Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
^ it’s okay I will not hold it against you,or the Canadian peanut gallery.

It is logic,somebody is shooting at you,would you have a better survival rate if ....

A: you are armed and can return fire

B: you are forced to run faster then the bullets.

You cannot expect or depend on the police to be there in less then 30 seconds,it is no different then if somebody breaks into your house,call the police and hope they will be there when?

Why do you think that they are picking soft target locations.

Because they know the intended victims will not be able or will not fight back.

Now they are saying it has nothing to do with being mentally unstable,like it is sane to go shoot a bunch of people that are unable to defend themselves.
You left out C) The gunman doesn't exist, cause we didn't let him get a gun or ammo in the 1st place.

Most effective strategy ever.

Proven to work throughout the world.

Toronto, a city of 3,000,000 has 32 homicides so far this year, that's a pace of 58 for the year.

Remind me what the homicide rate is down there?

Right, even El Paso, considered once of the safest cities in the US has a homicide rate in a normal year almost 3 per 100,000 residents.

By contrast, Toronto has a rate of 1.9 homicides per 100,000 residents.

That compares with 5.3 in the U.S. overall.

One strategy works, the other does not.