It’s shocking, but not surprising, to hear that a gun free zone at the location of the recent Virginia Beach shooting apparently prevented one of the victims from carrying her concealed carry weapon. Something that very well may have saved her life that day. As The Free Beacon reports:
A lawyer representing the family of one of the Virginia Beach shooting victims said on Monday she wanted to carry a gun at work due to her fear of the attacker but decided against it because of the city’s no-gun policy.
Kate Nixon told her husband shortly before the shooting that she was concerned about the coworker who ended up murdering her and 11 others on May 31, according to family lawyer Kevin Martingayle. The lawyer told WHRO Nixon considered carrying a firearm to her office for protection from the eventual attacker but decided not to because concealed guns were banned on the premises. His comments were first reported by the Virginian-Pilot.
“Kate expressed to her husband concerns about this individual in particular as well as one other person,” Martingayle told host Cathy Lewis. “In fact, they had a discussion the night before about whether or not she should take a pistol and hide it in her handbag and decided not to, ultimately, because there is a policy, apparently, against having any kind of weapons that are concealed in these buildings.”
“But they were so concerned they had that conversation,” Lewis said.
This tragedy very well may have been avoided if it wasn’t for the extreme liberal anti-gun measures in place.
Please fully grasp the chaos and suffering being created in our country today is a form of Worship.. Truly Satanic in origin.. That is why to good people the inexplicable evil behind disarming the American People.. Deliberately flooding our nation with dependent class immigrants whose cultures and beliefs are in direct opposition to the values of what it at it’s core a or Republic… and that’s really the point is’t it..
Anti-American Neo Con Republican Leadership and the Anti-American Democrat Leadership are unanimous in the contempt, loathing and hatred of the American People.. and our Republic..
All that is different today.. They have been revealed
Defend the Republic… Defeat the Globalists.
SUE THE CRAP OUT OF THEM!!!!
I have carried a “concealed weapon” most of my adult life. I have never cared about a “gun free zone” nor have I ever honored one.
When I was in the Academy to become a LEO, I had a firearms instructor who would often repeat the following statements … “We don’t shoot to kill, we shoot to stop” … “Always shoot for center mass, whatever that might be” … the one I remember the most and the one I give most credence to is “It is far better to be tried by twelve than carried by six.”
Gun Free Zones are an open invitation to any physco; miscreant; or disgruntled person who would put innocent people at mortal risk. Shame on anyone who could try to justify a “Gun Free Zone”.
absolutely the same thing I do. Screw their GFZ’s!
Arrest the piece of filth that came up with the “No guns” idea. They are a accessory to murder!
In the United Kingdom you really can’t have a gun. They are reporting more knife attacks and stabbings than ever before. The other day our St. Louis mayor spoke of gun violence. A gun needs A PERSON to cause any violence. When a child was shot there were 100s of other guns in people’s possession that same night. None of those guns caused violence. They can’t. IT TAKES A PERSON. Go ahead and take away all guns and you’ll soon be removing knives too. Then scissors? Then bricks? Then….
Guns are the reason we are not part of the United Kingdom and don’t have to talk like a dork.
I worked in a “Gun Free Zone” for 26 years and I carried a concealed firearm every day. No one ever knew until after I retired. Better safe than sorry… or dead.
Criminals, by Their very nature, don’t obey laws. Breaking a stupid law beats being murdered any day.
Good for you! I wrote a “letter to the editor” about a theater venue in a major city where they used a magnetic wand to check everyone that entered. I pointed out how easy it would be for a terrorist to enter, shoot the one uniformed officer and then just fire away till ammo ran out. Next time I visited that venue, no wand!
Stand up for your rights and common sense people!
We need better mental health checks before anyone can get a weapon. Perhaps the checks should occur every few years. We have to determine how to reduce these types of incidents. Even I as a Republican am becoming more “anti-gun.”
Be careful about the mental health barrier. They pulled that on a lot of veterans. Go to some counseling after bad experiences in combat and then come home to find you can’t buy a gun to go deer hunting, it’s happening.
The ACLU won’t let you hospitalize someone that dangerous to themselves and others but go through some bad times and need a psychologist and you’ve lost your gun rights.
I completely agree with your concern since I suspect once a law is passed, despite the best of intentions, it could be abused. If passed in any state, even a red state, you can’t account for a liberal/socialist/leftist governor and/or legislature being elected who would alter it. Quite frankly, I don’t trust liberals to do ANYTHING righteous. History is filled with those who thought they knew better than the majority. Hitler and Stalin are examples.
