The 'good guy with a gun' theory is a myth.

[FortKnox]

Or so says this army vet. But, we all know thats bull####.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-m-army-veteran-gun-owner-good-guy-gun-theory-ncna821976

The 'good guy with a gu

[Garufa]

Another heterosexual, white male hit piece as clearly illustrated in the third paragraph from a “genderqueer” dolt.

Edited November 19, 2017 by Garufa

[ArmyBrat61]

Ohhhkkkay..... I read the article.....sounds like an opinion from someone the Army, clearly, didn't issue one to......... genderqueer...what is this country and my Army coming to.

Edited November 19, 2017 by ArmyBrat61

[bersaguy]

Ok, so in the article the school shooting was mentioned and it was stated that the bad guy doing the shooting was shot and killed by police officers. Am I missing something or are Police Officers  not good guys with guns? Yea they responded after the fact but what would ahve happened had they not showed up? Same way with the Church shooting. How many more people would that maniac killed if it were not for the good guy with a gun shooting him as he exited the church and even persued him along with another good guy. There was another church 3 miles down the road. I think the guy that wrote this article has an issue wih his elevator not making it to the top floor, maybe not even leaving the basement.

To reply to Brats statement! It's damn sure not the Military I served in............

[Sidecarist]

At the end his point is that individuals can't be trusted... I agree I don't trust a stranger I'll keep my eye on them untill Im sure of the situation. This doesn't mean I'm afraid of them, just aware.

He wants to live in the fantasy world where everyone is trustworthy and safe because they have been neutered. I suggest he move to where ever awful place that is and leave us alone...

I'm glad he's no longer in the service.Those that serve in our military shouldn't have the burden of carrying his weight.

[Omega]

Thousands of hours respecting the gun?  LOfingL, I wonder what his DI is thinking right about now? Seems like training failure to me, specially regarding the freaking oath he spoke out loud at least once, maybe they should start spending more time explaining what it truly means:

Quote

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

 

[Dolomite_supafly]

It infuriates me that the person writing this article is a veteran. He obviously was not exposed to the same Army I was, probably because he alienated himself with his "I'm gay, look at me I'm gay" attitude he probably had. He IS the reason why people's sexual orientation should not be discussed in the military. I am sure there have been gays in the military since day one but the difference now is all the other soldiers must acknowledge it and accept it, some will refuse to leading to significant problems.

I can, and will, promise anyone that I would have zero problems shooting someone who is trying to kill innocent people. I always try to be prepared for that.

To me taking that oath was a commitment for life, both in length as well as sacrifice. Obviously this genderqueer does not feel the same way.

[DaveTN]

This is the same goof ball that threw a tantrum about Sherriff David Clarke’s uniform.  He doesn’t seem to know much about the issues he writes about.

He talks about becoming comfortable with killing like he’s a hardened combat vet. I could be wrong, but it doesn’t appear he was in combat.

It’s a shame an idiot like this can try to drag everyone through the mud just because he isn’t feeling real good about himself.

[GeorgeandSugar]

It infuriates me that the person writing this article is a veteran. He obviously was not exposed to the same Army I was, probably because he alienated himself with his "I'm gay, look at me I'm gay" attitude he probably had. He IS the reason why people's sexual orientation should not be discussed in the military. I am sure there have been gays in the military since day one but the difference now is all the other soldiers must acknowledge it and accept it, some will refuse to leading to significant problems.
I can, and will, promise anyone that I would have zero problems shooting someone who is trying to kill innocent people. I always try to be prepared for that.
To me taking that oath was a commitment for life, both in length as well as sacrifice. Obviously this genderqueer does not feel the same way.

"To me taking that oath was a commitment for life, both in length as well as sacrifice."

I took the same oath. Did not end when I retired. Confuses some. I tried explaining that to a family member who sees guns as evil and mire gun control is necessary. I explained that the police arrest criminals and investigate crimes. The police don't provide personal security protection. Moreover, calling 911 is no guarantee that police have any duty to respond. Provided case history to back-up my assertion. Family member perplexed. Went onto say, guns are a tool. Tools can be good or bad depending on who is on the other end. Focus on the person. Evil exists in the world. Self-defense is a natural right. Family member speechless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk