CDZ Virginia Beach shooting demonstrates the need for armed citizens...

[Oddball]

“Virginia Beach shooting demonstrates the need for armed citizens...”

No, it doesn’t.

Armed civilians lack both the training and experience to successfully engage with an active shooter.

Indeed, armed civilians in such a situation will only endanger others, resulting in additional deaths and injuries, while doing nothing to neutralize the threat.

Moreover, armed civilians in an active shooter situation are at risk of being killed by law enforcement, mistaken by police as being the active shooter.

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the compacity of ‘law enforcement,’ or to ‘combat crime,’ or as a ‘deterrent’ to mass shootings.

 

[2aguy]

Demonstrates for the fiftieth time we need to regulate magazine size

Yes...you are just trolling.....remember, this is the CDZ....

You have seen this many times...that you refuse to admit it's truth shows you are trolling...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN



Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----

NRA Propaganda is Trolling

High capacity magazines are the choice of those wishing to execute a mass killing

What your propaganda does not account for is stress. In the fog of a mass shooting, fumbling for a replacement magazine is a chance to screw up. A chance to be taken down

1) The research is not from the NRA.

2) High Capacity Magazines are not the choice in mass public shootings, and if you had read the quote from the actual research you would see they are used in 1% of mass public shootings. From my understanding of math, 1% out of 100% would mean it isn't the go to choice in anything.

3) If you had done your homework and studied mass public shootings, you would know from actual survivors of mass public shootings, that the shooters are never under stress........interviews with actual survivors who observe the mass shooters, state that the shooters are calm, relaxed and in no rush as they murder unarmed people......that is the difference...

Again.....in no hurry because he was attacking unarmed people, he changed magazines repeatedly, easily, and murdered 12 people....

As soon as people with guns showed up, after 12 were killed in the gun free zone......he killed 0 people because he was under the stress of being shot at....and had people with guns been on the scene shooting back immediately, there wouldn't be 12 dead people.

More NRA Propaganda

Show some mass shootings with significant casualties that used a small capacity weapon

Russia, Kerch Polytechnic shooting 20 killed, 70 injured Pump action shotgun 5 shots plus one in the chamber....

The Kerch Polytechnic College massacre was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded; the perpetrator also committed suicide.

Soooo, a 5 shot, pump action shotgun killed 20 injured 70 vs. two .45 pistols with the magazines you keep talking about....killed 12 injured 5.....

You don't understand this issue...

Virginia tech...two pistols, standard magazines...32 killed.

Luby's cafe...two pistols, 24 killed.

Fort Hood shooting, two pistols, one of them a revolver...14.



Navy Yard shooting, pump action shotgun, 13 killed....

Binghamton shooting....two pistols...13 killed.

 

[2aguy]

“Virginia Beach shooting demonstrates the need for armed citizens...”

No, it doesn’t.

Armed civilians lack both the training and experience to successfully engage with an active shooter.

Indeed, armed civilians in such a situation will only endanger others, resulting in additional deaths and injuries, while doing nothing to neutralize the threat.

Moreover, armed civilians in an active shooter situation are at risk of being killed by law enforcement, mistaken by police as being the active shooter.

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the compacity of ‘law enforcement,’ or to ‘combat crime,’ or as a ‘deterrent’ to mass shootings.

You have seen the actual research showing that what you just posted isn't even close to being true or accurate in relation to actual mass public shootings where civilians have their legal guns and shoot back.....

How is it, in the face of actual research, of actual events....with actual outcomes, that you continue to post what you post?

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

“Virginia Beach shooting demonstrates the need for armed citizens...”

No, it doesn’t.

Armed civilians lack both the training and experience to successfully engage with an active shooter.

Indeed, armed civilians in such a situation will only endanger others, resulting in additional deaths and injuries, while doing nothing to neutralize the threat.

Moreover, armed civilians in an active shooter situation are at risk of being killed by law enforcement, mistaken by police as being the active shooter.

