PDA

View Full Version : Media Coverage of Mall Shooting Fails to Reveal Mall's Gun-Free-Zone


RRangel
12-07-2007, 12:55 PM
Good article by John Lott. Gun free zones and safety should be thought of as polar opposites.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,315563,00.html

All these attacks indeed, all attacks involving more than a small number of people being killed happened in gun-free zones.
In recent years, similar attacks have occurred across the world, including in Australia, France, Germany and Britain. Do all these countries lack enough gun-control laws? Hardly. The reverse is more accurate.
The law-abiding, not criminals, are obeying the rules. Disarming the victims simply means that the killers have less to fear. As Wednesday's attack demonstrated yet again, police are important, but they almost always arrive at the crime scene after the crime has occurred.
The longer it takes for someone to arrive on the scene with a gun, the more people who will be harmed by such an attack.
Most people understand that guns deter criminals. If a killer were stalking your family, would you feel safer putting a sign out front announcing, "This Home Is a Gun-Free Zone"? But that is what the Westroads Mall did.

gmcal
12-07-2007, 1:26 PM
I get a little nervous each time I go to a mall to shop or to the local university to drop off or pick up a relative. Years ago a friend of mine was shot at the local community college, the next day the shooter went about 15 miles south and shot an individual at the university. No one died, thankfully. There have been shootings, including one murder, in the parking lot at the mall I shop at. It's not if it will happen, but when.

chico.cm
12-07-2007, 1:48 PM
Thanks for posting this Forum Guy. I was just about to...
It's a very timely story given the tenuous status of the 2A these days.
I actually had a conversation with my boss last night about this very story. She couldn't believe it and was completely surprised and visibly bothered that no one else had carried this story. I could tell that this was the beginning of future education opportunities for her with respect to guns.

Addax
12-07-2007, 2:04 PM
That was a really good article.

What is very sad, is the Internet and new agencies are broadcasting pictures of the shooter in the mall, and one of the photos shows him shouldering the rifle and taking aim...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071207/ap_on_re_us/mall_shooting

The negative media hype about the shooting, the shooter, the rifle, now the pictures of him taking aim with his rifle is going to increase the volume on the shooting and how tragic it is and that gun control is the only way to prevent this from happening.... Watch and you will start to see more people inc. politicians speak about the need for some sort of gun control.

What is really needed is more crime control, a much better system of background checks, firearms safety training and special licensing (like a car drivers license), issuing more CCW's, and getting rid of ridiculous gun free zones.

When people live in an area where you can legally carry a concealed firearm, idiots like the mall shooter will either think twice before they walk into a mall and gun people down, or someone in that mall will take him down before he can murder 8 people or more...

N6ATF
12-07-2007, 3:04 PM
It's getting easier and easier to avoid going to malls and higher education altogether... I do almost all my shopping online or at small shopping complexes, and if the class isn't lab or physical, I can usually take it online.

dustoff31
12-07-2007, 3:55 PM
The mall needs to put up bigger "No Guns Allowed" signs. I'm sure he just didn't see them. Had he seen them, he certainly would have just left and went to the bowling alley to shoot people instead. Right? :rolleyes:

milsurpshooter
12-07-2007, 4:10 PM
what a criminal break the law....no, get outta here i'm shocked. those people should have called the police. if they did nothing bad would have happened.

Ironchef
12-07-2007, 4:43 PM
I didn't know it was a "gun-free" mall. This is good because on some major media prints of this story (usatoday.com) I've been reading some anti-gun lobby people commenting and ripping on the idea that we (pro-gun lobby) have that an armed society will prevent such things and they derided the idea by saying, "So how exactly does putting more guns on the street make the streets safer? I didn't see anyone stopping this killing spree who had a [ccw]!"

Patriot
12-07-2007, 4:50 PM
Some dispute about Westroads being posted "no guns." No dispute, there is a big sign inside every mall entrance that says "MALL RULES" and item 3-4 is "no weapons" which is enough under state law to qualify. I have seen the sign. I will stop in and take a pic whenever the mall reopens.

http://joemerchant24.blogspot.com/2007/12/omaha-mall-shooting.html

Photo of Oak View's "no guns" sign


I stopped by Oak View, the sister mall to Westroads owned by the same property company.

Inside the main doors on the west side (facing 144th St.) I found these signs, one on each side of the entryway.


Please ignore item No. 13 (no photography without permission) and look at item No. 14... No weapons. I apologize for cutting the line off, but it's a big darn sign and my cell phone has limited wide angle... if you still want to read the words. Plus it was dark, so the illumination was courtesy a SureFire E2D.

I cannot logically verify Westroads sign by the presence of one at Oak View. However, the OWH article plus the shared management group tips the odds in my favor.

When Westroads opens tomorrow, I will hunt down their sign.

http://bp0.blogger.com/_HclHV5bwh4g/R1lWOxXuLsI/AAAAAAAAAAk/O75plFPNNsM/s1600/12-06-07_1758.jpg

xrMike
12-07-2007, 4:59 PM
I get a little nervous each time I go to a mall to shop or to the local university to drop off or pick up a relative.You should worry more about being killed during the ride to (or from) either location. :D Odds are a lot higher in favor of death-by-car-accident.

odesskiy
12-07-2007, 6:12 PM
You should worry more about being killed during the ride to (or from) either location. :D Odds are a lot higher in favor of death-by-car-accident.

Tell it to the people that got shot at the mall there....

1911su16b870
12-07-2007, 7:20 PM
The POS was a failed social experiment...

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1914352007

He was the type of person who would have done this with what ever he could get his hands one (car, machette etc). The Mall Gun Free Zone just allowed him to "take others with him", we need shall issue CCW, that would have given the innocents a chance.

