Davidson, Bill. “Why Half Our Combat Soldiers Fail to Shoot”

The constant bleep is that if guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. Well there is no reason to suspect that making the school a gun free zone was anymore effective in keeping guns out. Which was my point about my sons’s school.

By the way do we know of any instances in schools with metal detectors?
Colliers. 130 (8 November 1952) 16-18

1) As I’ve said, deranged killers do not choose victims that are known to be heavily armed; they choose victims that they feel safe in believing are not armed. Why? Because they want the power. They want to choose the victims, the place and time of their and their own demise. They want to go out feeling as though they are in charge all the way to the end. Knowing that campuses are conceal-carry zones rather than gun-free zones might make them think twice about campuses as the place to play “The Last Stand of God”.

2) As I’ve pointed out, in the two recent incidents where private citizens have been armed, it was the armed citizen, not the deranged killers that chose the place and time of the killers’ demise, presumably before the killers were through killing.

You are quite wrong. The campus of Virginia Tech. was a gun-free zone, at least as regards anyone but police and security. Guns that cannot be carried on campus are useless to stop a mass-murderer before he’s killed his self-set quota of innocents.

I can’t account for what your son saw. I wasn’t there. I’m not sure what that point was meant to make anyway.

As for the difficulty of killing someone, I’ve never done it either but I would imagine that having a gun pointed at you and your classmates — or, certainly, one’s own family and loved ones — would clarify the mind, impelling one, in such a him or me situation, to choose (to kill) him. Whereas I could never deliberately kill another human being who was not threatening me or mine, I think — I hope — I could kill one who was.

As far as I know Virgina has very lax gun laws, which means that those who wanted guns could have had them. As for the illeagality on campus, my son saw several guns in lockers while in HS in a NY suburb where it is totally illegal.

Nearly all of the mass shootings of late have been in “gun-free zones.” And the ones that weren’t — at the New Life Church in Colorado and the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia — were stopped by private citizens (and members of the community being attacked) with their own weapons.

Now I hadn’t actually thought of it in quite those terms but it makes sense. I mean the mass murderers don’t go to the firing range to start shooting people, where pretty much everyone is armed and either proficient at hitting a target or seeking such proficiency. They go where they know that almost no one has guns and the security guards may be far away at the time of their attack…the larger the campus, the better. Or they go where they probably assume no one is armed — I mean, why would a bunch of “pie in the sky bye and bye” believers who believe that life on earth is but a sojourn whereas heaven is their home bother to protect themselves? To die is gain, right? Surprise!

So carry that to the logical conclusion. If mass murdering wanabes know that students and staff might be packing, they could never be sure that the hallway or classroom where they choose to start shooting doesn’t have five or six people with guns to shoot back at him, will they be less likely or more likely to go on a shooting spree? I mean, these guys like taking their own lives on their own terms in their own time. The likelihood of three or four guns drawn on them and shooting back might not be so appealing to them. It doesn’t give them the same sense of being all powerful, of, for a while at least, playing God, choosing who will live and who will die, and then choosing their own death.