Julian Castro, the Obama HUD Secretary, not to be confused with his brother who doxxed Trump donors in San Antonio has decided that concealed carry has failed.

Since the shooter was not stopped or deterred by a Texan with CCW, concealed carry needs to be done away with.

This is part of the Leftist/Progressive mentality that anything short of absolute perfection is terrible and must be done away with.

Concealed carry has saved thousands of lives.  The CDC has determined that the number of defensive gun uses in the US is between 500,000 and three million per year.

But it didn’t stop this shooting, therefore it’s useless, and so the government should ban it and ban guns.  Not that a gun ban would do anything to reduce crime as places like Chicago have shown us.

Because some random Texan CCW didn’t stop this mass shooting we all have to lose our gun rights.


Spread the love

By J. Kb

12 thoughts on “Concealed Carry failed to stop the last mass shooting so it should be eliminated”
  1. And while he was talking crap:

    Concealed Carrier Thwarts Kidnapping And Sexual Assault After Noticing Woman In Distress, Holds Suspect At Gunpoin


    1. “Progressive” response: The suspect did not, in fact, succeed in kidnapping and assaulting the alleged victim. Therefore, the CCW didn’t prevent the crime, because the crime was never completed.

      And so we can do away with legal CCW; it cannot have affected the outcome of your example.

  2. And no CCW will ever stop a “mass shooting” by left standards. It is actually impossible.

    For it to be a mass shooting 4 or more people must be killed and it can’t be “gang related”. 1 of those can be the shooter. (this was a change in recent past, in order to get more mass shootings)
    For a CCW to stop a mass shooting, the CCW must keep the number of dead from reaching 4.

    So, if no CCW involved, CCW didn’t stop the shooting.
    If CCW stops the shooting after 4 are dead, the CCW didn’t stop the mass shooting.
    If the CCW stops the shooting before 4 are dead, it wasn’t a mass shooting.

    Therefore it is impossible for a CCW to ever stop a mass shooting, by leftist standards.

      1. Didn’t this start as a traffIc stop? Armed police didn’t stop the mass shooter the first half dozen times, we should get rid of them.

    1. And, when that logic is not applied, they pull out the “civilian” card. No civilian has ever stopped a mass shooting.

      Well, what about _______?
      Nope, that CCW person that stopped the shooter was former military, off duty cop, or retired cop. Not a civilian, does not count.

  3. “This is part of the Leftist/Progressive mentality that anything short of absolute perfection is terrible and must be done away with.”

    Read this:
    Or watch Evan Sayat give the speech the book is based on here:

    It makes EXACTLY that point.
    “The outcomes of a capitalist economy are not equal for everyone, therefore, it must be destroyed”
    “The US is not a perfectly equal society, therefore, it must be destroyed.”
    etc… etc… etc…

    The fact that they do not have a system that is better to replace it with does not cross their minds.

  4. “This is part of the Leftist/Progressive mentality that anything short of absolute perfection is terrible and must be done away with.”

    Except, of course, things they support. Then it’s always worth giving it another try, a little more effort… It will get there, even if it’s a complete disaster now you just need to have faith…

  5. As a thought experiment, suppose lawful CCWs had stopped every attempted mass shooting. What would the “Progressive” line of thinking look like?

    Here’s my guess: First, as Therefore points out above, since every potential mass shooting was stopped before it met the arbitrary definition, there were no mass shootings, so CCWs haven’t stopped squat.

    Second, because CCWs could fail to stop one, at some future undetermined date, it still needs to be banned. Even a perfect record of success isn’t enough to save what “Progressives” don’t like. If there’s a possibility of failure, no matter how remote, it must be banned.

    Note that only applies to things “Progressives” don’t like. The exact opposite happens for what they do like. Socialism, “gun control”, rent control, universal basic income, single-payer health care, etc…. It doesn’t matter. Even a perfect record of failure isn’t enough to condemn what “Progressives” like. If there’s a possibility of success, no matter how remote, it must be mandated.

    If it weren’t for double standards, “Progressives” wouldn’t have any standards at all.

Login or register to comment.