Another Mass Murder in Gun Free Zone
By now, you’re probably aware that at least 26 people, including 18 children, were murdered today at Newtown, Connecticut’s Sandy Hook Elementary School.
This tragedy happened despite the school district implementing new a “new safety policy designed to prevent situations such as what happened on Friday.” These new protocols included:
- Locking exterior doors during the day.
- Visitors required to ring the doorbell and register at the office.
- Photo ID required if staff didn’t recognize you.
There was no provision for training and arming teachers and qualified parents. This was wishful thinking, assuming that everybody was “nice” and that an insane person bent on publicity would behave by the rules.
As with nearly all mass murders, this occurred in a gun-free zone. The shooter was breaking the law as soon as he carried a firearm onto school property. He broke the law as soon as he aimed a gun at his first victim, even had he never pulled the trigger.
School-zone mass shootings didn’t begin until after passing Clinton’s Gun Free Schools Act. (There were prior mass murders, but explosives were used to kill 38 children.)
The victims were given a pretty security blankie to suckle on, being told to go back to sleep and feel good that the school “cared” enough to enhance their security protocols with no need to acknowledge that the real world is a dangerous place. Bad people are running around at large, some of them calling themselves public servants. Bad things happen to good people. Deal with it by claiming your God-given right to life. Arm yourself. Train like your life—or your family or community—depends on it. Be awake in public. That’s what being part of the militia is all about.
The next time some two-legged sheep or posturing predator uses such tragedies to bleat that more gun control will make us safer, place the blame on the tool creating these mass murders: Government that promises to keep us safe, yet fails to do so every day. Government that demands we pay taxes for all these feel-good “safety policies,” but after taking money from hard-working taxpayers, turns around and tells us they are not obligated, in the final analysis, to save our lives.
More from Bryan Preston.
Meanwhile in Israel, teachers are armed and trained.
•Locking exterior doors during the day.
•Visitors required to ring the doorbell and register at the office.
•Photo ID required if staff didn’t recognize you.
There was no provision for training and arming teachers and qualified parents. This was wishful thinking, assuming that everybody was “nice” and that an insane person bent on publicity would behave by the rules.
Do homocidal/suicidal maniacs EVER behave by the rules?
The photo ID rule, which liberals fight only when it involves voting, will no doubt stop a nutjob killer hell-bent on wreaking havoc.
Oops! Homicidal – not homocidal. My bad! Not a homophobe, I promise!
Government that promises to keep us safe, yet fails to do so every day.
This is one of the great lies ever foisted upon a free republic. If people stopped to think about how many police officers are hired per 1,000 people they would be surprised that crime actually happens at all. For example, in the Phoenix metro area there are almost 2 million people but about 3,500 police officers. That equates to 571 people per 1 police officer. Who in their right mind could believe that a police officer could provide adequate protection for the populace? Woe be to the city once it can no longer afford to pay for those police officers.
Chris, your math is slightly off. You are assuming that the officers are working 24 hours non stop. There are 24 hours in a day 7 days a week. Which is equal to about 4.2 offices needed to cover all residents 24 hours a day (working a 40 hour week). So the real statistic would be on the given average on any day there is 1 office for 2,400 people. Police don’t stop crimes they mainly take reports and solve cases.
Of course the math was off. I wasn’t calculating the people/cop ratio for the purposes of accuracy which you could have gleaned from the second statement I made. It was merely to give people an idea of how many cops are really out there providing safety for the population at a given time.
That being said I stand by my assertion which you then validated with your posts: Cops are generally not there to prevent crime because it is impossible for them to do so. Coming after the fact erodes the amount time they can solve crime (which was confirmed to me by a cop when I was the victim of a hit and run).
Regardless of how you do the math there are not enough cops that could ever guard the population nor protect others in the event of a major occurrence. That was my overarching point.
“Welcome to a gun-free zone where can criminals reign supreme”
Had there been a legally armed citizen in the area, this illegally armed gunman would not have killed so much innocent civilians.
Well, you should peruse the Atlantic online, check out their table of Pearson coefficients if you want to have a good laugh; apparently there’s a strong correlation between gun violence and Mccain voters (.66, although I wouldn’t call that strong). It’s hilarious, but I didn’t see anything on gun free zones. Apparently gun free zones are just not a significant independent variable for explaining gun violence and injuries.
Are you familiar with statistics? Then you’d know Correlation is not Causation. And you forgot the look for the R-value to see if the correlation was significant. Gun Free zones are indeed significantly correlated. For example, read John Lott’s book The Bias Against Guns. Lott found that in Right to Carry states, where citizens can carry concealed handguns, thereby reducing the number of gun free zones, there was a 67 percent drop in the number of mass murder attacks and about a 79 percent drop in the number of people killed or injured from such attacks.
actually you re incorrect. This was not a gun free zone. Conn allows CCW owners to carry at a School….IF THEY HAVE PERMISSION from the school administration. The following link supports what I am saying.
http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2012/12/connecticut_has_similar_law_to.html#incart_2box
http://www.ct.gov/dps/lib/dps/special_licensing_and_firearms/ct_firearms_law_reference_guide_2010.pdf
Sec. 53a-217b. Possession of a weapon on school grounds: Class D felony.
“The provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall not apply to the otherwise lawful possession of a firearm …(2) by a person in accordance with an agreement entered into between school officials and such person or such person’s employer…”
The article you cite speaks in generalities. We’re concerned with this specific school. When you have evidence that this school permitted private citizens to carry in premises, I will agree with you. The shooter’s mother worked there. He had a kid attending there. He knew more about that school than you or I.
Here ya go. Mass killings in 2012: Oregon, Colorado, Wisconsin, Connecticut (shooter apparently from New Jersey). All five states voted “blue” in the 2012 election. Significant? Don’t know, but there might be something to it.
I agree with Dutch. You never heard of this type of thing in the 40′s or 50′s and we used to bring our guns to school (leave them in our cars) and so did the teachers and no one would have ever DREAMED of doing something like this anyway. BUT–since then, starting with good ol’ Dr. Spock and the drug culture and liberal permissiveness plus constant TV violence given to us by good ol’ liberal Hollywood we now are working on our second generation of dysfunctional, maladjusted, anything goes, drugged up (illegal and prescription) people many of which ought to be locked up in the type of nut houses we had back then that some other liberal politicians decided to do away with. Long story short–liberalism IS a mental dissorder.
Laws don’t stop killers, people with guns do.
Gun free zones are a killers wet dream. A place where a killer can have absolute power with all disarmed victims trapped in a room. Schools, universities, post offices, malls, all gun free zones. It is the delusion of safety via faulty logic. It is a self evident truth that a killer will not obey a sign that says gun free and in fact appears to attract them. Stop creating gun free zones.
Right because the solution is more guns and more people armed. Stop trying to create a “gun free zone”? so government buildings like courthouses where you have to pass a metal detector are out on your list? You want people to be allowed to bring guns into a courthouse? Is that what you’re saying?
You did the alinsky straw man without negating his point about gun free zones being rapid mass murderers’ dream opportunity. You lost this debate.
Or perhaps we should be allowed to brings into airports that way we could have prevented 911 is what you mean? I’m pretty sure that’s exactly what you’re saying if you take your logic to its logical conclusion.
The two examples you gave (courthouses and airports) always have armed law enforcement. Obviously the need for concealed carry at those locations should be nil. How many mass shootings happen or are attempted at courthouses and airports compared to “gun free zones” that don’t have armed law enforcement or security? It’s not a coincidence that mass shooters target defenseless people. They don’t want a fight and moment there is resistance they usually off themselves or give up.