MedSpec65
12-07-2007, 8:00 PM
Without publicity, the average citizen is just not motivated to think through the implications of "Gun Free Zones". The major networks have declared gun stories off-limits for years because of the emotions about the subject. This cowardice has allowed the hoplophobes to maintain the status quo for way too long. Even conservative talk radio shows won't let you on if you want to talk about guns. This FOX story by Lott is the first definitive discussion I've seen in recent times. It's a start. Definitely good news.

SJshooter
12-07-2007, 10:27 PM
You are all crazy. Gun-Free Zones totally work. Every time!

Want proof?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beUQBXI22CA


:) :) :)

savageevo
12-07-2007, 11:12 PM
I find it really funny how our government is putting a lot more effort and tax payers money on putting baseball players with steriod or football players with dog fights to jail than finding mentally ill people ready to go out to do harm to others. I guess they have to show us all they are doing a real good job taking down the real criminals.:kest:

gmcal
12-07-2007, 11:51 PM
You should worry more about being killed during the ride to (or from) either location. :D Odds are a lot higher in favor of death-by-car-accident.


Yes, but I can take precautions such as wearing a seat belt, choosing a vehicle that scored well in crash tests, and being a safe and defensive driver, which I do. Being forced to go about my business without being able to arm myself leaves me and my family at the mercy of the criminal element who continue to prey upon those of us who abide by the law, no matter how rediculous the law is. An armed person with a little training can make difference in these types of crimes.

Hoop
12-08-2007, 9:16 AM
I find it really funny how our government is putting a lot more effort and tax payers money on putting baseball players with steriod or football players with dog fights to jail than finding mentally ill people ready to go out to do harm to others. I guess they have to show us all they are doing a real good job taking down the real criminals.:kest:

The funny part is, they have to have a hearings to determine whether or not a guy with the biceps of a gorilla actually took steriods...

PonchoTA
12-08-2007, 10:04 AM
Yes, but I can take precautions such as wearing a seat belt, choosing a vehicle that scored well in crash tests, and being a safe and defensive driver, which I do. Being forced to go about my business without being able to arm myself leaves me and my family at the mercy of the criminal element who continue to prey upon those of us who abide by the law, no matter how ridiculous the law is. An armed person with a little training can make difference in these types of crimes.(emphasis mine)

That's exactly right, and (I'll bet) is the general consensus of a great many folks on here and in the NRA, and even in the US population. The only problem is the do-gooders that have more political influence than we do, and those are the laws that are enacted. We need to get more PRO-active, than RE-active.

:cheers:

Jedi
12-08-2007, 11:15 AM
The POS was a failed social experiment...

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=1914352007

He was the type of person who would have done this with what ever he could get his hands one (car, machette etc). The Mall Gun Free Zone just allowed him to "take others with him", we need shall issue CCW, that would have given the innocents a chance.

Unfortunately, the CCW issuance laws in Nebraska are not the problem, the businesses who post signs stating that a law abiding citizen can not do what the law has permitted them to do, specifically the carry of a concealed firearm, is the problem. This is exactly the same problem as the Trolley Square incident, where the only thing that brought a rapid end to the incident was an off-duty Provo police officer who ignored the business's rule. Utah was at the time and still is a "Shall Issue" CCW state.

As has been discussed else ware, there are some shortcomings in Nebraska law, specifically a provision that makes it a misdemeanor to carry concealed in a place where it is prohibited. Up until this, I have not followed Nebraska CCW law too much, but I am curious if there has ever been a court case to test that provision and see if it refers to places prohibited by statute or by individual business rules. I would argue that the wording points to prohibition by statue.

CitaDeL
12-08-2007, 2:55 PM
How long will it be before someone's surviving family files a wrongful death suit against mall owners for not enforcing their "NO FIREARMS" policies?

No one is arguing that the establishment of these 'gun free zones' is an attempt to make patrons 'safer', but the property owner is not delivering any protection. The antis are quick to file lawsuits against manufacturers-- so why not sue property owners who ban weapons and then fail to protect their patrons?

Smitty
12-08-2007, 3:46 PM
I have relatives in Nebraska and was surprised that cities and towns have passed local ordinances denying the right of CCW holders to carry within their city limits. Lincoln is one such city. Don't know about Omaha. But by allowing CCWs to be overridden by local government sort of undermines the concepts and benefits thereof.

PonchoTA
12-08-2007, 6:01 PM
Some comments I thought were appropriate for the conversation...
(emphasis mine)

=======================================
straightarrow said...

Quit calling this a tragedy. A tragedy is a hurricane, a tornado, a flood, an accident or detrimental act of nature.

This was an atrocity. If we can't get the verbiage right to connote responsibility on the actor, how do we expect the gun grabbers and hysterical weak sisters to understand our position that people should be able to defend themselves.

Quit equating this with tragedy. It was an atrocity.
December 6, 2007 2:28 PM

=======================================
triumphspeedfour said...

I just sent the mall (http://www.westroadsmall.com/html/contactus.asp) this message: Congratulations on posting "no weapons allowed signs" in your mall. It appears that you effectively created a free fire zone. I hope that knowledge that you may have enabled this deranged murderer by keeping lawfully armed patrons away doesn't keep you awake at night.
December 7, 2007 1:53 PM

=======================================
jurjen said...

From the quoted article:
"The mall was locked down was the initial shooting report came out but several people got out of the building shortly after the gunfire and many others followed."

Do I understand correctly that the mall's SOP in responding to reports of gunfire is to lock as many unarmed citizens inside with the gunman(/men) as possible? After Trolley Square Mall, is there any way this is not criminal negligence at best, and accessory to murder at worst?
December 7, 2007 7:18 PM
=======================================

Enjoy your day!

:cheers:
Paul