Let me also say this: Here I am talking about the lawful and discrete concealed carry of defensive handguns. I am not talking about the open carrying of long guns - which has been criticized by the NRA and nearly every other gun rights group out there. I am not even talking about the open carrying of handguns. Again, I am talking about the discrete and legal carrying of concealed defensive handguns. So this is not about your customers being frightened - they will never know that the person next to them is lawfully carrying, any more than they would know if the person next to them is an off duty or plain clothes police officer who is likewise carrying a concealed firearm.
Still, there is a larger question: What is the safest thing to do? If you don't know much about guns or concealed carry, it might seem that the safest thing to do is to ban guns. If you have gotten most of your information from the media and gun control groups, chances are most of what you think is true about licensed concealed carry is not factual. As I will prove in the work that follows, it is banning guns that increases the danger to you, your employees and your customers. I think by the time you finish reading this, you will be convinced that by far, the wisest and the safest thing to do is to simply follow your state's law regarding concealed carry.
The Link Between Gun Free Zones and Mass Shootings
The goal of this section is to present the truth concerning so called "gun free zones" where signs are posted to prevent legal carry and mass shootings by homicidal maniacs or "active shooters" widely reported in the media. In spite of the reports you may have heard in the media, in cross referencing several lists, I was only able to identify 30 mass shootings since Columbine (an average of about two per year). I did exclude a few incidents that simply did not apply to the issue - mostly domestic violence and mobile/drive by shootings (these are listed at the end of this post). The news media themselves excluded many of these, as well as those committed in the furtherance of other crimes. With the possible exception of armed robberies, these criminal acts are like not affected by gun free zones. Details are at the end on in this article.
Rather then simply examining "gun free zones" vs. other locations, I broke it down into smaller groups:
Phony Gun Free Zone - A sign is posted banning legally carried firearms, without any further measures being taken to insure compliance. This action does nothing to stop those who are the real risk, while keeping those who might respond unarmed.
Actual Gun free Zone - Same as above, except at least some other measures have been taken to enforce the ban on firearms (metal detector, searches, etc.)
Virtual Gun Free Zone - The incident took place in a state where no carry permits were issued at that time, or where it is virtually impossible to obtain one. As with a "Phony Gun Free Zone" the would be mass murderer need not worry that one or more of his victims might be armed.
Not A Gun Free Zone - Legal carry is permitted both by state law and by those in charge of the location. "No Guns Allowed" signs are not posted. Firearms may be carried by duly authorized persons and permits are issued to all who can pass the required training and background checks.
How strong is the association between mass shootings by disturbed individuals (active shooters) and so called gun free zones? Well out of 30 mass shootings or attempted mass shootings on the media's lists, 24 or 80% took place in gun free zones.
In addition, the safest locations were non-gun free zones and actual gun free zones. The most likely place for a homicidal maniac will choose is a phony gun free zone, a location where "no guns allowed" signs are posted.
Unfortunately, those opposed to citizen carry use deceitful methods to promote the idea that posting "no guns allowed" signs involves no risk. As the data above indicates, nothing could be further from the truth. There is a strong association between locations where such signs are posted and mass shootings. In addition, logic suggests that an armed robber would be more, not less, likely to choose a business where customers are not permitted to carry guns. As far as I know, neither side has researched this at this time.
Why do gun control advocates do this? Simple, they lost the debate over concealed carry (50 states now issue them, with 43 doing so on a "Shall Issue" basis - if all training and background check requirements are met). We now have 25+ years of experience with concealed carry and not one state has repealed their law. Revocations run well under .5%. They know they have lost that battle. Their goal now is to make carrying a gun so burdensome that no one - not even off duty police - will do so. In fact, they recently succeeded in getting the NFL to ban off duty cops from carrying at games. They don't care about your individual safety - or the safety of those in your building - they have a larger political goal in mind.
The Effect Of Armed Citizens And Off Duty Police On Mass Shootings
Anti-gun rights groups frequently talk about how no good could possibly come from an armed citizen attempting to stop an "active shooter" - but what are the facts?
