Mass shooters target gun-free zones

[2aguy]

Good thing there was an armed and trained man at the site of the Oregon shooting.

It is easier for a mass shooter to get a gun in this country than any other country on the planet.

So why do we advertise the vulnerability of our schools?

In fact, why does this country even have gun laws anyways?

that's easy dipshit...so when you actually break the law with a gun you can be arrested. you morons think anyone who wants to own a gun is a criminal and should be arrested.....

 

[OnePercenter]

No...the average of all the studies done over 40 years, showed that Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack 2 million times a year....I post the 1.5 number because that is the number that bill clinton found through his anti gun study.....

I don't loe...I am not a lefty.

How many of the 2 million were police officers?

 

[2aguy]

Mass shooters select familiar terrain. Every school shooter was a student at the school they shot up.

And as the previous poster just pointed out, Fort Hood was not a gun free zone.

The gun free zone meme is bullshit.

Wrong......not true in the slightest. we have journals and actual videos of mass shooters and the Santa Barbara shooter, the South Caolina Church shooter, the cloroado theater shooter and others,chose gun free zones because they wanted to be free to kill without interference....your statement is a lie.

and on top of that......schools are by law automatically gun free zones, so the shooters who do choose their target based on an attachment don't have to worry about armed resistance...morons like you made those places gun free zones for victims...not killers.

 

[2aguy]

No...the average of all the studies done over 40 years, showed that Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack 2 million times a year....I post the 1.5 number because that is the number that bill clinton found through his anti gun study.....

I don't loe...I am not a lefty.

How many of the 2 million were police officers?

the studies that average comes from did not include miltary or police shootings, they were all,civilian shootings.

 

[2aguy]

No...the average of all the studies done over 40 years, showed that Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack 2 million times a year....I post the 1.5 number because that is the number that bill clinton found through his anti gun study.....

I don't loe...I am not a lefty.

How many of the 2 million were police officers?

And here you go...all of the studies that I base the average on...and they are designated civilian and police....and linked to the actual source....

I just averaged the studies......which were conducted by different researchers, from both private and public researchers, over a period of 40 years looking specifically at guns and self defense....the name of the researcher is first, then the year then the number of times they determined guns were used for self defense......notice how many of them there are and how many of them were done by gun grabbers like the clinton Justice Dept. and the obama CDC

And these aren't all of the studies either...there are more...and they support the ones below.....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....
GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, military)
DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, military)
L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, military)
Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops, military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."
(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


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

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..
*****************************************
If you take the studies from that Kleck cites in his paper, 16 of them....and you only average the ones that exclude military and police shootings..the average becomes 2 million...I use those studies because I have the details on them...and they are still 10 studies (including Kleck's)....

 

[2aguy]

Jaywalk or come into some other interaction with the police and they end up searching you and finding a weapon - go to jail. Why would a person subject themselves to that? They would not.

There is no grounds for you to believe that there is a real difference in meeting a cop or an armed citizen to the perpetrator. The result is the same. You claim that others arguments make no sense when you are demanding that there are arbitrary differences in an armed citizen stopping a crazy person and an armed cop without any reason behind it.

Only a tiny percent of people carry. Gun free zone or not the criminal is unlikely to run into one. And since they are suicidal it is unlikely it would change their actions.

They die quicker, so it does change their actions because time = lives.

No it doesn't because the chance of dying quicker is very slim.

Now you're just babbling.

No. Only 12 million choose to carry in a country of over 300 million. The criminal is unlikely to run into one. And if he did the criminal has all the advantages.

No, the criminal doesn't as the stories of armed defense show. In fact, the survival factor is in favor of the victim trying to save their life, since the criminal can break off the attack whenever they want.

 

[2aguy]

You guys ever hear of "suicide by cop"? They intend to die by being shot .If the cops don't do it, they do it themselves. Sure, they are going to kill people in the meantime. I am not convinced that an armed person would make much difference at the scene. In fact, unless the shooter is an idiot, the shooter would target him first if he can identify him. If he can't, then anybody in the crowd may have a gun concealed, whether it is a "no gun zone" or not. How the hell is anyone going to enforce a "no gun zone" against a "good" person carrying a concealed weapon? Your whole argument makes no sense at all.

