Poll: HE'S GOT A GUN!!!

[Connosaurus Rex]

I would tackle the people nearest me to the floor and crawl to the closest shield, i.e. desk booth and such.
I would also take out my constitution approved Bear Arms and shoot him with them.

 

[Snowalker]

I'd act as a human sheild to the nearest person while also tring to calm the guy down by talking to him...

 

[I Stomp on Kittens]

Untill this happens to me I won't know.

 

[Katherine Kerensky]

Take the bullet and strangle the life out of him.
with Bear Hands!

Wow your so manly you have the hands of a bear?

damn right I have Bear Hands!

Take the bullet and strangle the life out of him.
with Bear Hands!

You have bear hands?! wow how'd you attain those?

sorry had to point that out.
-snip-

Do Not Doubt The Bear Hands!

Spoiler: Bear Hands

 

[Seanchaidh]

You are clearly under the assumption that something has to be a defensible plan for it to be an option, and in that way the options presented can influence the example. But this is apparently only true some of the time as it appears only to be true in the case of the option you picked. Your approach is inconsistent and the "logic" you are using is apparently a biased version no one has ever heard of. Your repeated claim is vacated.

Hey, guess what: you can't disarm someone if you are not within range to do so. Shocking, isn't it?

I think running would be a good idea so long as the gun is not pointed in my direction. In fact, I would run if I think I have more chance of getting out of there alive. But in open space, chances are I won't. In which case, I will proceed to attacking the person straight away, no question asked. It's all about charging while minimizing exposing of your vital organs. If I somehow made it to the guy, I will either try poke out the assailant's eyes, an elbow to the neck or jaw (good for stunning), or kneeing the crotch if it's a guy. Hopefully adrenaline will keep me going even if I got shot along the way. Once the person is down, then it's a matter of curb-stomping the guy, possibly in the wrist, knees, or head to make sure he stays down (or dead).
Yes, to death. I love my life. If anyone threaten my life, then I will have absolutely no reservation about putting out theirs.

I don't think you're going to be poking out eyes after being shot (probably multiple times). Even if you were unharmed, you'd still probably fail. Poking someone's eyes is difficult, and most of the people who talk about it couldn't even hit someone in the head with a 12 oz boxing glove.

1)You misquoted that second part as me.
2)Hey, guess what: you have these things called legs. You can move.

 

[Seanchaidh]

1)You misquoted that second part as me.

Blame the forum software. I just hit the quote button.

2)Hey, guess what: you have these things called legs. You can move.

And you will be shot. But hey, I'm sure it works in video games.

There is a big difference between "will be" and "will probably be". This is why logic doesn't help you. When you talk about multiple possible occurrences, just a single counterexample can destroy a logical necessity. If 1/10000 of the time trying to disarm someone by running at him from 30 meters worked, you can make no assumptions based on it being "impossible" to do that. But even if none of the time it worked, it still says "try to." And since you do have these things called legs, that means you can try to from anywhere. You realize I'm the same one who was saying you'd probably get shot trying to disarm someone, right? I mean, your responses are almost seeming robotic at this point as they are so uncomprehending of the context. Is that what people do when they're wrong?

 

[666DuFFY666]

Id shield a loved one, loved ones come first

 

[thevanguard]

well if he was in a place with light shelving i'd tip it on him and see if HE likes being crushed by coco-puffs

 

[Seanchaidh]

There is a big difference between "will be" and "will probably be". This is why logic doesn't help you. When you talk about multiple possible occurrences, just a single counterexample can destroy a logical necessity. If 1/10000 of the time trying to disarm someone by running at him from 30 meters worked, you can make no assumptions based on it being "impossible" to do that.

You want to risk your life when you have a 1 in 10000 chance of succeeding, even though you have better options at your disposal? Cool man, go for it.

But even if none of the time it worked, it still says "try to." And since you do have these things called legs, that means you can try to from anywhere.

And you will die.

You realize I'm the same one who was saying you'd probably get shot trying to disarm someone, right?

So?

Is that what people do when they're wrong?

Don't ask me. You're the expert on being wrong.

Is English your second language? You seem to have quite the inability to read with comprehension (most specifically with respect to considering versus advocating a possible course of action.) I've explained why you're wrong as well as anyone could have, it's really up to you to recognize it and change or continue wallowing in ignorance. I really have explained it quite clearly, you're just failing (or refusing) somewhere along the line to understand what I've quite clearly written. You've missed the point so basically that I am unable to continue the discussion without having to teach elementary English. I don't want to do that: you're on your own.

Apologies to gof22, I'm probably done.

 

[Some bullets]

i'd probably just try to say somthing really cool like dirty harry, then likly get shot, but hey at least i had one dirty harry moment in my life

lol

 

[Seanchaidh]

Is English your second language? You seem to have quite the inability to read with comprehension (most specifically with respect to considering versus advocating a possible course of action.)

Actually, your last post was just nich-incomprehensible babble, so that might have made it a bit challenging for me to comprehend it.

I've explained why you're wrong

Not really.

I really have explained it quite clearly, you're just failing (or refusing) somewhere along the line to understand what I've quite clearly written.

I would not use the word 'clearly.'

That's why this has to end. You're obviously incapable of grasping even the simplest ideas of logic. You've misunderstood me at almost every turn for the last few posts. A person with normal brain function could have followed me, I'm quite sure. Or at least they could have followed themselves and figured it out. I'm honestly bewildered as to how you could have failed to get it.

 

[Bat Vader]

I love how many people said "try to disarm him". No you bloody wouldn't.

It's almost as funny as the "I'd pull out a gun and shoot him!"

...when he has a gun pointed at you. He must be on horse tranquilisers to not be able to pull a trigger faster than you can pull a gun and pull a trigger. >_>

At this point, I'm going to go with "I'd dropkick him through a window and into a street where he would get hit by a sixteen wheeler. Or cast fire". Because, well I think it's as realistic as the gun part.

I would paint bullseye on my shirt.

Now we're talking. It's just like Xbox...only you die.

Try to run up to him as fast as i can while dodging a bit to make targeting hard for him. When i run up to him,grab his arm,kick him in the balls,take the gun,throw the clip out,shoot in the air once,and then pistol-whip him 10-15 times for being stupid.

I don't think he'll be able to hit head or vital organs even if he DOES hit me.

Yeah, you're a ninja. Thats why you're on a gaming forum website.

I lol'd. I won't lie.

I also lol'd.

 

[Orange Monkey]

Pull out my P-19 of course.

 

[coyotejoe]

If he has a gun, I'm just gonna go back to eating my lunch, after all we all need our vitamins A's, B's, and C's

A cookie if someone can tell me where that is from...

 

[Seanchaidh]

That's why this has to end. You're obviously incapable of grasping even the simplest ideas of logic. You've misunderstood me at almost every turn for the last few posts. A person with normal brain function could have followed me, I'm quite sure. Or at least they could have followed themselves and figured it out. I'm honestly bewildered as to how you could have failed to get it.

Your posts are incoherent. Build a bridge and get over it, or learn to express yourself clearly.

You can claim that, but you're wrong. At a certain point, it ceases to be my responsibility that you cannot understand. You've passed that point. Even disagreeing with me about this... you're stupid: build a bridge and get over it.