Of the 20% (6) that did not take place in gun free zones, a full 50% resulted in armed citizens (2) or an off duty police officer (1) intervening . In 2/3 of these cases, the intervention was fully successful. In one of these cases, the citizen was killed, but was able to buy time for others to escape. In addition, there have been other cases where mass shootings were stopped by citizens but these stories were not widely reported or included in the media lists of mass shootings. Even including these incidents, there was not one case where the intervention of the armed citizen or police officers caused more causalities. Even in the one case where the armed citizen was killed, the impact of his intervention was positive - in every one of these cases the only people who died after the armed citizen or off duty cop acted were the mass shooters. In every case where an armed citizen or off duty cop intervened the killing of innocents stopped.
In addition to the three reported cases where armed citizens or off duty police acted to stop mass shootings outside of gun free zones, there were an additional two incidents where an off duty cop or armed citizen ignored posted signs and entered a "gun free zone" - and then acted to stop a mass shooting. Their intervention is both cases ended the killing of innocents.
Conclusion: While the sample size is small, armed citizen intervention has been universally positive. In fact 17% (5 of 30) of the mass shootings on media lists were stopped by armed citizens or off duty police officers.
Isn't It Better To Wait For The Police?
Rather than reinvent the wheel, I have used his study. As the graphic indicates, the average number of deaths when people "wait for the police" is 14.3. When those on scene are able to stop the incident, the average number of deaths is 2.3. It should be noted that, largely due to the fact that these killers choose gun free zones, most - but not all - of the incidents that were stopped by those on scene were stopped by other means. However, the most effective way to stop a homicidal maniac with a gun, is to have your own gun. Even with a gun, the safest thing to do is to flee. That said, frequently this is not an option. In these cases hiding and waiting for the cops is the most dangerous of two dangerous options.
Waiting for police may be good advice for armed robberies - by it is very bad advice for an "active shooter"!
Why are so few mass shootings and killings stopped by armed citizens?
There two primary reasons why more "mass shootings" are not stopped by armed citizens or off duty police:
1) As this work has proved, mass shooters select locations where law abiding citizens (and in many cases off duty/retired cops) are not permitted to carry. Obviously, this makes intervention by armed citizens impossible, unless the cop or CCW holder violates the gun free zone.
2) In spite of the above, there have been incidents where mass shootings have indeed been stopped by off duty cops or armed citizens - usually because they ignored the signs. However, when this happens, the toll of dead and injured frequently falls below the minimum to be considered a "mass shooting" (4 victims). The study above indicates that when a mass shooting is stopped by citizens - using any means - the average death toll is 2.3. This is well under the FBI minimum to be considered a mass shooting and these incidents seldom make national news. I am aware of incidents where school resource officers and others stopped shooting incidents below the required number (in some cases no one was killed), but I didn't include these because they were not on the media's list.
In this regard the arguments of those opposed to concealed carry are just like a sick person who refuses to take a proven cure and then says, "See I told you it won't work!"
Although I limited my study to incidents widely reported in the media and included in their lists, there have been other incidents where armed citizens and off duty cops have stopped "active shooters" with firearms. Here are a few examples with links:
Pearl High School shooting
Winnemucca bar shooting
Parker Middle School dance shooting (Police response was greater than 11 minutes!)
Destiny Christian Center
Tyler courthouse shooting
Plymouth shooting rampage
Isn't Permitting Licensed People To Carry In My Business Dangerous?
The short answer is absolutely not. Let's look at the issue logically:
First, merely posting a sign will not keep out dangerous people. The people you need to worry about - criminals, homicidal maniacs, and even those who simply carry illegally will simply ignore your sign and bring their gun in anyway. Worse than this, many criminals will see your business as a more attractive target. Anyone who thinks that someone intent upon armed robbery or mass murder will be stopped by a sign is simply delusional. The only people who will respect such a sign at your door are those who are cautious, thoughtful, responsible and law abiding - the very people who present no threat.
First, merely posting a sign will not keep out dangerous people. The people you need to worry about - criminals, homicidal maniacs, and even those who simply carry illegally will simply ignore your sign and bring their gun in anyway. Worse than this, many criminals will see your business as a more attractive target. Anyone who thinks that someone intent upon armed robbery or mass murder will be stopped by a sign is simply delusional. The only people who will respect such a sign at your door are those who are cautious, thoughtful, responsible and law abiding - the very people who present no threat.
So, that leaves us, in all but a few states that do not require permits for concealed carry, with the issue of those people with government issued permits to carry a concealed firearm. Are they a significant danger as the gun control groups claim?
