scenario where everyone has a gun and they respond with countervailing force. i'm not an anti-gun person at all. i grew up with guns and i understand the second amendment perfectly well. but what would that be like? if everyone in that crowd had their own gun and someone turned on loughner, they may have missed him and hit someone else. is that really a solution? >> with 19 people shot if someone in the crowd had a firearm and could have stopped loughner, you don't see that as an improvement? in arizona, lots of people have firearms. we have banquets where people go out, carry their guns openly and they're peaceful, wonderful affai affairs. the only way to stop loughner is with countervailing force. no, you don't want to shoot out in public. but if someone goes berserk, look how this story would have been different if some individual would have had a gun.