Does a business that advertises itself as a gun free zone deserve to be attacked?

[2aguy]

Fucking dumb shits.

The idea behind businesses not permitting guns on their property is to prevent chicken shits like you from ACCIDENTALLY OFFING SOMEONE or from TRYING TO PLAY SUPER HERO if someone does attempt to rob the joint. Your help is not wanted.

Assholes who are determined to shoot up a place don't give a fuck if there are armed people inside or not. They are SUICIDAL or otherwise DERANGED and are not concerned with consequences..

Sure they are concerned about the consequences. They want to make sure they are dead as a door nail so they don't have to suffer imprisonment. That's why they pick gun free places; so nobody will injure them enough so they can't commit suicide.

Who says they pick gun free zones? That's just what the gun nuts say. Has anyone ever confessed to that ?

No, it just happens to be a coincidence that most all of the mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

Nope. That's a myth. Debunked here...
And here....
And here....
And here...
And here.

That's just page one of search results...

And more info. on shooters who picked gun free zones...

Minnesota…...the teen was going to make his school a gun free zone by luring cops away from the school and murdering the school resource officer first..the only one on campus with a gun...

Teen made bombs, stockpiled guns in prep for Minnesota school massacre: police

The unhinged teen told cops, after being busted Tuesday, that he planned to shoot his sister, mom and dad with a .22-caliber rifle before he went to a rural field and set a fire to distract cops.

The 11th-grader then said he planned to go to Waseca Junior and Senior High School where he would toss Molotov cocktails and explode pressure-cooker bombs to try and kill “as many students as he could” in the cafeteria during lunchtime.

About 1,000 students, in 7th through 12th grade, attend the school.

LaDue, according to the notebook of his plan, would kill the school resource officer before continuing to kill other students.




************************


Vince Vaughn is right about guns (and was brave to be so honest) | Fox News

Last June, Elliot Rodger, who killed six people in Santa Barbara, Calif., explained his own choice. In his 141-page “Manifesto,” Rodger turned down alternate targets because he worried that someone with a gun would cut short his killing spree.

That same month, Justin Bourque shot to death three people in Canada. His Facebook page made fun of gun bans, with pictures of defenseless victims explaining to killers that they weren’t allowed to have guns.

The diary of the Aurora, Colorado, “Batman” movie theater killer, James Holmes, was finally released this past week. It was clear that he was considering both attacking an airport and a movie theater, but he turned down the airport option because he was concerned about their “substantial security.”

Of course, there are numerous other examples such as the Columbine killersopposing the concealed carry law that was then working its way through the state legislature. The bill would have allowed people to carry permitted concealed handguns on school property. The killers timed their attack for the very day that final passage of the law was planned for in the legislature.

If you go to the link for the Colorado theater shooter they have a photo of his journal where he has notes about airports…..he lists one of the items…."Substantial Security"

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/james-holmes-notebook-dragged.pdf
**************

Sandy hook, did not have police resource officer....the shooter went to Sandy Hook, the middle school and the high school...the middle school and the high school had armed police resource officers...Sandy Hook did not...

Building a safer Sandy Hook | News21: Gun Wars

The high school and middle school, which already had armed resource officers, doubled down on security and restricted all visitors that didn’t have prior permission to enter.

Lupica: Lanza plotted massacre for years

They don’t believe this was just a spreadsheet. They believe it was a score sheet,” he continued. “This was the work of a video gamer, and that it was his intent to put his own name at the very top of that list. They believe that he picked an elementary school because he felt it was a point of least resistance, where he could rack up the greatest number of kills. That’s what (the Connecticut police) believe.”
The man paused and said, “They believe that (Lanza) believed that it was the way to pick up the easiest points. It’s why he didn’t want to be killed by law enforcement. In the code of a gamer, even a deranged gamer like this little bastard, if somebody else kills you, they get your points. They believe that’s why he killed himself.

-----


*****************


ONce the police were heard....he heard their sirens...he realized that the school would no longer be gun free....and he stopped and shot himself...


MILLER: Adam Lanza shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown final report

The shooter only stopped when the police arrived. He had plenty of ammunition and was prepared to continue changing magazines and reloading.

 

[2aguy]

Fucking dumb shits.

