Shock: All But 2 Public Mass Shootings Since 1950 Have Occurred in “Gun-Free Zones”

So, it’s not exactly a shock to most of us. It’s just common sense. Put yourself in a criminal’s position. You feel like shooting and killing a bunch of people, and you want to be met with as little opposition as possible. If you go to a place that allows concealed carry, there’s a risk that someone could take you out before you start shooting, and that’s a risk you don’t want to take.

Naturally, you’d go to a place that has heavy restrictions on gun-carriers. That’ll pretty much guarantee that no one will be able to fight back, and you’d be able to shoot and kill as many as you want. And then you’d get your 15 minutes of fame when the media give you nonstop coverage. So, probably more than “15 minutes,” but, you know, it’s just an expression.

The subject of gun-free zones is up again, because of the shooting that took place at Ft. Hood the other day. Many have already commented that the shooting occurred in a gun-free zone. Most of them do for reasons described above.

Here’s John Lott:

But if schools, theaters, and malls allowed for concealed carry, it would turn America into the Wild West, right? Matt Vespa referred to a National Review article that appeared not long after Newtown:

There is no evidence that private holders of concealed-carry permits (which are either easy to obtain or not even required in more than 40 states) are any more irresponsible with firearms than the police. According to a 2005 to 2007 study by researchers at the University of Wisconsin and Bowling Green State University, police nationwide were convicted of firearms violations at least at a 0.002 percent annual rate. That’s about the same rate as holders of carry permits in the states with “shall issue” laws.

The left would love to turn this entire country into one big gun-free zone, and they’d do it, all the while paying lip service to our 2nd Amendment “right to hunt.”



Posted in 2nd Amendment, Crime, Gun Control Tagged with: ,
42 comments on “Shock: All But 2 Public Mass Shootings Since 1950 Have Occurred in “Gun-Free Zones”
  1. woonsocket says:

    The gun makers are busy promoting irresponsible gun ownership. 85-90% of Americans want strict background checks for gun purchases. Yes, Republican voters too. They just conveniently forget about it in the voting booth. It should be illegal for the gun makers and all gun lobbyists to be involved in the exchange of money and influence in politics.

    • jessica22 says:

      I wish all you gun-control lovers would create your own country and live there – all law-abiding people without guns – until one of your citizens becomes mentally ill and shoots the entire population.
      Then you’ll learn your lesson.

      How stupid can you be?

      • woonsocket says:

        Your answer is illogical. You don’t need to teach us a lesson. We’re the one who need to teach Americans about what happens when it’s easy to buy a gun. You don’t protect people by arming everyone. Some of those “everyone” should not have a gun in the first place.

        If I owned a gun it would be for my own protection. I would gladly be screened for ownership. The best possible outcome for me would be never having to use it and never having someone break into my home. That’s why I support gin REFORM. You’re outnumbered pardner.

        • Ron says:

          Hey Woon, where do you live that it is sooooooooo easy to buy a gun. I have several guns and every time my background is checked. The VAST majority of sales have background checks done. Only SOME personal sales go without checks.

          So how many times have you gone to buy a firearm? I supposed you walk in and just throw the money down and pick up the weapon and walk out. BS

        • Virgil Hilts says:

          Woonsocket is a city in Rhode Island. That just about tells you all you need to know.

        • jessica22 says:

          I didn’t give an answer.

          It was just a wish that you gun-control freaks could “enjoy” the safe and secure environment of a gun-free zone.
          We have plenty of background check laws now.
          We don’t need more gun control laws.

          Teach people how to safely use a gun.
          Allow conceal carry.
          Identify and treat mental illness.
          Then there’d be no mass shootings.

        • WilliamSpires says:

          The things you mention are good ideas on sensible gun safety but Obama and the democrats are sliding toward making guns illegal and if they can’t get enough restrictions on guns then the ammunition will be government controlled. If the government is successful in destroying the Second Amendment then the most likely mass shooting will be from our own government unless the Fourth Reich Gestapo administration that would make Adolph Hitler jealous is drop kicked to hell where it belongs.

        • Ron says:

          Yes sir, I agree. Bury half of your ammo and guns where ‘they’ won’t look.

        • Graywolf12 says:

          For years guns were available at yard/garage sales, but no more People with guns or inherited guns will not let them go. Even 22 ammo is impossible to find at private sales, and gun stores are almost always out of stock.