The state of Texas provides the most exhaustive information regarding licensed carry, so let's look at that state:
In 2000, four years after the Texas law allowing licensed carry went into effect, William E. Sturdevant published "An Analysis Of The Arrest Rate Of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders As Compared To The Arrest Rate Of The Entire Texas Population" The chart at left is an extract from that article. Note that those authorized to carry a firearm are significantly less likely to commit crimes than the general population.
In 2000, four years after the Texas law allowing licensed carry went into effect, William E. Sturdevant published "An Analysis Of The Arrest Rate Of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders As Compared To The Arrest Rate Of The Entire Texas Population" The chart at left is an extract from that article. Note that those authorized to carry a firearm are significantly less likely to commit crimes than the general population.
Texas has continued to publish a great deal of information regarding those licensed to carry. By 2011 516,625 licenses to carry were outstanding in Texas. The state also keeps detailed records of all criminal convictions by CCW permit holders (called a Concealed Handgun License or CHL in Texas), The report for 2011 provides a great deal of information. For instance, how many CHL holders were convicted of a violent crime in 2011? Answer, 38 out of 516,625 or 1 conviction for each 13,595 CHL holders. How many were convicted of any crime? 120 of 516,625 or 1 for each 4305 CHL holders. It's easy to see why many cops call a CCW or CHL permit a "good guy card". People who carry are very responsible and law abiding.
How do Texas CHL holders compare to the general population? In 2011, the adult population of Texas was 18,702,825. The adult population was convicted of total of 63,679 crimes. This works out to a crime rate of one crime for each 294 adult Texans. Furthermore there were a total of 38,064 violent crimes committed in Texas, or 1 for each 491 adult Texans.
Converted to the standard per 100,000 index, it looks like this:
Converted to the standard per 100,000 index, it looks like this:
So, a person licensed to carry a firearm is 27.75 times less likely to commit a violent crime then the average adult. They are 14.6 times less likely to commit ANY CRIME than the adult population.
But the VPC Issues Reports That Prove Concealed Carry Is Dangerous!
As is sadly so often the case, the Violence Policy Center is intentionally dishonest. In their report called "Concealed Carry Killers" they have included people who never ever held a permit, people who had been or were later cleared of all charges, and worst of all, they have counted the same incident as many as three times! The leading firearms researcher in the nation, John Lott, has documented the "flaws" in their "research" in a National Review article.
Furthermore, they will never compare the small number of bad actors (who likely would have carried permit or not) to the 10 MILLION licensed individuals nationwide. Why? Simple: It would put even their bogus figures into perspective.
Crimes are committed by all groups - even police officers. In fact a study by Dean Weingarten, a former police officer, military officer and firearms instructor indicates that police officers - while more law abiding then the general population, are roughly three times more likely to commit murder than CCW permit holders. Does this mean that we start telling cops to leave their guns outside? Banning lawful concealed carry makes no more sense.
Some media outlets are beginning to pick up on these facts. For example, Townhall.com published an article entitled, "Hard Truth for Gun-Control Advocates: Permit Holders Extremely Law-Abiding"
Clearly, there is little to no risk associated with simply following the law in your state regarding concealed carry.
What Do Police Officers Think?
First of all, you will seldom get an accurate answer to that question by listening to a police chief. In most cases, police chiefs are politicians, appointed by other politicians - such as mayors. They are selected because they agree with the politicians who appointed them and can often fire them at will. Since most big city mayors are both liberal and anti-gun rights, surprise, surprise - so are most big city police chiefs.
So, how can we find out what law enforcement offers really think? How about a survey of over 15,000 currently serving officers done by the largest police organization in America? Well, that is exactly what Police One has done. While this survey covers a wide variety of gun and gun control issues, let's look at the questions that address the issue of mass shootings and concealed carry:
What is the most common answer given by police when you ask them what would stop shootings and save lives? More concealed carry.
But only 28.8% chose concealed carry as what would help "the most" - what do they say if you ask them about concealed carry specifically?
Here you are:
86.2% of active police officers believe that causalities would have been reduced or eliminated of an armed citizen were present.
When asked directly about concealed carry, the officers were very supportive. Consider this article on Police One's website, which was based on the survey:
"More than 91 percent of respondents support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable."
