On Trump’s Solutions to Mass Shootings

Source: Activist Post
Published: Aug 6, 2019
Author: Scott Lazarowitz
Post Date: 2019-08-07 08:31:19 by Deckard
Views: 5170

Op-Ed by Scott Lazarowitz

More mass shootings again. In El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio.

So once again Donald Trump and his fellow politicians are turning to more fascist proposals to solve the issue of these young people shooting up places and killing people. More gun regulations, background checks and “Red Flag” laws, none of which will help to prevent the violent episodes.

The dysfunction going on now is mainly a result of government intrusions and government interventionism in the first place, so just how will more government intrusions and interventions solve any problems? They won’t. Bureaucrats will only make things worse, as they are now.

Why would we want to trust government agencies and their government databases to do background checks on people, when the bureaucrats and enforcers themselves are not entirely trustworthy and not particularly competent? The El Paso alleged shooter bought his gun(s) legally, and last year’s Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz also passed a background check.

The FBI were given a heads up by the Russian government on the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaevs, but the FBI did nothing with the information. So much for “Red Flag” laws.

But “Red Flag” laws will help disgruntled co-workers or ex-workers, or spouses going through nasty divorces, or neighbors who don’t like a particular neighbor, to report targeted individuals to the government or to the police.

We already have “Zero Tolerance” laws in the schools, in which teachers and staff report a kid to the police (not to the principal’s office, but police) who has carved a pastry into the shape of a gun or points his finger and says, “bang, bang.” And sheeple neighbors now report a lone child, playing outside or walking along the street, to the police and police arrest the kid’s mother at home for being “negligent.”

We have those things now, because society in Amerika is dysfunctional, irrational, and many people are quite ignorant and their critical thinking skills and common sense have been suppressed or punished by the authoritarian enforcement of political correctness in the schools.

Just read through any of John Whitehead’s columns from the Rutherford Institute, and you’ll get a good sense of the police state in the government schools and in Amerika.

Trump mentioned the Internet and video games in his press conference this week. What are we going to do, ban video games and censor the Internet? Big Tech SJWs are already censoring those they feel are “triggering” or are guilty of “hate,” mainly those whose political or social views the Big Tech censors disagree with. And we know how crazy some of those tech people are now.

So now in addition to censoring, the tech authorities will use “Red Flag” laws to report “suspicious” activity to the police, giving police the users’ IP addresses and access to their social media accounts, and so on. Get ready for The Purge, everyone.

But what is causing these young people to go postal at the government schools, at shopping malls or movie theaters? I’ve already discussed the connection between psychiatric drugs and these shootings. I know, the killer is responsible for his own actions, but the drugs are having the effect of numbing their judgments and self-control.

But police don’t or won’t “go there” because either they like Big Pharma’s exploiting people’s problems in the name of greedy profits, or, as was mentioned in this article regarding Sandy Hook shooter Adam Lanza, maybe police are like the state of Connecticut’s bureaucrats who refused to release Lanza’s medical records, denying a parents rights organization’s request “because ‘it would cause a lot of people to stop taking their medications’.”

And Donald Trump mentioned the video games, like taking them away will change anything.

In this article, I wrote about Adam Lanza:

Regarding Adam Lanza and his incessant video game playing, there are several articles online which seem to be distorting or exaggerating his use of violent video games. For instance, this Guardian article states that Lanza was obsessed with mass murder and listed only violent video games based only on some items police actually found in the Lanza home, while this Techdirt article clarifies that he also had non-violent video games such as Dance Dance Revolution, and it was that video with which the article claims Lanza actually was obsessed. This Hartford Courant op-ed agrees based on witness interviews that Lanza’s real obsession was for the non-violent video games, especially Dance Dance Revolution.

So, Adam Lanza was most obsessed with his non-violent video Dance Dance Revolution, but he didn’t exactly go into the Sandy Hook School and dance for the kids, did he? Nope.

And I also wondered whether Adam Lanza may have been “brainwashed,” like from video games:

… connections between the recent mass killings and implications of government-infiltration of media and use of drugs to “trigger” violent behavior in people, some of whom have claimed no knowledge of their even having committed violent acts.

Which should not be too hard to fathom, by the way, given that we now know that the NSA has not only collected video gamers’ chats, buddylists and geolocations but also NSA agents themselves participate and role-play in games and discussions as a means of extracting personal information and metadata and recruiting informants, specifically in Xbox Live and World of Warcraft. We also know that governments have instilled their propaganda in these video games.

And I think Trump said something about video games “desensitizing” the kids and young adults to violence and murder. But what about the military? Since the early 1990s especially the U.S. military has gone over to the Middle East, bombing and shooting and mass killing, especially in Iraq, murdering or causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents. And the death and destruction was revitalized when the George W. Bush started new wars against Iraq and Afghanistan, and to this day their drone bombers, and Obama’s drone bombers, and now Trump’s drone bombers continue to murder mostly innocent people.

Talk about “desensitized”! The U.S. military intentionally desensitizes and suppresses the consciences of military members.

And Trump also said something about looking at “mental illness.” Why do Trump and others want to disarm people who are supposedly “mentally ill” and make them defenseless? We already have sitting ducks in the “gun-free zone” schools and other mandatory “gun-free” places — why put targets on the backs of “mentally ill” people?

And who is to decide who has “mental illness”? Local law enforcement, some of whom are Iraq War vets and who have PTSD? Psychiatrists? Yeah, right. I would trust the average psychiatrist to determine who is mentally ill as far as I could throw him.

Like in the old Soviet Union (and the United State), those who criticize the Regime in Washington will be diagnosed as having a “mental illness,” as will those who continue to use correct-gendered pronouns, those who identify as Christian or conservative or those who homeschool their kids. You get the idea, and it’s not too far-fetched. We know how brainwashed many people are now in today’s culture of nonsense, irrationality and pathological political correctness.

But the police state in Amerika has grown exponentially especially since 9/11, with little children being terrorized by sicko perv molesters and gropers at the airports, and being made to fear every little thing. The government schools are terrorizing the kids into fearing that the end is near with climate change extinction. The schools are indoctrinating the kids to accept “transgender” as a normal aspect of life when it is no such thing, and the kids know this deep down.

The kids are intentionally being made by the government schools to be confused about gender and sexuality, they are being labeled with made-up diseases and conditions such as “ADHD,” “ADD,” “PhD,” and told they are “autistic,” when in fact they are just normal, growing kids. So, we have a lot of them, mainly boys, who are being tormented by an increasingly dysfunctional and corrupt society. This in addition to their brains being poisoned by pharmaceutical drugs such as Xanax and Zoloft and Adderall, and the vaccine adjuvants such as aluminum are also interfering with their normal brain development.

My conclusion is that government has played a large role in these societal problems. Government schools, government-Big Pharma colluding, government’s invasions of other countries for no good reason and murders of innocent foreigners, government’s own violence and intrusions into the lives and liberty of its own people in the United State of Amerika.

So, the solution includes getting rid of government schools. End the wars and occupations abroad and the police state at home, dismantle the national security state, and end the government’s support of the pharmaceutical industry. Those things would help us out a lot.

Scott Lazarowitz is a libertarian writer and commentator. Please visit his blog.

Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: Gatlin    To: Deckard (#0)

Author: Scott Lazarowitz is a libertarian writer and commentator.
It figures that only a ibertarian would be so mindless and ill-advised whereby he would be so incredulously stupid and propose:
The solution [to mass shootings] includes getting rid of government schools. End the wars and occupations abroad and the police state at home, dismantle the national security state, and end the government’s support of the pharmaceutical industry.
This is yet another of many terrible, horrible, no good and very bad proposed solution from an indisposed to believe lamebrained libertarian.

Here’s why …

A study of every mass shooting since 1966 reveals detailed information about the shooters and the study shows absolutely no association with “getting rid of government schools; ending the wars and occupations abroad; ending the police state at home; dismantling the national security state and ending the government’s support of the pharmaceutical industry.”

The study …

In the last week, more than 30 people have died in three separate mass shootings in Gilroy, El Paso and Dayton, Ohio. We believe that analyzing and understanding data about who commits such massacres can help prevent more lives being lost.

