Letter to the Editor: More gun-free zones would only make life more dangerous
Updated Nov 23, 2015 at 11:35 PM
I think that gun free zones are one of the big problems. In the so called gun free zones the people that could help, that could respond are made helpless and vulnerable just like everyone else. They say that we should wait and depend on the police who may be many minutes away to eventually arrive and save us. The problem with this is that every second of delay could be another death.
I agree that there are ingrained problems with less than properly trained people running toward an active shooter. These issues are in fact large enough that they would deter many people from responding if they knew the extent of the possible outcomes. For the moment let’s just say that if the average permit holder wants to help maybe he should help people get to the door.
But let’s look at the real elephant in the room with gun free zones and that is the way the bad guys see them. The active shooter, the bad guy sees these as places they can go to murder with no one there to stop them. A couple of generations ago the military recognized “free fire zones” as places where no one should be and anyone there could be shot with no repercussions. And that is the way the bad guys see them also. Over the last several years of active shooter/mass shooter tragedies almost all have been in gun free zones. All of the shooters who left letters or manifestos clearly stated that they chose gun free zones because they knew no one would be there to stop them. The few that were captured alive stated that they chose gun free zones because they knew that no one would be there to stop them. As example a few of the gun free zones that have made news are; the school at Newtown, Virginia Tech, the church in Charleston, Umpqua College, and the clinic at Ft Hood where a radicalized Army doctor killed 22. On the international scene you might note that Paris is a gun free zone as is the Canada Parliament and the Australian coffee shop where Islamic militants took hostages killing several and holding a protracted shootout with firearms they were banned from owning.
Despite all of this the gun haters keeping calling for more “gun free zones”. The only logic I can see in this is that there may be a limited number of potential shooters and by increasing the number of “gun free zones” you reduce the odds of them attacking the one you are in.