100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No.
Five cases commonly cited as a rationale for arming Americans don't stand up to scrutiny. —By Mark Follman | Wed Dec. 19, 2012 3:01 AM PST 461 shooting target Pack Shot/Shutterstock In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of the 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea. Those pesky facts haven't stopped the "arm America more!" crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny. Here are five of them and why they don't work: Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage at the law school in 2002 to armed "students" who intervened. They conveniently ignore that those students also happened to be current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of ammunition by the time they got to him. Tragedy in Newtown Read our two-month investigation: More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence? A Guide to Mass Shootings in America What Happened in the Newtown School Shooting Mass Shootings: Maybe What We Need Is a Better Mental-Health Policy No More Newtowns: What Will It Take? WATCH: Newtown Residents Gather to Mourn and Reflect Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania An ambiguous case from 1998, in which the shooter may well have already been done shooting: After killing a teacher and wounding three others, the 14-year-old perpetrator left the dance venue. The owner of the venue followed him outside with a shotgun, confronting and subduing him in a nearby field until police arrived. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, who himself recently argued for more guns as an answer to gun violence, told me this week that one police source he talked to about this case said that it was "not clear at all" whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he'd left the building. High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi Another case, from 1997, in which the shooting was apparently already over: After killing two and wounding seven inside Pearl High School, the 16-year-old perpetrator left the building and went outside near the parking lot. The assistant principal—who was also a member of the Army Reserve—ran out to his own vehicle, grabbed a handgun he kept there, and then approached the shooter, subduing him at gunpoint until authorities arrived. New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby. Advertise on MotherJones.com Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada In 2008, a gunman who killed two and wounded two others was taken out by another patron in the bar, who was carrying with a valid permit. But this was no regular Joe with a concealed handgun: The vigilante, who was not charged after authorities determined he'd committed a justifiable homicide, was a US Marine. And what about cases in which citizens try to use their guns and things go terribly wrong? There are at least two examples of ill-fated attempts that you won't see mentioned by those arguing for your kid's teacher to start stashing a loaded Glock in her classroom: Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington As a rampage unfolded in 2005, a civilian with a concealed-carry permit named Brendan McKown confronted the assailant with his handgun. The shooter pumped several bullets into McKown, wounding six people before eventually surrendering to police after a hostage standoff. A comatose McKown eventually recovered after weeks in the hospital. Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas In 2005, a civilian named Mark Wilson, who was a firearms instructor, fired his licensed handgun at a man on a rampage at the county courthouse. Wilson was shot dead by the body-armored assailant, who wielded an AK-47. Such actions in chaotic situations don't just put the well-intentioned citizen at risk, of course. According to Robert McMenomy, an assistant special agent in charge in the San Francisco division of the FBI, they increase the danger for innocent bystanders. (Exhibit A: the gun-wielding guy who came really close to shooting an innocent person as the Tucson massacre unfolded.) They also make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to do their jobs. "In a scenario like that," McMenomy told me in a recent conversation, "they wouldn't know who was good or who was bad, and it would divert them from the real threat." http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. Five cases commonly cited as a rationale for arming Americans don't stand up to scrutiny. —By Mark Follman | Wed Dec. 19, 2012 3:01 AM PST 461 shooting target Pack Shot/Shutterstock In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of the 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea. Those pesky facts haven't stopped the "arm America more!" crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny. Here are five of them and why they don't work: Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage at the law school in 2002 to armed "students" who intervened. They conveniently ignore that those students also happened to be current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of ammunition by the time they got to him. Tragedy in Newtown Read our two-month investigation: More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence? A Guide to Mass Shootings in America What Happened in the Newtown School Shooting Mass Shootings: Maybe What We Need Is a Better Mental-Health Policy No More Newtowns: What Will It Take? WATCH: Newtown Residents Gather to Mourn and Reflect Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania An ambiguous case from 1998, in which the shooter may well have already been done shooting: After killing a teacher and wounding three others, the 14-year-old perpetrator left the dance venue. The owner of the venue followed him outside with a shotgun, confronting and subduing him in a nearby field until police arrived. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, who himself recently argued for more guns as an answer to gun violence, told me this week that one police source he talked to about this case said that it was "not clear at all" whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he'd left the building. High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi Another case, from 1997, in which the shooting was apparently already over: After killing two and wounding seven inside Pearl High School, the 16-year-old perpetrator left the building and went outside near the parking lot. The assistant principal—who was also a member of the Army Reserve—ran out to his own vehicle, grabbed a handgun he kept there, and then approached the shooter, subduing him at gunpoint until authorities arrived. New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby. Advertise on MotherJones.com Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada In 2008, a gunman who killed two and wounded two others was taken out by another patron in the bar, who was carrying with a valid permit. But this was no regular Joe with a concealed handgun: The vigilante, who was not charged after authorities determined he'd committed a justifiable homicide, was a US Marine. And what about cases in which citizens try to use their guns and things go terribly wrong? There are at least two examples of ill-fated attempts that you won't see mentioned by those arguing for your kid's teacher to start stashing a loaded Glock in her classroom: Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington As a rampage unfolded in 2005, a civilian with a concealed-carry permit named Brendan McKown confronted the assailant with his handgun. The shooter pumped several bullets into McKown, wounding six people before eventually surrendering to police after a hostage standoff. A comatose McKown eventually recovered after weeks in the hospital. Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas In 2005, a civilian named Mark Wilson, who was a firearms instructor, fired his licensed handgun at a man on a rampage at the county courthouse. Wilson was shot dead by the body-armored assailant, who wielded an AK-47. Such actions in chaotic situations don't just put the well-intentioned citizen at risk, of course. According to Robert McMenomy, an assistant special agent in charge in the San Francisco division of the FBI, they increase the danger for innocent bystanders. (Exhibit A: the gun-wielding guy who came really close to shooting an innocent person as the Tucson massacre unfolded.) They also make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to do their jobs. "In a scenario like that," McMenomy told me in a recent conversation, "they wouldn't know who was good or who was bad, and it would divert them from the real threat." http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings
What garbage is this??? Please this must have came from a anti-gun garbage site eh? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. Five cases commonly cited as a rationale for arming Americans don't stand up to scrutiny. —By Mark Follman | Wed Dec. 19, 2012 3:01 AM PST 461 shooting target Pack Shot/Shutterstock In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of the 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea. Those pesky facts haven't stopped the "arm America more!" crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny. Here are five of them and why they don't work: Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage at the law school in 2002 to armed "students" who intervened. They conveniently ignore that those students also happened to be current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of ammunition by the time they got to him. Tragedy in Newtown Read our two-month investigation: More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence? A Guide to Mass Shootings in America What Happened in the Newtown School Shooting Mass Shootings: Maybe What We Need Is a Better Mental-Health Policy No More Newtowns: What Will It Take? WATCH: Newtown Residents Gather to Mourn and Reflect Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania An ambiguous case from 1998, in which the shooter may well have already been done shooting: After killing a teacher and wounding three others, the 14-year-old perpetrator left the dance venue. The owner of the venue followed him outside with a shotgun, confronting and subduing him in a nearby field until police arrived. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, who himself recently argued for more guns as an answer to gun violence, told me this week that one police source he talked to about this case said that it was "not clear at all" whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he'd left the building. High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi Another case, from 1997, in which the shooting was apparently already over: After killing two and wounding seven inside Pearl High School, the 16-year-old perpetrator left the building and went outside near the parking lot. The assistant principal—who was also a member of the Army Reserve—ran out to his own vehicle, grabbed a handgun he kept there, and then approached the shooter, subduing him at gunpoint until authorities arrived. New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby. Advertise on MotherJones.com Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada In 2008, a gunman who killed two and wounded two others was taken out by another patron in the bar, who was carrying with a valid permit. But this was no regular Joe with a concealed handgun: The vigilante, who was not charged after authorities determined he'd committed a justifiable homicide, was a US Marine. And what about cases in which citizens try to use their guns and things go terribly wrong? There are at least two examples of ill-fated attempts that you won't see mentioned by those arguing for your kid's teacher to start stashing a loaded Glock in her classroom: Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington As a rampage unfolded in 2005, a civilian with a concealed-carry permit named Brendan McKown confronted the assailant with his handgun. The shooter pumped several bullets into McKown, wounding six people before eventually surrendering to police after a hostage standoff. A comatose McKown eventually recovered after weeks in the hospital. Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas In 2005, a civilian named Mark Wilson, who was a firearms instructor, fired his licensed handgun at a man on a rampage at the county courthouse. Wilson was shot dead by the body-armored assailant, who wielded an AK-47. Such actions in chaotic situations don't just put the well-intentioned citizen at risk, of course. According to Robert McMenomy, an assistant special agent in charge in the San Francisco division of the FBI, they increase the danger for innocent bystanders. (Exhibit A: the gun-wielding guy who came really close to shooting an innocent person as the Tucson massacre unfolded.) They also make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to do their jobs. "In a scenario like that," McMenomy told me in a recent conversation, "they wouldn't know who was good or who was bad, and it would divert them from the real threat." http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings
Mother Jones is jonesing bad! They need to get off the Koolaid,and stop serving it! Those who push hardest for outlawing guns are not the altruists among us But it's they who'd create a big socialist state If they had power now, they'd have hung us Disarming the people converts them to sheeple For they lose any means to resist They'll just follow in line and obey every sign When they're ordered to march of the cliff |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The extreme leftists may have a point.
