He spends a fair bit of time also beating up the media for not even acknowledging mass shootings in other countries, which gives the American public the perception that this is a uniquely American problem…It’s not.
Almost every gun debate hinges on the subject of mass shootings. It’s almost as if crime is no longer an issue anymore, what with all the focus on these mass killings. In fairness, they’re horrific, and they seem to be happening all too often for anyone’s comfort.
However, as most gun folks have pointed out in debates, there’s a fact that is constantly ignored, and that’s how most of these things happen in gun free zones.
John Lott, writing at the Chicago Tribune, has some thoughts on why that is.
While Americans are rightly concerned by the increased frequency and severity of mass public shootings, the rest of the world is experiencing much larger increases in per capita rates of attack. The frequency of foreign mass public shootings since 1998 has grown 291 percent faster than in the U.S.
The media bias on this is overwhelming. Even after President Donald Trump again raised the danger of gun-free zones, the news media still refuse to mention this fact in its reporting of mass shootings. The attack earlier this month at Borderline Bar & Grill occurred in a gun-free zone. Unlike in 39 states, concealed handgun permit holders in California are banned from carrying permitted concealed handguns into bars. The mass shooting Monday at Chicago’s Mercy Hospital & Medical Center in Bronzeville was at a place where law-abiding citizens were banned from having guns.
Most gunmen are smart enough to know that they can kill more people if they attack places where victims can’t defend themselves. That’s one reason why 98 percent of mass public shootings since 1950 have occurred in places where citizens are banned from having guns.
The national media tend to ignore case after case of mass public shootings being stopped by armed private citizens. Just a couple of days before the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh a concealed handgun permit holder stopped an alleged killer who was shooting blacks at a Kroger grocery store in Louisville, Ky.
National media outlets such as ABC and NBC covered the attack, noting that the alleged gunman told another white man that: “Whites don’t kill whites.” It sounded as if the gunman was merely reassuring a bystander that he had nothing to worry about. But reporters left out the crucial first part of the quote. The killer said: “Don’t shoot me. I won’t shoot you. Whites don’t shoot whites.” The other white person was pointing a permitted concealed handgun at the killer.
He spends a fair bit of time also beating up the media for not even acknowledging mass shootings in other countries, which gives the American public the perception that this is a uniquely American problem.
But the means to stop them are uniquely American, and that’s the armed citizen. Lott brings up the Kroger shooting in Lexington, KY. He was met with armed resistance that ended the attack.
Look, I’m not going to say that armed citizens will universally stop bad guys and survive. In fact, there’s a good chance that some armed citizens reacting to mass shootings may be shot themselves. But speaking for myself, if I can buy my family and others a little bit more time to escape to safety, I’m OK with that trade. If I can put the rabid animal down in the process and save more lives, so much the better.
What we do know is that armed resistance works. It stops attacks and saves lives.
But when will the mainstream media report that?
Tom Knighton is a Navy veteran, a former newspaperman, a novelist, and a blogger and lifetime shooter. He lives with his family in Southwest Georgia. https://bearingarms.com/author/tomknighton/
“Owning a handgun doesn’t make you armed any more than owning a guitar makes you a musician.” – Jeff Cooper
Call for a pizza, a cop, and an ambulance and see which one arrives first.
In Warren v. District of Columbia the court ruled, and the Supreme Court upheld, that “(T)he desire for condemnation cannot satisfy the need for a special relationship out of which a duty to specify persons arises.” Because the complaint did not allege a relationship “beyond that found in general police responses to crimes,” the court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a claim.
The bottom line is that your local police are not legally obligated to protect you, the average citizen. In addition to the Warren case, there are hundreds of court rulings which state that cops are not legally responsible for protecting individual citizens. For example, see Zelig v. County of Los Angeles.
The government can’t protect you as you saw on September 11, 2001 as well as during the Washington, DC area “sniper” rampage and the plethora of active shooter events that we have had since.
In fact, the government could very well be our greatest fear, due to its propensity to murder people because of their ideas (See Ruby Ridge, ID and Waco, TX).
A simple internet or youtube.com search of “the police state” or “police brutality” will reveal literally thousands of violent crimes (from assault to cold blooded murder) committed by the State’s costumed emissaries of officially sanctioned violence (aka The Police State) against harmless and innocent people.
So, who does that leave to protect you, your life, property and family? The one and only answer is: YOU It is your duty and personal responsibility to protect yourself and your loved ones.
This responsibility is a natural right given to us by God as human beings and guaranteed to us as individuals by the Constitution of the United States of America.
Options for Homeland Defense, Inc. offers professional weapons and tactics training that will make the difference. Instructed by experienced combat veterans—guys that have “been there and done that.” It offers private instruction at its privately owned range and mobile training teams are available. All interactions are confidential and discrete.