Mass shooting: At Least 11 Shot At Gilroy Garlic Festival

An extreme gun control state, a gun free zone event....where they even had armed guards and metal detectors at all the gates....

The attacker cut his way through a fence to avoid the metal detectors....

He killed until someone used a gun to stop him, this time a police officer..

Another mass public shooting at another gun-free zone: the Gilroy Garlic Festival attack - Crime Prevention Research Center

Three people were killed and 15 injured.

The attacker cut through a back fence to avoid security checkpoints with metal detectors. This area was a gun-free zone.

But as a general point, even if this wasn’t an area where people were already banned from having guns, do you wonder why there isn’t someone to stop some of the mass public shootings in places such as California? In 2018, the County with a little over 1.5 million adults had issued just 113 concealed handgun permits — that is just 0.007% of adults. To put it differently, that is only 1 permit issued for every 14,300 people. General citizens in Santa Clara County are banned from being able to carry concealed handguns. There is no nearby county that has even one percent of the population with permits, and for California as a whole, only 0.39% of adults have a permit. Last year, outside the restrictive states of California and New York, about 8.63% of the adult population has a permit.

What very few permits are granted in the county are going to be granted in in San Jose and the wealthiest areas of the county, not in Gilroy.

Here is a list of cases we found where concealed handgun permit holders have stopped what otherwise would have been a mass public shooting.

Again, police are important, but they have a very difficult job in stopping these types of attacks. Attackers will either wait until there are no officers nearby or if there is an officer nearby, they will kill him first. There were police near, but even a minute or two is a very long time.
So, instead of trying to stop a shooter from taking a weapon into the festival, they would all be alive if we just let all guns into the festival.

I get it.


Likely......mass shooters do not target places where people can carry guns...we know this from the shooters we capture and the shooters who left detailed notes on their attacks....

Orlando, Pulse Night club shooter wanted to attack Disney land

Pulse shooter’s initial target was Disney site, prosecutors say


Prosecutors say the Orlando nightclub shooter intended to attack Disney World’s shopping and entertainment complex by hiding a gun in a stroller but became spooked by police and chose the gay club as his target.



3/5/18
The Washington Post's School Shooter Profile: A Chilling Account | National Review

The second thing: The shooter reveals that he thought seriously about whether his target would be a “gun free zone.” I mention this not to endorse any particular policy, but to make it clear that it is by no means rare for those who would do harm to first scope out their destinations and to make sure that they won’t encounter much resistance. The shooter openly explains that he chose the local elementary school, rather than the school he was really angry with (his own), because it lacked an armed guard. He also admits to having researched how long it took cops to respond in the area (15 minutes), and how long it would be before SWAT was on site (45 minutes). This echoes comments made by the shooter at Isla Vista, who considered carrying out his attack on Halloween, but decided against it because there’d be “too many cops walking around during an event like Halloween, and cops are the only ones who can hinder my plans.”

The actual story linked above...

“I HAVE TO BEAT **** **** . .” he wrote nine days before the Sept. 28, 2016, shooting in a misspelled reference to the Sandy Hook killer,**** ****. “Atleast 40.”

Two days later, he debated whether he should attack his middle school, from which he’d been expelled, or his elementary school, just up the road.

He decided on Townville Elementary because it was closer and had no armed security.


“Itll be like shooting fish in a barrel,” he wrote his friends, whose identities remain unclear, along with whether the FBI has tracked any of them down. The agency declined to comment, citing Jesse’s open case.

In the chat, he said he had researched police response times for the area and found that it would take them 15 minutes to get there, maybe 45 for SWAT. He said he would throw pipe bombs into each classroom before he got in a shootout with police and killed himself with his shotgun. He said he had been planning a massacre for two years.

=========
The Colorado theater shooter evidence...

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/10/did-colorado-shooter-single-out-cinemark-theater.html#ixzz2F4pLqhxu

Yet, neither explanation is right. Instead, out of all the movie theaters within 20 minutes of his apartment showing the new Batman movie that night, it was the only one where guns were banned. In Colorado, individuals with permits can carry concealed handgun in most malls, stores, movie theaters, and restaurants. But private businesses can determine whether permit holders can carry guns on their private property.

Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater’s entrance.

A simple web search and some telephone calls reveal how easily one can find out how Cinemark compared to other movie theaters. According to mapquest.com and movies.com, there were seven movie theaters showing "The Dark Knight Rises" on July 20th within 20 minutes of the killer’s apartment at 1690 Paris St, Aurora, Colorado. At 4 miles and an 8-minute car ride, the Cinemark’s Century Theater wasn't the closest. Another theater was only 1.2 miles (3 minutes) away.

