If we had more guns, the Omaha mall shooting may not have happened

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Yep. Same with Virginia. Gun free zones tend to draw their atterntion.

By the time the mass shooting began the university wasn't gun-free, the VPI police had already been armed, they were simply in the wrong place. The VPI campus is centered around a huge drill field that's at least 4 blocks long by a block wide. The main class buildings surround the drill field. On the north side of the campus is the main dormitory area, an area that's at least 2 blocks thick. The first shootings occurred in that area. Police had to cross to the other side of the campus in order to respond to the attack on Norris Hall, but the streets are arranged so there is no straight direct pathway.

Anyway, knowing Tech it would not surprise me if any number of the off campus students had guns in their cars on any given day.

Since the VPI shooting the state has instituted new gun laws that will prohibit psychiatric patients from legally buying guns, but changes in medicaid may make it actually harder for the mentally ill to obtain treatment. The bulk of medicaid recipients have been handed over to private insurance providers.

[Dis]

In case anyone is interested, most security guards in Las Vegas casinos do not carry guns. So if you want to rob one... We learned long ago the danger of shooting a bad guy in a crowd full of people, and the lawsuits that would bring.

[Ben Kenobi]

True, that murder rates should go down by default, in having a lower percentage of young men. We've seen that here in Canada, even though our gun laws have not changed.

However, it seems to be an unpleasant trend to go where you feel people would be least likely to intervene, or if they do it will take to long.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by uberloz
One thing is for sure, these shooters are definately targeting areas were they are least likely to encounter armed resistance.

Definitely. Unless, maybe -- just maybe -- they're targeting the areas in their community that are full of people, and familiar to them.

Uberloz, I'd like you to meet William of Occam; William, this is Uberloz.

[uberloz]

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly


Definitely. Unless, maybe -- just maybe -- they're targeting the areas in their community that are full of people, and familiar to them.

Uberloz, I'd like you to meet William of Occam; William, this is Uberloz.

We've met before. Wazzup Willy?

You seem to think my statement and yours are mutually exclusive?

Not so. They go together quite nicely.

Yes, the settings are certainly familiar to the shooters.

So familiar, in fact that they know resistance will most likely be light or absent altogether.

I believe that their knowledge of how little danger they will face while they commit their atrocities plays a huge role in attempting their attacks in the first place.

Then when these shooters do finally face significant resistance; usually in the form of armed policemen; they have an overwhelming propensity to kill themselves rather than square off against other people with guns. That doesn't seem coincidental to me.

That's not always the case but then not every case is exactly similar.

[Deity Dude]

According to the FBI, Michigan's crime rate is down 10.5% since the Concealed Weapons law took effect. Basically the law allows anyone who passes a safety test to carry a concealed weapon. Everyone who was against it said the same sort of crap I am hearing in here. "shooting will go up... Crime will go up.... More guns = More people getting shot etc etc. It just plain doesn't work that way.

http://www.ohioccw.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1490&Itemid=67

Anecdotal evedence. I have a friend who bought a party store in Southfield. It had been robbed 4 times at gunpoint in a 2 -year period. He got a concealed weapon and during the last robbery shot one of the burglars and killed him - wounded a 2nd and the third has gotten away. That store has not had an incident in the last 3 years since he shot the thieves. Believe me the word gets around and it is a deterrent.

Same sort of story except a little different. The party store down the street from me got robbed on 9/11/02. The murder/burglar killed 4 customers, one clerk and shot another clerk in the face - he lived. He shot these people after he was given everything he wanted. Since then the owner has bought and carries a concealed weapon and posts prominently throughout the store that the workers are armed. Not 1 incident in that store in the last 5 years. Believe me the word gets around.

Many people before committing a crime plan it out. If they know the potential victim is armed or think there is a strong chance that he is they probably won't hassle them.

If the guy in the other thread who shot the criminals at his neighbor's house gets off - which it is starting to appear he may not even be charged - I bet people will not be robbing his house.

I personally don't own a gun but encourage and support people right to own and carry a gun.

[chequita guevara]

Texas has a concealed carry law and is the most violent state in the country.

[Alinestra Covelia]

My brother is trying for a concealed carry permit in a not-very-violent state in the U.S.

Part of me understands the need to protect yourself and your family. He just got married and in a hypothetical situation where the police can't intervene to prevent a threat to their lives (rather than to punish harm already done to them) I can see the reassurance of having some defensive force under your own control.

At the same time, part of me also understands that a step taken in one's own personal benefit does not always inure to the public benefit overall. (See tragedy of the commons.) And I have often told him if he's going to have weapons in the house, he has to be careful enough with them to ensure that they don't accidentally end up hurting the people they're supposed to protect.

It's all a muddle. :/

[chequita guevara]

I want a gun, I just don't want a gun in the house.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Dis
In case anyone is interested, most security guards in Las Vegas casinos do not carry guns. So if you want to rob one... We learned long ago the danger of shooting a bad guy in a crowd full of people, and the lawsuits that would bring.

Yes, but the casinos are all owned by either organized crime or the Mormons. No one in their right mind would tangle with either group.

[Deity Dude]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Texas has a concealed carry law and is the most violent state in the country.

Even if that is true - you can not say that it wouldn't be worse without such a law.

Nationwide average for state's that switched was a decrease of 7%.

The only true measurement is a before and after measurement.

[Wezil]

LAS VEGAS - Six junior high or high school students were shot Tuesday after they left a school bus and two were critically hurt, police said.

Gunshots rang out in northeastern Las Vegas just before 2 p.m. local time, Officer Bill Cassell said. Six young people were transported to area hospitals. Four had minor gunshot injuries and two were in critical condition, Cassell said.

At least two people are believed to have taken part in the shootings, he said. Police were not saying whether the shooting suspects were on foot or in a vehicle.

The school bus had left from Mojave high school earlier, said Clark County School District spokesman Michael Rodriguez. The school was expected to open Wednesday with extra security measures and support services, he said.

The shooting occurred near two elementary schools, Woolley and Clyde Cox elementary schools. Rodriguez said both were locked down temporarily but were reopened before 3 p.m.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2007/12/11/4719510-ap.html

[Krill]

Kill everyone and let god sort them out...

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by uberloz


We've met before. Wazzup Willy?

You seem to think my statement and yours are mutually exclusive?

Not so. They go together quite nicely.

Yes, the settings are certainly familiar to the shooters.

So familiar, in fact that they know resistance will most likely be light or absent altogether.

I believe that their knowledge of how little danger they will face while they commit their atrocities plays a huge role in attempting their attacks in the first place.

Then when these shooters do finally face significant resistance; usually in the form of armed policemen; they have an overwhelming propensity to kill themselves rather than square off against other people with guns. That doesn't seem coincidental to me.

That's not always the case but then not every case is exactly similar.

I don't think shooters give a thought to "resistance" -- because they don't have to. Almost no place in an ordinary town does offer armed resistance, so there's no point in even factoring it into the equation. Certainly in the town I grew up in (a suburb of Chicago, population 30k), anyplace a shooter opened fire would offer no resistance, save only the local police station.

There's simply no evidence that these guys take the question of "resistance" into account when they go on their sprees, and your efforts to deduce that based on their choice of locations is making William of Occam cry.

[Krill]

...What is the most amount of people someone has killed in a spree without a gun?