When this horrible incidents happen, the gun control lobby quickly appears on TV mocking the idea that an armed citizen could have done any good. Having likely never even fired a gun, they suddenly become experts. Who will you choose to believe, the talking heads on TV or nearly 9 out of 10 cops?
So, here are the facts:
1) Most mass shootings happen in locations where legal carry is banned. It is likely that such sick individuals prefer gun free zones.
2) Legally armed citizens and off duty police have stopped such shootings on several occasions.
3) Waiting for police to respond drastically increases the number of dead and wounded.
4) CCW permit holders are incredibly law abiding and safe. They present no danger to the general public.
5) Police officers overwhelmingly support concealed carry and believe that it would reduce or eliminate causalities in a mass shooting situation.
These are the facts - now you have to choose. You can ban legally carried firearms, which will both make your establishment more dangerous and cause you to loose customers - OR - you can simply follow the law in your state.
Some time soon, some business - after experiencing a tragic shooting - is going to have to defend their decision to forbid licensed citizens from carrying in their place of business in a court of law. If you were to be that business, how would you defend such a decision? Wouldn't a much safer course of action be to simply follow the law in your state?
But only 28.8% chose concealed carry as what would help "the most" - what do they say if you ask them about concealed carry specifically?
Here you are:
86.2% of active police officers believe that causalities would have been reduced or eliminated of an armed citizen were present.
When asked directly about concealed carry, the officers were very supportive. Consider this article on Police One's website, which was based on the survey:
"More than 91 percent of respondents support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or not been deemed psychologically/medically incapable."
When this horrible incidents happen, the gun control lobby quickly appears on TV mocking the idea that an armed citizen could have done any good. Having likely never even fired a gun, they suddenly become experts. Who will you choose to believe, the talking heads on TV or nearly 9 out of 10 cops?
So, here are the facts:
1) Most mass shootings happen in locations where legal carry is banned. It is likely that such sick individuals prefer gun free zones.
2) Legally armed citizens and off duty police have stopped such shootings on several occasions.
3) Waiting for police to respond drastically increases the number of dead and wounded.
4) CCW permit holders are incredibly law abiding and safe. They present no danger to the general public.
5) Police officers overwhelmingly support concealed carry and believe that it would reduce or eliminate causalities in a mass shooting situation.
These are the facts - now you have to choose. You can ban legally carried firearms, which will both make your establishment more dangerous and cause you to loose customers - OR - you can simply follow the law in your state.
Some time soon, some business - after experiencing a tragic shooting - is going to have to defend their decision to forbid licensed citizens from carrying in their place of business in a court of law. If you were to be that business, how would you defend such a decision? Wouldn't a much safer course of action be to simply follow the law in your state?
Supporting Information
Why do gun control groups list so many more mass shootings?
Why do gun control groups list so many more mass shootings?
Most anti-gun rights groups include incidents in their "studies" intended to skew them away from the conclusion that homicidal maniacs are attracted to gun free zones. The FBI defines a mass shooting as any incident in which 4 or more people are shot. This happens most often in the furtherance of criminal activity (Gang wars, armed robbery, drug deals gone bad, etc.) or domestic violence. Most of these incidents are not included in lists published by news organizations because they are not random attacks by homicidal maniacs. Clearly domestic violence most often takes place in the home and is unaffected by gun free zones. Drug related shootings usually take place outdoors or in private homes, so again gun free zones are not a factor. On the other hand, I did include workplace shootings with more than 4 victims, because if someone keeps shooting after killing their target (for example, the boss) they clearly fit the definition of a homicidal maniac. Incidents that involved "drive by" or multiple locations in a single incident were excluded, even though most of the time at least one of the locations was a "gun free zone".
Details
Where the data came from: These incidents were all listed in news articles on mass shooting in the mainstream media, beginning with the Columbine High School shooting. They did not come from gun rights organizations. I am sure that some applicable incidents may have been omitted, but it is not intentional. It is still a representative sample of incidents reported in the media. After compiling the list, I then researched in order to discover if the incident took place in a gun free zone.
Included incidents:
April 20, 1999: Teenagers Eric Harris and Dylan Kiebold shot up Columbine High School in Colorado. They killed 13 people and wounded 21 others. They killed themselves after the massacre. As a Colorado school, Columbine is a phony gun free zone.