Jaywalk or come into some other interaction with the police and they end up searching you and finding a weapon - go to jail. Why would a person subject themselves to that? They would not.

There is no grounds for you to believe that there is a real difference in meeting a cop or an armed citizen to the perpetrator. The result is the same. You claim that others arguments make no sense when you are demanding that there are arbitrary differences in an armed citizen stopping a crazy person and an armed cop without any reason behind it.

Only a tiny percent of people carry. Gun free zone or not the criminal is unlikely to run into one. And since they are suicidal it is unlikely it would change their actions.

actually, you don't know what you are talking about, these attacks are actually studied. If an attacker does attack a place where there is a concealed carrier, the death count is likely to be reduced as studies on the topic actually shoe.


And also...research on the behavior of mass shooters shows 2 things...when they are confronted by armed resistance they either commit suicide...or they immediately surrender.

They commit suicide because they do not want to go to jail. So getting shot by an armed citizen is somehting they want to avoid since it might lead to being captured and unable to kill themselves....

 

[2aguy]

It is always fascinating listing to RW gun nuts talk about how killers go to gun free zones, while ignoring the fact that they usually intend to shoot themselves when they get there......

You mean after they kill a bunch of unarmed people...right?

 

[2aguy]

You guys ever hear of "suicide by cop"? They intend to die by being shot .If the cops don't do it, they do it themselves. Sure, they are going to kill people in the meantime. I am not convinced that an armed person would make much difference at the scene. In fact, unless the shooter is an idiot, the shooter would target him first if he can identify him. If he can't, then anybody in the crowd may have a gun concealed, whether it is a "no gun zone" or not. How the hell is anyone going to enforce a "no gun zone" against a "good" person carrying a concealed weapon? Your whole argument makes no sense at all.

Because good people obey the law moron. If you carry a concealed carry gun into a school zone you can be punished as a misdemeanor, and lose your gun rights, have to go to court, and pay a lawyer....you can also lose your job if you get a felony for it......so law abiding people have a lot to lose by not obeying the law and there are all kinds of cops who are gun grabbers and prosecutors and judges too, just waiting to throw the book at a law abiding citizen who carries a gun.

For example, the woman in New Jersey...she was from Pennsylvania and had a concealed carry permit. She drove into New Jersey not realizing that her permit was no good in New Jersey....she was stopped for speeding or another traffic infraction and she did as she was trained to do in Penn. she told the cop she was a lawful concealed carrier and that she had a weapon on her person.....

She was arrested by the officer for felony weapon possessiion in the state of New Jersey, and faced going to prison for 3 years, getting a felony conviction and as a nurse, with that felony conviction she would have lost her job.....it took action by Chris Christie to keep her out of jail......and to clear her record...

That is why law abiding people don't carry guns into gun free zones.


And in Oregon...if you were caught with a concealed carry gun as a student, you would be expelled, and as an employee, you would be fired....even though it is legal to carry a gun on a university campus.

so that is why law abiding people don't carry in gun free zones.

 

[2aguy]

"... 16-year-old Luke Woodham entered Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., armed with his estranged father's hunting rifle and dozens of cartridges. When Woodham opened fire, vice principal Joel Myrick sprinted to the parking lot, grabbed a Colt .45 automatic pistol from his truck and forced the gunman to surrender by pointing the gun at his head. This limited the casualties to two students killed and seven wounded. In 1998, Andrew Wurst, 14, opened fire on an eighth-grade graduation dance in Edinboro, Pa. The owner of the banquet hall where the dance was being held grabbed a shotgun from his office and quickly confronted Wurst, who dropped his gun. The toll was thus limited to one slain teacher and two wounded students."

Arm Teachers To Stop Shootings

After he was already trying to leave.

Read it again.

I've read the actual story. Shooter was i car leaving.

And he was still armed and he was going to another school.....do you think asking him nicely to get out of the car would have worked......

 

[2aguy]

A short list of mass shooters stopped by armed citizens...

