Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones![W: 124]

[Shewter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Sure. The fact that one does not assume one thing does not mean that one assumes the opposite. Experience suggests that one can choose to make no assumptions at all, and instead, rely on facts



No, the difference is large. If someone breaks the no smoking rule, it's obvious. If someone break the no guns rule by carrying a concealed weapon, it's not obvious. Unless that Starbucks conducts pat-downs or has a metal detector at the entrance, they're not the same.



Which is why bars have bouncers, right?

It's why many public events, stores and malls, hire security right?

The difference is not large. It's about natural compliance. People will generally follow the posted rules in such an establishment.

Unless you mean to tell me you think a bunch of people are carrying concealed firearms onto private property with "Gun Free" signs or anything to that effect?

Bars have bouncers due to the nature of the environment. You'll also notice that not all Bars have bouncers and the ones that usually do are "happening" scenes and they usually employ the bouncers during high volume service times. As an example though Applebees has a bar, and it doesn't have a bouncer. Are you suggesting that a coffee shop and a school both share common ground with an establishment where people purposefully intoxicate themselves and wind up doing belligerent things?

 

[sangha]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

The difference is not large. It's about natural compliance. People will generally follow the posted rules in such an establishment.

Unless you mean to tell me you think a bunch of people are carrying concealed firearms onto private property with "Gun Free" signs or anything to that effect?

Bars have bouncers due to the nature of the environment. You'll also notice that not all Bars have bouncers and the ones that usually do are "happening" scenes and they usually employ the bouncers during high volume service times. As an example though Applebees has a bar, and it doesn't have a bouncer. Are you suggesting that a coffee shop and a school both share common ground with an establishment where people purposefully intoxicate themselves and wind up doing belligerent things?

"People will generally" <> "people will"

And it doesn't take a "bunch of people" to stop a shooting. Just one.....with a gun

And the intoxicated are not the only ones who do not follow rules. Everyone knows this, which is why some people carry concealed weapons.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Care to elaborate?

If the Starbucks down the road from my house has a few signs posted, one reading "No Smoking Allowed" the other reading "No Firearms Allowed" the difference is negligible. When I enter the establishment I expect not to see cigarette smoke, and I expect not to see firearms.

To expect anything but compliance from individuals who patronize a private business with posted rules to do anything other than follow said rules is illogical.

Criminals do not obey the law, that is why we call them criminals (even before arrest or conviction, I don't mess with saying "alleged" often).

Robbing banks is illegal, yet somehow we still have bank robbers.

 

[Shewter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

"People will generally" <> "people will"

And it doesn't take a "bunch of people" to stop a shooting. Just one.....with a gun

And the intoxicated are not the only ones who do not follow rules. Everyone knows this, which is why some people carry concealed weapons.

Right, but the point is, when a rule is posted it is reasonable to assume that the patrons of the establishment will be in compliance with the rule. To think otherwise is just straight sillyness.

 

[Viv]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones![W: 12

According to Dr. John Lott, economist and author of, "More Guns, Less Crime," every single public shooting where 3 or more people were killed (except the Gabby Giffords shooting scene) since 1950 has taken place in a Gun Free Zone.

....with guns in it...:doh

Amazing statistic!

Gun Free Zones don't work to make us safer.

...unless there are no guns in them...

And what have you created when you establish a GFZ?

A situation where the law abiding innocent citizens are disarmed and vulnerable to the law breaking, gun wielding assailant(s)!

A pocket. You need to widen the zone to avoid loony gun boys viewing civilisation as prey. Across entire US?

Disarming the law abiding citizen doesn't work to make us safer.

...unless you actually disarm the gung ho gun guys also.

If magazine capacity is restricted to 10 or 7 rounds and you meet up with an assailant, a criminal (or criminals) with an outlawed 20 or 30 round mag. you are already dangerously over matched and outgunned.

In a gun free society it doesn't happen. You can't be outgunned by someone who doesn't have a gun (try to grasp this basic fact)

Reducing magazine capacity doesn't work to make us safer.

It does when you don't have a gun.

What HAS been shown to be most effective are for the good guys to have guns.

The point is they already have guns but they bugger all stop shootings.

Because, like an image I may have seen on these pages says, if a bad guy points a gun at you, you are going to wish you had a gun or you are going to have to wait until someone with a gun arrives to rescue you.

And at that point even all of the atheists reading this will be praying that the armed rescuer comes in time to make a difference.

No, strangely that's not what I was wishing...

Just some things to think about.

Think = oxymoron after reading that post.

 

[sangha]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Right, but the point is, when a rule is posted it is reasonable to assume that the patrons of the establishment will be in compliance with the rule. To think otherwise is just straight sillyness.

Your "point" is silly

It is rarely wise to make assumptions about any group of strangers.

 

[Shewter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Your "point" is silly

It is rarely wise to make assumptions about any group of strangers.

Screw it. You're right, I'm going to start peeking around the corner to see if I catch any smokers when I go out to eat in a restaurant with a clear and posted sign that states no smoking. It would be unwise to assume that 99% of the people that dine there won't be smoking.

