Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why is it the mass shootings never occur at places that are awash in firearms such as gun stores, shooting ranges, and gun shows? According to the logic of hoplophobes, firearms cause murder as if they're some kind of airborne contagion that transforms otherwise rational people into homicidal maniacs like a zombie plague. If this is the case, the morgues should be overflowing with bodies of people who regularly visit gun stores and gun ranges, what with all of the guns under one roof. Our guns laws are based upon the premise that guns cause people to commit homicide, and that homicide is directly correlated with the abundance of firearms. In practice, however, it seems the opposite is true.
Mass shootings do not occur at places with a high abundance of firearms sometimes or rarely, they never occur at places rife with guns. Mass shootings almost always occur at gun-free zones. Therefore it is reasonable to conclude that not only do guns not cause mass shootings, but they in fact prevent them. If you were a homicidal maniac intent on killing as many people as possible, would you perpetrate a mass shooting at a place where you would be met with armed resistance and swiftly neutralized such as a gun store, or would you go to a government school where not only are would-be victims disarmed, but in the event of an armed intruder are forcibly imprisoned in a lockdown such that they can be swiftly and strategically slaughtered? Gun-free zones may as well put up a sign "Mass shooters welcome" since gun-free zones facilitate mass murder.
Banning guns to prevent mass shootings is like banning fire extinguishers and smoke detectors to prevent fires or banning airbags to prevent car accidents.
The perps in most mass shootings pick their places because that's where the people they want to kill are. Kids shoot up schools because that's where they spend most of their time. The Columbine shooters apparently never considered their armed school resource officer as they planned their massacre or maybe they knew he'd be off school grounds getting lunch when they planned to bomb the common area.
I believe the insinuation you are making that mass shooters go where they know most people won't be armed is frankly wrong and short-sighted in most if not all cases.
Last edited by Joe the Photog; 02-01-2018 at 10:54 PM..
I brought it up on another tread that Charles Whitman, the Texas Tower shooter, was brought down by police under the covering fire of armed citizens who retrieved their personal firearms and pinned him down allowing the police to enter the tower and get to him.
He killed 17 people and seriously wounded 30 more. Had people not took it upon themselves to return fire or been denied the ability to do so by a "gun free zone" the toll would no doubt have been far higher. And Whitman didn't use a high capacity semi auto rifle. He used a 3 shot bolt action Remington 700 ADL hunting rifle.
To my mind this dispels the myth that gun free zones are even a good idea on paper and also discredits this notion that only semi auto service style rifles are capable of causing mass carnage in the hands of a mad man.
But even in the face of facts the ban happy bunch continues to say that it's all about the types of firearms citizens are allowed to own and that disarming lawful citizens will stop an insane person bent on mayhem. But stopping mayhem is not the goal. These types just want firearms banned from private ownership. They don't like guns, are contemptuous of people who own and use guns and want to cram their views down everybody's throat.
First it was "Saturday night specials" that were the root of all evil, but it was revealed it was ALL handguns they really wanted to ban. Then it was the AK, they got the AWB pushed through, which did nothing to stop any violent crime but took imported service style rifles and many handguns and shotguns off the market for American shooters. Now the AR15 is the king of demons, but folks are wise to the façade now and it's becoming clear that more bans and insane laws that only target lawful gun owners will not be well received.
If a ban on ARs and other semi autos were to make it into being bolt action "sniper rifles" would be next which is basically every common hunting and competition rifle out there. It's not about violent crime and public safety. Never has been. The true agenda, which is the complete disarmament of American citizens and the repeal of the 2A has been revealed.
One need only look at CA to see just what an abject failure laws that only make criminals out of honest citizens are.
The perps in most mass shootings pick their places because that's where the people they want to kill are. Kids shoot up schools because that's where they spend most of their time. The Columbine shooters apparently never considered their armed school resource officer as they planned their massacre or maybe they knew he'd been off school grounds when they planned to bomb the common area.
I believe the insinuation you are making that mass shooters go where they know most people won't be armed is frankly wrong and short-sighted in most if not all cases.
Quite the opposite; I have not heard of a Mass Shooting in a Police station. All of the police in a police station are armed. If you intent was to try and kill lots of people why not start their.
Simple the person is most likely a coward, and does not want to be met with armed resistance.
Notice in most mass shooting, the killer chooses to take their own life, why again, they do not want to spend the rest of their lives in jail, or did not want to go out in a hail of bullets. But one quick bullet of their own does the trick again a coward.
Banning guns to prevent mass shootings is like banning fire extinguishers and smoke detectors to prevent fires or banning airbags to prevent car accidents.
Except it's essentially worked in other countries.
Not that I think that justifies getting rid of our right to them. Freedom is messy.
Banning guns to prevent mass shootings is like banning fire extinguishers and smoke detectors to prevent fires or banning airbags to prevent car accidents.
Really, then why do other countries who ban guns don't have the violence we have.
Quite the opposite; I have not heard of a Mass Shooting in a Police station. All of the police in a police station are armed. If you intent was to try and kill lots of people why not start their.
Because in most cases, the intent may not be to kill lots of people, but to kill lots of the people you hate. Such as kids at school if you're a mucked up kid at that school. Not to mention the Las Vegas shooter certainly had a situation where he could kill more people at a concert than any police station.
A few miles north of me, there was some guy who actually did go to a police station to shoot the place up. It didn't end too well for him. Though I suspect it ended just as he intended.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