There was also a theater just slightly further away, 10 minutes. It is the "home of Colorado's largest auditorium," according to their movie hotline greeting message. The potentially huge audience ought to have been attractive to someone trying to kill as many people as possible. Four other theaters were 18 minutes, two at 19 minutes, and 20 minutes away. But all of those theaters allowed permitted concealed handguns.

So why would a mass shooter pick a place that bans guns? The answer should be obvious, though it apparently is not clear to the media – disarming law-abiding citizens leaves them as sitting ducks




FBI: Dearborn Heights ISIS supporter planned to attack Detroit church

In conversation's between Abu-Rayyan and the undercover agent, Abu-Rayyan described his desire to commit a martyrdom operation.

The complaint filed in federal court doesn’t specify which Detroit church he was allegedly planning to attack, only that it was close and could seat 6,000 members.

The complaint quotes Abu-Rayyan saying:

“It's easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news. Everybody would've heard. Honestly I regret not doing it. If I can't do jihad in the Middle East, I would do my jihad over here."

He had also told the undercover agent that a church would be an easy target because people are not allowed to carry guns there and that it would make the news.
----------------
Minnesota…...

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/minn-teen-made-bombs-stockpiled-guns-prep-school-massacre-police-article-1.1776006

The unhinged teen told cops, after being busted Tuesday, that he planned to shoot his sister, mom and dad with a .22-caliber rifle before he went to a rural field and set a fire to distract cops.

The 11th-grader then said he planned to go to Waseca Junior and Senior High School where he would toss Molotov cocktails and explode pressure-cooker bombs to try and kill “as many students as he could” in the cafeteria during lunchtime.

About 1,000 students, in 7th through 12th grade, attend the school.

LaDue, according to the notebook of his plan, would kill the school resource officer before continuing to kill other students. He was prepared to be gunned down by a SWAT Team, police said.



************************


Vince Vaughn is right about guns (and was brave to be so honest) | Fox News

Last June, Elliot Rodger, who killed six people in Santa Barbara, Calif., explained his own choice. In his 141-page “Manifesto,” Rodger turned down alternate targets because he worried that someone with a gun would cut short his killing spree.

That same month, Justin Bourque shot to death three people in Canada. His Facebook page made fun of gun bans, with pictures of defenseless victims explaining to killers that they weren’t allowed to have guns.

The diary of the Aurora, Colorado, “Batman” movie theater killer, James Holmes, was finally released this past week. It was clear that he was considering both attacking an airport and a movie theater, but he turned down the airport option because he was concerned about their “substantial security.”

Of course, there are numerous other examples such as the Columbine killersopposing the concealed carry law that was then working its way through the state legislature. The bill would have allowed people to carry permitted concealed handguns on school property. The killers timed their attack for the very day that final passage of the law was planned for in the legislature.

If you go to the link for the Colorado theater shooter they have a photo of his journal where he has notes about airports…..he lists one of the items…."Substantial Security"

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/james-holmes-notebook-dragged.pdf
**************

Sandy hook, did not have police resource officer

Building a safer Sandy Hook | News21: Gun Wars

The high school and middle school, which already had armed resource officers, doubled down on security and restricted all visitors that didn’t have prior permission to enter.

h
 
But gun nutters are a fearful bunch, and there are a lot of you in this country.
Never a truer word. Look at 2aguy, absolutely trembling with fear. I bet he's so scared he can't go grocery shopping without being armed with a sidearm.
 
My thoughts and prayers go out to the 18 to 21 year old white supremacists in California who, because of a new CA law, must drive to Nevada to buy their semi-automatic rifles.

So much for gun control laws eh? Apparently the park's gun-free zone did absolutely 0 to stop this human excrement. If the park-goers were armed and guns were ubiquitous and open-carry, this little fuck would have been taken down sooner than a few minutes. Don't get me wrong, the cops did a great job but, they are only capable of doing so much in a crowd. If everyone was allowed to carry arms this guy would have been snuffed sooner IMO. In fact, the little piss-pants coward probably would have been too afraid to do what he did.

You have no idea how often a gun free zone prevents gun violence.

In this case, it forced the shooter to sneak into the area making it more likely to be caught & arrested. Otherwise, they could just walk in & nothing could be done until people died.


They don't... they are only safe because no one decided to attack them....as this shooting shows, this gun free zone with metal detectors was still not safe......
 
mass shootings are the least of our murder problems
But they show quite high in your mass murder problems.
less than 1% of all murders

like I said not much of a problem


In 2018 there were 12 mass public shootings....with 93 killed. 600 million guns in the country. Cars and pools kill more people than this every single year....we need to ban cars and pools.

Knives kill more people than rifles.......we need to ban knives.....

For 2017.....with now more than 17.25 million Americans carrying guns for self defense....

