Do you think he should’ve just drawn on the kid rather than try to dive on him? Seems in the state the shooter was in he would’ve shot him if he had pulled his weapon, not surrendered. Should he have just shot him while he was down? What was tactically the best option? And legally?

I’m not sure whether it’s a weakness or a strength that for someone on the left, the non-lethal option was what he went for. You just know any CHUD would’ve shot first asked questions later, as proven by the fash baby.

  • CarlTheRedditor [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Here’s my question: Would it be a good or a bad idea to come with a gun but no ammunition?

    Awful. Terrible. No good, very bad. You'd basically have all the downsides of carrying (attracts attention, legality issues) with none of the benefits.