As on "FOX NEWS" Web Site

This is a discussion on As on "FOX NEWS" Web Site within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; More Guns, Not Less, Would Prevent Shooting Massacres Wednesday, August 29, 2007 By John Lott and Maxim Lott Few tragedies make their victims feel more ...

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: As on "FOX NEWS" Web Site

  1. #1
    Ex Member Array TC_FLA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    P.C.B., Florida
    Posts
    92

    As on "FOX NEWS" Web Site

    More Guns, Not Less, Would Prevent Shooting Massacres
    Wednesday, August 29, 2007

    By John Lott and Maxim Lott

    Few tragedies make their victims feel more helpless than multiple-victim shootings.

    Imagine the terror: Unable to escape, simply waiting for the killer.

    With school starting, the April 16 attack at Virginia Tech that left 32 dead is still on many people’s minds. Some are looking for guarantees that such an attack won’t happen again.

    But Virginia Tech’s just released report on how to stop future tragedies was pretty disappointing, and this coming week’s Virginia Governor’s task force report isn’t likely to be any better. The university proposes more counseling for mentally troubled students, internet based billboards to alert students of emergencies, putting both the police and fire departments into the same building to allow better coordination, more surveillance cameras, and locks that make it easier for students to get out of buildings.

    Well, more cameras might help get campus police to the scene faster, but let’s hope that the next attacker doesn’t commit the attack where there are no cameras or that he doesn’t disable them first. Assuming that the doors to buildings are merely locked as they normally would be--and that the assailant has not blocked them or tied them shut with a chain-- easy to open locks could help.

    If a current student is planning the next attack, gets identified as having mental problems and has treatment, and that the treatment is successful, more mental health resources could be helpful.

    But one glaring omission remains: The report failed to ask whether there were any common features or similarities among the different multiple-victim public shooting tragedies. And what happens if these policies fail? Should there be some ultimate protection upon which the university can rely?

    Of course, these horrors are hardly unique to the United States. In 1996, Martin Bryant killed 35 people at Port Arthur in Tasmania, Australia. In the last half-dozen years, European countries-- including France, Germany and Switzerland-- have experienced multiple-victim shootings.

    The worst, in Germany, resulted in 17 deaths; in Switzerland, one attack claimed the lives of 14 regional legislators. Of course, since 1997 there have been multiple attacks in the U.S., with the 13 dead at Columbine.

    Prior to Virginia Tech, the two previous most deadly shootings in the U.S. were the 1991 Luby's Cafeteria massacre in Texas, which left 23 people dead, and the shooting at a California McDonald's in 1984, in which 21 people were killed.

    All these attacks shared something in common: citizens were already banned from having guns in those areas. Indeed, every multiple-victim public shooting of any significant size in the United States has occurred in one of these gun-free zones.

    The problem with gun-control laws is not that there isn't enough regulation, rather that it is primarily the law-abiding, not the criminals, who obey these laws.

    Virginia Tech has rigorously enforced its gun-free zone policy and suspended students with concealed handgun permits who have tried to bring handguns onto school property, and it will continue to do so. Imagine what this means for a faculty member fired for bringing even a permitted concealed handgun on campus. It would be impossible for them to get another academic job at any other university. Similarly, a student who gets expelled for a firearms violation will find it virtually impossible to get admitted to another school.

    But whether it is the suspensions and expulsions at universities, or even the three-year prison terms that can await those who take guns onto property of K-12 schools in most states, these penalties are completely meaningless for someone intent on killing and facing multiple life sentences or death penalties.

    But citizens and police who pack heat do help, because they can stop a shooting while it is happening. Amazingly, opposition to guns on campuses is so extreme that some even oppose police being able to carry guns.

    When, in the wake of the Virginia Tech shooting, campus police at Brandeis University asked that they be armed to prevent similar tragedies, the president of the Brandeis Student Union even argued that, “the sense of community and the sense of safety would be disturbed very much by having guns on campus.”

    The administration is now considering arming its officers but has not taken action. By Sept. 10, the University of Iowa, Iowa State University and the University of Northern Iowa will also decide whether to end an almost 30-year ban and allow campus police to again carry handguns.

    Police with guns are certainly helpful, but there simply aren’t enough police to ensure that an officer will be at the scene when shooting starts. For example, this past spring at Virginia Tech, each officer on duty had to cover well over 250 acres.

    Up until the early 1970s, Israel had to deal with the cold reality of terrorists who would take machine guns into shopping malls, schools, and Synagogues and open fire. That type of attack doesn’t occur any more. Why? Israelis realized that armed citizens could stop such an attacker before he did much damage.

