A novel idea on how to stop rampage shootings

From Instapundit:

HOW TO STOP MASS SHOOTINGS: Rampage shooters crave the spotlight, and we should do everything possible to deprive them of it. But that would make pro-gun-control emotional bullying impossible. Can’t have that.

But don’t expect the media to take responsibility for their role in getting people killed.

Click to expand...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303309504579181702252120052 -- not behind a paywall.:banana:

Note to pro-gun-control folks - if it saves one life it's worth it. BTW, what you keep trying has not worked, does not work, and will not work. And children die because of that.

stay safe.

Buried near the end of the OP's linked article:

Massacres also would not be nearly so lethal without the widespread availability of guns and high-capacity magazines designed more for offense than for defense.

Click to expand...

*sigh* Nearly destroys a quality piece. The best defense is a good offense!

Oh, and these shooters might not be paranoid-schizophrenic, but they are NUTS, especially that wacko in Aurora. And the Gabby Giffords shooter? Wackadoodle. So let's not play down their nuttiness. Most of the shooters may have a different kind of nuttiness than the public is led to believe that they have, but, if you go with the typical definition of mental illness, that it interferes with routine life functions, then these shooters are certifiable.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.
<O>

good point. they both had clear mental issues and should have had flags that kept them from getting weapons. Ill add though, that any reasonably intelligent person can get most any "illegal" item they want whether it be drugs, guns etc..... and that's anywhere in the world.

True. 4473s and background checks are feel-good measures that accomplish not nearly enough to justify the governmental intrusion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

Here's a novel notion: one cannot do anything to stop random acts of violence.

Its part of our human nature that some folks just want to harm others.

Every 20 yrs or so it becomes apparent in this and other countries...our country is not the only one that had killers.

And all this psycho babble does not change our 2nd amendment.

Don't want to live in a world with random acts of violence? You know what to do....

Did a quick GOOGLE and found this...

The average number of people killed in mass shootings when stopped by police is 14.29

The average number of people killed in a mass shooting when stopped by a civilian is 2.33

Click to expand...

http://dailyanarchist.com/2012/07/31/auditing-shooting-rampage-statistics/

Not a peer reviewed paper but an interesting place to start.

Here is another..

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/one-in-ten-mass-shootings-stopped-by.html

I read the article and most of the suggestions seem to be based on denying the shooter from achieving his/her 15 minutes of fame:

Excerpts from the article:


Taking away the publicity *might* prevent copy-cat events, but I am not at all sure that in this age of 24/7 news cycles, police scanners, helicopter coverage, etc., that the news services could ever be dissuaded from "reporting the news." Remember the old dictum: "If it bleeds, it leads."

I am far more confident that enforcing the existing laws on the books regarding mental illness reporting (including filing timely reports into NICS) will work to prevent prohibited people from *legally* obtaining firearms. As for those who illegally obtain firearms, e.g., by killing his mother and stealing her AR-15 (Newtown), I am not confident that the presence or lack of reporting on past shooting rampages would have made any difference.

JamesCanby said:

I am far more confident that enforcing the existing laws on the books regarding mental illness reporting (including filing timely reports into NICS) will work to prevent prohibited people from *legally* obtaining firearms. As for those who illegally obtain firearms, e.g., by killing his mother and stealing her AR-15 (Newtown), I am not confident that the presence or lack of reporting on past shooting rampages would have made any difference.

Click to expand...

Most of the category of mass killings that is the subject matter of this thread involve people who do not have any mental illnesses.

As I said before on the forum, there is nothing one can do but to make access into the bldg more difficult.

More regulation is useless .. and has been.

How can people think that guns are the worst way to do something evil?

If the 'people' doing the evil deeds couldn't get a gun... would they just give up? no... you know how many more kids could be killed in a school by some wacko poisoning food in the lunchroom... and possibly never get caught?

To adapt an Anthony Jeselnik joke:

Woman: You shouldn't own a gun.

Me: Why not?

Woman: You might hurt somebody.

Me: Oh, like I'm stupid. Like I'm irresponsible. Like I don't have a million other ways to hurt somebody.

Weve heard the tyrant and chief saying all along " if we can save just one child blah blah blah" well I guarentee when those shootings happend ole tyrant and his regime secretly did a happy dance behind closed doors.

wethepeople said:

Weve heard the tyrant and chief saying all along " if we can save just one child blah blah blah" well I guarentee when those shootings happend ole tyrant and his regime secretly did a happy dance behind closed doors.

Click to expand...

I've always been bothered by that statement and the implication that one child potentially saved in a mass shooting is worth all those who saved themselves by bearing arms.

The leaders in the gun control crowd all agree on one thing........that more mass shootings are a necessary evil that must be endured in order to convince the majority of Americans to agree with their solution.

All of these people are postured to play on the emotions that boil over every time there is another unnecessary mass shooting...... mass murders...that could have been deterred by the presence of armed individuals on site.

For this singular reason they consistently oppose efforts to reduce the number of gun-free zones, and the relaxation of restrictions on the right to carry.

This is a sad commentary...but it is what it is.

These same people are the ones who say that " The NRA has blood on its hands."

These true believers are so committed in their pursuit of the disarmament of the rest of us that they are willing to fall victim to a mass shooter themselves. I call this insanity.

rushcreek2 said:

The leaders in the gun control crowd all agree on one thing........that more mass shootings are a necessary evil that must be endured in order to convince the majority of Americans to agree with their solution...

Click to expand...

That would explain GFSZ. By ensuring the continued existence of these free-killing zones, they guarantee that there will be more shootings, justifying their brand of gun control.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>