Citizens have the right to carry firearms pursuant to lawful self-defense – not act in the compacity of ‘law enforcement,’ or to ‘combat crime,’ or as a ‘deterrent’ to mass shootings.

Unwarranted Assumptions
The fallacies of presumption also fail to provide adequate reason for believing the truth of their conclusions. In these instances, however, the erroneous reasoning results from an implicit supposition of some further proposition whose truth is uncertain or implausible.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

The shooter in Virginia Beach targeted a place he knew would be a gun free zone.....which is the primary target of mass public shooters...

Unarmed people who can't shoot back.....12 dead 5 injured.

The police, able to shoot back...one injured, zero dead........

Once people were shooting back at the attacker, he was no longer able to simply murder defenseless people and was forced to react, rather than kill.....and he didn't kill anyone after people with guns started shooting back at him......

This simple equation needs to be understood by anti-gunners......

And as actual research into mass public shootings show....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

the father was an illegal? i dont know if that was true .

that certainly aint gonna fly on CNN

 

[bodecea]

The shooter in Virginia Beach targeted a place he knew would be a gun free zone.....which is the primary target of mass public shooters...

Unarmed people who can't shoot back.....12 dead 5 injured.

The police, able to shoot back...one injured, zero dead........

Once people were shooting back at the attacker, he was no longer able to simply murder defenseless people and was forced to react, rather than kill.....and he didn't kill anyone after people with guns started shooting back at him......

This simple equation needs to be understood by anti-gunners......

And as actual research into mass public shootings show....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

See? Classic giddiness over a shooting happening is what is perceived to be a "gun free zone".

 

[rightwinger]

well , i do as police are simply taxpayer paid public servants RWinger .

Public servants who keep us safe

Gun nuts don’t keep us safe...never have

 

[rightwinger]

Demonstrates for the fiftieth time we need to regulate magazine size

Yes...you are just trolling.....remember, this is the CDZ....

You have seen this many times...that you refuse to admit it's truth shows you are trolling...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN



Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----

NRA Propaganda is Trolling

High capacity magazines are the choice of those wishing to execute a mass killing

What your propaganda does not account for is stress. In the fog of a mass shooting, fumbling for a replacement magazine is a chance to screw up. A chance to be taken down

1) The research is not from the NRA.

2) High Capacity Magazines are not the choice in mass public shootings, and if you had read the quote from the actual research you would see they are used in 1% of mass public shootings. From my understanding of math, 1% out of 100% would mean it isn't the go to choice in anything.

3) If you had done your homework and studied mass public shootings, you would know from actual survivors of mass public shootings, that the shooters are never under stress........interviews with actual survivors who observe the mass shooters, state that the shooters are calm, relaxed and in no rush as they murder unarmed people......that is the difference...

Again.....in no hurry because he was attacking unarmed people, he changed magazines repeatedly, easily, and murdered 12 people....

As soon as people with guns showed up, after 12 were killed in the gun free zone......he killed 0 people because he was under the stress of being shot at....and had people with guns been on the scene shooting back immediately, there wouldn't be 12 dead people.

More NRA Propaganda

Show some mass shootings with significant casualties that used a small capacity weapon

Russia, Kerch Polytechnic shooting 20 killed, 70 injured Pump action shotgun 5 shots plus one in the chamber....

The Kerch Polytechnic College massacre was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded; the perpetrator also committed suicide.

Soooo, a 5 shot, pump action shotgun killed 20 injured 70 vs. two .45 pistols with the magazines you keep talking about....killed 12 injured 5.....

You don't understand this issue...

Virginia tech...two pistols, standard magazines...32 killed.

Luby's cafe...two pistols, 24 killed.

Fort Hood shooting, two pistols, one of them a revolver...14.



Navy Yard shooting, pump action shotgun, 13 killed....

Binghamton shooting....two pistols...13 killed.

Welcome to the USA

We have no control over what happens in Russia
It is Putin’s problem

 

[pismoe]

keep you SAFE eh widdle boy and 'subject' like person RWinger !!