 

[sangha]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Screw it. You're right, I'm going to start peeking around the corner to see if I catch any smokers when I go out to eat in a restaurant with a clear and posted sign that states no smoking. It would be unwise to assume that 99% of the people that dine there won't be smoking.

Go right ahead, but as far as this thread goes, it would make more sense if you pat them down for guns.

Or you could keep pretending that carrying a concealed weapon is just as obvious as smoking is.

Whatever floats your boat

 

[Arbo]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

I stand on the side of logic and consistency. Unfortunately, my "allies" in specific arguments change far too often based on their particular political agendas. People will often forgo such things as logic and consistency when it suits their agenda. I don't agree with gun prohibitions and I support the right to carry concealed, but I will not reject logic and consistency in order to do so.

I hear what you are saying. Some day I might see you talk about what you support.

 

[marsden]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones![W: 12

....with guns in it...:doh



...unless there are no guns in them...



A pocket. You need to widen the zone to avoid loony gun boys viewing civilisation as prey. Across entire US?



...unless you actually disarm the gung ho gun guys also.



In a gun free society it doesn't happen. You can't be outgunned by someone who doesn't have a gun (try to grasp this basic fact)



It does when you don't have a gun.



The point is they already have guns but they bugger all stop shootings.



No, strangely that's not what I was wishing...


Think = oxymoron after reading that post.

Your postion is simplistic.

Unrealistic. Unfair. Unworkable.

Dare I say, unAmerican.

I know you are moved by the LATEST shooting, as we all are, but I think you are not thinking as much as you are feeling.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones![W: 12

Your postion is simplistic.

Unrealistic. Unfair. Unworkable.

Dare I say, unAmerican.

I know you are moved by the LATEST shooting, as we all are, but I think you are not thinking as much as you are feeling.

Viv's opinion really doesn't have weight in America, being this particular poster is in Scotland, U.K.

Not attacking mind you..........just sayin'.

 

[Dammitboy!]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Screw it. You're right, I'm going to start peeking around the corner to see if I catch any smokers when I go out to eat in a restaurant with a clear and posted sign that states no smoking. It would be unwise to assume that 99% of the people that dine there won't be smoking.

You could head over to the highway and count how many people are breaking the posted speed limit. You'll find that even though we have posted signs everywhere and heavy fines for not obeying those signs, that the majority of the people on the highway are in fact breaking the rules of the posted sign.

 

[marsden]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones![W: 12

Viv's opinion really doesn't have weight in America, being this particular poster is in Scotland, U.K.

Not attacking mind you..........just sayin'.

Thanks for that. After I posted I noticed her location and then thought back to the shooting in Dunblane. I'm sensitive to those who are emotionally torn by gun violence.

 

[Shewter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

You could head over to the highway and count how many people are breaking the posted speed limit. You'll find that even though we have posted signs everywhere and heavy fines for not obeying those signs, that the majority of the people on the highway are in fact breaking the rules of the posted sign.

And the highway is a much more open area. Examples given previously were smaller establishments that are heavily monitored if nothing else due to confined spaces. Point being, that in a smaller controlled environment, particularly a business, when a rule is posted it is USUALLY followed.

Making it unreasonable to EXPECT to see the rules trampled on.

I am not saying that people do NOT break the rules, I am saying that it is generally assumed that the VAST MAJORITY of patrons in "gun free zone" establishments are going to be following that rule.

 

[Tucker Case]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

If a serial killer did commit two murders on each end of a city every law enforcement agency would consider that different events, I don't know why you would think otherwise.

Do you see how you engage in the begging the question fallacy here? Just asking, as you seem to be posting continuous fallacies at this point.

To prove your position absurd, however, allow me to ask you this Socratic question:

Do you think that the sandy hook shooter should be classified as a serial killer or a mass murderer?

 

[Tucker Case]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

I hear what you are saying. Some day I might see you talk about what you support.

There's plenty of threads here where I discuss my personal positions at length.

But the thing I support most is honest, logic-based reasoning. I don't really care if someone disagrees with me on a topic, nor do I care if someone agrees with me on a topic, so long as honest, valid logic is employed. And regardless of the particulars of the specific situation, pretty much anything I debate will boil down to promoting that kind of reasoning.

 

[Arbo]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

There's plenty of threads here where I discuss my personal positions at length.

Just saying I haven't seen them.

But the thing I support most is honest, logic-based reasoning.

There is probably a forum out there better suited to such things, as that sort of discussion is something I rarely see around here.

 

[Tucker Case]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

There is probably a forum out there better suited to such things, as that sort of discussion is something I rarely see around here.

I think you sell the people here short. For example, even though I am embroiled in a debate with LMR right now, I would actually say that his reasoning is perfectly valid logic-based reasoning the vast majority of the time. With regard to the gun issue in general, I tend to find myself agreeing with him far more often than disagreeing with him.

