That last line is both funny and scary.

After WWII, there was a massive movement from the farms to the cities.

City life provided no opportunities for the parents to take their children our shooting in the lower 40.

The job of "safety' was turned over to the police.

In the mid 60's a young woman was raped repeatedly, then murdered.
A very large number of people heard her cries and screams, yet none called the police, or made an effort to save her.

i have no doubts that, during those hours before her murder, law enforcement passed within hearing.

THAT encouraged the criminal element, and they haven't been held in check since.

Police now view the job as filling out paperwork AFTER the fact.

IF a person is silly enough to want to PROVIDE THEIR OWN PROTECTION they face endless obstacles from government to ARM THEMSELVES.
IF they do succeed and actually USE THEIR WEAPON, there will be endless criminal charges for shooting a democrat voter.

This would be my option if there was some distance between. If you are armed, you can of course grab some cover and make sure the nutter is put down if the other armed citizen doesn't get it done.

And if its something with decent mass, well you have an improvised club :)

True unfortunately. Our society wasn't like this years ago, prior to the mid-60s for instance. People took more responsibility for their own situations then.

Yes.

Separately from shooters, it seems to me the world has become a place of a lot more "observers" that actors, and this has emboldened the nutter and criminals. The more of us that act when something is wrong, the healthier our society will be. Presently our immune system is just the police (antibiotics) and a handful of white blood cells.

Even if throwing that shopping bag with a $500 dress is all you have, because if you're dead, the dress loses a lot of its value.

If you are the initial target there is no effective option other than engage them. Attack them as viciously and "dirty" as you can to disable or take out completely as fast as possible.

COG - Only to pick at a nit. Otherwise, just so. So says another 70+ geezer.

Do you often rely on "OUT OF CONTEXT", to refute ideas?

And it WOULD "Make the country safer".

Criminals do well when their victims have no defense.
THAT changes when the odds are that either the VICTIM or someone nearby, WILL BE ARMED.
They RELY ON FEAR as their backup weapon.
When the fear belongs to them, they quit and go home.

COG - I would salute that as a strong start. The notion of 2nd Amendment open carry might then make the country safer. Only the owning of the "urge to put some morons out of my misery." gives me pause.

From the beginning of mankind, all the children in the various clusters/clans, children were always in the presence of the most dvanced weapons available.

They knew everything there was to know about the handling, care, and Usage of the weapons.
In this country, when the farmers moved into the cities, they NEED TO BE
AWARE of all the possible dangers was relaxed and the 'police' were
hired to KEEP THE STREETS SAFE.
Now the worst of all predators roam the streets 24/7/365 and the People
have been DISARMED and do not have a clue on being THEIR OWN FIRST RESPONDER!

Even if the nearest cop is 9 seconds away, he is ALREADY 30 SECONDS TOO LATE!

Whether the government likes it or not, EACH INDIVIDUAL is 100% responsible for their own SELF DEFENSE and the defense of his Family, Neighborhood,
Community and State!
No level of government, nor any branch of government, has any power or
authority to alter the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, and that includes
the supreme court.
When the supreme court hears a weapons related case, it is CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED to whether or not the law in question 'INFRINGES" UPON THE rights of the people!

They do not have the luxury of considering if the law is 'common sense' because "liberal common sense" is an impossibility!
At this point in time, the ONLY workable solution is:

MANDATORY FIREARMS EDUCATION K-12.
Mandatory because even gun haters NEED TO KNOW how to handle a firearm the may find, or NEED TO USE.
EVERY CHILD should know how to safely handle any firearm in case they find a
loaded handgun in a toy bin at their local Target store.
K- because it seems that some careless parents failed to teach their own
children how to NOT KILL THEMSELVES with firearms left out, or
accessible.
1-5, hands on experience with safe handling and usage, including live fire
with daisy lever action BB-guns under close supervision.
I was shooting at 5 and 6, with my own rifle at 8. 70+ and still haven't
managed to harm any person with a firearm, despite the urge to put some
morons out of my misery.
Competitive shooting classes, clubs and Teams as a sporting event.
The training at all levels can begin immediately because there are a few
million fully trained Veterans that know more about firearms safety than
99% of the drivers ed teacher know about starting the car.
The biggest benefit is the necessary teaching of the WHY the 2nd Amendment even exists.
The Military gets fully trained Marksmen, the Law Enforcement has fully
trained recruits, as well as an Armed and Ready Militia should the need
arise.
A very large percentage of People would take on the responsibility of their own Self Defense.
The numbers of People on the streets at any given time that may, or may not
be carrying would be a daunting prospect for the criminal element.
And Lastly, the Voters would stop electing gun control nuts because they
WILL KNOW THE TRUTH and WHY those politicians want the People HELPLESS
BEFORE A RUTHLESS DICTATOR OF THE POLITICIANS CHOOSING.

Actually, I refined the skills my father taught me by going to Girl Scout Camp where we took our .22 rifles.

We need large numbers of live fire training centers.
My monthly range practice is too infrequent and not enough.

You knock the cellphone out of the guys hand so that the leftist idiots who watch the video won't be able to claim that, somehow, the armed citizen was the aggressor.

I would hit the deck, drop the bastard behind me with my own piece.....then I would shake the hand of the Armed Citizen who was prepared to come to my defense......while we watch the bastard who I downed bleed out. Then, we call 911.

I would act as his spotter letting him know where his round hit if he missed and continue giving information on the target.

No harm, no foul. or is it fowl...? G

That's what I get for taking a moment out of a serious activity that uses a different section of my brain. :-) Apparently, I missed the "switchover" moment.

Wouldn't be the first time I missed the mark....and I'm sure not the last.

That was PURE SARCASM aimed at ANTI GUN types that want weapons OUT of the hands of Citizens because a politician told them to believe their crap.

At VMI where the shooter lined the students up against the wall, and asked them a question before shooting them.

WHY, when they heard him stop to reload, didn't they attack him?

They should have started throwing textbooks and everything else they had handy to keep him off balance.

In a mall, shopping bags or anything else to distract him so someone can close and engage the shooters.

first - draw my own weapon
second - take appropriate stance/position and be ready for anything.
third - think if there's one shooter, there's probably two (always think 1=2; 2=3, and its never firecrackers)

I find it interesting that neither my numeric keyboard or top row of numerals put out keystrokes....

the should have been one hundred miles.

One long standing rule of active engagement in this type of scenario is to get the first shot off quickly. You may not hit the target where you want, but the shooter will be distracted and unnerved, giving you time to make the second shot more accurate.

"Scream at the Armed Citizen to put his gun away and wait for the police?" Seriously? Why would I want to stop him - or distract him - from killing an active shooter (at least as far as I can tell)? Plus, I am not a screamer.

"Or do you throw out a quick Prayer the ARMED Citizen does not miss?"
I don't pray. A prayer and about $4.00 will actually get me something at Starbux. Also, I consider groveling in front of people OR an imaginary being to be undignified.

Of all the answers, Thoritsu's makes the best sense to me. Also, it's rare any more that I go into crowded areas without my husband. He's always armed as long as it's legal for him to be, and yes, I rely upon him to protect me. If he's not with me, then I stay out of places I consider to be risky (busy shopping centers at back-to-school or Christmas time, or even Sunday evenings) and I shop at 7 am. Most mass shooters, burglars, and other miscreants are far too lazy to be up doing their misdeeds at 7 in the morning.