Monday, February 22, 2016

Gun Free Zones

Where in the U.S. can you experience the biggest risk of an active shooter event? Choose any gun free zone. On December 3, 2015 The Washington Post published an article citing a decline in gun violence in the U.S. for the last 20 years. It said, “In 1993, there were seven homicides by firearm for every 100,000 Americans. … By 2013, that figure had fallen by nearly half, to 3.6 [per 100,000].” It also said, “Even as a certain type of mass shooting is apparently becoming more frequent, America has become a much less violent place.” I agree with the fact that gun violence is down. The article cited reasons that I won’t repeat because I think they are really no reasons at all. Here’s the article link if you’d like to check it out.
What I do believe is that gun violence is down, but gun violence in gun free zones (GFZ) is way up!
Congressional Research Service showed that the number of privately owned firearms increased from 192 million in 1994 to 310 million in 2009. And record background checks under President Obama make it easy to see how tens of millions more privately owned guns have found their way into Americans’ hands since 2009. So gun ownership increased for 20 years, but “gun homicides” decreased–except in gun free zones.
The Washington Post points to a study by Mother Jones that claims that high-profile shootings began increasing in gun-free zones in late 2011/early 2012. The examples Mother Jones provides are the Aurora movie theater, Sandy Hook Elementary, and the D.C. Navy Yard, all of which were gun-free zones.
Other examples of shootings in gun-free zones that could have been cited are Arapahoe High School (December 2013), Fort Hood (April 2014), Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church (June 2015), Chattanooga military offices (July 2015), the Lafayette Grand Theatre (July 2015), and Umpqua Community College (October 2015). Also in 2015 France was attacked by terrorists. This is a little different than a nut with a gun, but France’s gun laws are already strict. It is virtually a “gun free” country.
Now an Uber driver goes on a rampage killing 6 people. Here’s part of Uber’s “no-gun” policy
“Uber and its affiliates therefore prohibit possessing firearms of any kind in a vehicle.”
These are all clear examples that gun free laws and policies don’t really work. Law abiding citizen’s go unarmed, but terrorists and criminals can have all they want. There are liberal leaning publications (most main stream media is included) that will try to tell you that someone being armed other than police will not make a difference. This is a lie that I know from personal experience is just not true. I realize that every person is not going to be armed even if they can legally do it. I know that being unarmed in a gun free zone is pressing your luck.
I want a fighting chance. Mother Jones and the Washington Post think that if the economy was a little better (President Obama says that it is…) or if we had stricter gun control that these shootings will decrease.
To be honest, I’m not sure they know, and I know that I don’t know what to do to change the current situation.
The right to defend yourself is a God given right. No laws, statistics, or studies will change that fact. The Constitution is just a document that recognizes that right. The rest of the world has always wanted to be like the U.S. I’m not so sure how they may feel now, but at one time we were the worlds example. The Constitution and our rights are why the world has patterned themselves after our form of government.
As Colonel Jessup said in A Few Good Men, “You can’t handle the truth!” I say that guns “…existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall, you need me on that wall.”
Those that say we don’t need guns yet are protected by “gun totin’” security, police, or military are being hypocritical. Politicians that don’t want citizens to have a gun yet have one themselves are hypocritical. I have worked with, shot with, and trained with these professionals that liberals say are the only people that should be authorized guns. Most of them are exceptional. Some of them are dinks. Some of them barely qualify with their service weapon every 3 months. Who would you rather have armed? Someone who practices every week, or someone who hardly shoots their assigned weapon?
I know that every concealed carrier does not necessarily practice like I do. I enjoy it. It relaxes me. I used to compete but that got to be not what I wanted shooting to be for me.
I guess what I’m trying to say is, just because you wear a badge doesn’t mean you can shoot a 2 inch group at 25 yards. And also that being in a gun free zone is a dangerous risk. A risk we put on our children and military every day.
This puts a great responsibility on concealed carry participants. One, to not do stupid things with your gun, and two, to practice and be worthy of the defensive power that you wield.
Train like you mean it and when the time comes, you won’t be defenseless even though you carry a gun.
Semper Paratus
Check 6