    About 15 percent of Israelis are now licensed to carry weapons, and determined terrorists have to resort to less effective, secretive routes of attack such as bombing.

    Increasing the probability that someone will be able to protect himself or herself increases deterrence. Even when any single person might have a small probability of having a concealed handgun, the probability that at least someone in the crowd will have a gun is very high.

    There have been a number of attempted public attacks have been stopped by permit holders on streets, at universities, and public schools.

    While right-to-carry laws-- now operating in 40 states -- do reduce violent crime generally, the effect is much larger for multiple-victim shootings. Normally about 2 to 6 percent of adults in any state have permits, and for most crimes that means some deterrence. But for a shooting in a public place where there might be dozens or hundreds of people, it will almost ensure that at least someone -- someone who is unknown to the attacker -- will be able to defend themselves and others.

    People won't have to wait helplessly for the killer to get them.

    Police are extremely important in deterring crime but, as this latest attack showed again, they almost always arrive after the crime has been committed. Annual surveys of crime victims in America by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics continually show that, when confronted by a criminal, people are safest if they have a gun.

    Just as the threat of arrest and prison can deter criminals from committing a crime, so does the fact that victims can defend themselves.

    Other countries wonder how millions of Americans can be allowed to legally carry concealed handguns. We must be crazy. Won't blood flow in the streets?

    Many Americans also initially shared the same fears, but not any longer. The permit holders have proven to be extremely law-abiding. There is a reason no state that has allowed citizens to carry guns has reversed course.

    Most people understand that guns deter criminals. Suppose you or your family are being stalked by a criminal who intends to harm you. Would you feel safer putting a sign in front of your home saying "This home is a gun-free zone"? Would it frighten criminals away?

    Good intentions don't necessarily make good laws. What counts is whether the laws ultimately save lives. Unfortunately, too many gun laws primarily disarm law-abiding citizens, not criminals.


    John Lott is the author of Freedomnomics and a senior research scientist at the University of Maryland. Two of his sons are attending public universities in Virginia. Maxim Lott is a college student in Virginia at the College of William & Mary.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Senior Member Array slimjim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Upstate NY
    Posts
    687
    AMEN!

    "The problem with gun-control laws is not that there isn't enough regulation, rather that it is primarily the law-abiding, not the criminals, who obey these laws."

    This is very basic concept that many fail to recognize. Reminds me of a Thomas Jefferson quote:

    "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
    Thomas Jefferson

  4. #3
    Member Array Kompact9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    427

    Hard to Believe...

    Hard to believe this came out on a Fox news site...if they'd just run it continually for a few days, the word might get out and wake some folks up. Good post...
    noli nothis permittere te terere...

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array jeephipwr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Triangle, NC
    Posts
    608

    I second that AMEN

    "Insanity" - doing the same thing and expecting different result.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    25,807
    Lott's eyes are wide open. I don't agree with some of his stats or conclusions, but he sees the whole field. I'm amazed at how this direct type of writing is getting so much play, the past 6mos. If this "full court press" keeps happening, then perhaps some good can ultimately come out of the VT tragedy.
    Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Thoughts: Justifiable self defense (A.O.J.).
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Reason over Force: The Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos).
    NRA, GOA, OFF, ACLDN.

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array rabywk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis Metro Area
    Posts
    675
    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,294954,00.html

    Here is the link if anyone wants it
    NRA Rifle Coach
    NRA Pistol Instructor
    NRA Personal Protection In the Home Instructor

    --- Some of the friendliest people I have ever talked to are gun owners and shooters and according to the gun activists we are the mass murders and felons of the nation???

  8. #7
    Moderator
    Array Bark'n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    West Central Missouri
    Posts
    9,917
    +1 on all the posts!

    And may I be the first to say, "I'll keep my ccw rather than make a good faith effort to give it up in order to make the feel safer!"
    -Bark'n
    Semper Fi


    "The gun is the great equalizer... For it is the gun, that allows the meek to repel the monsters; Whom are bigger, stronger and without conscience, prey on those who without one, would surely perish."

  9. #8
    88m
    88m is offline
    Member Array 88m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Western Colorado
    Posts
    146
    The administration is now considering arming its officers but has not taken action.
    that just makes no sense to me at all. I mean there Officers aren't even armed!
    “The will to survive is not as important as the will to prevail... the answer to criminal aggression is retaliation.” Jeff Cooper

  10. #9
    Distinguished Member Array SonofASniper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    1,249
    Quote Originally Posted by 88m View Post
    that just makes no sense to me at all. I mean there Officers aren't even armed!
    But its a gun free zone. That means they are safe. Even the UK disarmed its officers because they were "safer" once it became gun free. It was soooooo succesful thats why they started to re-arm them after officers were getting killed.


