I don’t think anyone is arguing that the shooter did anything wrong here. Just that in this particular case nobody would be dead had guns not been available to the general public. I suppose that’s true. But this case is such an outlier that I wouldn’t use it to refute or endorse gun control measures.
In those cases in which a police officer just shoots and kills someone in such a situation, I do criticize it. Purported attacker has a knife; cop has a gun. The cop is in a superior position and has a lot more options than just to shoot and kill right away. The cop should be trained not to do that.
In this case, in which it’s not a real attack, there’s plenty of time for an armed cop to discover that he’s not actually in mortal danger.
Ah, that makes it a bit more understandable.
But only a bit. 
He’s still a good friend but, yeah, he had some interesting quirks. At least he would do it when none of us were in the apartment. How he managed not to alarm the neighbors, I don’t know exactly. He said he would turn the music all the way up, but I would have thought that wasn’t enough. (And, yes, I have seen evidence of a gun being fired in the house, as in bullet holes in the drywall.) We also lived right across the street from our town’s civic center, the local government building.
Good times.
Well, when Sherlock Holmes got bored one day, he used his pistol to make a patriotic “V.R.” pattern in one of the interior walls of their flat at 221B Baker Street, according to Dr Watson.
Don’t know what Mrs Hudson thought of it.
She’s a teenager, not an adult. Teenagers do stupid things, but they grow up. And they are, generically, pretty ignorant.
FYI
That post was from 3 years ago, and the poster has been gone for 2.
The exact details of the incident are not very clear - did this guy run at someone waving knives and yelling? Did he grab someone and hold a knife to them? In either of those cases, or similar (and noting that I am not usually on the pro-gun side of the argument), that is, if it looked like an immediate and serious threat, I would say that someone shooting him does not seem too disproportionate a response.
If, on the other hand, he was just standing in a car park holding a knife, maybe not so much.
Is South Dakota part of her punishment?
Dan
Again, this is beside the point. If there had been no guns present at that place, no one would be dead. That would have been a preferable outcome. It’s always better that no one have been killed rather than some have justifiably killed someone.
If the guy hadn’t threatened strangers with a butcher knife, no one would be dead.
Well that is obviously and demonstratively false. There are loads of examples where if someone had been killed many others would have been saved.
It’s stupid (despite what the other posters say) because you only ever shoot a bullet at something you would be okay with completely destroying. So you don’t shoot a bullet at a human you don’t plan to kill, even if they think they’re being protected by some item.
This is basic gun safety. Maybe (though I am skeptical) some professional might have a reason to ignore this rule, but no layperson should be shooting at other humans they aren’t trying to kill or injure.
In this specific case, where the guy had no actual intent to harm anyone with the knives, and barring the kind of stupid accidents that seem at least a little likely when someone embarks upon such stupidity as to wave large knives around in public, yes, it might be that no one would be dead.
Had this happened in the UK, he may only have been counterattacked with a fire extinguisher and a narwhal tusk, until the police arrived to finish the job, but of course this guy cannot have been unaware that guns exist in his world, and that members of the public might well use them in justifiable self defence.
I would prefer a world where nobody bothered carrying guns because nobody felt the need to prepare to defend themselves, but that seems like wishing for unicorns.
I dunno but, unfortunately, it wasn’t Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary. That might have had a chance at doing the job.
Of all the guns to use, they had to use one that is famed for its power?! 
I laughed.
Classic gravestone inscription: “I told you I was sick.”
Wave of the future? “Famous last words—‘Hey ya’ll watch this!’” Mrs. L and I spotted that in a cemetery for a young guy in his 20s. That inscription wasn’t on the main stone…it was etched on a plaque, hanging from a flower holder. I wonder what the story was.
That is a super naive thing to say. I used to live in a very bad neighborhood where knife robberies were common and had friends/family members who routinely carried knifes themselves around and would covertly “ready” them when they saw someone approach them that didn’t look friendly. They were always fully ready to stab the fuck out of someone at a moments notice, so it’s naive to think if guns didn’t exist somehow nobody would die in self-defense related incidents.
This is the same silly stuff that always pops up. I’m not naive about knives. The fact is that it’s a lot harder to kill with a knife than a gun. Replace all the guns with knives and you will automatically see a plummet in the number of deaths, just because it’s so much harder to hurt someone with one, if for no other reason than you have to get in close.
Moderator Note
I don’t have a problem with people expressing their opinions of whether or not someone should or shouldn’t have been carrying or using a gun at the time, but let’s not hijack this thread into yet another thread about gun control. Everyone knows where Great Debates is if you want to engage in that particular debate.
This is a discussion about stupid pranks and people getting hurt (or worse). Stick to the topic, please. Feel free to state your opinions as they relate to the prank, but don’t debate gun control here.