9 Potential Mass Shootings That Were Stopped By Someone With A Personally Owned Firearm

3. The Appalachian School of Law shooting
asl.edu
Jan. 16, 2002
A 43-year-old Nigerian former student named Peter Odighizuwa arrived on campus with a handgun. There are different variations of the story, but according to eyewitness accounts, law students Tracy Bridges, a county sheriff’s deputy, and Mikael Gross, a police officer, ran to their cars after hearing gunshots and grabbed personally owned firearms. They approached Odighizuwa, ordering him to drop his firearm; he did and was subdued by unarmed students.

Three people were killed and three others were wounded.


The above story is interesting because it shows how gun grabbers in the press report stories about armed citizens....

In the actual event, the armed citizens stopped and disarmed the shooter, and then another student tackled him...in the media reports...they never mention the armed citizens disarming him, they only mention the student jumping on him...after he was disarmed.

 

[2aguy]

Here is a short list of shooters who actually targeted gun free zones as revealed in videos and journals that survived them.......

Minnesota…...

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

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


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

 

[whitehall]

Most mass shooters are genuinely crazy. With the exception of the jihad U.S. Major it's doubtful if they even think of gun free zones. Major Nadal opened fire on his own Troops because he knew they were unarmed. Mass shooters pick soft targets like students because it's easy or the voices in their heads tell them to.

 

[2aguy]

"... 16-year-old Luke Woodham entered Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., armed with his estranged father's hunting rifle and dozens of cartridges. When Woodham opened fire, vice principal Joel Myrick sprinted to the parking lot, grabbed a Colt .45 automatic pistol from his truck and forced the gunman to surrender by pointing the gun at his head. This limited the casualties to two students killed and seven wounded. In 1998, Andrew Wurst, 14, opened fire on an eighth-grade graduation dance in Edinboro, Pa. The owner of the banquet hall where the dance was being held grabbed a shotgun from his office and quickly confronted Wurst, who dropped his gun. The toll was thus limited to one slain teacher and two wounded students."

Arm Teachers To Stop Shootings

After he was already trying to leave.

Read it again.

I've read the actual story. Shooter was i car leaving.

Do you think he would have gotten out of the car and surrendered without the guy with the gun....and he was heading to another place to kill more people.....moron.

 

[2aguy]

And church shootings.....how many lives are saved when armed civilians are at the scene....

Some details to help you make your guess....

Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia ( 6 dead, 4 wounded)

Charleston church shooting - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia ( 9 dead)


vs.


Deputies Osceola pastor shot church janitor in self-defense ( 0 dead)

6 Shot At New Life Church Gunman 2 Churchgoers Dead - 7NEWS Denver TheDenverChannel.com ( 2 dead, 3 wounded)

Remember This SC Concealed Carrier Stops Mass Shooting During Church Service. No Casualties. ( 0 dead)
**********
No guns: 15 dead

Sikh temple ( 6 dead, 4 wounded)

Charleston ( 9 dead)


Parishioners with guns: 2 dead

Osceola ( 0 dead )

New life ( 2 dead, 3 wounded)

South Carolina shotgun guy ( 0 dead)

 

[2aguy]

"... 16-year-old Luke Woodham entered Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., armed with his estranged father's hunting rifle and dozens of cartridges. When Woodham opened fire, vice principal Joel Myrick sprinted to the parking lot, grabbed a Colt .45 automatic pistol from his truck and forced the gunman to surrender by pointing the gun at his head. This limited the casualties to two students killed and seven wounded. In 1998, Andrew Wurst, 14, opened fire on an eighth-grade graduation dance in Edinboro, Pa. The owner of the banquet hall where the dance was being held grabbed a shotgun from his office and quickly confronted Wurst, who dropped his gun. The toll was thus limited to one slain teacher and two wounded students."

Arm Teachers To Stop Shootings

After he was already trying to leave.

To go somewhere else, another school and shoot more people...he was only stopped and made to get out of that car by the armed civilian...the cops hadn't arrived yet and if not for the guy with the gun he would have killed more people.

 

[2aguy]

Good thing there was an armed and trained man at the site of the Oregon shooting.