If guns are made illegal and only criminals have guns, they could help control the population. They can go on killing sprees knowing they won't face any opposition. The libs will just call the murders late term abortions. Google Children of the Drones. Why does Barry condemn others killing kids? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here's a study done by the DOJ. Not some lib rag, yo-mama-jonesin'.
Thursday, 20 December 2012 14:36 Written by Tim Macy Let's let facts guide the gun control debate for a change With the recent horrible shootings around the nation, the left-wing -- led by President Obama, some members of the Senate and House, and most of today’s media -- are screaming for new gun control laws. But what would the consequences of such laws be? A study done by the Justice Department in 1999 analyzed the 1994 "Assault Weapons" ban and concluded it did nothing to reduce crime or shootings. The Justice Department stated, “The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun-murder incident or multiple-gunshot wound victims.” No wonder the Congress allowed the useless gun ban to “sunset” after ten years -- it didn't work, period! Despite the fact we have these new incidents where innocents were murdered, gun murders themselves have drastically dropped over the last two decades. Why? Noted gun-crime author and statistician, Dr. John R. Lott, attributes much of this to the increase in “concealed carry” permits issued nationwide to ordinary citizens, which now allow them to carry weapons for personal protection and the protection of others. These laws have reduced crime because potential perpetrators don't know who's carrying for personal protection. In fact, according to FBI data, U.S. murders dropped nearly 40% to 14,478 in 2010 -- a significant drop from 23,440 in 1990 -- even as the overall population grew by 24 percent! This may be why Dr. Lott's most famous book is titled "More guns, less crime." So, if Congress really wants to reduce crime and to stop shootings at so-called “gun-free zones” like schools, movie theaters and other places, maybe they ought to pass laws making it easier for citizens -- especially teachers and school administrators -- to get the training they want to be proficient in gun safety and proficient in hitting their target with a concealed handgun. Most freedom-loving Americans understand that this administration and many in Congress are radical anti-gun members of the Left. They know America and our Constitution are much safer when the Second Amendment is in full force. And that is exactly what they want to change. They are in this for the power, plain and simple. They want control over every aspect in American life, and they are moving at break-neck speed to attain their goal. Many nations that have given up their rights to gun ownership have suffered by the hand of their own government shortly thereafter. Over 170,000,000 (that's one hundred and seventy million) human beings have been slaughtered by their governments in the 20th Century after they gave up their guns. WHY ON EARTH WOULD AMERICANS FOLLOW THIS PATH? I pray they don't. That's why Gun Owners of America was formed to fight the anti-gunners in Congress and in every state house in the nation. Tim Macy is the Vice Chairman of Gun Owners of America, a national gun lobby with over 300,000 members |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lets see, how can we say that guns give the capability to kill, but also say that they are useless for defensive purposes . . . hmmmm.
