Cons: Should the police have had more guns to stop this shooting?

This is proof that more guns, since police are well armed does not protect anyone, and therefor their posession by civilians should be more seriously restricted.

It's also evident that these officers did not have adequate trainingh in dealing with weapons,

Hope this helps

I'm not a con. but guns don't ensure security or safety they are inanimate objects that an individual can use to help or harm. . Ask yourself was the shooter safe since he had a gun or was he also brought down by a bullet from a police men? Why do you wish to disarm police and why be so callous to this tragic event?

If the police are so incompetent that they cannot even stop a shooting in a friggin police booking station, what makes you think that they can protect you or anyone else from being shot up?

This incident will be looked at by police supervision as a mistake on the part of the officers inattention and lack of training!

Nothing more....nothing less!

Why do you pretend we can prevent every tragedy?

Police go through rigorous training to prevent a criminal from grabbing their weapon from them. Maybe you should focus on the failures of the cop who had his gun taken, and the criminal responsible, rather than focusing on a moronic insinuation that 'more guns would have been good in this situation.'

The police sometimes don't get there in time to stop anything, an armed civilian will be right there and stop it immediately..