re: #185 Dark_Falcon
The idea is to save lives. If in taking down the shooter you save lives he otherwise would have taken, in my mind that can justify the risk to innocent people of returning fire. It doesn’t always justify it, of course, since one must weigh odds of success vs. probability of collateral damage.
The armed bystander in Clackamas decided it wasn’t worth the risk to try shooting.
But the idea is to stop the shooter from killing others, not to survive yourself. I would submit that if someone can, as one of the teachers did at Sandy Hook, draw the shooter away from others he might target, then one is right in doing so, even if the person themselves is killed. The highest good is to save lives in a situation like that, personal survival should come a distant second.
One of the teachers at Sandy Hook did that without a gun.