For two years, we’ve been studying the life histories of mass shooters in the United States for a project funded by the National Institute of Justice, the research arm of the U.S. Department of Justice. We’ve built a database dating back to 1966 of every mass shooter who shot and killed four or more people in a public place, and every shooting incident at schools, workplaces, and places of worship since 1999. We’ve interviewed incarcerated perpetrators and their families, shooting survivors and first responders. We’ve read media and social media, manifestos, suicide notes, trial transcripts and medical records.

Our goal has been to find new, data-driven pathways for preventing such shootings. Although we haven’t found that mass shooters are all alike, our data do reveal four commonalities among the perpetrators of nearly all the mass shootings we studied.

First, the vast majority of mass shooters in our study experienced early childhood trauma and exposure to violence at a young age. The nature of their exposure included parental suicide, physical or sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and/or severe bullying. The trauma was often a precursor to mental health concerns, including depression, anxiety, thought disorders or suicidality.

Advertisement

Second, practically every mass shooter we studied had reached an identifiable crisis point in the weeks or months leading up to the shooting. They often had become angry and despondent because of a specific grievance. For workplace shooters, a change in job status was frequently the trigger. For shooters in other contexts, relationship rejection or loss often played a role. Such crises were, in many cases, communicated to others through a marked change in behavior, an expression of suicidal thoughts or plans, or specific threats of violence.

Third, most of the shooters had studied the actions of other shooters and sought validation for their motives. People in crisis have always existed. But in the age of 24-hour rolling news and social media, there are scripts to follow that promise notoriety in death. Societal fear and fascination with mass shootings partly drives the motivation to commit them. Hence, as we have seen in the last week, mass shootings tend to come in clusters. They are socially contagious. Perpetrators study other perpetrators and model their acts after previous shootings. Many are radicalized online in their search for validation from others that their will to murder is justified.

Fourth, the shooters all had the means to carry out their plans. Once someone decides life is no longer worth living and that murdering others would be a proper revenge, only means and opportunity stand in the way of another mass shooting. Is an appropriate shooting site accessible? Can the would-be shooter obtain firearms? In 80% of school shootings, perpetrators got their weapons from family members, according to our data. Workplace shooters tended to use handguns they legally owned. Other public shooters were more likely to acquire them illegally.

So what do these commonalities tell us about how to prevent future shootings?

One step needs to be depriving potential shooters of the means to carry out their plans. Potential shooting sites can be made less accessible with visible security measures such as metal detectors and police officers. And weapons need to be better controlled, through age restrictions, permit-to-purchase licensing, universal background checks, safe storage campaigns and red-flag laws — measures that help control firearm access for vulnerable individuals or people in crisis.

Another step is to try to make it more difficult for potential perpetrators to find validation for their planned actions. Media campaigns like #nonotoriety are helping starve perpetrators of the oxygen of publicity, and technology companies are increasingly being held accountable for facilitating mass violence. But we all can slow the spread of mass shootings by changing how we consume, produce, and distribute violent content on media and social media. Don’t like or share violent content. Don’t read or share killers’ manifestos and other hate screeds posted on the internet. We also need to study our current approaches. For example, do lockdown and active shooter drills help children prepare for the worst or hand potential shooters the script for mass violence by normalizing or rehearsing it?

We also need to, as a society, be more proactive. Most mass public shooters are suicidal, and their crises are often well known to others before the shooting occurs. The vast majority of mass shooters leak their plans ahead of time. People who see or sense something is wrong, however, may not always say something to someone owing to the absence of clear reporting protocols or fear of overreaction and unduly labeling a person as a potential threat. Proactive violence prevention starts with schools, colleges, churches and employers initiating conversations about mental health and establishing systems for identifying individuals in crisis, reporting concerns and reaching out — not with punitive measures but with resources and long-term intervention. Everyone should be trained to recognize the signs of a crisis.

Proactivity needs to extend also to the traumas in early life that are common to so many mass shooters. Those early exposures to violence need addressing when they happen with ready access to social services and high-quality, affordable mental health treatment in the community. School counselors and social workers, employee wellness programs, projects that teach resilience and social emotional learning, and policies and practices that decrease the stigma around mental illness will not just help prevent mass shootings, but will also help promote the social and emotional success of all Americans.

