if they were prepared and expecting this to happen, what do you think the very minimum would be for all of this? 30 seconds at the very minimum? Now, in an enclosed restaurant, how many people could a trained shooter hit if he really continued to shoot during that entire time? Many more than three, right?
Again, you guys are the ones making assumptions. Even your own source with the police uses the word "potentially" when referring to others possibly being hit.
This is a case study in arguing for arguing's sake.
Thank god there was a brown guy with a gun to shoot the crazy white guy. Wait.... that’s not the way this is suppose to work.
Semantics...who cares? A good guy shot and killed a bad guy. The bad guy won't be shooting anyone again.
God bless you good guy.
God bless you good guy.
I'm no expert like countryroads, but i think she's doing that double handy wrong