 

[Pilot1]

Gun Free Zones should be abolished, and law abiding, qualified citizens should be able to conceal carry firearms in the workplace. Every company I have worked for does not allow guns to be LEGALLY brought on their premises. However, as criminals don't follow laws, they can easily bring in a gun and shoot people who are unarmed and defenseless. They should call them Victim Zones instead.

People should sue these companies, and government agencies for creating and UNSAFE work environment.

 

[2aguy]

Yes...you are just trolling.....remember, this is the CDZ....

You have seen this many times...that you refuse to admit it's truth shows you are trolling...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN



Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----

NRA Propaganda is Trolling

High capacity magazines are the choice of those wishing to execute a mass killing

What your propaganda does not account for is stress. In the fog of a mass shooting, fumbling for a replacement magazine is a chance to screw up. A chance to be taken down

1) The research is not from the NRA.

2) High Capacity Magazines are not the choice in mass public shootings, and if you had read the quote from the actual research you would see they are used in 1% of mass public shootings. From my understanding of math, 1% out of 100% would mean it isn't the go to choice in anything.

3) If you had done your homework and studied mass public shootings, you would know from actual survivors of mass public shootings, that the shooters are never under stress........interviews with actual survivors who observe the mass shooters, state that the shooters are calm, relaxed and in no rush as they murder unarmed people......that is the difference...

Again.....in no hurry because he was attacking unarmed people, he changed magazines repeatedly, easily, and murdered 12 people....

As soon as people with guns showed up, after 12 were killed in the gun free zone......he killed 0 people because he was under the stress of being shot at....and had people with guns been on the scene shooting back immediately, there wouldn't be 12 dead people.

More NRA Propaganda

Show some mass shootings with significant casualties that used a small capacity weapon

Russia, Kerch Polytechnic shooting 20 killed, 70 injured Pump action shotgun 5 shots plus one in the chamber....

The Kerch Polytechnic College massacre was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded; the perpetrator also committed suicide.

Soooo, a 5 shot, pump action shotgun killed 20 injured 70 vs. two .45 pistols with the magazines you keep talking about....killed 12 injured 5.....

You don't understand this issue...

Virginia tech...two pistols, standard magazines...32 killed.

Luby's cafe...two pistols, 24 killed.

Fort Hood shooting, two pistols, one of them a revolver...14.



Navy Yard shooting, pump action shotgun, 13 killed....

Binghamton shooting....two pistols...13 killed.

Welcome to the USA

We have no control over what happens in Russia
It is Putin’s problem

Yes....I showed you were wrong, so now you ignore your original question, and the fact that the answer shows you were wrong....

 

[2aguy]

well , i do as police are simply taxpayer paid public servants RWinger .

Public servants who keep us safe

Gun nuts don’t keep us safe...never have

And that is incorrect.....

According to the Centers for Disease Control research, Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies and murders.....

And as more Americans own and carry guns.......

Over the last 26 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 17.25 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2018...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[Pilot1]

Yet the Liberal/Progressives (Democrats) want to disarm law abiding people, including women, who would otherwise be defenseless. Why do they want to enable criminals, and create more VICTIMS?

 

[bodecea]

Yes...you are just trolling.....remember, this is the CDZ....

You have seen this many times...that you refuse to admit it's truth shows you are trolling...

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages by Gary Kleck :: SSRN



Do bans on large-capacity magazines (LCMs) for semiautomatic firearms have significant potential for reducing the number of deaths and injuries in mass shootings?
========
In sum, in nearly all LCM-involved mass shootings, the time it takes to reload a detachable magazine is no greater than the average time between shots that the shooter takes anyway when not reloading.