This data show that mass shooters have much in common. We need to use this data to drive effective prevention strategies instead of reading some libertarian brain farts by Scott Lazarowitz.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-07 15:36:31   Reply   Private Reply

#2: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#1)

Our goal has been to find new, data-driven pathways for preventing such shootings.

Hint: Almost every mass shooting took place in gun-free zones. Certainly the last two. There's your data.

The new pathway is to allow concealed carry. Nothing would make me happier than to see 10-20 citizens gunning down a mass shooter in a hail of bullets.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-07 16:29:18   Reply   Private Reply

#3: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#2)

… Almost every mass shooting took place in gun-free zones. Certainly the last two.
You might want to check on that.

There are reports that the Walmart in El Paso in NOT a gun-free zone and that while the victims in Dayton were attacked as they exited a nightspot that was a gun-free zone, the shootings actually took place in a public area and not a gun-free zone.

Nothing would make me happier than to see 10-20 citizens gunning down a mass shooter in a hail of bullets.
Police were already nearby in Dayton when the gunman, armed with an AR-15- style assault rifle fitted with a 100-round drum magazine opened fire. He fired at least 41 times and killed nine people while wounding 14 others in the 32 seconds it took for six officers to respond and kill him.

How could 10-20 concealed carry citizens have prevented this mass shooting?

The new pathway is to allow concealed carry.
There were reportedly 3000 people in an allowed concealed carry Walmart in El Paso and there is not one single report of a person with a concealed carry weapon engaging the shooter.

I am for concealed carry and I believe in some cases it would reduce the number of deaths and casualties in mass shootings.

Returning to this for a moment …

Nothing would make me happier than to see 10-20 citizens gunning down a mass shooter in a hail of bullets.
Take a moment and paint a chaotic picture for me where the police enter an ongoing mass shooting area and your 10-20 citizens are banishing guns in an attempt to hunt down a mass shooter to gun him down in a hail of bullets.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-07 18:27:09   Reply   Private Reply

#4: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#3)

You might want to check on that.

I did before I posted. The Cielo Vista Mall is owned by the Simon Property Group which does not allow guns.

(#3, https://www.simon.com/legal/code-of-conduct).

Walmart was identified in press accounts as part of the Cielo Vista Mall. Further research on my part now indicates that might not be true. If so, you may be right. I can't find anything -- one way or the other -- on Walmart's gun policy in El Paso.

Nevertheless, according to the shooter's manifesto he wasn't concerned about an armed response at that particular Walmart in a state notorious for gun ownership.

As for the Dayton shooter, the victims were exiting a gun-free zone. Meaning they were unarmed even though they were in public.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-08 10:01:44   Reply   Private Reply

#5: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#3)

How could 10-20 concealed carry citizens have prevented this mass shooting?

The same way the 6 cops did.

And I never said 10-20 concealed carry citizens could have prevented this mass shooting. But they could have stopped it much sooner than the 6 cops. Or maybe it wouldn't have started if the shooter knew that 10-20 people could be armed.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-08 10:05:52   Reply   Private Reply

#6: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#3)

Take a moment and paint a chaotic picture for me where the police enter an ongoing mass shooting area and your 10-20 citizens are banishing guns in an attempt to hunt down a mass shooter to gun him down in a hail of bullets.

He was shot chasing people as they were running into a bar to take cover.

At any time before that, people could have taken cover and returned fire. Concealed carry is for personal defense, not offense. I'm not going to "hunt down" anyone.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-08 10:21:22   Reply   Private Reply

#7: Orwellian Nightmare    To: misterwhite (#5)

And I never said 10-20 concealed carry citizens could have prevented this mass shooting. But they could have stopped it much sooner than the 6 cops.

What I don't get is that there were what, maybe a hundred people in the mall?

Not one of the men had the stones to grab a baseball bat or a trash can and knock him down and out, anything to render the shooter incapacitated? And one of the shootings was in Texas?!

I mean, just tackle the guy from behind while he's reloading.