On Nov. 11, 1938, the Nazi German minister of the interior issued “Regulations against Jews possession of weapons.” Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own “truncheons or stabbing weapons.” In addition to the restrictions, the Nazis had already begun raiding Jewish homes and seizing weapons. By the time the “final solution” was decided the Jews were defenseless. The other reason the holocaust occurred, Nazi Germany had no freedom of the press. There wasn’t any freedom to investigate what was really going on in the concentration camps. As a consequence, the Jews were herded into places like Auschwitz totally unaware what waited them in the “showers”.
Can laws be written and passed to remove guns from someone who is considered dangerous? Possibly it can. But it would have to be done only after being very, very, VERY careful it can’t be abused. History has examples of how people responded to government abuse. The actions of patriots like George Washington and the Continental Congress are some examples we could consider. I know most would think it impossible for such abuses to occur in the United States of America. Think again. Can you imagine the laws that would be passed by those zealots who seriously adhere to Global Warming and Climate Change theories? Removing our ability to resist those laws would be one of the first laws passed. Don’t kid yourself. They know better than the rest of us, just like Hitler.
The problem is generally not about “mental health” so much as how these issues are treated. The use and overuse of SSRIs (Prozac, etc.), which have been proven to induce homicidal thoughts in a small percent of users, corresponds almost exactly with the relatively sudden explosion of spree shootings and other random attacks. And in every case where we have access to medical history details, it has been proven that were using SSRIs of some variety.
To address your last thought, might I suggest that turning America into a coast to coast concentration camp is a poor idea. Humanity tried this once before; it was called “The Third Reich”. Watch “Schindler’s List” if you need a refresher as to why “anti-gun” sentiments are such a horribly bad idea.
My guns are not the problem. Stop pretending otherwise.
This has been my understand all along. The sad part is that society prevents inquiries into perpetrators’ use of SSRIs, even when they’ve been convicted of their homicidal rampages. This needs to change, so we can better ascertain the causative factors preceding suicides and homicides, but Leftists are loathe to such scientific inquiries, because they wish to preserve the myth that firearms are the problem, not that people are the problem. They’re just protecting their own — mentally unstable people.
Background checks for firearms purchases MUST be allowed to check criminal records AND mental health records. People taking SSRIs now or recently should not be allowed to own firearms. Once safely weaned from such drugs, individuals’ rights to own firearms should be restored, assuming no other disqualifying factors remain.
Background checks and some other things wouldn’t be such a bad deal but you never know when the dumbass democrats will run the country again and abuse the laws to their perverted ideals.
Sorry she had to die because of the jerks she worked for. But am glad the family has a lawyer, hope you end up owning that company. This shows how stupid so called gun free zones are.
Gun-free zones do serve as more-attractive targets to violent criminals or mass shooters because perpetrators will be less likely to encounter armed resistance in these areas. It is a fallacy that gun free zones are safer. Actually, gun free zones are more dangerous and you are more likely to get killed in a gun free zone versus one that is not.
According to Crime Prevention Research Center President John Lott Jr. in October 2015, only two mass shootings in the U.S. since 1950 have occurred in an area where citizens were not prohibited from carrying a gun.”
When are people going to learn. Gun free zones are dangerous for those inside them. The shooters know there is no protection there and that is why they come to kill.
Very few mass kilLings occur at rifle ranges, gun shows ,police stations . I wonder why.
Moreover, Marty, it isn’t so much a fear of being killed that prevents mass shooters from attacking armed targets in free gun zones [sic], it’s a fear of failing to make an explosively murderous statement. They don’t care if they end up dead, they care only that they take a crowd with them.
Attacking an armed garrison is unlikely to produce mass casualties, but attacking unarmed people provides them the hope of creating a record killing incident before being captured or killed.
Indeed, most mass shooters hope to see their accomplishments pasted on the nightly news, so they can basque in their infamy, relishing the shocked and repulsed reactions of people who otherwise wouldn’t have raised an eyebrow had they simply committed suicide or died in an accident.
They don’t want a mere 15 minutes of fame in a local newspaper obituary column, they want weeks and months of fame in world news outlets and a footnote in the annuals of crime. It’s not about the firearms, it’s about the people, i.e., it’s about the killers.
The continued existence and original enactment of these Gun Free Zones all to clearly indicates the failure of both intellect and intestinal fortitude on the part of The Congress
I think that the families of the victims who were murdered should sue the so called businesses that refuse to allow people to defend themselves, they should at least be accountable for the funeral and medical expenses!
Time for a wrongful death case against that city.
GUN FREE ZONE
BUT THE ASSWHOLE THAT DID THE SHOOTING HAD !!!! A GUN
A L L !!!!!!!! SO CALLED GUN FREE ZONES SHOULD BE OUTLAWED