Wednesday, December 15, 2010

Picard To Engineering....

The forcefields are malfunctioning. The "Gun Free Zone" forcefield that is.

Here's a first hand account of the Florida School Board shooting from board member Ginger Littleton.

I was concerned about my guys. They were lined up like ducks in a row. He was already basically standing on the same level as them. I knew something bad was going to happen. That was my only option. ... My guys had three-ring binders and pencils for protection, and that's all."

Once again we see the fallacy of "Gun Free Zones." They simply aren't. Laws and signs prohibiting guns didn't keep a man from walking in armed and threatening the lives of everyone in that room. Littleton paints an all too familiar picture. Helpless, disarmed victims at the mercy of their assailant. Littleton jumped into action with the only "weapon" she had. Her purse. She failed, and the only reason she didn't die is because the shooter didn't intend to kill her.

Make no mistake about it. This is the world anti-gunners want for all Americans, as described by Bill Husfelt,

"The only thing we had, the only thing we could possibly do, was buy time. ... He had us. He could have sat there and picked us off."

Let that last sentence sink in. "He could have sat there and picked us off." Gun control provided them with absolutely NO real security, only the illusion of security, which was shattered the moment Duke walked in.

There are only two reasons everyone in that room isn't dead right now. One, Duke didn't walk in and execute them all. Two, a man with a gun shot him, stopping the assault and forcing Duke to end his own life.

H/T to WizardPC, who succinctly notes how this played out. If it sounds familiar that's because this is the basic progression of every "gun free zone" shooting. Those who create these victim-rich environments should be held responsible.


Anonymous said...

I am saddened each time I read about shootings in gun free zones such as this. It makes me think twice about putting myself in this situation. I have to go to a school function tonight...I hate having to go unarmed! One would think the antis would see the truth.

Andrew said...

This happened in my town, so this is obviously a hot topic of debate. Here's the discussion I've been having with my other (pro gun) friends.

Would you want someone who's not an avid shooter, that has a CCW permit siting across from you if this guy walked in? I just know too many people that get a CC and only go to the range once or twice a year. Then again, most of those people don't actually carry that often.

What are your thoughts about varying skill level shooters in that close quarters situation?

Linoge said...

Gun-free zones do precisely one thing, and they do it extraordinarily well - they ensure that the criminal's intended victims are unarmed and defenseless.

Criminals know this. Criminals exploit this. And anti-rights nuts facilitate them.

What a world.

Regarding training, this murderous scumbag shows how hard even a 10-foot shot can be if you do not practice and are an idiot about it. Given that the criminal committed suicide at the first sign of armed resistance, I believe a firearm would have served a beneficial purpose regardless, but that is me.

R. Stanton Scott said...

This actually looks like a case where an armed citizen could have gotten the drop on this guy and done some good.

Of course, making sure this nutcase couldn't get a gun in the first place would also do the trick.

Linoge said...

Yes, because it is not already illegal to concealed carry a firearm in Florida without a permit.

Yes, because it is not already illegal to carry a firearm onto school property in Florida.

Yes, because it is not already illegal for convicted felons to even touch firearms.

Yes, because it is not already illegal to attempt to assault and murder people with a firearm.

All we need is ONE MORE LAW, and things like this will NEVER happen AGAIN.

Once again, Stan breaks out the big guns, and applies his brain's full processing power to the situation. So much for that, huh?

But, y'know what? I completely and absolutely agree with Stan - we should have ensured this nutcase could not have gotten a gun... BY KEEPING HIS SORRY ASS IN JAIL. If a legal adult cannot be trusted with a firearm, they simply have no business in society, given all of the other materials, substances, and equipment that can cause so very much greater amounts of damage and loss of life than some paltry firearm in the hands of an incompetent.

Mike W. said...

we should have ensured this nutcase could not have gotten a gun... BY KEEPING HIS SORRY ASS IN JAIL.

To be fair, we can't even keep guns, knives, & other weapons out of our jails. That of course just shows how disgustingly ineffective the infringements Stan loves so much really are.

Of course the positions he advocates have never been about preventing crime. They're about disarming honest Americans. That goal has never changed.

Andrew - I'm very much on the other end of the spectrum regarding necessary "skill level" needed to defend onesself with a gun. That deserves a post of its own.

Weer'd Beard said...

I would simply ask Stan what country is able to keep firearms out of the hands of their criminal class?

And knowing Stan and all his mental prowess he'll change the subject or vanish.

Mike W. said...

I would simply ask Stan what country is able to keep firearms out of the hands of their criminal class?

Hell, even oppressive totalitarian police states can't do that. Even police states which are goddamn islands (see UK) can't do it.

And of course, I'd ask. If you can't keep guns & other weapons out of the hands of people in prison how in the hell will you do so with free men out in society?

But yes Weer'd. Stan will run from debate and obfuscate as he always does.