Consequently, there is no affirmative evidence that reloading detachable magazines slows mass shooters’ rates of fire, and thus no affirmative evidence that the number of victims who could escape the killers due to additional pauses in the shooting is increased by the shooter’s need to change magazines.
==========
The most common rationale for an effect of LCM use is that they allow mass killers to fire many rounds without reloading.
LCMs are used is less than 1/3 of 1% of mass shootings.
News accounts of 23 shootings in which more than six people were killed or wounded and LCMs were used, occurring in the U.S. in 1994-2013, were examined.
There was only one incident in which the shooter may have been stopped by bystander intervention when he tried to reload.
In all of these 23 incidents the shooter possessed either multiple guns or multiple magazines, meaning that the shooter, even if denied LCMs, could have continued firing without significant interruption by either switching loaded guns or by changing smaller loaded magazines with only a 2-4 second delay for each magazine change.
Finally, the data indicate that mass shooters maintain slow enough rates of fire such that the time needed to reload would not increase the time between shots and thus the time available for prospective victims to escape.

--------

We did not employ the oft-used definition of “mass murder” as a homicide in which four or more victims were killed, because most of these involve just four to six victims (Duwe 2007), which could therefore have involved as few as six rounds fired, a number that shooters using even ordinary revolvers are capable of firing without reloading.

LCMs obviously cannot help shooters who fire no more rounds than could be fired without LCMs, so the inclusion of “nonaffectable” cases with only four to six victims would dilute the sample, reducing the percent of sample incidents in which an LCM might have affected the number of casualties.

Further, had we studied only homicides with four or more dead victims, drawn from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports, we would have missed cases in which huge numbers of people were shot, and huge numbers of rounds were fired, but three or fewer of the victims died.


For example, in one widely publicized shooting carried out in Los Angeles on February 28, 1997, two bank robbers shot a total of 18 people - surely a mass shooting by any reasonable standard (Table 1).

Yet, because none of the people they shot died, this incident would not qualify as a mass murder (or even murder of any kind).

Exclusion of such incidents would bias the sample against the proposition that LCM use increases the number of victims by excluding incidents with large numbers of victims. We also excluded shootings in which more than six persons were shot over the entire course of the incident but shootings occurred in multiple locations with no more than six people shot in any one of the locations, and substantial periods of time intervened between episodes of shooting. An example is the series of killings committed by Rodrick Dantzler on July 7, 2011.

Once eligible incidents were identified, we searched through news accounts for details related to whether the use of LCMs could have influenced the casualty counts.

Specifically, we searched for

(1) the number of magazines in the shooter’s immediate possession,

(2) the capacity of the largest magazine,

(3) the number of guns in the shooter’s immediate possession during the incident,

(4) the types of guns possessed,

(5) whether the shooter reloaded during the incident,

(6) the number of rounds fired,

(7) the duration of the shooting from the first shot fired to the last, and (8) whether anyone intervened to stop the shooter.

Findings How Many Mass Shootings were Committed Using LCMs?

We identified 23 total incidents in which more than six people were shot at a single time and place in the U.S. from 1994 through 2013 and that were known to involve use of any magazines with capacities over ten rounds.


Table 1 summarizes key details of the LCMinvolved mass shootings relevant to the issues addressed in this paper.

(Table 1 about here) What fraction of all mass shootings involve LCMs?

There is no comprehensive listing of all mass shootings available for the entire 1994-2013 period, but the most extensive one currently available is at the Shootingtracker.com website, which only began its coverage in 2013.

-----


-----
The offenders in LCM-involved mass shootings were also known to have reloaded during 14 of the 23 (61%) incidents with magazine holding over 10 rounds.

The shooters were known to have not reloaded in another two of these 20 incidents and it could not be determined if they reloaded in the remaining seven incidents.

Thus, even if the shooters had been denied LCMs, we know that most of them definitely would have been able to reload smaller detachable magazines without interference from bystanders since they in fact did change magazines.

The fact that this percentage is less than 100% should not, however, be interpreted to mean that the shooters were unable to reload in the other nine incidents.