        • Evan White says:

          If theres not guns there are still as last resort, knives, swords, and gators that would love to eat that thug

        • jessica22 says:

          How right you are!

          I used to be able to get lots of good ammo reasonably at Walmart… until about 2 years ago. Now there are so few deliveries of ammunition to the store and when it does come in a friend puts away a couple boxes for me. It’s really hard to get!

          I hear the government is hoarding ammunition so the public can’t get any. There Obama goes screwing with “supply and demand”. Wish he’d let this free market correct itself!!

        • Frank J. Austin says:

          I support Gin reform too Woonsocket. Maybe if we had that, people like you wouldn’t post your diatribe while suffering from a drunken stupor.

        • Trixie52 says:

          I support gin reform too.

        • Tomk777 says:

          Liar, your outnumbered 10 to 1, thats why you and people like you have to pass legislation in the middle of the night, (Like Colorado) and then get your AZZZ recalled by an overwhelming majority. Keep deluding yourself, that everyone believes your crap if you want, it’s consistent with every other lie a liberal tells him/her self, that doesn’t conform with reality.

      • Evan White says:

        And likly the mentaly ill shooter would be gay

    • Bob Compton says:

      There are already strict background checks on gun purchases. It is a federal felony to attempt to buy a gun if you are not allowed to because you are a felon, etc. During Clinton’s time in office, he averaged less than 100 arrests a year for illegal attempts to buy guns! There are over 20,000 gun laws nation-wide on the books. Most of them are unconstitutional. You want to use that 85-90% statistic? Here’s where you can. That’s the percentage of gun crimes that are known to be committed in this country, but not enforced. obama bragged one year they had stopped 110,000 people from buying guns that were not allowed to possess them. There were zero arrests made! Way to go, holder! Read the article! Gun-free zones kill people, not guns! If you exclude Chicago, DC, Detroit, and the other city I don’t recall which one it is, the US ranks 4th from the bottom of all western countries in gun deaths! Liberal policies are what’s killing all the people! Don’t restrict 80+% of the population because of the crimes of the other 20%.

    • Virgil Hilts says:

      YOU WROTE: “The gun makers are busy promoting irresponsible gun ownership.”
      Try offering some evidence for that sweeping generality….alleged ‘logic’ such as you attempt to purport as actual fact carries about as much weight as the 18th Century Englishman in the colonies, who boldly pronounced that ‘All Indians walk in single file”…after having seen 3 of then do so.

    • Graywolf12 says:

      Those of you suffering from Haplophobia should do a little research. Note that the USA ranks very low in gun violence compared to all the 142 countries that rank higher in gun crimes per 100,000 population. A rank of 143 isn’t bad when compared to 192 countries in the world. Oh, did I tell you ALL the countries with more gun crimes are all highly controlling countries. Go find something else to cry about.

  2. abinico says:

    All of these shooters were taking medication with known side effect of violent behavior. This was even originally reported by MSM in the Lanza case. And it was interesting to see MSM play that news down after they got a back room reaming from big pharma. What we should be asking is why do we allow medications that cause violent behavior. And keep in mind, many of these medication induced violent incidents never make it in the news.

    • woonsocket says:

      You forgot something. Keeping guns away from mentally ill Americans. I’m not talking about a case of common depression. I’m talking about dangerously ill people. There’s a distinction.

      • Ron says:


      • Another Guest says:

        The problem with that are the ones determining who is mentally ill.

        • WilliamSpires says:

          That is exactly the problem, since Obama and the democrats consider anyone not supporting them and making big donations to their scam as mentally ill.

        • MyronJPoltroonian says:

          Just like Soviet Russia and its Gulags that were filled with the mentally ill whose displayed symptoms were that they disagreed with “The State”.

      • Evan White says:

        I don’t know what your point is but if you are in support of people who are disBled not being banned from guns, thank you.

      • Evan White says:

        I just want all gun bans on mentaly ill people lifted.