Rifles...still kill fewer people each year than knives... 403

Knives.....1,591

Hands and feet......696

Clubs.....467

Cars.....over 38,000
 
mass shootings are the least of our murder problems
But they show quite high in your mass murder problems.


It is a good thing he didn't use a rental truck for the attack......

In Nice, France, a muslim terrorist using a rental truck murdered 86 people and injured 435....

this guy...3 dead, 12 injured.... trucks are deadlier than rifles.
 
There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.

Coincidence? I don't think so.
 
But gun nutters are a fearful bunch, and there are a lot of you in this country.
Never a truer word. Look at 2aguy, absolutely trembling with fear. I bet he's so scared he can't go grocery shopping without being armed with a sidearm.


Awwww...you're thinking of me......

We are lucky he didn't decide to use fire.....

He killed 3 with a rifle....the guy in Japan killed 35 with fire....we need to ban gasoline....

Kyoto Animation arson attack - Wikipedia

The arson killed at least 35 people and injured an additional 33, and destroyed most of materials and computers in Studio
 
There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.

Coincidence? I don't think so.
For the most part legal gun owners are some of the most law abiding people in the country

People with concealed carry permits even more so
 
There has never been a mass shooting at an NRA or FOP convention, even though NRA members and police officers are among the best armed people in the country.

Coincidence? I don't think so.


When normal people have guns during a mass shooting attack....they have a 94% success rate at stopping the attack and saving lives...

Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events [FBI]

Of all the active shooter events there were 33 at which an armed citizen was present. Of those, Armed Citizens were successful at stopping the Active shooter 75.8% of the time (25 incidents) and were successful in reducing the loss of life in an additional 18.2% (6) of incidents. In only 2 of the 33 incidents (6.1%) was the Armed Citizen(s) not helpful in any way in stopping the active shooter or reducing the loss of life.

Thus the headline of our report that Armed Citizens Are Successful 94% Of The Time At Active Shooter Events.



In the 2 incidents at which the armed citizen “failed” to stop or slow the active shooter, one is the previously mentioned incident with hunters. The other is an incident in which the CCWer was shot in the back in a Las Vegas Walmart when he failed to identify that there were 2 Active Shooters involved in the attack. He neglected to identify the one that shot him in the back while he was trying to ambush the other perpetrator.

We also decided to look at the breakdown of events that took place in gun free zones and the relative death toll from events in gun free zones vs non-gun-free zones.

Of the 283 incidents in our data pool, we were unable to identify if the event took place in a gun-free zone in a large number (41%) of the events. Most of the events took place at a business, church, home, or other places at which as a rule of law it is not a gun free zone but potentially could have been declared one by the property owner. Without any information in the FBI study or any indication one way or the other from the news reports, we have indicated that event with a question mark.

If you look at all of the Active Shooter events (pie chart on the top) you see that for those which we have the information, almost twice as many took place in gun free zones than not; but realistically the vast majority of those for which we have no information (indicated as ?) are probably NOT gun free zones.

If you isolate just the events at which 8 or more people were killed the data paints a different picture (pie chart on the bottom). In these incidents, 77.8% took place in a gun-free zone suggesting that gun free zones lead to a higher death rate vs active shooter events in general

=====

One of the final metrics we thought was important to consider is the potential tendency for armed citizens to injure or kill innocent people in their attempt to “save the day.” A common point in political discussions is to point out the lack of training of most armed citizens and the decrease in safety inherent in their presence during violent encounters.

As you can see below, however, at the 33 incidents at which Armed Citizens were present, there were zero situations at which the Armed Citizen injured or killed an innocent person. It never happened.
 
***yawn*** You are so glib with your terms..and so butt ignorant with your lack of insight and your knowledge of history. Freedom from govt. you say? Yet their very first acts were to form a govt.--never-mind that most of them would have been happy staying with England until eternity--had England been smart enough to give them seats in Parliament and an American Peerage. One of the oddities of the American Revolution is that unlike so many others..it was a revolt of the Merchants and Landowners--the nascent middle class of the times. The masses were used, abused, and fooled. As soon the the war was over..the ruling elite created things like the Electoral College and the granting of Representative govt. based on slave populations to dilute the power of the masses and concentrate power just where they wanted it.

I note with amusement your inability to actually address what I had to say..and find some nit-picky bs about terms.

Your calling me a fool is a compliment..for if we agreed..I'd have to seriously check my conclusions.





Yes, a government of, by, and FOR the people. Not some dictatorship. The only person demonstrating a severe lack of historical knowledge is you, dude.
Uh huh...not that you have the gonads to actually point my alleged lack of knowledge...LOL! I do appreciate the irony of your quoting Abe Lincoln--although it is a bit of a stretch to consider him a 'founding father'. My amusement comes from the fact that many of your ilk often refer to Lincoln as the first American dictator. Suspension of Civil rights like habeas corpus and such.
You are seriously out of your league..when it come to history...I've read your posts for years..so can state this with some degree of certainty.

