Tuesday, December 11, 2007

More on the myth of "Gun Free Zones"

From my friend, Wayne Chiang, at wanusmaximus:
Site: Virginia Tech
Time:
9 minutes
Result:
Suicide

Site:
Omaha, Nebraska (Mall)
Time:
6 minutes
Result:
Suicide

Site:
Colorado Springs, Colorado (Church)
Time:
Seconds
Result:
Denied.


Why? Because they [Virginia Tech and Omaha] had giant "Gun Free Zone" signs.

Also, it turns out it was - shock shock - AN ARMED PRIVATE CITIZEN LEGALLY CARRYING A CONCEALED WEAPON that brought the Colorado Springs church shooting to an abrupt end. LINK

Assam said she believes God gave her the strength to confront Murray, keeping her calm and focused even though he appeared to be twice her size and was more heavily armed.

Murray was carrying two handguns, an assault rifle and over 1,000 rounds of ammunition, said Sgt. Jeff Johnson of the Colorado Springs Police Department.

"It seemed like it was me, the gunman and God," she said.

Assam worked as a police officer in downtown Minneapolis during the 1990s and is licensed to carry a weapon. She attends one of the morning services and then volunteers as a guard during another service.

Boyd said Assam was the one who suggested the church beef up its security Sunday following the Arvada shooting, which it did. The pastor credited the security plan and the extra security for preventing further bloodshed.

Boyd said there are 15 to 20 security people at the church. All are volunteers but the only ones armed are those who are licensed to carry weapons.

The security guards are members of the church who are screened and not "mercenaries that we hire to walk around our campus to provide security," Boyd said.

About 7,000 people were on the church campus at the time of the shooting, said Boyd.


14 comments:

Unknown said...

All the arguments for or against won't mean much after the supreme court has their say.

Am I the only one that thinks it's going to be a month long riot either way?

Unknown said...

If I'm a criminal wanting to hold up a gas station in Israel, I must account for a better than good chance that the workers and patrons are armed.

In Israel, all Jewish citizens can carry guns pretty much wherever they want (except the Temple Mount). Openly. I even saw some non-soldiers carrying assault weapons.

It is no coincidence that petty crime and murder (discounting ethnically-motivated attacks by the Arabs) are very very rare.

Unknown said...

**PS to above comment**

"all Jewish citizens can carry guns..."

All Jewish citizens are permitted to carry guns _if_ they have had military service. Which is most people. And, pretty much only Jews and Druse are permitted in the military (not even Arab citizens, obviously).

Since the 1970s, policy dictates that teachers and parent aids be armed with semi-automatic weapons on school campuses. The result? School shootings are zero.

Israel said...

I'm not a anti-gun person.

I think you guys are overlooking something pretty obvious.

This was an armed security guard and former cop right?

It wasn't just some random citizen (Aunt Mabel who just happens to take her Glock to church) carrying a weapon.

-----

The Israel thing is a stupid analogy.

People just use bombs to kill people. So guns make them safer how?

Unknown said...

^^^

Technically, the Israel example was not an analogy. It was an example. And, it wasn't stupid, it was informed. I've been there and studied the place quite a bit.

Most places away from the Gaza strip and certain areas of the west bank are very very safe. It is a common misconception that all the streets of Israel are flowing with blood from suicide bombers. The Israelis are quick to point this out.

Israel may be in a protracted war with the Arab world, but it does not have a problem with domestic violence and it's own citizens running into synagogues and schools and murdering people. I was merely pointing out that after instating a carry policy for teachers, problems of this sort dropped to zero in schools.
-----
Second, the lady was a security guard, but it was her concealed carry license that permitted her to have the weapon. Other security guards who were not so endowed also were not armed.
-----
Further, I'm not advocating everyone should go out and get a weapon and carry. I'm am dead against Indiana's policy of handing out CCWs without a training prerequisite.

Israel said...

Well the story is basically armed security guard shoots gunman.

Who cares? Big deal, stuff like that happens all the time.

It doesn't prove anything one way or the other as far as the debate on guns is concerned.

As far as Jews are concerned, I know of at least one instance of a Jew (who happened to be crazy) running into a mosque in Israel and killing people at random.

Just like here.

Japan is much safer than Israel and the U.S. and their citizens don't carry guns, so that whole guns make you safer argument is pretty ridiculous.