      • Evan White says:

        Believe it or not, only less than 1% of disabled people are serial killers I myself suffer from Autism and where i live theres a ban that says that disabled people can’t own small arms like pistols they can only own rifles and shotguns

      • Raymond Michael Borland says:

        I believe if you read the applications to buy a handgun in any state you will find people who have been confined for more than 7 days in a mental institution are prohibited from buying a handgun. In some cases these shooters had a history of mental illness like anxiety and depression but apparently either their doctors did not perceived them as a threat to themselves or to society and never had them committed to a mental hospital or they never manifested that degree of mental illness before they snapped and started shooting people. In the case of the NY shooter who set fire to homes and killed fire fighters who showed up to put out the fires, He had murdered his grandmother brutally by beating her to death with a hammer. He was paroled in 6 years or so. He could not buy a gun so he stole the one he used to shoot the firefighters. The judges and parole board who let a brutal murderer should be tried as accomplices to murder and given 10 life sentences.

        Adam Lanza was mentally disturbed but again he never was committed to a mental hospital. He was old enough to buy a gun but instead he murdered his mother and stole the guns she legally owned. None of the gun laws can ever stop a first time killer from killing people.

        If you look back at all the shootings except the NY firefighter shooting, the gun laws would not have prevented them.

        The only way to prevent school shootings is to train teachers who want to carry a concealed handgun how to use them safely and kill anyone who comes into the school with a gun.This is what Israel did back in the 1970s when they had Muslim terrorists do school shootings. There have been none of these shootings since then.

        The vast majority of people with mental illness are not dangerous people. It would be wrong to forbid all of them from owning a gun. It is estimated half the people in the country have been anxious and depresses at one time or another in their life and needed medical help or use of a tranquilizer or antidepressant. Most cases of depression are exogenous depression caused by loss of a loved one, a divorce, loss of a job, financial problems, etc.

        Since people who are put on psychiatric drugs may have underlying violent behavior tendencies it really is difficult to sort out whether a drug causes violent behavior or whether you are treating someone who already had violent thoughts and suicidal ideation.

    • rockyvnvmc says:

      Yet cannabis, which has been Proven to quell violent tendencies, remains illegal…

      • Raymond Michael Borland says:

        3% of chronic marijuana user between the age of 20 and 30 get schizophrenia (they become psychotic) compared to only 1% of non-users. It has yet to be proven marijuana causes this or that people who become chronic marijuana users are more likely to be pre-psychotic and marijuana brings it out. Without a doubt chronic marijuana use does have detrimental effects on a person including paranoia, withdrawal from social interactions, poor learning ability, and passivity. Schizophrenic patients are rarely violent but they do occasionally try to commit suicide and do sometimes become violent and hurt others. The voices they hear in their mind can sometimes tell them to hurt themselves and others. It is very rare. We do not ban gun ownership from everyone driving an SUV but some SUV owners become killers. Get the point?

        • rockyvnvmc says:

          While the US gov’t, has yet to fund a single study, looking at the Positive benefits of cannabis (it was used for over 5,000 years, all throughout history, across civilizations, for it’s medicinal effects) Israel Has funded many studies geared towards looking at the herb’s (not ‘drug’) medicinal benefits and have come up with a lot of positive information, that our government ought to be looking at.
          It was readily available, all throughout the US, prior to the Corporate Lobbyists (Timber and Pharmaceutical, to name a few) pushing to have it banned, with such blatant lies as the movie ‘Reefer Madness’ and other outright lies.
          The Drug Commission of 1970 recommended that the herb be totally Legalized, but Pres. Nixon ‘nixed’ that idea and put it, instead, at the very highest level of prohibited drugs, along with Heroin and LSD, above, in fact Cocaine, which Can be prescribed.
          At the very least, it should be placed at a level where studies could realistically be done on it and doctors should be allowed to prescribe it, for various treatments, as with Cocaine.

        • Raymond Michael Borland says:

          Cocaine is only legal to use to prevent bleeding in the nose during nasal surgery. It has been used for this for such a long time that it probably never had formal double blind clinical trials
          The problem with legalizing a herb (marijuana leaf) is that the amount of THC varies depending on the part of the plant smoked and where it was grown and under what conditions. The FDA would have to authorize tests on purified THC at known doses administered by a metered dosimeter like the way cortisone sprays are used in your nose. They would have to do a whole array of metabolism, excretion, and efficacy /safety type studies for each disease they are treating. These would have to be double blind placebo controlled studies.As you may not know placebo (a sugar pill) is a very effective drug and it can cure pain, lower blood pressure, calm anxiety, etc. even though it has no active ingredient. It would have to be proven that the THC at an appropriate dose established by a dose response trial is both safe and effective. if it is intended to be used for long term therapy ,long term safety and efficacy trials are also necessary. I do not know if all the necessary animal studies have been done so far on THC. My guess is no. These animal studies look for carcinogenic effects as well as to establish the toxic dose of THC and the way an animal dies from an overdose so that human overdoses can be treated. basically the way a pharmaceutical company would study a brand new drug would be required of THC. I can tell you now the FDA would never allow clinical trials with marijuana leaf/bud, or a mixture of each as the dose and other drugs in the herb have not been established. A drug must be a pure drug and at a known dose. I did drug clinical trials with pharmaceutical companies for many years and have an M.D.-Ph.D. so this is not a layman’s opinion.

      • ADRoberts says:

        But it will kill you with tars and nicotine and other deadly chemicals LIKE carbon monoxide.
        Then there are all the people who will be killed in car wrecks because the driver of another car is STONED.
        But you want to claim that quelling violent tendencies outweighs all of those other problems.

  3. ChristCrusader says:

    Gun Free Zones = Victim Rich Zones
    Any way you look at it:
    Whether murderers seek out gun free zones to do their work “safely”;
    or murderers succeed in killing enough helpless victims in gun free zones to attain “mass shooting” status;
    or would-be mass-murderers are stopped in time by an armed good guy in a 2A-Zone before he can complete his business,

    Gun free zones are more dangerous than 2A Zones

  4. ABBAsFernando says:

    Those who are responsible for disarming citizens preventing their RIGHT of Self Defence are just as guilty as the criminal.

  5. Michael J. Fell says:

    An “inconvenient truth” that anti-gun “progressive” dimwits willfully ignore.

  6. Bill_S says:

    I’d really like to see a nice graphic chart posted with the following info:

    Date–Location–number shot–weapon–shooter age–shooter politics (Left/right/unknown)–Shooter religion–On medications?–gunfree?–anyone around with gun?

  7. MyronJPoltroonian says:

    To me, a “Good Guy With A Gun” looks like Wally Cox.

    Regarding the tragic school shooting in Connecticut and other shootings that have occurred in “Gun Free Zones”, I have to note that southern New England (along with New York, D.C., Chicago, California [and, of all idiocy, our military bases], etc.) are bastions of “Progressive Gun Control”, creating so called, “Gun Free (or, as I call them, Victim Rich) Zones”, from which, since they haven’t worked, there will be a cry for even more of the same types of restrictions. Restrictions that failed to protect even one of the victims. To me, the solution to these school shootings is MORE Guns, not less. Before you recoil in horror that what I (or anyone else of like mind) propose is unthinkable (and in light of the nationwide average of a 20+ minute response time by the police after they are called), let me ask you one simple question: Why were the authority figures in the school all helpless and unable to defend their charges from this sudden, unpredictable, close quarters violence? (There should be more to teaching teachers than just how to be good keepers of the myriad rules and regulations imposed on them by both the government and their union.) If we can’t trust our teachers with guns, why do we trust them with our children?

    I had a grade school teacher at the A.E. Platt School, in Riverside, Rhode Island, who looked like Wally Cox (who played “Mr. Peepers” on TV in the ’50’s). One day, while we were lining up after recess, one of us noticed a bulge in his right hand jacket pocket (remember when male teachers routinely wore jackets and slacks and female teachers wore dresses?) and asked him what it was. He pulled out his snub nosed Colt Detective Special in .38 S&W Special Caliber and showed it to us. We were amazed, curious and pleased, all at the same time. Funny thing about it was, nobody felt intimidated, frightened or in danger because of that incident. In fact, we all felt safer. Nobody called the authorities, the school, nor took their children out of school because of it. He suffered no negative consequences whatsoever. Neither did we. Oh, yes, no new union employees were needed or involved, and the response time was at an absolute minimum. Of course, this was in the late, late ’40’s/early ’50’s, so I guess we’re much more violent as a society now than we used to be shortly after WW II and on into Korea. If so, why?

  8. Joseph says:

    It’s all about control folks, people without guns are very easy for this TYRANNICAL OBAMA GOVERNMENT to control.

Last Resistance Newsletter