That's what I would have done.

Orwellian Nightmare posted on 2019-08-08 10:26:30   Reply   Private Reply

#8: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#5)

... maybe ...

Yea.

"Maybe" ...

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-08 10:27:12   Reply   Private Reply

#9: Orwellian Nightmare    To: Gatlin (#3)

Police were already nearby in Dayton when the gunman, armed with an AR-15- style assault rifle fitted with a 100-round drum magazine opened fire.

As in every other case, the police did little to stop the shootings. It behooves the citizens in cases like this to defend themselves.

There was a couple of cops who ran away in one of the shootings.

One can not depend on the police for protection in these scenarios.

Orwellian Nightmare posted on 2019-08-08 10:29:53   Reply   Private Reply

#10: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#6)

Concealed carry is for personal defense, not offense.

We are in agreement of this.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-08 10:30:51   Reply   Private Reply

#11: Gatlin    To: Orwellian Nightmare (#9)

As in every other case, the police did little to stop the shootings.
That's true. So – What could the police have done to stop these two shootings?
It behooves the citizens in cases like this to defend themselves.
That’s true. It behooves the citizens in all cases to defend themselves.
There was a couple of cops who ran away in one of the shootings.
I didn’t read that. Was the one shooting in El Paso or Dayton?

One can not depend on the police for protection in these scenarios.
Nor should anyone ever depend on the police for protection in any scenario. Warren v. District of Columbia, 353 F. 3d 36 – 2004 established that.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-08 10:59:33   Reply   Private Reply

#12: Orwellian Nightmare    To: Gatlin (#11)

There was a couple of cops who ran away in one of the shootings.

I didn’t read that. Was the one shooting in El Paso or Dayton?

That was the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting in Florida.

I was mistaken. Officer Scot Peterson didn't run away, he hid outside and as of June 4th he is facing criminal charges.

I had thought that there was more than one.

Orwellian Nightmare posted on 2019-08-08 11:43:43   Reply   Private Reply

#13: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#8)

... maybe ... Yea. "Maybe" ...

Allowing concealed carry stands a better chance of deterring a mass shooter than any of the other proposals I've heard.

Yet not one mention of it in the MSM.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-08 12:14:56   Reply   Private Reply

#14: sneakypete    To: misterwhite (#6)

I'm not going to "hunt down" anyone.

I would. In a situation where mass murder is being committed and there seems to be no one else around to handle the situation,the duty falls on the citizen that is equipped to deal with the situation.

I am usually ill-equipped to do this because I live in a rural area,and normally only carry a 9 shot 22 revolver with no rear sight and a 1-3/4 inch long barrel. Useful for shooting snakes or rabid animals,but not much else unless I can get close. Even a 22 LR hollowpoint will put your lights out instantly if it goes through a skull. Especially a eye socket.

When I go "to town" I am generally better equipped. I carry a 5 shot 44 Special with a 3 inch barrel that is loaded with 200 grain Silvertips. Oddly enough,this thing is insanely accurate. I have literally shot snakes in the head with it that were trying to run away,and it never took me more than 2 shots.

With so many people today using body armor,you have to pretty much plan on taking head shots or throat shots. If that's not possible,go for a kneecap. People with shattered kneecaps have more important things to worry about than shooting other people. Like calling on their mamas to make the pain go away.

Plus,I can promise you there is zero chance of them running away before the cops get there,or chasing down anyone else.

sneakypete posted on 2019-08-08 12:57:14   Reply   Private Reply

#15: sneakypete    To: Orwellian Nightmare (#9)

There was a couple of cops who ran away in one of the shootings.

Wasn't there a lawsuit maybe 10 years ago where the cops ran away from a public shooting,leaving more victims defenseless,and the court ruled that the police do NOT have a responsibly to protect individuals,only to protect society?

sneakypete posted on 2019-08-08 13:00:22   Reply   Private Reply

#16: sneakypete    To: misterwhite (#13)

Allowing concealed carry stands a better chance of deterring a mass shooter than any of the other proposals I've heard.

Yet not one mention of it in the MSM.

