Let me start by saying this was originally a comment to Uncle’s post but eventually I turned it into a post because honestly this needs to be out in front.
Now why would I make a post out of this? Because last night on Facebook, god knows where at this point, someone left a comment along the following lines:
That was because it was an off duty officer! They’re tested so such a high standard that no mere citizen could qualify. That’s why this armed individual was able to stop this criminal!
For those who don’t feel like clicking the link, here’s the video shown in that post, which gives more details:
So lets bust this whole thing open shall we? First up we have statistics showing police vs. civilian response. 14.3 deaths during a police response to 2.3 deaths when armed civilians response. Admittedly a limited sample pool given you’re more likely to be struck by lightning. Moving forward though there’s the argument that an armed citizen will more likely hit bystanders than the police. Lets compare and contrast two videos shall we?
NYPD score, 1 bad guy, 9 innocent civilians. A block of “highly trained” individuals.
Old guy with a CCW score: 2 injured assailants, no civilian casualties.
Again, why do we want more than 10 rounds in a magazine? The idea of a one shot stop is a myth. The idea that police are some how superior is a myth. The idea that a gun free zone will some how make you safe is a myth. The idea that an armed citizen cannot take care of themselves is a myth, one easily disproven I might add.
Why is it one side of this debate consistently argues myths instead of facts. The reason the national news doesn’t cover this is because it doesn’t fit their narrative of myths.