With the recent rounds of terrorist acts, I think it would be useful to discuss what PRACTICAL steps we can take against them. Let me start by saying I'd like to avoid discussing who's fault it all is. I'd like to avoid references to Obama, Bush, Democrats, Republicans, etc.
Here's an example of something I think would help. It was posted in another thread and got me to thinking along these lines.
But I also believe that a substantial increase in the number of armed, law-abiding citizens EVERYWHERE would reduce the response time of useful resistance to the terrorist act. It is not reasonable to rely entirely on police/SWAT responses. Armed citizens in the vicinity of the terrorist act have some chance of being able to respond in a way that reduces the terrorists opportunity to commit violence unopposed.
To enable this kind of response, I believe there are a few things that can be done:
1. Eliminate gun free zones. Law abiding citizens should be able to carry literally anywhere they can legally go. There are probably some places where there is already an armed, active security force in place, prisons for example. Disallowing general public to be armed in such places may be a reasonable limitation, but see a couple points below.
2. Actively encourage children and adults to learn about guns, to be unafraid of them, to be able to use one if necessary. Not suggesting mandatory armament. But let's stop teaching kids that guns are evil. Let's actively oppose groups who promote that agenda.
3. Establish training systems where interested citizens can learn more than just which end goes bang. Teach weapon retention. Promote use of higher level retention holsters. Teach situational awareness. Teach about subsonic/frangible munitions for use in aircraft.
I'm sure there are other things that could be done. Better vetting of immigrants. Elimination of the Diversity Lottery Visa program. What other PRACTICAL steps can be taken?
Here's an example of something I think would help. It was posted in another thread and got me to thinking along these lines.
I believe it is not practical to prevent terrorists from entering the US. I believe it is not practical to prevent Americans from deciding to agree with terrorists and become a home-grown terrorist. I believe it is not practical to prevent the injury/death of the first (or even the first few) victims of a terrorist attack.
But I also believe that a substantial increase in the number of armed, law-abiding citizens EVERYWHERE would reduce the response time of useful resistance to the terrorist act. It is not reasonable to rely entirely on police/SWAT responses. Armed citizens in the vicinity of the terrorist act have some chance of being able to respond in a way that reduces the terrorists opportunity to commit violence unopposed.
To enable this kind of response, I believe there are a few things that can be done:
1. Eliminate gun free zones. Law abiding citizens should be able to carry literally anywhere they can legally go. There are probably some places where there is already an armed, active security force in place, prisons for example. Disallowing general public to be armed in such places may be a reasonable limitation, but see a couple points below.
2. Actively encourage children and adults to learn about guns, to be unafraid of them, to be able to use one if necessary. Not suggesting mandatory armament. But let's stop teaching kids that guns are evil. Let's actively oppose groups who promote that agenda.
3. Establish training systems where interested citizens can learn more than just which end goes bang. Teach weapon retention. Promote use of higher level retention holsters. Teach situational awareness. Teach about subsonic/frangible munitions for use in aircraft.
I'm sure there are other things that could be done. Better vetting of immigrants. Elimination of the Diversity Lottery Visa program. What other PRACTICAL steps can be taken?