Today is Monday. And we all know what happened on Thursday. Another mass murderer killed nine people on a college campus in Roseburg, Oregon. The reasons why this happened were as plentiful as the blame. I, and most sensible people INCLUDING the murderer’s own father, think a share of the blame should be held by the proliferation of firearms that permeate our society. However, the other side simply throw their hands up, shrug their shoulders and blame crazy people… as if we’re really the only country with crazy people. As if it’s only crazy people shooting people to death every night. But outside of simply blaming crazy people(and not proposing to do a damn thing about it), over the weekend, I’ve remarkably seen a single visual element of all the blame that gun activist have now promoted as their Public Enemy #1. This:
Gun activist have, almost immediately and effectively in unison, began to blame the fact that Umpqua Community College and most other locations where we see these high profile mass murders are “Gun Free Zones”, where most people, including your “Good guy with a gun”, are not allowed to bring guns and since criminals don’t obey laws, they are the only ones that bring guns in these location and have free reign to kill as many people possible with no one to stop them because apparently the only way these people are stopped is with a “good guy with a gun”. That is the argument that gun activist have shoved my way throughout the weekend. Well, as you can imagine, they’re absolutely wrong. Again.
For instance, they’ve said that firearms are not allowed on Umpqua’s campus and there was no one there to stop the asshat shooting people. Well, not only was Umpqua exempt from that law, but there’s this gem that they want to ignore:
Yeah. This guy… who I’m almost positive would shoot anyone from the Obama Administration that tried to take his gun, he was armed. Now, as I’m pretty sure he is fully versed on Oregon law, he’s also smart enough to know that a “good guy with a gun” are the ones we pay and give badges to. So much for that logic there.
But, of course, gun activist talk about everywhere else where there’s a shooting is logically a “Gun Free Zone”, all 10,000 murders through the year naturally. They point at Chicago and Washington D.C., cities with strict gun control laws that restrict ownership and say “See! These places don’t allow guns and people still get killed!” What they won’t tell you is not only are these city streets flooded with illegally gained firearms, but they won’t tell you they’re coming from surrounding states like Virginia and Indiana that don’t share their restrictions. They should know that there aren’t no weapon factories in the Southside of Chicago or outside the Capitol Heights Metro. Do any of these gun activist ever ask themselves where do these guns come from? No, because if they did, they would stop the blind ignorance and realize these city streets are in fact not gun free zones at all.
But those aren’t the only areas where firearms are not only plentiful but armed resistance should be expected. Of course they can say “Sandy Hook Elementary School: Gun Free Zone” or “Chattanooga Recruitment Center: Gun Free Zone” among others. Okay. Maybe they are Gun Free Zones. But lets look at what they’re not talking about:
- June 1994, Fairchild Air Force Base, an airman shot 27 people, killing four.
- October 1995, Fort Bragg, a sergeant shot 19 people, killed one.
- November 2009, Fort Hood, 45 people shot, 13 killed.
- September 2013, Washington Naval Yard, 16 shot, killing 12.
- April 2014, Fort Hood, 19 shot, three killed.
These are just some of the locations where not only were there good guys with guns, but they were expected to be good guys with guns there. If that weren’t enough, Columbine High School had armed security in the building when 34 were shot and 13 kids were killed. Virginia Tech, like many 4-year colleges have their own police force when 49 were shot, 33 of which were killed in 2007. Just like Northern Illinois did too when 22 were shot, with 5 killed a year later. There are others, several others where a murder could not possibly have any idea who may or may not be armed when they decide to go kill a mass of people.
Fact of the matter is these mass murders don’t go research areas are “Gun Free Zones” and target areas they think won’t have anyone to shoot them. Jared Loughner did not go to a Safeway in Tucson and say “Hey, I don’t think they’ll be anyone with guns here, oh wait a congresswoman is here!” James Holmes didn’t go see “Magic Mike” and decide he hated it so much that he had to shoot 60 people and kill 12 of them. Dylann Roof could have tripped outside of his door in Columbia, South Carolina to find a black church to go kill people. That’s not how this worked. Adam Lanza targeted the school his mother worked at, that he attended. Nadal Hassan was stationed at Fort Hood. James Huberty went to a crowded McDonald’s 200 feet from his front door when he shot 40 people, killing 21 of them. Omar Thornton was just fired from his job when he took his gun and shot 10 people, killing eight. And that’s just some of the more prolific shootings. And even IF you assume the gun activist are completely right about these mass murderers targeting “Gun Free Zones” as the only places they’ll go shoot, that still don’t answer your everyday murder, in homes, in back alleys and street corners across America on a daily basis. The laughable part of it all is that gun activist in one breath try to convince us that these are all just crazy people, then in another expect us to believe these same crazy people are rational enough to calculate the probability that they will not encounter anyone armed to get in their way. In most cases, murderers target by connection and convenience. Not by perceived ease of murder. Because what makes it easy isn’t a supposed “Gun Free Zone”. It’s made easy by the gun itself.