We need some really good rhetoric for this! Come on people we need more sound bytes that make us look like we know what we are talking about and conceal the contradictions! Good job willowdraga, or dragoness or whatever you call yourself these days! |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Leigh2154
on
Fri 12/21/12 09:41 AM
|
|
Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. Five cases commonly cited as a rationale for arming Americans don't stand up to scrutiny. —By Mark Follman | Wed Dec. 19, 2012 3:01 AM PST 461 shooting target Pack Shot/Shutterstock In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of the 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea. Those pesky facts haven't stopped the "arm America more!" crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny. Here are five of them and why they don't work: Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage at the law school in 2002 to armed "students" who intervened. They conveniently ignore that those students also happened to be current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of ammunition by the time they got to him. Tragedy in Newtown Read our two-month investigation: More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence? A Guide to Mass Shootings in America What Happened in the Newtown School Shooting Mass Shootings: Maybe What We Need Is a Better Mental-Health Policy No More Newtowns: What Will It Take? WATCH: Newtown Residents Gather to Mourn and Reflect Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania An ambiguous case from 1998, in which the shooter may well have already been done shooting: After killing a teacher and wounding three others, the 14-year-old perpetrator left the dance venue. The owner of the venue followed him outside with a shotgun, confronting and subduing him in a nearby field until police arrived. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, who himself recently argued for more guns as an answer to gun violence, told me this week that one police source he talked to about this case said that it was "not clear at all" whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he'd left the building. High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi Another case, from 1997, in which the shooting was apparently already over: After killing two and wounding seven inside Pearl High School, the 16-year-old perpetrator left the building and went outside near the parking lot. The assistant principal—who was also a member of the Army Reserve—ran out to his own vehicle, grabbed a handgun he kept there, and then approached the shooter, subduing him at gunpoint until authorities arrived. New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby. Advertise on MotherJones.com Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada In 2008, a gunman who killed two and wounded two others was taken out by another patron in the bar, who was carrying with a valid permit. But this was no regular Joe with a concealed handgun: The vigilante, who was not charged after authorities determined he'd committed a justifiable homicide, was a US Marine. And what about cases in which citizens try to use their guns and things go terribly wrong? There are at least two examples of ill-fated attempts that you won't see mentioned by those arguing for your kid's teacher to start stashing a loaded Glock in her classroom: Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington As a rampage unfolded in 2005, a civilian with a concealed-carry permit named Brendan McKown confronted the assailant with his handgun. The shooter pumped several bullets into McKown, wounding six people before eventually surrendering to police after a hostage standoff. A comatose McKown eventually recovered after weeks in the hospital. Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas In 2005, a civilian named Mark Wilson, who was a firearms instructor, fired his licensed handgun at a man on a rampage at the county courthouse. Wilson was shot dead by the body-armored assailant, who wielded an AK-47. Such actions in chaotic situations don't just put the well-intentioned citizen at risk, of course. According to Robert McMenomy, an assistant special agent in charge in the San Francisco division of the FBI, they increase the danger for innocent bystanders. (Exhibit A: the gun-wielding guy who came really close to shooting an innocent person as the Tucson massacre unfolded.) They also make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to do their jobs. "In a scenario like that," McMenomy told me in a recent conversation, "they wouldn't know who was good or who was bad, and it would divert them from the real threat." http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings
Mother Jones is jonesing bad! They need to get off the Koolaid,and stop serving it! Those who push hardest for outlawing guns are not the altruists among us But it's they who'd create a big socialist state If they had power now, they'd have hung us Disarming the people converts them to sheeple For they lose any means to resist They'll just follow in line and obey every sign When they're ordered to march of the cliff 