It is easier for a mass shooter to get a gun in this country than any other country on the planet.

So why do we advertise the vulnerability of our schools?

In fact, why does this country even have gun laws anyways?

Because an appeal to extremes does not a counter argument make...

Okay. Same reason they have "drug free zone" signs at schools. To show that penalties are worse in that zone.

How do the penalites stop a killer who plans on committing suicide? You guys, do you ever think about what you believe.....

 

[2aguy]

The key point...if shooters know that there will be someone at their chosen target with guns who will try to stop them they will pick another target.....we know this from actual shooters who left journals....simply getting rid of the gun free zone, and allowing parents to carry legal guns to pick up, drop off their kids and when they visit the school will deter almost all of these nuts.

 

[2aguy]

Nope it works in every thread. I believe we have more mass shootings than the next like 10 - 15 countries combined. Something you must be very proud of.

There are many countries you can get firearms more easily.
But of course you know that which is why you changed your spiel.

And of course you also know if we got rid of ghetto violence our murder rate would plummet.

Aside from the third world, there is nowhere in the world where it is easier to get a gun than it is in parts of the US.

There really is no legitimate argument about that.

Even in the 3rd world, if a criminal wants to get a gun they have to walk into the dangerous underworld of the black market, overpay for a shoddy old gun, and have a limited amount of ammo.

In the U.S., you just drive to Wal-Mart.

One of my favorite arguments by the gun crazies is that everyone in London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, Geneva, Berlin, Munich, Brussels, Sophia, Warsaw, etc... who has an itch to murder someone knows where this supposed "black market" is and has a guy they can call up to deliver any weapon they want immediately!!!!

I'm almost 40 years old. I have zero idea how to access the black market to buy a DVD of the new Hunger Games movie.

It's almost as if you have to have a degree in nonsense to have a conversation with the gun crazies.

I could easily find an illegal firearm.
It all boils down to how big of a risk you want to take to get one.
For you I'd imagine it would be more dangerous because of the part of town you'd have to enter. For the locals it's cake.

If you know anyone who uses pot...you have an avenue to get an illegal gun...

 

[OnePercenter]

No...the average of all the studies done over 40 years, showed that Americans use guns to stop violent criminal attack 2 million times a year....I post the 1.5 number because that is the number that bill clinton found through his anti gun study.....

I don't loe...I am not a lefty.

How many of the 2 million were police officers?

the studies that average comes from did not include miltary or police shootings, they were all,civilian shootings.

Here are some interesting FACTS about the study you posted.

A favorite study of these advocates is 1995’s “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense With a Gun” (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall/95), byGary Kleck and Marc Gertz, which found that guns were used defensively about 2.5 million times annually in the U.S.—or almost 7,000 times a day.

Researcher John Lott conducted another study favored by gun advocates, published in his 1998 book More Guns, Less Crime, which claimed that increasing numbers of concealed carry permits in a given area are associated with decreasing crime rates.

Both studies have been convincingly challenged in the scientific community. In a 2004 meta-study of gun research, the National Research Council of the National Academies of Science found that Lott’s claims were not supported by his data. And when Lott misrepresented the report (New York Post, 12/29/04), the NAS published a letter (Deltoid, 1/26/05) listing his distortions. Shooting Down the More Guns Less Crime Hypothesis (11/02), a paper published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, found crime actually increased in states and locales where concealed carry laws had been adopted.

The Harvard School of Public Health’s David Hemenway took on Kleck in Survey Research and Self Defense Gun Use: An Explanation of Extreme Overestimates (Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 1997), demonstrating that because of the nature of the data, Kleck’s self-reported phone survey finding 2.5 million defensive uses of guns per year was wildly exaggerated. For example, Kleck says guns were used to defend against 845,000 burglaries in 1992, a year in which the National Crime Victimization Survey says there were fewer than 6 million burglaries.

If you want to promote your case, you need to use facts.

And more.

10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down

Don't get me wrong. I'm pro second amendment, but I promote responsible gun ownership, and post responsible facts, not what the NRA wants you to believe.