Quote from nitro:
Thing is, I really don't quite understand what is going on inside these peoples brains anyway. It can't be the killing that is what sets them off. I mean think about it, if your goal was just to kill, why not do what Timothy McVey did and drive a truck full of explosive material next to the building and detonate it? Or if that doesn't work, there are probably equally horrible ways to take hundreds of lives, not just shoot at people one-by-one. How about being a suicide bomber, just strap a bunch of explosives to yourself and go to the school and blow yourself up?
This leads to the hypotheses that this person was living out a fantasy. It was not just the killing, it was the way he was going to kill. Or perhaps one takes skill and planning and premeditation, and the other one is something goes off in your brain where you snap, you grab a weapon near by...But then why dress in fatigues?
Do you see what I am getting at? It may simply be futile to arm the staff because people can be crazy in different ways. Still, not sure...
So, are we even asking the wrong question? How much protection does a gun really provide against people we don't even understand?
This post is a great argument for NOT restricting gun rights. You understand nitro, that there are many ways to commit mass murder. taking the guns away from the populace wouldn't in any way ensure that these events will stop, it would however ensure that the avg citizen has NO CHANCE in a situation like this. The ft hood shooter was active military for fucks sake.. should we take away their guns as well?