I love it when you talk dirty..... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Man, you're sure rackin up the thumbsup on this thread ....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All you gun toting Americans are a scary & paranoid bunch... For Real!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do Armed Civilians Stop Mass Shooters? Actually, No. Five cases commonly cited as a rationale for arming Americans don't stand up to scrutiny. —By Mark Follman | Wed Dec. 19, 2012 3:01 AM PST 461 shooting target Pack Shot/Shutterstock In the wake of the unthinkable massacre in Connecticut, pro-gun ideologues are once again calling for ordinary citizens to arm themselves as a solution to mass shootings. If only the principal at Sandy Hook Elementary School had possessed a M-4 assault rifle she could've stopped the killer, they say. This latest twist on a long-running argument isn't just absurd on its face; there is no evidence to support it. As I reported recently in our in-depth investigation, not one of the 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years has been stopped this way. More broadly, attempts by armed civilians to intervene in shooting rampages are rare—and are successful even more rarely. (Two people who tried it in recent years were gravely wounded or killed.) And law enforcement overwhelmingly hates the idea. Those pesky facts haven't stopped the "arm America more!" crowd from pressing the argument with alleged examples of successful armed interventions. The problem is, the few examples they keep using—in which they depict plain old folks acting heroically and with definitive results—fall apart under scrutiny. Here are five of them and why they don't work: Appalachian School of Law shooting in Grundy, Virginia Gun rights die-hards frequently credit the end of a rampage at the law school in 2002 to armed "students" who intervened. They conveniently ignore that those students also happened to be current and former law enforcement officers, and that the killer, according to police investigators, was out of ammunition by the time they got to him. Tragedy in Newtown Read our two-month investigation: More Guns, More Mass Shootings—Coincidence? A Guide to Mass Shootings in America What Happened in the Newtown School Shooting Mass Shootings: Maybe What We Need Is a Better Mental-Health Policy No More Newtowns: What Will It Take? WATCH: Newtown Residents Gather to Mourn and Reflect Middle school dance shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania An ambiguous case from 1998, in which the shooter may well have already been done shooting: After killing a teacher and wounding three others, the 14-year-old perpetrator left the dance venue. The owner of the venue followed him outside with a shotgun, confronting and subduing him in a nearby field until police arrived. The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg, who himself recently argued for more guns as an answer to gun violence, told me this week that one police source he talked to about this case said that it was "not clear at all" whether the kid had intended to do any further shooting after he'd left the building. High school shooting in Pearl, Mississippi Another case, from 1997, in which the shooting was apparently already over: After killing two and wounding seven inside Pearl High School, the 16-year-old perpetrator left the building and went outside near the parking lot. The assistant principal—who was also a member of the Army Reserve—ran out to his own vehicle, grabbed a handgun he kept there, and then approached the shooter, subduing him at gunpoint until authorities arrived. New Life Church shooting in Colorado Springs, Colorado In 2007 a gunman killed two people and wounded three others before being shot himself; the pro-gun crowd likes to refer to the woman who took him out in the parking lot as a "church member." Never mind that she was a security officer for the church and a former cop, and that the church had put its security team on high alert earlier that day due to another church shooting nearby. Advertise on MotherJones.com Bar shooting in Winnemucca, Nevada In 2008, a gunman who killed two and wounded two others was taken out by another patron in the bar, who was carrying with a valid permit. But this was no regular Joe with a concealed handgun: The vigilante, who was not charged after authorities determined he'd committed a justifiable homicide, was a US Marine. And what about cases in which citizens try to use their guns and things go terribly wrong? There are at least two examples of ill-fated attempts that you won't see mentioned by those arguing for your kid's teacher to start stashing a loaded Glock in her classroom: Shopping mall shooting in Tacoma, Washington As a rampage unfolded in 2005, a civilian with a concealed-carry permit named Brendan McKown confronted the assailant with his handgun. The shooter pumped several bullets into McKown, wounding six people before eventually surrendering to police after a hostage standoff. A comatose McKown eventually recovered after weeks in the hospital. Courthouse shooting in Tyler, Texas In 2005, a civilian named Mark Wilson, who was a firearms instructor, fired his licensed handgun at a man on a rampage at the county courthouse. Wilson was shot dead by the body-armored assailant, who wielded an AK-47. Such actions in chaotic situations don't just put the well-intentioned citizen at risk, of course. According to Robert McMenomy, an assistant special agent in charge in the San Francisco division of the FBI, they increase the danger for innocent bystanders. (Exhibit A: the gun-wielding guy who came really close to shooting an innocent person as the Tucson massacre unfolded.) They also make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to do their jobs. "In a scenario like that," McMenomy told me in a recent conversation, "they wouldn't know who was good or who was bad, and it would divert them from the real threat." http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/12/armed-civilians-do-not-stop-mass-shootings
More mass hysteria. Unarmed civilians don't stop mass killings either. Why is it shooters go to gun free zones to do their horrendous crimes??? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Sojourning_Soul
on
Fri 12/21/12 12:14 PM
|
|
Using "gun free" zones as kill zones.... does anyone really believe that these idiot patsies (like Oswald) really consider this when they are supposed to be crazy enough to commit mass murder..... then suicide? Why do they never live to tell their tale if it's all about becoming famous? One thought might be that if they are dead, anything other than the "official story" becomes simply debunked as a conspiracy theory.....and easily perpetuated by the media believing morons!