The idea behind businesses not permitting guns on their property is to prevent chicken shits like you from ACCIDENTALLY OFFING SOMEONE or from TRYING TO PLAY SUPER HERO if someone does attempt to rob the joint. Your help is not wanted.

Assholes who are determined to shoot up a place don't give a fuck if there are armed people inside or not. They are SUICIDAL or otherwise DERANGED and are not concerned with consequences..

Sure they are concerned about the consequences. They want to make sure they are dead as a door nail so they don't have to suffer imprisonment. That's why they pick gun free places; so nobody will injure them enough so they can't commit suicide.

Who says they pick gun free zones? That's just what the gun nuts say. Has anyone ever confessed to that ?

No, it just happens to be a coincidence that most all of the mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

Nope. That's a myth. Debunked here...
And here....
And here....
And here...
And here.

That's just page one of search results...

Oh please, Mother Jones as your source? After all, three of your five posts (two of them are the same) all pointed to Mother Jones, and the other was a CNN opinion piece.

Here, try some real news sources:

The Facts about Mass Shootings | National Review Online

KEN BLACKWELL: Ban gun-free zones - Washington Times

Report: 92 Percent of Mass Shootings Since 2009 Occurred in Gun-Free Zones - Breitbart

From your first link....

Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, told me earlier this year at the time of the Aurora, Colo., Batman-movie shooting. Indeed, there have been many instances — from the high-school shooting by Luke Woodham in Mississippi, to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo. — where a killer has been stopped after someone got a gun from a parked car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter.

Read more at: The Facts about Mass Shootings | National Review Online

 

[Pogo]

Fucking dumb shits.

The idea behind businesses not permitting guns on their property is to prevent chicken shits like you from ACCIDENTALLY OFFING SOMEONE or from TRYING TO PLAY SUPER HERO if someone does attempt to rob the joint. Your help is not wanted.

Assholes who are determined to shoot up a place don't give a fuck if there are armed people inside or not. They are SUICIDAL or otherwise DERANGED and are not concerned with consequences..

Sure they are concerned about the consequences. They want to make sure they are dead as a door nail so they don't have to suffer imprisonment. That's why they pick gun free places; so nobody will injure them enough so they can't commit suicide.

Who says they pick gun free zones? That's just what the gun nuts say. Has anyone ever confessed to that ?

No, it just happens to be a coincidence that most all of the mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

Nope. That's a myth. Debunked here...
And here....
And here....
And here...
And here.

That's just page one of search results...

Last I heard Mark Kelly was a retired astronaut...not a trained researcher....

and armedwithreason is wrong.......what they hide is the fact that most places where people have a connection...a school, a church or a job....are already legally mandated gun free zones...so it doesn't enter into their equation....

Of course...one would have to look at actual mass shooters...who did not attack places where they had an emotional attachment...and see what they said as to why they chose the target...and in each of those cases..they chose targets that were gun free zones...including the Sandy Hook shooter....

Oh please. Now you want to start whining about all kinds of "exceptions" because you LOST the point.

Cram it, you dishonest hack. You're a loser.

 

[koshergrl]

Think about it. If you're a criminal looking for a place to rob, or a terrorist looking for a "soft" target, who do you think they're going to go after? A gun free sign is just asking for trouble. Isn't it?

No one deserves to be attacked. However, it is illogical to not take the necessary precautions.
For example, let's say Joe Schmoe is opposed to gun ownership. He owns a business. He prefers his customers not carry firearms. The prudent thing to do it NOT post a sign but let anyone entering Joe's business that carrying of firearms is not permitted. His property. His right.

So small business owners can refuse to serve customers who pack....but they can't refuse to cater homo parties. Interesting.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Sure they are concerned about the consequences. They want to make sure they are dead as a door nail so they don't have to suffer imprisonment. That's why they pick gun free places; so nobody will injure them enough so they can't commit suicide.

Who says they pick gun free zones? That's just what the gun nuts say. Has anyone ever confessed to that ?

No, it just happens to be a coincidence that most all of the mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

Nope. That's a myth. Debunked here...
And here....
And here....
And here...
And here.

That's just page one of search results...

Oh please, Mother Jones as your source? After all, three of your five posts (two of them are the same) all pointed to Mother Jones, and the other was a CNN opinion piece.