    Good article, and I agree. Lets keep on the full court press here. I think more people are starting to wake up to the realities of life.
    I will support gun control when you can guarantee all guns are removed from this planet. That includes military and law enforcement. When you can accomplish that, then I will be the last person to lay down my gun. Then I will carry the weapon that replaces the gun.

  11. #10
    VIP Member Array edr9x23super's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,108

    My only problem with the police response is:

    And I am not bashing LEOs in any way, just the tactics mind you, is that in every one of these shootings, we have all watched hundreds of cops all standing around with their tricked-out assault weapons and flak jackets standing around while we hear the sound of gunshots. If those were my kids in that school, believe me, I would be in there in a heartbeat carrying the fight to the BG, in the hope of drawing his attention away from the helpless, and possibly my own children. But tactics nowadays require that LEOs wait, and try to negotiate, or worse yet, "wait for backup". When the shooting has started, it is too late for backup. You need to act and act now, I think this would go a long way to helping save at least a few lives.

    Just my .02c
    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined". - Patrick Henry

  12. #11
    Senior Member Array rabywk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    St. Louis Metro Area
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by edr9x23super View Post
    And I am not bashing LEOs in any way, just the tactics mind you, is that in every one of these shootings, we have all watched hundreds of cops all standing around with their tricked-out assault weapons and flak jackets standing around while we hear the sound of gunshots. If those were my kids in that school, believe me, I would be in there in a heartbeat carrying the fight to the BG, in the hope of drawing his attention away from the helpless, and possibly my own children. But tactics nowadays require that LEOs wait, and try to negotiate, or worse yet, "wait for backup". When the shooting has started, it is too late for backup. You need to act and act now, I think this would go a long way to helping save at least a few lives.

    Just my .02c
    This issue is with administration and not those on the ground fighting the fight. I really think if given the opportunity you would have seen some officers making entry and trying to help save those they could.
    NRA Rifle Coach
    NRA Pistol Instructor
    NRA Personal Protection In the Home Instructor

    --- Some of the friendliest people I have ever talked to are gun owners and shooters and according to the gun activists we are the mass murders and felons of the nation???

  13. #12
    Senior Moderator
    Array pgrass101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    13,399
    I really like the article
    “You can sway a thousand men by appealing to their prejudices quicker than you can convince one man by logic.”

    ― Robert A. Heinlein,

  14. #13
    Member Array Dusty Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Escalon, CA
    Posts
    335
    The police don't just rush in with guns blazing because that tactic, as often as not, will TRIGGER a killing rampage rather than stop it. Lets give them credit for having a bit of good sense and some training that increases the likelihood of ending a standoff w/out bloodshed.

  15. #14
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,418
    'Nuff said...'
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  16. #15
    Member Array ethereal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    95

    Standoff?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dusty Miller View Post
    The police don't just rush in with guns blazing because that tactic, as often as not, will TRIGGER a killing rampage rather than stop it. Lets give them credit for having a bit of good sense and some training that increases the likelihood of ending a standoff w/out bloodshed.
    I would not characterize VA tech, Columbine, and Bailey as standoffs. It was an unopposed slaughter of unarmed innocents while those responsible (but not obliged to act) for our safety "waited out" the situation. LEOs will always have my undying respect - managers, watchers, waiters... not so much. The "E" part of LEO (enforcement) is a verb - an action word. I don't want them "rushing in with guns blazing" either, but I don't want them sitting in the parking lot with kids being sexually assaulted and shot {Bailey, CO} And yes, the cops new what was going on for hours.

    This morning's news stories about VA Tech are painting the BG as a victim of an overburdened mental health system who fell through the cracks, etc, etc, etc. The tragedy happened because some insane nut was unopposed by law-abiding people in a gun-free zone. This was compounded by first-responders and school officials who wanted to "manage" the situation rather than take action.
    Protect your family. Reload. Call 911.

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. "Gun Nuts Showing Off Near Site of AZ Rampage"
    By jonnyd49 in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: January 17th, 2011, 07:46 PM
  2. Expanded "Ballistics By The Inch" site up.
    By Jim Downey in forum Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: June 8th, 2009, 11:35 PM
  3. Everyone on this site vote "no" on the cnn pole now!!!!!
    By Dustinmk4 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: March 12th, 2009, 12:33 AM
  4. You have GOT to check out this "news-behind-the-new" site!
    By peacefuljeffrey in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: June 14th, 2007, 06:52 PM

Search tags for this page

what happen to fox news web page

Click on a term to search for related topics.