Posted on 04/06/2009 10:59:51 AM PDT by serialcrimes
I gotta admit that I didn't expect to see this in an article of this sort.
We now know the shooting, including the Wong-ending bullet, was over in 2-3 minutes....
Hey, my enemies should be destroyed!
If they're liberals, just inconvenience them... that is much worse as far as they're concerned.
Don’t forget that they are all on legal drugs.
In 1999, John Lott and William Landes published an extensive statistical study of multiple shooting incidents. They showed that mass shootings occur less often in areas where responsible citizens are allowed permits to carry weapons discretely.
http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/brown/080800.htm
“Multiple Victim Public Shootings”
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=272929
Of course, my statement assumes you are not in a "GUN FREE ZONE" or a "NO CCW PERMIT" situation. When that is so, then the burden should fall upon the government for criminal liability keeping people from defending themselves as guaranteed in the 2nd amendment. Suit should be initiated and people should be paid handsomely for their loss CAUSED by the government not protecting them, as is assumed if they are not allowed to protect themselves.
PS: Goodyear Tire stores are all "Gun Free Zones" ... safer to buy your tires elsewhere.
Heh. I'm a monster. I like to offend them.
Most often, these killers stalk areas that they know. A school. A workplace...
Gun-Free Zones...
When seconds matter...the police will be there in minutes. Wong had his plan set in motion the moment he barricaded the back door with his car. He knew the building layout as a frequent visitor for language classes. He knew where to find lots of victims quickly. He wore body armor in anticipation of some resistance. It is reported that he killed himself when the first siren was heard. It was also reported that he spent lots of time at the range prior to the incident. His shooting skills were well polished.
I can't find anything within the US Bureau of Justice Statistics to substantiate this so a grain of salt is required.
Before 9/11, the single biggest "mass murder" incident in New York City involved no guns whatsoever. A total of 87 victims died in the infamous arson fire at the Happyland social club in 1990. The "murder weapon" was a dollar's worth of gasoline and a match.
***This is when the killers get their weapons and conceptualize the attacks. They rigorously think through how they can kill the highest number of victims in an attempt to get attention and show the world how sad and meaningless ****
If you look at most of the receent killings they were meticulously planned. Body armor, guns, bombs everything well planned.
Now, suppose there was a magic magnet that flew over the US and sucked up EVERY semi auto rifle and pistol.
If you only had a six shot revolver and a lever action rifle could you still kill the same number? Yes, by simple planning.
If you set down in a historical archive you will find mass murders throughout American history.
1755 Pensylvania school house massacre.
1813 school children murdered in Illinois,
1867 school house massacre, Hamilton, Tx
The Spicer family murders
Lots of serial killers back then also.
John Turlow in Washington and Oregon
The deformed Indian of Osage County, Oklahoma.
Queho in Nevada
Ahvote in Nevada.
And Harry Tracy, who with just a lever action Winchester stacked up dead lawmwn like cordwood.
Just for the record, Julio Gonzalez murdered 87 people in 1990 at the HappyLand night club in NYC.
His weapon, a gallon of gasoline and a match.
And then there is 9-11-2001, when 19 men with box cutters murdered 3000 innocent people in NYC.
D**N! Beat me to it!
Man, this article just described 98% of the people who post over at the DUmp. Good thing that liberals don't believe in owning / are afraid of owning guns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.