That's because it would be a violation of union rules.

sneakypete posted on 2019-08-08 13:01:30   Reply   Private Reply

#17: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#13)

Allowing concealed carry stands a better chance of deterring a mass shooter than any of the other proposals I've heard.

I recall reading where 94 percent of these active shooter and mass shootings take place in gun-free zones. I also recall reading it’s not true that most mass shootings occur in so-called gun-free zones. Most mass shootings occur in private residences and involve domestic violence. Which of these is correct – I don’t know.

What I do know is that the Walmart in El Paso wasn't a gun-free zone. Not only was it in an open carry state but open carry is allowed in Walmart. Furthermore, I have read there were even armed customers in Walmart when the shooting happened.

Le it be known that I am a FIRM supporter of concealed carry and I believe that “gun free zones” disarm only those who obey the law. I also believe that allowing concealed carry may minimize casualties in these shootings in some instances. I however can find no valid reason to believe allowing concealed carry will PREVENT mass shootings – Although I would like to.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-08 14:07:04   Reply   Private Reply

#18: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#17)

What I do know is that the Walmart in El Paso wasn't a gun-free zone.

How do you know that? I read that Walmart has posted both 30.06 and 30.07 signage.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-08 17:06:13   Reply   Private Reply

#19: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#18)

What I do know is that the Walmart in El Paso wasn't a gun-free zone.

How do you know that?

I should have posted …
What I read a few times is that the Walmart in El Paso wasn't a gun-free zone.
Here is but one source …
Shannonr Watts -
Walmart is not a gun-free zone. Some customers said they were armed. Yet at least 19 Walmart shoppers were killed, dozens more were injured, and the shooter was taken into custody without being shot.
Another interesting tweet at the same link and on the subject we have been discussing is …
Scott M Stedman -
Witness with a license to carry tells KTTSM that a police officer arriving on the scene thought he was the shooter because he had his gun out.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-08 18:07:36   Reply   Private Reply

#20: Gatlin    To: Orwellian Nightmare (#12)

I was mistaken.
I already knew that.
[The one officer] didn't run away, he hid outside and as of June 4th he is facing criminal charges.
You remember all that now.

But do you remember during the same 2018 year time frame any of the incidents where 55 officers did not hide and died in the line of duty as a result of felonious acts?

Probably not, so here – Let me help you …

Felonious Deaths

The 55 felonious deaths occurred in 28 states and in Puerto Rico. The number of officers killed as a result of criminal acts in 2018 was 9 more than the 46 officers who were feloniously killed in 2017. The 5- and 10-year comparisons show an increase of 4 felonious deaths compared with the 2014 figure (51 officers) and an increase of 7 deaths compared with 2009 data (48 officers).

Officer Profiles. The average age of the officers who were feloniously killed was 37 years old. The victim officers had served in law enforcement for an average of 10 years at the times of the fatal incidents. Of the 55 officers:

  • 52 were male
  • 3 were female
  • 46 were white
  • 7 were black/African American
  • 2 were Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander

Circumstances. Of the 55 officers feloniously killed:

  • 23 died as a result of investigative or enforcement activities
    • 8 were performing investigative activities
    • 6 were involved in tactical situations
    • 3 were interacting with wanted persons
    • 3 were investigating suspicious persons or circumstances
    • 2 were conducting traffic violation stops
    • 1 was handling a person with mental illness
  • 11 were ambushed (entrapment/premeditation)
    • 6 were involved in pursuits
    • 4 were involved in foot pursuits
    • 2 were involved in vehicular pursuits
  • 4 were responding to crimes in progress
    • 2 were burglaries in progress
    • 1 was a report of a person with a firearm
    • 1 was reported in the category of other crime against property.
  • 3 were involved in arrest situations and were attempting to control/handcuff/restrain the offender(s) during the arrest situations
  • 2 were on administrative assignments and were performing prisoner transports
  • 2 were assisting other law enforcement officers with foot pursuits
  • 2 were responding to disorders or disturbances
    • 1 was responding to a disturbance call
    • 1 was responding to a domestic violence call
  • 1 was performing traffic control
  • 1 was involved in an unprovoked attack

Weapons. Offenders used firearms to kill 51 of the 55 victim officers. Four officers were killed with vehicles used as weapons. Of the 51 officers killed by firearms:

  • 37 were slain with handguns
  • 10 with rifles
  • 2 with shotguns
  • 2 with firearms in which the types of firearms were not reported.

