Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmy
Two problems:
1. It wasn't a gun free zone. Guns didn't prevent Vegas, Douglas high, Fort Hood, Columbine...
2. Most of these crazed people are looking for a final shoot out, so the idea of "let's attack, because bullets aren't coming back" doesn't hold up.
|
Were the shooters looking for or expecting bullets to come back? The Las Vegas shooter was in an upper story room of a building away from the festival. The festival itself was a gun free or weapons of any kind free zone (the shooter in the attack on the republican base ball game also was also operating outside of the kill area and was stopped by guards on the field using handguns.) Fort Hood massacre--the victims were not allowed to be armed on base. The armed guards at Douglas High and Columbine failed. Better security was required, lesson learned.
What is the evidence that gun free zones hold up? Aren't the vast majority of gun homicides a result of an armed person killing an unarmed person or persons rather than being a shoot out?