Here, try some real news sources:

The Facts about Mass Shootings | National Review Online

KEN BLACKWELL: Ban gun-free zones - Washington Times

Report: 92 Percent of Mass Shootings Since 2009 Occurred in Gun-Free Zones - Breitbart

From your first link....

Jim Kouri, the public-information officer of the National Association of Chiefs of Police, told me earlier this year at the time of the Aurora, Colo., Batman-movie shooting. Indeed, there have been many instances — from the high-school shooting by Luke Woodham in Mississippi, to the New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colo. — where a killer has been stopped after someone got a gun from a parked car or elsewhere and confronted the shooter.

Read more at: The Facts about Mass Shootings | National Review Online

Murderers may be insane, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are stupid.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fucking dumb shits.

The idea behind businesses not permitting guns on their property is to prevent chicken shits like you from ACCIDENTALLY OFFING SOMEONE or from TRYING TO PLAY SUPER HERO if someone does attempt to rob the joint. Your help is not wanted.

Assholes who are determined to shoot up a place don't give a fuck if there are armed people inside or not. They are SUICIDAL or otherwise DERANGED and are not concerned with consequences..

Sure they are concerned about the consequences. They want to make sure they are dead as a door nail so they don't have to suffer imprisonment. That's why they pick gun free places; so nobody will injure them enough so they can't commit suicide.

Who says they pick gun free zones? That's just what the gun nuts say. Has anyone ever confessed to that ?

No, it just happens to be a coincidence that most all of the mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

We'll most of these mass shootings involve schools . It became a thing . I don't see why you consider the gun free part as the base fir the target. It's usually some disgruntled student out for revenge .

First.....schools are automatically gun free zones by law...so the shooter doesn't even have to factor that into his decision making process....

Second...of the mass shooters who either survived or those who left journals or social media...they specifically said that they chose locations that were gun free...

the Santa Barbara shooter wanted to shoot up an out door street fair....but was concerned about armed police stopping him...so he chose a sorority where he believed they would be unarmed...

the colorado theater shooter...wanted to shoot up an airport....but in his notes he wrote that there would be too much armed security...

A kid in Minnesota...he planned on starting fires in a local field to draw armed police away from the school, and then he planned on murdering the only person on the school grounds carrying a gun, the police resource officer...

The Sandy Hook killer....he also attended the middle school and the high school, but only Sandy Hook was unprotected by an armed resource officer.....

the guy who murdered the Canadian soldier and attacked their parliament....ridiculed their gun free zones before the attack....

Even the Tucson shooter shot up a Democrat rally.

 

[martybegan]

Does a business that advertises itself as a gun free zone deserve to be attacked?


Of course not.

On the other hand....

If a business advertises itself as a "Gun Free Zone" and puts up signs forbidding customers from bringing guns inside...

...and some whacko barges in, holds up the customers, and then shoots one....

..should that customer (or his next of kin) sue the business for depriving the customer of his right to defend himself and then failing to protect the unarmed customer, resulting in his injury or death?

Obviously the person most at fault is the whacko who pulled the trigger.

But does the business deserve at least some liability for what happened?

If a business forbids customers the right to carry the means to defend themselves, is the business then responsible for defending them instead?

Yes, they should be held liable. They actively prevented a person from bringing in their own protection. If they do so, they should be required to 1)provide it themselves or 2) be held liable if something happens.

 

[Geaux4it]

I don't recognize gun free zones. Id rather be judged by 12 than carried by six

If I'm in the room with you, we're armed

-Geaux

 

[Cecilie1200]

Fucking dumb shits.

The idea behind businesses not permitting guns on their property is to prevent chicken shits like you from ACCIDENTALLY OFFING SOMEONE or from TRYING TO PLAY SUPER HERO if someone does attempt to rob the joint. Your help is not wanted.

Assholes who are determined to shoot up a place don't give a fuck if there are armed people inside or not. They are SUICIDAL or otherwise DERANGED and are not concerned with consequences..

Sure they are concerned about the consequences. They want to make sure they are dead as a door nail so they don't have to suffer imprisonment. That's why they pick gun free places; so nobody will injure them enough so they can't commit suicide.

