Media Criticism, Political Commentary, Social Commentary

Guns Save Lives

10 Comments

The science is settled:

With a single exception, every multiple-victim public shooting in the U.S. in which more than three people have been killed since at least 1950 has taken place where citizens are not allowed to carry their own firearms.

The Cinemark movie theater in Aurora, like others run by the chain around the country, displayed warning signs that it was illegal to carry guns into the theater.

This applied to all nonlaw enforcement personnel, including individuals with concealed handgun permits. In other words, despite more than 4% of the adult population of Colorado having concealed handgun permits, a gunman intent on killing a lot of people could be confident that law-abiding citizens there would be sitting ducks.

Isn’t it funny how no one ever shoots up a gun show?

And yet morons like Mike Bloomberg are willing to break the law in order to disarm us, while he has his own police bodyguard.

[Update a few minutes later]

Bloomberg’s fascist suicide cult. No, I don’t think that’s too harsh a description.

10 thoughts on “Guns Save Lives”

  2. So what was the exception? I couldn’t find it. I’m thinking UT clock tower, as the campus wasn’t a gun free zone at the time, and it took a student getting a long rifle to finally return effective fire. It wasn’t Ft. Hood, as the soldiers were not allowed to have firearms in the area of the shooting.

  3. MK, you deserve a medal my friend for showing us that. Uh, Chris, Fletcher, this wasn’t a ‘dark’ theater, but it was a crowded store. Read that last line.

    “The officer and a clerk promptly returned fire, covered by several customers who also drew their guns, thereby removing the confused criminal from the gene pool.

    No one else was hurt.”

    I’m sure it was just blind dumb luck. It can’t be practice or knowledge, you told us that t can’t be done. Yet two people made this shot.

    Leland,
    huh?

    1. DS, from the article:
      With a single exception, every multiple-victim public shooting in the U.S. …

      I can’t find the exception in the article. Even Kent’s example doesn’t qualify, because multiple people weren’t injured. I’m just curious what the exception was. I attempted to go through the article’s comments, but there is too much stupidity for me to stand.

      Also, I’m not sure I buy that there is only one exception. With various drive by shootings, is there only one exception?

  4. re: what was the exception?

    Maybe the 1984 mass killing of 21 people in a California MacDonalds? It was one of the first such mass shootings…

    1. That could be it. Don’t know what the laws were like back then in California, but I’m fairly sure they weren’t as draconian in 1984.

  5. I was, alas, too clueless to figure out how to comment on Mr. Lott’s linked article, but I would like to point out that -from what I’ve read on more than one milblog- what the shooter wore was not body armor, but a “tactical” vest.

    And, yes, I would like to read about the exception myself. I find this article timely in that I was wondering if there was in fact a correlation between “gun-free” zones and mass shootings.

  6. I’d be interested to know how he defines his terms “not allowed to carry firearms” too.

    For instance, does the entire city of Chicago qualify?

Comments are closed.