TexasCHLforum.com

Yes, it is a deterrent. For the same reason it is a deterrent to crime in general. Look at the attack in Giddings. Two jihadis with semi-auto AK's drove to that Draw Muhammed exhibit intending to kill people. Only they got killed instead. If you think that result didn't give others back at their home a clue then you are dreaming. Others might look at that and think they will do it better, but the deterrent is there.

These guys don't ONLY want to die. If that were the case, they can commit suicide anytime they wish. They want to kill infidels and probably have that feeling of power over others like some violent criminals. If you fight back and prevent them from doing some or all of that, it takes away from their moment. If all four airliners had crashed into the ground on 9/11 instead of hitting buildings, it would still have been a tragedy, but not near what it actually was. Their success encourages more terrorism. Our success in defense discourages it and can also change the media story.


I would clarify that it isn't necessarily concealed carry alone that is the deterrent. It is successful defense against their attempts to kill innocent people. Concealed carry is a means to an end for us. The Marines in France a while back did not have guns, but they still fought back and were successful.

Ahem. The airman, national guardsman, and the last one might have been a Marine, I can't remember.



Air Power! (on the train)

carlson1 wrote:It is not a deterrent because they are seeking death. Them dying is how they are able to reach their paradise with 72 virgins.

What it can do is reduce the casualties of the civilians.

BTW, What if they are wrong and it is 72 Virginians? Stomping their "bodies" into pieces, and then doing it again on into eternity.

Personally I do not think it would be a deterrant to an attack by jihadists, but in the long run there will be far less casualties when we do not have to wait for response because the response is already there.