Who says they pick gun free zones? That's just what the gun nuts say. Has anyone ever confessed to that ?

No, it just happens to be a coincidence that most all of the mass shootings happen in gun free zones.

Nope. That's a myth. Debunked here...
And here....
And here....
And here...
And here.

That's just page one of search results...

FYI, the name "Mother Jones" on the website automatically precludes it being any sort of "debunking" whatsoever. You might as well just cite "The Onion" and expect us to take it seriously. Ditto for Politico, Media Matters for America, op-eds, and generic anonymous blog sites no one's ever heard of.

Try a page of search results that include someone people will actually believe. This is the equivalent of me linking to the Rush Limbaugh Show website, which I'm certain you would never accept.

 

[Timmy]

Think about it. If you're a criminal looking for a place to rob, or a terrorist looking for a "soft" target, who do you think they're going to go after? A gun free sign is just asking for trouble. Isn't it?

No one deserves to be attacked. However, it is illogical to not take the necessary precautions.
For example, let's say Joe Schmoe is opposed to gun ownership. He owns a business. He prefers his customers not carry firearms. The prudent thing to do it NOT post a sign but let anyone entering Joe's business that carrying of firearms is not permitted. His property. His right.

So small business owners can refuse to serve customers who pack....but they can't refuse to cater homo parties. Interesting.

There's no law saying biz owners can't keep gun owners out .

 

[Siete]

when I first got my carry permit I carried all the time, now I only go heavy when I travel long distance in cars and/or have over 1000$ on me ...

there's one stupid ass on the thread that keeps providing links to shootings that ignores the TITLE of the post.

yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[Freewill]

NO!!!!

Why would you ask such a question? ISIS and those kind of groups deserve to be attacked.

 

[Freewill]

Think about it. If you're a criminal looking for a place to rob, or a terrorist looking for a "soft" target, who do you think they're going to go after? A gun free sign is just asking for trouble. Isn't it?

No one deserves to be attacked. However, it is illogical to not take the necessary precautions.
For example, let's say Joe Schmoe is opposed to gun ownership. He owns a business. He prefers his customers not carry firearms. The prudent thing to do it NOT post a sign but let anyone entering Joe's business that carrying of firearms is not permitted. His property. His right.

So small business owners can refuse to serve customers who pack....but they can't refuse to cater homo parties. Interesting.

There's no law saying biz owners can't keep gun owners out .

Just as long as they are not gay.

 

[Timmy]

No. If a gay has a gun they can refuse .

You really want some bar filled wh Wild West packing 20 something's ?

 

[KingOfCars]

Deserve? NO

Asking for it? YES

 

[Siete]

RW's must live in some really shitty neighborhoods.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

RW's must live in some really shitty neighborhoods.

The suburbs?

 

[koshergrl]

Think about it. If you're a criminal looking for a place to rob, or a terrorist looking for a "soft" target, who do you think they're going to go after? A gun free sign is just asking for trouble. Isn't it?

No one deserves to be attacked. However, it is illogical to not take the necessary precautions.
For example, let's say Joe Schmoe is opposed to gun ownership. He owns a business. He prefers his customers not carry firearms. The prudent thing to do it NOT post a sign but let anyone entering Joe's business that carrying of firearms is not permitted. His property. His right.

So small business owners can refuse to serve customers who pack....but they can't refuse to cater homo parties. Interesting.

There's no law saying biz owners can't keep gun owners out .

There's no law that says they have to cater homofests, either.

 

[koshergrl]

No. If a gay has a gun they can refuse .

You really want some bar filled wh Wild West packing 20 something's ?

As long as they aren't black gang bangers in a gun free zone. Those guys are creepy, and stupid with guns. They're constantly accidental shooting kids.

 

[paulitician]

Nutbags are afraid to go anywhere without their metal manhood to protect them.

Just what we need. A bunch of Barney Fife's fumbling with their junk whenever they see a kid in a hoodie with his hands in his pockets.

Don't own a firearm. Be a 'Gun Free Zone' moron. That's your call. Problem solved.

I own one. And I don't need it with me when I go to the store or movie theater. That's what chicken shit pussies do.

Your opinion. That's all it is. You wanna be a 'Gun Free Zone' dipshit, go for it. Doesn't mean everyone else to be one.