Sept. 15, 1999: Larry Gene Ashbrook opened fire on a Christian rock concert and teen prayer rally in Fort Worth, Tex. He killed seven people and wounded seven others, almost all teenagers. Ashbrook committed suicide. Clearly motivated by anti-christian bigotry. All churches are phony gun free zones under Texas law.
Dec. 26, 2000: Edgewater Technology employee Michael McDermott shot and killed seven of his coworkers at the office in Wakefield, Mass. McDermott claimed he had “traveled back in time and killed Hitler and the last six Nazis.” Louis "Sandy" Javelle's was one of victims. He held a CCW permit in his home state of New Hampshire, but was forbidden to carry in MA. He was killed while attempting to tackle the shooter. Phony Gun Free Zone.
July 8, 2003: Doug Williams shot up a Lockheed plant in Meridian, Miss. in a racially motivated rampage, killing seven before taking his own life. News reports indicated that the Lockheed plant is a phony gun free zone.
March 12, 2005: Terry Michael Ratzmann, a member of the Living Church of God, shot up a service at a hotel in Brookfield, Wisc. Ratzmann killed himself after executing the pastor, the pastor’s 16-year-old son, and seven others. At the time all carry was illegal in the state, thus making the church a virtual gun free zone.
March 21, 2005: Teenager Jeffrey Weise killed his grandfather and his grandfather’s girlfriend before opening fire on Red Lake Senior High School, killing nine people on campus, plus himself. Like nearly almost all school, this was a phony gun free zone.
Feb. 12, 2007: Five people were shot to death in Salt Lake City by 18-year-old gunman Sulejman Talovic. The mall in which the shooting took place is a phony gun free zone - but an off duty cop ignored the signs. Running towards the sound of the shots, he traded gunfire with the murderer until other officers arrived and killed him, thus preventing more causalities. Phony Gun Free Zone.
April 16, 2007: Virginia Tech became the site of the deadliest school shooting in U.S. history when a student, Seung-Hui Choi, gunned down 56 people. Thirty-two people died. Like most college campuses, Virginia Tech was and is a phony gun free zone. Choi chained the doors to a classroom building shut and had 11 minutes to kill people before police could gain entry. Since no one, not even trained CCW permit holders, could be armed while on campus, no one could stop him. Phony Gun Free Zone.
Dec. 5, 2007: A 19-year-old boy, Robert Hawkins, shot up a mall department store in Omaha, Neb. Hawkins killed nine people and wounded four before killing himself. Not only is the Westwoods mall a phony gun free zone, surveillance footage showed the murderer entering the mall unarmed and confirming (by finding the sign) that the mall prohibited firearms before returning with his weapon. Phony Gun Free Zone.
December 9, 2007: 24-year-old Matthew J. Murray attacked the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, with a number of firearms, killing two people and injuring three before being shot and wounded by a member of the church's congregation who was carrying a 9mm under a Colorado CCW permit; he then committed suicide. Not a gun free zone.
Feb. 7, 2008: Six people died and two were injured in a shooting spree at the City Hall in Kirkwood, Missouri. The gunman, Charles Lee Thornton, opened fire during a public meeting after being denied construction contracts he believed he deserved. Thornton was killed by police. As a public building, the City Hall was a phony gun free zone.
Feb. 14, 2008: Steven Kazmierczak, 27, opened fire in a lecture hall at Northern Illinois University, killing six and wounding 21. At the time, Illinois law forbade all forms of carry - and as a university this was another virtual gun free zone.
March 29, 2009: Eight people died in a shooting at the Pinelake Health and Rehab nursing home in Carthage, N.C. The gunman, 45-year-old Robert Stewart, was targeting his estranged wife. The facility was posted as a phony gun free zone.
April 3, 2009: Jiverly Wong, 41, opened fire at an immigration center in upstate Binghamton before committing suicide. He killed 13 people and wounded 4. Although the facility was privately owned, it was posted as a phony gun free zone.
Nov. 5, 2009: Forty-three people were shot by Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan at the Fort Hood army base in Texas. Thirteen were killed and 29 were wounded. Like all US military bases since the Clinton administration ordered it, this base was and is a phony gun free zone.
Aug. 3, 2010: Omar Thornton, 34, gunned down Hartford Beer Distributor in Manchester, Conn. after getting caught stealing beer. Nine were killed, including Thornton. I was unable to determine if the building is a gun free zone, but CT law effectively makes it one because CCW permits are so hard to get. Virtual Gun Free Zone.