And, frankly, if the arguments in this thread were along the following lines:

"A significant majority of mass shootings have occurred at locations where guns are prohibited to the public (either by legal statute or by the rules in place at privately-owned establishments). While it is unlikely that the majority of these mass murderers specifically choose the locations of their crimes based on such prohibitions, some evidence exists which suggests that at least a few of them may have factored such prohibitions into their decisions. Two things appears fairly certain, however. 1. such prohibitions have not achieved their desired goal of preventing such crimes. 2. Such prohibitions, when adhered to by law-abiding citizens, removes their ability to defend themselves effectively from such crazed gunmen should they be unfortunate enough to find themselves trapped in such a situation. While I would never do something as insane such as call for the arming of all teachers, for I recall the irrational and erratic behavior of my 5th grade English teacher, I do think that qualified individuals who have demonstrated that they are capable of handling a firearm effectively via training or military service should not be prohibited from possessing said weapon in these locations. Clearly prohibiting them from doing so has done - nay, can do nothing to prevent such atrocities from occurring, because anyone willing to systematically slaughter innocent people, including young children, is not going to be impeded in any way by something so simple as a law or sign declaring an area gun-free. Ending such prohibitions might have no overall effect on preventing such atrocities, nor would I ever claim that they would, but it would increase the possibility of having a "good guy" present with the same kind of firepower that the "bad guy" has. And frankly, that is the only way to have any chance of minimizing the casualty counts in such events. It might not work, but it is certainly better to have some chance than it is to have none."

I'd be sending out "likes" to that person left and right.

 

[Arbo]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

I think you sell the people here short.

When we have people that think the preamble of the constitution defines 'militia', when we have people that say cartridge and magazine are the same thing, when we have people that talk about what they think others 'do not need' and thus justify taking it away from them... no, I don't think that I am selling anyone short.

And I have learned that in life, like here on DP, going for the long rational explanation is most often a waste of time, as it is most often 1) ignored by those that disagree, or 2) responded to with personal attacks or utter nonsense that has nothing to do with what has been said.

 

[Tucker Case]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

When we have people that think the preamble of the constitution defines 'militia', when we have people that say cartridge and magazine are the same thing, when we have people that talk about what they think others 'do not need' and thus justify taking it away from them... no, I don't think that I am selling anyone short.

But don't you see, ignorance of guns is what causes their fear of guns. Ignorance is combated with information, not disinformation. that's why arguments that include blatant disinformation (such as the argument that shooters pick their targets because they are gun free zones) are more of a detriment to the gun-rights position than anything else. We do not alleviate the ignorance of others with such arguments, we increase it. And when they incredulously verify the accuracy of our claims, and find them to be false or dishonest, it damages the credibility of ALL gun-rights positions for them. It solidifies their opposition. It puts them into a position where they will harden their hearts to the truth.

 

[Arbo]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

But don't you see, ignorance of guns is what causes their fear of guns. Ignorance is combated with information, not disinformation. that's why arguments that include blatant disinformation (such as the argument that shooters pick their targets because they are gun free zones) are more of a detriment to the gun-rights position than anything else. We do not alleviate the ignorance of others with such arguments, we increase it. And when they incredulously verify the accuracy of our claims, and find them to be false or dishonest, it damages the credibility of ALL gun-rights positions for them. It solidifies their opposition. It puts them into a position where they will harden their hearts to the truth.

I disagree, as I have not yet met one person that has a 'fear of guns', that has had their ignorance erased by facts, reality and truth. It sounds all nice, but I don't buy that those that suffer cognitive dissonance will ever break that cycle.

 

[Tucker Case]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

I disagree, as I have not yet met one person that has a 'fear of guns', that has had their ignorance erased by facts, reality and truth.

Have you ever actually tried to reach someone that way?


(P.S. I am married to a woman who still fears guns, but no longer supports gun control laws because of the very approach I am discussing)

 

[LaMidRighter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

Do you see how you engage in the begging the question fallacy here? Just asking, as you seem to be posting continuous fallacies at this point.

To prove your position absurd, however, allow me to ask you this Socratic question:

Do you think that the sandy hook shooter should be classified as a serial killer or a mass murderer?

Actually Tucker, you are the one engaging in bad logic and not even realizing it. I gave you the definition and example of a gun free zone, and the difference in multiple murder types as defined by the F.B.I. and you when you are trying to claim my error I have to go to these tacts because you are either not getting it or trying to find technicalitites where they do not exist.

 

[LaMidRighter]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

I think you sell the people here short. For example, even though I am embroiled in a debate with LMR right now,

Oh, that's what you call this? Accusing me of lying, and playing semantics games. I usually have the utmost respect for you man but this has not been a good one on your part.

 

[Fustercluck]

Re: Virtually all public shooting deaths since 1950 occurred in Gun Free Zones!

I disagree, as I have not yet met one person that has a 'fear of guns', that has had their ignorance erased by facts, reality and truth. It sounds all nice, but I don't buy that those that suffer cognitive dissonance will ever break that cycle.

Actually, I started out as anti-gun because I considered it to be a very logical position (European btw) but it's only after I came across well thought out and articulated pro-gun arguments that I started to measure them against other stances and thought critically of various information and statistics regarding guns, and I adjusted my position accordingly.