It is possible that the shooters could also have reloaded in many of these nine shootings, but chose not to do so, or did not need to do so in order to fire all the rounds they wanted to fire. This is consistent with the fact that there has been at most only one mass shootings in twenty years in which reloading a semiautomatic firearm might have been blocked by bystanders intervening and thereby stopping the shooter from doing all the shooting he wanted to do. All we know is that in two incidents the shooter did not reload, and news accounts of seven other incidents did not mention whether the offender reloaded.

----

For example, a story in the Hartford Courant about the Sandy Hook elementary school killings in 2012 was headlined “Shooter Paused, and Six Escaped,” the text asserting that as many as six children may have survived because the shooter paused to reload (December 23, 2012). ''

The author of the story, however, went on to concede that this was just a speculation by an unnamed source, and that it was also possible that some children simply escaped when the killer was shooting other children.

There was no reliable evidence that the pauses were due to the shooter reloading, rather than his guns jamming or the shooter simply choosing to pause his shooting while his gun was still loaded.

The plausibility of the “victims escape” rationale depends on the average rates of fire that shooters in mass shootings typically maintain.

If they fire very fast, the 2-4 seconds it takes to change box-type detachable magazines could produce a slowing of the rate of fire that the shooters otherwise would have maintained without the magazine changes, increasing the average time between rounds fired and potentially allowing more victims to escape during the betweenshot intervals.

On the other hand, if mass shooters fire their guns with the average interval between shots lasting more than 2-4 seconds, the pauses due to additional magazine changes would be no longer than the pauses the shooter typically took between shots even when not reloading.

In that case, there would be no more opportunity for potential victims to escape than there would have been without the additional magazine changes

-----

NRA Propaganda is Trolling

High capacity magazines are the choice of those wishing to execute a mass killing

What your propaganda does not account for is stress. In the fog of a mass shooting, fumbling for a replacement magazine is a chance to screw up. A chance to be taken down

1) The research is not from the NRA.

2) High Capacity Magazines are not the choice in mass public shootings, and if you had read the quote from the actual research you would see they are used in 1% of mass public shootings. From my understanding of math, 1% out of 100% would mean it isn't the go to choice in anything.

3) If you had done your homework and studied mass public shootings, you would know from actual survivors of mass public shootings, that the shooters are never under stress........interviews with actual survivors who observe the mass shooters, state that the shooters are calm, relaxed and in no rush as they murder unarmed people......that is the difference...

Again.....in no hurry because he was attacking unarmed people, he changed magazines repeatedly, easily, and murdered 12 people....

As soon as people with guns showed up, after 12 were killed in the gun free zone......he killed 0 people because he was under the stress of being shot at....and had people with guns been on the scene shooting back immediately, there wouldn't be 12 dead people.

More NRA Propaganda

Show some mass shootings with significant casualties that used a small capacity weapon

Russia, Kerch Polytechnic shooting 20 killed, 70 injured Pump action shotgun 5 shots plus one in the chamber....

The Kerch Polytechnic College massacre was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded; the perpetrator also committed suicide.

Soooo, a 5 shot, pump action shotgun killed 20 injured 70 vs. two .45 pistols with the magazines you keep talking about....killed 12 injured 5.....

You don't understand this issue...

Virginia tech...two pistols, standard magazines...32 killed.

Luby's cafe...two pistols, 24 killed.

Fort Hood shooting, two pistols, one of them a revolver...14.



Navy Yard shooting, pump action shotgun, 13 killed....

Binghamton shooting....two pistols...13 killed.

Welcome to the USA

We have no control over what happens in Russia
It is Putin’s problem

But totally predictable to point out what happens in other countries tho NONE of them have close to the number of shootings we have. Oh well......nothing to see here...nothing to do.

 

[2aguy]

NRA Propaganda is Trolling

High capacity magazines are the choice of those wishing to execute a mass killing

What your propaganda does not account for is stress. In the fog of a mass shooting, fumbling for a replacement magazine is a chance to screw up. A chance to be taken down

1) The research is not from the NRA.