But hey..surprise me...post a cogent rebuttal of my posts..point out all my factual errors....astound us with your ability. Or at least get your copy and paste on!





Where do you think i quoted abe lincoln? This oughta be good....


***sigh*** I would have thought that such a vaunted intellect would have read the Gettysburg address..i know I was required to memorize it and declaim it in front of the whole class:


Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate - we cannot consecrate - we cannot hallow - this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember, what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us - that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion - that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain - that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom - and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

The History Place - Great Speeches Collection: Abraham Lincoln - The Gettysburg Address


Now you might claim that your paraphrasing was not exact..and thus it was not a quote..but it was...albeit unknowingly.





Try again, junior...

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
promote the general Welfare
 
Another mass killing by a white supremacist. You must be disappointed. You were hoping for a Hispanic or better yet an illegal Hispanic
White supremacist /Antifa what different does it make?


Your right there, both groups seem to be on the payroll of CNN
you caught me in mid post
leftist have no problem defending Antifa you will not find right wingers defending White supremacist
Why would anybody from the right defend white supremasists? There’s good people on that side right? ;-)
No one was defending white supremacist
The president was talking about people who were defending their confederate heritage. Hell I know at least one leftist on another board who is proud of his Confederate heritage and has defended against any monuments removal
I know who he was talking about and there was no reason to talk about them in that way given the situation of Nazis marching the streets and killing a young lady.

Trump could t go on attack mode against the Nazi for reasons I’ll let you figure out... instead he had to divert and attack ANTIFA with the both sides comment. We all know what’s going on here. Same ol games
 
For the most part legal gun owners are some of the most law abiding people in the country
Sure thing.

upload_2019-7-31_2-18-0.jpeg
 
White supremacist /Antifa what different does it make?


Your right there, both groups seem to be on the payroll of CNN
you caught me in mid post
leftist have no problem defending Antifa you will not find right wingers defending White supremacist
Why would anybody from the right defend white supremasists? There’s good people on that side right? ;-)
No one was defending white supremacist
The president was talking about people who were defending their confederate heritage. Hell I know at least one leftist on another board who is proud of his Confederate heritage and has defended against any monuments removal
I know who he was talking about and there was no reason to talk about them in that way given the situation of Nazis marching the streets and killing a young lady.

Trump could t go on attack mode against the Nazi for reasons I’ll let you figure out... instead he had to divert and attack ANTIFA with the both sides comment. We all know what’s going on here. Same ol games
Not true
 
Another mass killing by a white supremacist. You must be disappointed. You were hoping for a Hispanic or better yet an illegal Hispanic
White supremacist /Antifa what different does it make?


Your right there, both groups seem to be on the payroll of CNN
you caught me in mid post
leftist have no problem defending Antifa you will not find right wingers defending White supremacist
Why would anybody from the right defend white supremasists? There’s good people on that side right? ;-)
You know he means on both sides of the issue itself.

But that doesn't help you build your image of him.
I know what he meant. Wrong time and place to defend monument people and attack ANTIFA. It was a water down comment
 
How so? Because they have gun laws?


That would be oppressive gun laws against the Bill of Rights.

Too bad the Supremes are too chickenshit to apply the same strict scrutiny to the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms the same as they apply to other Constitutional rights. Kinds of makes the BORs a joke, doesn't it?

What good does it have a Constitutional right that says that "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" when commie states like California can infringe the shit out of the right?
Well let me ask... do you think that a person should have the right to walk into a store, buy a machine gun as easy as buying a coke, then go watch a high school football game with it sitting on his lap? Is that something that you’d find acceptable in the society you live in?
What is your qualitative experience on the use of deadly force? What gives you the ability to have an opinion on what an individual needs to prevail in a fight for their life?
Are you asking if I’ve ever been in a situation where I’ve had to fight for my life? The answer is no. My experience simply comes from living my life. And I’m not telling anybody what they need or don’t need to prevail in a fight. My hope would be that we learn skills to avoid and diffuse fights so that they don’t happen.

How come you didn’t answer my question? Not very nice manners to answers questions with questions.
Why do you people always appeal to the ridiculous?

I'm surprised you didn't use a nuclear missile in your example
Next time time formulating am actual counter argument and explain yourself. That’s how debates work
 
Look, you guys are happy enough that recurring mass murders and sky high firearm homicide rates come with easy access to handguns and military style semi automatic rifles. No need to be so stridently defensive, carry your selfishness with pride.
 

Forum List

Back
Top