This Associated Press/Newsday article http://www.sott.net/article/254797-Connecticut-Chief-Medical-Examiner-School-massacre-perpetrators-used-military-style-rifles-that-were-rigged-to-reload-quickly-Sandy-Hook-autopsies-worst-I-ve-seen#reply13318 on Saturday, December 15th, reported that “Only the rifle was used on the victims“, a statement that is supported by Dr. H. Wayne Carver II, Connecticut state’s chief medical examiner. Of the seven autopsies he personally performed on Sandy Hook victims, all of them had “three to 11 wounds apiece”. He also said that the ‘gunman’ used a military-style rifle rigged to quickly reload, and that the ‘shooter’ was able to reload so quickly because he had “taped two magazines together.” Even before the State Chief Medical Examiner had given these statements, it had been stated that spent shell casings from .233-caliber (rifle) bullets were found inside the school http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZo_iOPqXew. So all the victims’ wounds were the result of rifle-fire, specifically from “the rifle”, the one we were told in early reports was found in the trunk of a car in the parking lot! This is simply not credible. One veteran has a take on it..... without facts, and only questions caused by conflicting news reports, witness accounts and video, there is only conjecture....on any side of the argument! http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/12/20/sandy-hook-massacre-official-story-spins-out-of-control/ Obamas' drone strikes bear out the following statement by the author! The use of Black Water mercenaries know for such crimes in places like Iraq and Afganistan is also well documented! "The psychopaths in power have absolutely no compunction about using state terrorism, in this case organising the deliberate massacre of innocent children, to control people. In effect, this is little different from the U.S. government calls counter-insurgency or counter-terrorism in foreign countries, where it attacks innocent civilians to create the impression that they were killed by ‘communists’, ‘terrorists’, ‘insurgents’ or ‘militants’, with the aim of generating public support for the illusion that the common people need a strong, ruthless government to protect them from the ‘evil-doers’. When the common people buy into this manipulation, the end result, as history shows repeatedly, is an overt and brutal police state." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Colorado movie shooter actually wen't to a theater farther away from his house to one that had a sign that stated no firearms allowed (He knew there would be defenseless people in there).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Colorado movie shooter actually wen't to a theater farther away from his house to one that had a sign that stated no firearms allowed (He knew there would be defenseless people in there). He went farther from his home because that is what most criminals do when they plan things ahead of time...lol I guess you don't pay attention to the show much huh? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Colorado movie shooter actually wen't to a theater farther away from his house to one that had a sign that stated no firearms allowed (He knew there would be defenseless people in there). He went farther from his home because that is what most criminals do when they plan things ahead of time...lol I guess you don't pay attention to the show much huh? Yeah...They case places to look for the best place to perpetrate their crime...Looks like he found it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ill tell ya this im bustin a cap if i see some crazy guy shootin people and ya know whats the difference between him and me is i got him at any distance 1 shot!! ill make it fun and ill bust 2... only being honest.. dont tell me u would watch. and i know plenty of people in this country would be on my side!
and banning or taking away guns or whatever does not make a person a criminal if they have one and the bad people would get them so easy on how many there are in this country or just go to the boarder and buy our US guns back!. maybe u should see the sport in having one and not be a baby lol have a fun life including all :p .. its not going to be possible to get rid of the guns and u think they will put that much people in jail the ones who wont give them up? arent they over crowding enough? for even weed! lmao!!..... im down to shoot a crazy or even make it so he can be judged! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The OP piece is simply false, as are all these anti gun threads. Reading the "Armed Citizen" gives hundreds of examples of armed citizens in everyday life stopping crime, preventing crime, and sometimes ending the careers of criminals altogether.
The really big lie being sold here is that Congress has the right to abridge an honest citizen's right to bear arms. They do not. If anti-gunners were honest they would petition the government to change the Constitution as it was designed to be changed when necessary. But that failing, they should drop it. You don't hear much of a stink about the huge percentage of crime being committed by the illegal aliens or the repeat criminals who get out of jail through the revolving door ... or even the federal government's lack of enforcement of existing law. All you hear is the need to take honest citizen's rights away. |
|
|
|
|