Jan. 8, 2011: Jared Loughner, 22, opened fire at a Safeway market in Tucson, Ariz. Six people died, and then-Rep. Gabby Giffords was badly injured. This shooting did not take place within a gun free zone, because it took place outdoors. Not in a Gun Free Zone.
Sept. 6, 2011: Eduardo Sencion, 32, entered an IHOP restaurant in Carson City, Nev. and shot 12 people. Five died. You guessed it, this IHOP was posted as a phony gun free zone.
Oct. 14, 2011: Eight people died when 41-year-old Scott Evans Dekraai shot up the Salon Meritage hair salon in Seal Beach, Calif. Not a gun free zone, by gun laws in my native California make it virtually impossible to obtain a permit, so it is a Virtual Gun Free Zone.
Feb. 27, 2012: Three students were killed by Thomas "TJ" Lane in a rampage at Chardon High School in Ohio. As a school, Chardon High is a phony gun free zone.
April 2, 2012: A former student, 43-year-old One L. Goh killed seven people at Oikos University, a Korean Christian college in Oakland, Calif. Unknown is any policy banned guns, but in this county (and most of urban CA) CCW permits are never issued. Virtual Gun Free Zone.
July 20, 2012: During the midnight premiere of “The Dark Knight Rises” in Aurora, Colo., 24-year-old James Holmes killed 12 people and wounded 58. Holmes had 7 theaters to choose from. Some were closer to his home, some further away. Some were larger, some smaller. He chose very carefully, visiting some of the theaters and buying his tickets 2 weeks ahead of time. His choice? The only theater out of seven that banned legally carried firearms. Phony Gun Free Zone.
Aug. 5, 2012: Six Sikh temple members were killed when 40-year-old Army veteran Wade Michael Page opened fire in Oak Creek, Wisconsin. Page killed himself as cops moved in. Wisconsin law allowed legally carried firearms in house of worship. However, the Temple had elected to post the require "no guns allowed" signs. Another phony gun free zone.
Sept. 27, 2012: Five were shot to death by 36-year-old Andrew Engeldinger at Accent Signage Systems in Minneapolis, Minn. Engeldinger ended up killing himself in the rampage over losing his job. I was unable to determine if this business was posted, so I will count is as not a gun free zone.
Dec. 11, 2012: 22-year-old Jacob Tyler Roberts killed two people and himself with a stolen rifle in Clackamas Town Center, Oregon. His motive is unknown. The incident ended when a CCW permit holder who had ignored the "no guns allowed" signs pointed his Glock at him (he held his fire due to people being behind the shooter). Roberts saw him and immediately ran away and found a secluded location where he killed himself. The FBI did not count this as a mass shooting (only two victims) - therefore anti-gun rights groups say it was not a mass shooting stopped by a CCW permit holder. Another incident in a phony gun free zone.
Dec. 14, 2012: 20-year-old Adam Lanza fatally shot 20 children and six adult staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. Earlier, he had killed his mother Nancy at their Newtown home. As a school, Sandy Hook was a phony gun free zone.
July 26, 2013: Hialeah apartment shooting. Hialeah, Florida. Pedro Vargas, 42, set fire to his apartment, killed six people in the complex, and held another two hostages at gunpoint before a SWAT team stormed the building and fatally shot him. Not in a gun free zone.
Sept. 16, 2013: Washington Navy Yard. A gunmen opened fire inside the Washington Navy Yard, killing at 12 people in an attack on office workers at the heavily secured military installation in the heart of the nation's capital, authorities said. As a US military facility, the Navy Yard is a gun free zone. Even the presence of armed security did not stop this attack - and even though many inside the building were "weapons qualified" they were all forbidden to have firearms with them. Actual Gun Free Zone.
June 5, 2014: Seattle Pacific University A man armed with a shotgun invaded the school and opened fire, killing 1 and wounding several others before being subdued by a student security officer armed with pepper spray. As a college, Seattle Pacific is a phony gun free zone.
