Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ETD
I fear that I must agree with our young pacifist the shaggster. If he had a gun then there would not have been the three people left alive who peed in their pants and will probably think very hard about pulling that stunt again (hopefully while being pounded behind bars  ). Again, in my ideal world, the warriors with the most skills win and no bystanders get shot by strays. There'll be blood and guts and limbs flying around but the good guys go home. Just a dream... |
If that guy was able to mortally injure two of them with a pocket knife without them firing a shot, if he had had a .40 cal, he would have dropped all five of them there with far less risk to himself and surrounding people. There was no guaranty that, when Autry counter-attacked with the foot and knife, the armed criminals weren't going to start shooting randomly endagering people all over the place. With Autry armed with a gun, more criminals would have been more likely to die but no one else would have been. It would have ended quckly and decisively and with less risk to Autry. In the end, he came out on top, but the firearm would have made it more certain.
No big deal about the dead criminals. Death is what you deserve and should expect when you threaten another person's life in your desire to do criminal mischief. Not all life is valuable. The lives of people who enjoy killing and raping are not valuable. The more of them who die the better because that means that less good people with families get killed and raped.