Anonymous said...

^^^ RE Mosque shooting

(I know you are not an anti-gun advocate and are just playing devil's advocate here...no hard feelings).

1. That unreferenced anecdote is a bit of a special case due to the nature of the sectarian violence between Israelis and Arabs. Regardless, the crime rate in Israel (discounting the racial attacks) is remarkably low.

2. It is illegal (and enforced) for an Arab to own a gun in the Jewish-controlled portion of Israel. I do not remember that particular incident and can't verify, but I doubt any of them were packing....which lends credence to my point.

Japan is a bit of a unique case because the majority are for strict gun laws and willing to subject themselves to some very heavy-handed police enforcement (largely cultural), non of which would fly in our country...there is no evidence that such laws would work in another environment.

Crime and homicide rates in the States fell in the 1940s, 1950s, and early 1980s, all periods during which per capita gun handgun ownership rose. And Japan suffers no less murder than Switzerland, one of the most heavily armed societies on earth.

If nothing else, there is no conclusive evidence that a lack of restrictive gun laws adversely affects crime rates.

Israel said...

The unreferenced anecdote actually happened unless you have evidence that major media outlets just made it up. I saw it on TV. (How's that for a reference?)

I have no problems with your conclusions, I just have problems when people overreach rhetorically based on extreme circumstances, like the church lady who was packing heat.

I'm sure she saved lives and I'm sure armed security guards save lives everyday.

That doesn't make a good argument for having everyone go to church packing heat.

I could just as easily argue based on the same circumstances that Christians are homicidal maniacs and that argument would hold just as much weight.

There is a legislative tenet out there that says:

"Extreme cases make bad law," which means that legislatively, knee jerk reactions one way or another to extreme cases, usually end up doing more harm than good.

Unknown said...

The only person I've heard so far talking in terms of everyone carrying is you, Israel.

The many cases where a legally armed citizen was able to stop an assailant using deadly force occurred in a situation where only a small percentage of bystanders were armed. In some cases only one person out of a few hundred, and that's all it takes.

Most people are uninterested in carrying, or don't want to go through the trouble involved...and that's fine. However a reasonable percentage of sidearm carrying, law abiding citizens would drastically reduce an armed assailants chances of shooting five, ten, even fifteen victims.

Also, it's ridiculous to suggest that the gun carry practices (or lack of) in Japan would have the same effect in the US. The culture there is completely opposite from ours in almost every way.

Israel said...

Heres my solution and it ranks right up there with other brilliant suggestions, I've seen from gun-toting Christians.

--------

Why don't we just give all the "good" people guns and not let the "bad" people have them?

That way when bad people do bad things, good people can shoot them.

Yay! I just solved the violence problem!

Thank you very much!!

--------

Well I don't know about Japanese culture being the complete opposite of our culture. I don't know how you'd even go about assessing that.

Japanese: Smart
Us: Stupid?


Japanese: Hard working
Us: Lazy?

Japanese: Law Abiding
Us: Criminals?

Japanese: Clean
Us: Dirty and stinky?

Japanese: Polite and well mannered
Us: Illmannered and Uncouth

Yep! I guess you're right, we're complete opposites...

Unknown said...

*tongue firmly in cheek*

You forgot one other Japanese/US comparison.

Japan: non-Christian, Buddhist pagans
US: Planet Hollywood

...oh...wait.

Anonymous said...

if the Japanese are so great and we are so evil we did japan attack us first i mean i am just saying we being the evil ones you would think we would have attacked first and as for them being clean and we being dirty that tells me that you need to get out of the dump you live in maybe try a different part of the country Arizona is dirty your correct there and i don't know about California but just because your place is dirty doesn't mean mine is

Unknown said...

First of all "Anonymous", punctuation is your friend. My pet robot has a fit trying to interpret sentences that long.

Secondly, please post under a proper name so we can agree with or make fun of you by name.

Thirdly, there's no reason for you to be so defensive when the last two posts have been so obviously sarcastic.

Finally, we did drop two nukes on Japan, so as far as I'm concerned we're even up. I'm also really doubting that Israel lives in a dump.

Israel said...

Hee! Hee!

Anonymous, does your name start with a "J?"

I'm guess you're from Ohio and you write all the Copy for the LOLCats photos and you can't figure out why everyone is laughing.

I'm in Yur blog writng Badd stuf!