June 8, 2014 Las Vegas Shooting - Jerad and Amanda Miller murdered two police officers, stole their weapons and invaded a nearby Walmart. At this point they were confronted by a CCW permit holder whom Amanda (who was blending into the crowd) killed by shooting him in the back. However, this likely threw the shooters plans into disarray and bought some time for shoppers to flee. This allowed police to barricade the rear exits, trapping the shooters in the store. Jerad was killed in the exchange of gunfire and Amanda committed suicide.
A Sheriff's spokesman called Joseph Robert Wilcox "a hero". In the midst of their own grief over two lost officers, the Sheriffs contributed thousands of dollars towards his final expenses. Never the less, he was slammed on left wing forums and the incident was hailed as proof that CCW holders cannot stop mass shooters. The truth: Wilcox acted EXACTLY as a police officer would have done. The vast majority of mass shooters act alone. Police are now trained to engage them alone if no one else is immediately available. Joe Wilcox knew he was taking a huge chance, but he stepped up. Anti-gun groups can call him stupid and reckless - but I'll go with the cops opinion: He was a hero. Not in a gun free zone.
June 10, 2014: Reynolds High School, OR an active shooter situation occurred at the school during morning period. One student, 14-year-old freshman Emilio Hoffman, died. A physical education teacher suffered non-life-threatening injuries. The shooter, 15-year-old Jared Michael Padgett, who was using an AR-15 and also equipped with a handgun and a knife, engaged a responding officer in a gunfight before retreating inside a school bathroom, where he turned the gun on himself and died. Nearly all news reports omitted the fact that he retreated into the bathroom after being confronted by the schools two full time, armed resource officers. IN SHORT, THE NRA'S SOLUTION WORKED. Although this is indeed yet another shooting in a gun free zone, thankfully these two cops were allowed to carry. Given that the shooter should have known about the resource officers, I will count this one as not a gun free zone.
Excluded incidents:
July 29, 1999: Mark Orrin Barton, 44, murdered his wife and two children with a hammer before shooting up two Atlanta day trading firms. Barton was believed to be motivated by huge monetary losses. He killed 12 including his family and injured 13 before killing himself. Excluded as domestic violence.
March 25, 2006: Seven died and two were injured by 28-year-old Kyle Aaron Huff in a shooting spree through Seattle, Wash. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
Oct. 2, 2006: An Amish schoolhouse in Lancaster, Penn. was gunned down by 32-year-old Charles Carl Roberts, who separated the students by gender before killing five girls. Roberts committed suicide afterward. As a school, the was a phony gun free zone - but I will not count it as such because the Amish are pacifists and would not have used deadly force to stop the murders. Excluded - Not applicable.
April 6, 2012: Jake England, 19, and Alvin Watts, 32, shot five black men in Tulsa, Okla., in racially motivated shooting spree. Three died. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
May 29, 2012: Ian Stawicki opened fire on Cafe Racer Espresso in Seattle, Wash., killing five and himself after a citywide manhunt. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
June 6, 2013: Santa Monica rampage. Santa Monica, California. John Zawahri, 23, armed with a homemade assault rifle and high-capacity magazines, killed his brother and father at home and then headed to Santa Monica College, where he was eventually killed by police. Although it ended in a gun free zone, it did not begin in one, so I will not count it as such. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
April 21, 2013: Pinewood Village Apartment shooting. Federal Way, Washington. Dennis Clark III, 27, shot and killed his girlfriend in their shared apartment, and then shot two witnesses in the building's parking lot and a third victim in another apartment, before being killed by police. Excluded, domestic violence.
March 13, 2013: Mohawk Valley shootings, Herkimer County, New York. Kurt Myers, 64, shot six people in neighboring towns, killing two in a barbershop and two at a car care business, before being killed by officers in a shootout after a nearly 19-hour standoff. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
May 23, 2014 A killing spree was perpetrated on May 23, 2014, in Isla Vista, California, near the campus of University of California, Santa Barbara, by 22-year-old Elliot Rodger. Rodger killed six people and injured thirteen others before committing suicide. It should be noted that half the victims were killed with knives, not guns. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
April 2, 2014 A shooting spree occurred at several locations on the Fort Hood military base near Killeen, Texas. Four people, including the gunman, were killed, while sixteen additional people were injured. The shooter, 34-year-old Ivan Lopez, died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Although this entire incident took place in a phony gun free zone, I will exclude it to be consistent. Excluded - "drive by/multiple locations"
No comments:
Post a Comment