Posted on 12/09/2012 10:45:34 AM PST by marktwain
A few weeks back we had a discussion of a road rage incident where a woman pulled off the road and the guy didn't give up so she shot him through the window. Several reasons for her doing that, one of which was 'fear' ~ but how often does that happen where a strange man comes knocking on a car window and it doesn't end up in a shooting?
Two ways to do that ~ man knocks on window shoots woman or man knocks on window woman shoots ~ incredibly the second version where he knocks and she shoots shows 39 million google entries. The first version where he knocks and then shoots her shows a mere 21 million entries.
holy smolly
It's pretty clear that if you find yourself knocking on the window of a car and there's a woman in there you have double the chance of her shooting you than of you shooting her.
So, how much fear is there in that?
I'm sure the analyst who wrote the lead piece could do quite a job on this issue just like he did on the question of cops stopping serious rampages.
The reason for the disparity (citizens vs cops) is that there are more of us around than there are cops.
One study I’d like to see is how many mass shooting occur in “gun free” (aka free fire) zones as opposed to other areas.
I also find it interesting that these situations never happen at trap and skeet ranges or rifle ranges.... In fact the incidence of crime at skeet ranges is so low that I don’t even lock my truck when I shoot.
fyi
A third man did arrive armed.
Here is another one for your list.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Gravure_shooting
Killed 8,m wounded 12
Correction: Joe Zamudio
A man is at home, and a thug comes to kill or injure him. He produces a gun and the thug suddenly wants to go somewhere else. Liberals accept this, but only begrudgingly.
The same man might be in a public area, and the same thug wants to kill or injure him, but the liberals don't want the man to be able to defend himself by means of a firearm.
My question to the liberals is this: What makes the protection from death or injury more important at a home than in a public area? It's the same person, and the same need for self preservation!
It would behoove everyone to read up and study these facts to be prepared for the next mass-shooting – because you can bet your bippy that the gun grabbers are getting prepared in their own little freedom destroying ways.
It would not surprise me to find out that the gun grabbers already have their talking points and press releases written just waiting to fill in the blanks with the details of the next shooting.
I imagine they have their own cold calculus on such tragedies on how much of our freedom they can destroy based on the number killed and wounded and the types of hardware involved.
5-10 dead – banning of specific items like so-called ‘high capacity’ magazines. [Whatever the h.. ‘high capacity’ means]
10 – 20 dead - banning of certain types of weapons – handguns, so-called “Assault weapons” [regardless if said weapons were involved with said shooting]
20 –30 dead – major legislation degrading out right of self-defense – the banning of private sales, the expansion of registration, etc.
Of course, with the dear liar theoretically ensconced in the White House for another 4 years those values may be a bit high – with his Excellency unworried about getting re-selected, they may try for what they think they can get with even lower values.
Almost 30 years later, the commentator Erica Carle wrote a pithy, pungent and piercing review on the probability of the nationwide malignant twisting of high school civics and moral indoctrination to induce suicidal views in these immature, tender minds, in her article SHOOTING RAMPAGES: WHY DO CHILDREN KILL?. This extremely interesting assessment of the state of high school (and certainly college-level) cultural integration shewed her prescient predictions of such tragedies as arising out of the educational bent which practically forces the children into self-destructive attitudes and practices.
I strongly recommend that anyone undertaking to support the private possession of guns as defensive devices really ought to read Carle's treatise, remember it, and post it to others. She has intimated what I've already said myself on this, that the Columbine massacre and that at Virginia Tech were simply the victims of fool-headed institutions being simply defrauded, depressed, and distraught students wreaking the wrath of their instruction-ingrained hopelessness on the systems producing their mindset.
In fact, if we continue to permit the training of a civilian population into such a predominant self-centered, values-free worldview, then leaving them unrestricted access to deadly weapons is simply asking for a far-greater likelihood of rampages, at school, at work, at recreation and relaxation venues, in shopping plazas, etc. And this is why the Anti-Gun propagandizers are exactly correct, because they know whast they are creating, and are seeking to prevent the broadly morally insensitive consitituency which is now fully maturing and becoming very effective in setting up these vile terroristic activities. And eventually, they will not be striving to maintain right-to-life for babes, children, or adults; they will prevail over we, the reactionaries, to establish anarchy over us.
I believe that pro-gun, Second Amendment protagonists must at the same time incorporate an overwhelming and persistent First Amendment attack aimed toward training up a Godly culture by torpedoing the current humanistic, atheistic and/or islamistic, racistic, unionistic domination of public education, while there still is a chance. And do it now.
If this is not done, any vestige of a society prevalently upholding the Old Constitution and Our Founder's Primary Values is done for.
The reason your shooting is not on the list,is because it is likely not included in the author’s sources. It is pre-internet.
Fascinating article. Interesting that so many of the shooters were stopped by civilians that were unarmed.
Let’s Roll, so to speak.
http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/crime/timeline-the-emcore-shooting
After studying other shootings, APD policy is to swarm the site with any and all available officers. The theory is that the introduction of armed officers takes the initiative away from the shooter.
Isn’t that simply blaming the results of these trends on inanimate objects that had nothing to do with how children are raised these days?
If you could wave a magic wand and rid the world of guns, there would still be edged weapons by which death and destruction could be wrought.
If not edged weapons then fire or explosive could be used to create these massacres.
Why can’t we address the root of the problem instead of resorting to band aide liberty destroying solutions that have nothing to do with the original cause?
Firearms aren’t exactly a new technology – why haven’t there bee any of those mass shootings 60 –80 –120 years ago?
You are correct. I believe it is because of degradation in moral upbringing, mostly relating to the destruction of the black family and its Christian roots. The lower income family of other cultures will follow if it continues long enough.
I must correct my last post. Most mass school shootings are not by black children,but they dominate overall homicide figures for children.
No! the thrust in my comment is not about guns being causitive, its about the changing worldview of values of their owners who accept widespread killing of unborn baby humans and want polite society to be rid of The God of the Bible and His ridiculous ten No-Nos. In my 1950s you never thought about packing heat unless you lived in Spanish Harlem (Bronx), or near South State Street in Chicago (esp after dark). Now you do -- who you gonna worry 'bout dissin' today, hunh? whatcha gonna do when they come 4 you, bad boy? --
Why can’t we address the root of the problem instead of resorting to band aide liberty destroying solutions that have nothing to do with the original cause?
That's what my comment on this is about -- got it? We are coming to the point where we are so terrorized that either everybody carries, or nobody carries -- thanks to our humanist bent in the classroom -- and in the 'hood.
Firearms aren’t exactly a new technology – why haven’t there bee any of those mass shootings 60 –80 –120 years ago?
I think you are totally missing the thrust of my comment. The reason we didn't have mass school shootings 50 plus years ago was that children had not yet been robbed of meaning and hope for the future by their ego-flattening public school "education" in morals and values. When we relieved them of any hope for the future, they began shooting back, dontcha see?
Please find it very illuminating by reading the cited article by Erica Carle, OK?
• “Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings,and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws.”
A Study by Profs. John Lott and William Landes
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=161637
How do Multiple Victim Public Shooters Decide Where to Attack?
http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/2012/09/how-do-multiple-victim-public-shooters.html
basically an armed defender (“good guy”) is the only thing stopping these freaks (other than if/when they kill themselves)
Ronald Gene Simmons. Dover Arkansas
But then we must weigh them against other mass murderers like Julio Gonzalez who burned out the Happyland Dance Club,
or Tim McVeigh who used a bomb, or 19 arabs with boxcutters...
Bookmark
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.