2) High Capacity Magazines are not the choice in mass public shootings, and if you had read the quote from the actual research you would see they are used in 1% of mass public shootings. From my understanding of math, 1% out of 100% would mean it isn't the go to choice in anything.

3) If you had done your homework and studied mass public shootings, you would know from actual survivors of mass public shootings, that the shooters are never under stress........interviews with actual survivors who observe the mass shooters, state that the shooters are calm, relaxed and in no rush as they murder unarmed people......that is the difference...

Again.....in no hurry because he was attacking unarmed people, he changed magazines repeatedly, easily, and murdered 12 people....

As soon as people with guns showed up, after 12 were killed in the gun free zone......he killed 0 people because he was under the stress of being shot at....and had people with guns been on the scene shooting back immediately, there wouldn't be 12 dead people.

More NRA Propaganda

Show some mass shootings with significant casualties that used a small capacity weapon

Russia, Kerch Polytechnic shooting 20 killed, 70 injured Pump action shotgun 5 shots plus one in the chamber....

The Kerch Polytechnic College massacre was a school shooting and bomb attack that occurred in Kerch, Crimea, on 17 October 2018.[2][3] Twenty victims were shot to death and 70 others wounded; the perpetrator also committed suicide.

Soooo, a 5 shot, pump action shotgun killed 20 injured 70 vs. two .45 pistols with the magazines you keep talking about....killed 12 injured 5.....

You don't understand this issue...

Virginia tech...two pistols, standard magazines...32 killed.

Luby's cafe...two pistols, 24 killed.

Fort Hood shooting, two pistols, one of them a revolver...14.



Navy Yard shooting, pump action shotgun, 13 killed....

Binghamton shooting....two pistols...13 killed.

Welcome to the USA

We have no control over what happens in Russia
It is Putin’s problem

But totally predictable to point out what happens in other countries tho NONE of them have close to the number of shootings we have. Oh well......nothing to see here...nothing to do.

You guys act as if this is a permanent condition in those countries........their welfare states have destroyed their families, and their immigration policies have brought people who are completely hostile to their values into their neighborhoods.....and you think that with the illegal guns in those countries that they are going to stay safe?

That is funny. The British police admit they can't stop the flow of illegal guns into Britain, the French police state that fully automatic military weapons are the weapon of choice for French criminals...yet you tell us that their gun control laws keep their murder rates low?

How do you manage to think like that and still think you are logical?

 

[pismoe]

The shooter in Virginia Beach targeted a place he knew would be a gun free zone.....which is the primary target of mass public shooters...

Unarmed people who can't shoot back.....12 dead 5 injured.

The police, able to shoot back...one injured, zero dead........

Once people were shooting back at the attacker, he was no longer able to simply murder defenseless people and was forced to react, rather than kill.....and he didn't kill anyone after people with guns started shooting back at him......

This simple equation needs to be understood by anti-gunners......

And as actual research into mass public shootings show....

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.


In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.

See? Classic giddiness over a shooting happening is what is perceived to be a "gun free zone".

-------------------------

 

[2aguy]

From witness accounts it becomes painfully obvious that if someone in that building had had a legal gun with them, this shooter could have been stopped, and lives could have been saved.......

Notice, again......

The shooter in the gun free zone building for 15 minutes......12 dead.

The shooter, facing people shooting back at him, stopped murdering people and then killed 0 people.....

From the witnesses...notice how often these people in that gun free zone had a chance to fire back at the attacker.....

Virginia Beach Shooting Survivor Says Victim Laid Down His Life To Save Colleagues

 

[M14 Shooter]

Gun free zones: Getting people killed since, well, forever.
As intended.

 

[Pilot1]

The Police can not anticipate crime, and the courts have ruled they have NO RESPONSIBILITY to protect you. So, the several minutes, or more that police need to respond to a shooter in a gun free zone allows the murderer to do a LOT of damage. What stops bad guys with guns are good guys with guns.