Moderator: Van Canna
"Very little!"Van Canna wrote:Interesting indeed, Laird...hard to argue against your views.
And what do we tell people when they ask about our study of a martial art?
Ever hear this? ''So you want to have guns for self protection and you study a martial art...what are you afraid of ??"
The debate will be steered no matter what you say to position you as being irrational, emotionally challenged, lacking in interpersonal skills, and as having violent tendencies.
In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea of armed citizens getting involved.
One of the major factors will be the cognitive appraisal that is going on about the event while experiencing the simultaneous physical effects. That cognitive appraisal may make a tremendous difference in the response in terms of the emotional reaction and contingent problem solving and decision making abilities and consequent action tendencies.
Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 4 guests