How many more will die in 'gun-free' zones

[Abdul Alhazred]

How many more will die in 'gun-free' zones before the media start asking why? (Las Vegas Review Journal)

Police have identified Robert A. Hawkins, 19, as the assailant who killed eight people with a semi-automatic rifle (not an assault rifle) at the Westroads Mall in Omaha Dec. 5.

Chalk up eight more deaths to "gun control."

The shooting was at least the fourth at an American mall or shopping center so far this year, including one in February in Salt Lake City.

Once again, the killer chose a "gun-free" zone.

...

"Oh come on, Vin," someone will protest at this point. "It wouldn't matter even if these places did allow people to carry guns. Hardly anyone goes armed, so how often would a plain old non-policeman with a gun really save lives?"

Pretty often, it turns out.

...

Click the link for plenty of examples.

Synopsis: None of the examples involve anyone taking the law into their own hands.

 

[DoubtingStephen]

7.

 

[Kestrel]

How many more will die in 'gun-free' zones before the media start asking why? (Las Vegas Review Journal)



Click the link for plenty of examples.

Synopsis: None of the examples involve anyone taking the law into their own hands.

Since this was in a Las Vegas paper, I wonder why the editorial writer didn't mention the six students shot at a school bus stop a few days earlier in Las Vegas?

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

How many more will die in 'gun-free' zones before the media start asking why? (Las Vegas Review Journal)



Click the link for plenty of examples.

Synopsis: None of the examples involve anyone taking the law into their own hands.

Well duh, the author was cherry-picking anecdotes for his cause.

And lol at 'Chalk up eight more deaths to "gun control."' It is impossible to know if allowing guns would have saved anyone, if a shoot out would have killed more people, or if more shooting would occur and more people would die over time if guns were allowed.

This is just full of bias and fallacy.

 

[The Fool]

Its pretty obvious that the US simply does not have enough guns available in enough places to ensure a reasonable level of safety. More guns.....you need more guns. Then you will all be so much safer.

 

[sinclairmcevoy]

Guns don't kill people. People do. With guns.

 

[Distracted1]

75%% of the examples cited in the article refer to police, or ex-police/security guards stopping an armed assailant.

1)Vice-principal stops assailant
2)Two off duty*officers stop assailant
3)one off duty*officer stops assailant
4)one security-guard stops assailant
Is someone proposing that policeman and security guards should be disarmed?

Is it surprising that police stop crime?
Were I the author of that article, I would have foregone the examples where officers or security guards used their sidearms to stop crime, and focused on the "thousands" of instances where civilians did so.

*In Philadelphia and Detroit (two metro areas I have lived in), Police ar never considered "Off-Duty" and are encouraged to take their weapon with them wherever they go.

 

[pipelineaudio]

*In Philadelphia and Detroit (two metro areas I have lived in), Police ar never considered "Off-Duty" and are encouraged to take their weapon with them wherever they go.

Why?

Guns can't stop crime

 

[NeoRicen]

Am I the only one who noticed that the person doing the shooting had a gun!?

 

[a_unique_person]

Its pretty obvious that the US simply does not have enough guns available in enough places to ensure a reasonable level of safety. More guns.....you need more guns. Then you will all be so much safer.

They should allow you to pick up a gun at the door of each shopping mall and put it back on the way out.

 

[Zep]

Yay! Another gun thread! I was getting SO bored waiting for one to show up!

 

[DoubtingStephen]

They should allow you to pick up a gun at the door of each shopping mall and put it back on the way out.

I bet the clerks in the department stores would be very polite in such a case.

But I'd want to have some sort of sanitary wipes at the gun selection station, in case the last person who had the Uzi I select might have had cooties, or been a Republican.

 

[Zep]

I bet the clerks in the department stores would be very polite in such a case.

And if they weren't? Follow through on the threat? Sweet! I've always had it in for those naff department store clerks!

But I'd want to have some sort of sanitary wipes at the gun selection station, in case the last person who had the Uzi I select might have had cooties, or been a Republican.

Or they had left someone's brain matter on the barrel. You never know whose brain that may have been, and we don't want to get kuru, do we!

 

[corplinx]

Is it surprising that police stop crime?

Yes. Since as a general rule, police do not prevent or stop crimes. They show up afterwards to write reports and tag corpses.

 

[a_unique_person]

Yes. Since as a general rule, police do not prevent or stop crimes. They show up afterwards to write reports and tag corpses.

It's the collective will and civility of a state that prevents crime.

 

[gumboot]

I just want to point out something...

I am strongly in support of stringent gun controls. I do not believe that regular citizens in a modern society need guns at all. I think it's really stupid.

Having said that, having areas where there are stringent gun controls inside a nation where there are also areas without stringent gun controls is even more stupid. Either the entire society must have stringent gun laws, or not at all. I really can't see it working any other way (unless you have controlled borders between areas, which climbs another rung up the ladder of stupid).

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

Yes. Since as a general rule, police do not prevent or stop crimes. They show up afterwards to write reports and tag corpses.

So if there were no police the crime rate would not increase?

-Gumboot

 

[Kestrel]

Yes. Since as a general rule, police do not prevent or stop crimes. They show up afterwards to write reports and tag corpses.

This may be a feature of the theory that radio dispatched police cars are the optimum use of police manpower. But there is some evidence that having the police actually walk a beat and talk to the residents is far more effective at keeping crime rates down.

 

[Kestrel]

I just want to point out something...

I am strongly in support of stringent gun controls. I do not believe that regular citizens in a modern society need guns at all. I think it's really stupid.

Having said that, having areas where there are stringent gun controls inside a nation where there are also areas without stringent gun controls is even more stupid. Either the entire society must have stringent gun laws, or not at all. I really can't see it working any other way (unless you have controlled borders between areas, which climbs another rung up the ladder of stupid).

In most of the US, you can drive to a state with lax gun laws in only a few hours. The two exceptions are Alaska and Hawaii.

Perhaps we should examine the differences in gun policy and violent crime rates in those two states?

 

[lionking]

I just want to point out something...

I am strongly in support of stringent gun controls. I do not believe that regular citizens in a modern society need guns at all. I think it's really stupid.

Having said that, having areas where there are stringent gun controls inside a nation where there are also areas without stringent gun controls is even more stupid. Either the entire society must have stringent gun laws, or not at all. I really can't see it working any other way (unless you have controlled borders between areas, which climbs another rung up the ladder of stupid).

-Gumboot

Good point gumboot, but the chances of stringent gun laws in the US are close to zero. I just wish gun enthusiasts would be a bit more honest and admit that the cost of a lack of gun controls are mass killings like the one in the OP. Instead we get rubbish like "if more people were armed then potential mass murderers would be taken out".

In a recent thread nobody could come up for an explanation for the lack of mass shooting murders since the banning of semi-automatics in Australia, other than the ban itself.