Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee F. Smith
All due respect to the other opinions, you can’t realistically think that these psychotic killers did not consider where they choose to carry out their plan. Obviously, the primary reason would be some perceived wrong done to them in the past; but to think that they did not consider their target is naive in the extreme. Once again don’t confuse psychotic with stupid. These individuals are predators that do consider what, where and when to carry out their attack.
To the original question I agree with on campus CCW, to Rodsteal’s question “Do you think the gunman picked that mall because he knew it was a gun free zone.” Absolutely, was it the primary reason? Doubtful, but only Peter Pan would say it played no role in the attack.
|
They keep hitting schools and malls because they have repeatedly seen that it works in the past.
Do you think these guys sit down and brainstorm a list of pros and cons for multiple targets before deciding on a specific one? No, they choose them because history has shown that they can kill a maximum number of people in a minimal amount of time, and more often than not, they have a personal attachment to that location.
Gun policy or no gun policy, VT and The Colorado Springs were hit because those places were important locations in the involved peoples lives. The target location is known well in advance...they don't choose the target, they are driven towards that target for a reason...
Ultimately, they are looking for the easiest score...plenty of targets of opportunity. The weapon policy role is tertiary at best. Neither the Omaha attack or the Church attack publicly advertised no gun policies, yet it didn't deter the attacks that occured there.
If someone were to open fire in my church, would it be because of a no gun policy? No, it would be because they have a problem with the teaching, or their wife or kids are on campus while in the midst of a custody battle.
Quite frankly, if there were no signs, and the implication was there that there were armed security, would it stop someone?
Not necessarily...Look at the Colorado Church incident. I can guarantee that there is unspoken knowledge that there are armed security there...EVERY mega church has armed security. Trust me, I know this as FACT.
Yet that didn't stop the guy.
I will conceed that saying the sign has NO influence was probably an exaggeration...I will continue to argue that I don't believe it has as much power in the decision making process, because there are no choices being made...these people are hitting these places because of some sort of obsessive reason.
I WILL agree that places where people are KNOWN to be carrying guns deter crime, but I will not agree that gun free zones are picked solely because they are labled "Gun Free Zones".