Regions. Felonious deaths were reported in four U.S. regions and Puerto Rico:

  • 26 officers were feloniously killed in the South
  • 12 in the Midwest
  • 12 in the West
  • 4 in the Northeast
  • 1 in Puerto Rico.

Suspects. Law enforcement agencies identified 55 alleged assailants in connection with the felonious line-of-duty deaths:

  • 49 of the assailants had prior criminal arrests
  • 20 of the offenders were under judicial supervision at the times of the felonious incidents

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-08 18:47:36   Reply   Private Reply

#21: Operation 40    To: misterwhite (#2)

Hint: Almost every mass shooting took place in gun-free zones. Certainly the last two. There's your data.

Hint: Almost every mass shooting involves someone who is either withdrawing from or still on psych drugs. And a lot more unreported SEE: http://ssristories.org

Speaking of "drugs", have you ever informed the forum of whether you have smoked marijuana in the past?

"Drugs" like Luvox and Paxil are the real problems. The evidence is clear.

Operation 40 posted on 2019-08-08 20:25:07   Reply   Private Reply

#22: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#19)

Some customers said they were armed.

Many concealed carry people admit they carry in commercial gun-free zones.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-09 09:35:07   Reply   Private Reply

#23: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#22)

Some customers said they were armed.

Many concealed carry people admit they carry in commercial gun-free zones.

I can accept that.

What is your point here?

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-09 09:42:11   Reply   Private Reply

#24: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#23)

What is your point here?

Saying that people were carrying concealed in the El Paso Walmart is not proof that it was permitted by Walmart.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-09 12:57:32   Reply   Private Reply

#25: misterwhite    To: Operation 40 (#21)

Hint: Almost every mass shooting involves someone who is either withdrawing from or still on psych drugs.

Hint: Almost every mass shooting involves a younger white male.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-09 12:59:18   Reply   Private Reply

#26: goldilucky    To: misterwhite (#2)

Excellent post!

goldilucky posted on 2019-08-09 13:05:24   Reply   Private Reply

#27: Justified    To: misterwhite (#25)

I do not believe that is true.

Depends on your source of information.

All white mass shooters are non stop published to make us feel that way. There have been many nonwhite mass shooters. Almost all gangland shooting which is mass shooting is either black or Hispanic but since it does not fit the left's narrative its not published.

Justified posted on 2019-08-09 13:47:16   Reply   Private Reply

#28: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#24)

What is your point here?

Saying that people were carrying concealed in the El Paso Walmart is not proof that it was permitted by Walmart.

That’s true.

I really don’t know the gun policy for the El Paso Walmart. I only know that I read in a couple places where the El Paso Walmart is not a gun-free zone and even open carry is permitted.

I have never read, or heard, that the El Paso Walmart is a gun-free zone.

I do keep finding articles stating that Walmart doesn’t post 30.07 signs by its doors that would make open carry in the store a crime.
[https://www.texasmonthly.com/the-daily-post/open-carry-texas-activists-are- very-upset-with-walmart-right-now/]

After a thorough search of the Internet, I must consider the El Paso Walmart not to be a gun-free zone and I will maintain this position unless I read, or hear, otherwise.

Furthermore, I find no evidence that the open public area is Dayton where those who were shot/killed is a gun-free zone.

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-09 13:48:19   Reply   Private Reply

#29: misterwhite    To: Gatlin (#28)

Furthermore, I find no evidence that the open public area is Dayton where those who were shot/killed is a gun-free zone.

Open areas uually aren't unless that area is something like a public park or private parking lot. But my point was that the victims were leaving an establishment where guns were not permitted. Meaning they were unarmed.

misterwhite posted on 2019-08-10 10:19:26   Reply   Private Reply

#30: Gatlin    To: misterwhite (#29)

Got it ...

Gatlin posted on 2019-08-10 11:40:35   Reply   Private Reply