>You completely missed my point. To be clear, I disagree with those who argue the Batman attack could've been stopped. That murderer was not only armed to the teeth, but was heavily covered in body armor. It is not reasonable to suspect that anyone with a pistol would've stopped him. If there happened to be an armed expert marksman in the audience maybe, but again, that's not reasonable to assume.
>
>My posting was directly in response to your statement :
>
>Does a month go by without one of these news stories?
>
>The point was that you don't hear about these because it's not "newsworthy" to hear about a potential tradgedy averted because someone had the ability to take matters into their own hands and protect themselves and their family. These types of events happen, literally every day and either go unreported entirely or only locally mentioned in a 30 second blip on the nightly news or a parapgraph on the back page of the local paper.
>
>>Lots of people do make this argument, though. It's exactly what was said after the Batman massacre in Colorado earlier this year -- if some of the audience had been armed they could have saved some lives.
>>
>>Personally I don't think 300 million people going around armed to the teeth is a great idea. Got a problem? Start firing!
>>
>>>What a pathetic exemple to justify the right to carry/possess firearms. You should keep quiet about your conviction on this subject today, in respect to all the young victims and their family.
>>>
>>>>Not a day goes by without one of these stories.
>>>>http://wtaq.com/news/articles/2012/dec/06/concealed-carry-helps-appleton-man-during-road-rage-incident/

Let's just say I do not agree with your "solution" of more guns. IMO it is pure imagination to believe more guns lead to fewer tragedies.

See you in more cheerful threads, Jake. You already know you are one of my favorites here. We are just in different solar systems on this topic.