Doug_Nightmare
Active member
https://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/...s-intended-prevent-mass-shootings-case-series Free, full text. No teaser
Are you suggesting that denying the GVRO would provide the only proof that the threats were credible? They weren't carried out. How much more proof do you need?Quick scan: the authors seem to imply that 21 incidents were prevented by GVRO. That can only be true if they can show that the threats would have been carried out absent GVROs.
Try as I might, I cannot grok how you arrive at this response to my post.Are you suggesting that denying the GVRO would provide the only proof that the threats were credible? They weren't carried out. How much more proof do you need?
If you are confronted by an individual who presents a credible threat of death or grievous bodily harm, do you defend yourself with lethal force (a very severe form of a GVRO) or do you try to prove he will carry out his threat first? Your successful self defense will stop the threat, but will you be able to show that he would have attacked you if you had chosen to not act?
Does the above apply to a cop who is acting unlawfully?...
If you are confronted by an individual who presents a credible threat of death or grievous bodily harm, do you defend yourself with lethal force (a very severe form of a GVRO) or do you try to prove he will carry out his threat first? Your successful self defense will stop the threat, but will you be able to show that he would have attacked you if you had chosen to not act?