One More Non-Tragedy

 | 

Another crazy gunman opened fire at a movie theater this weekend, this time as a crowd of happy filmgoers exited the building. Police think the shooter was angry at his girlfriend, who worked at a restaurant next door. The incident took place Sunday night at the Mayan Palace Theaters in San Antonio.

Why isn't this tragic event hitting the national press? Because it didn't end tragically.

San Antonio is in Texas, where citizens can carry guns. An off-duty deputy saw the man, heard the shots, and took him down before he could kill anyone.

Fatalities when no one but the shooter has a gun: 28. Fatalities when a licensed bystander is carrying a gun: Zero. Even the shooter made it out alive.

Gun control is not the answer. Terrorists took down four jet planes without a single gun.




Share This

Comments

Ralph Baker

Don't blame the 'Gun-Free Zone' laws. Blame the 'Compulsory Attendance' laws instead. End all school taxes, end all compulsory school attendance, maintain the Gun-Free Zone. In the meantime, Ms. Skousen...remember THIS!....

At 500+ miles per hour, the flying bullet has only one mission. ASSAULT!...with intent to Dent and/or Damage and/or Destroy. To the bullet, all targets are INNOCENT.

Personal defense means MUSCLES. Not guns. Amen!

Ethan

You seem to be a few bricks shy of a load. Good thing their was an off duty cop there with a firearm. Muscles don't stand up to bullets.
Man1 Are you for real!

Jo Ann

Police are seldom on the spot to prevent crime. The best they can do is clean up afterward and find the ones who did it (often blaming ones who did not do it). The right to protect oneself and one's property is essential in a civilized society. Let's keep these stories coming.

Bill

You may add one more incident to your list: the recent Portland, Oregon mall shooter only killed two people before ending his own life. Such a low number did not make sense to me, and my only conclusion was he realized the horror of what he was doing after actually shooting two people, so he stopped. The answer came weeks later during an interview on the news: one of the debaters informed us that an armed citizen in the mall pulled his pistol and aimed it at the shooter, but did not shoot b/c of bystanders. The shooter saw this, immediately stopped shooting others and turned his gun on himself. Why is it the news media neglected to inform us of that little detail?

Luther Jett

Thank you, Ms. Skousen. In the past few days, we've seen the usual rhetoric comparing the high rates of gun violence with other countries where (ostensibly) gun laws are much stricter and no-one has guns excepting government agents.

But here is an article that points to a country which has restrictive gun laws, low rates of gun violence, and yet, whose citizenry are highly armed. The country is Israel.

http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/119408/why-israel-has-no-newtowns/

Victoria

The best example is actually Switzerland. Highly armed citizens, minimal gun crime.

Australia has already seen a 44% jump in armed robberies since they confiscated and banned guns last year. The state of Victoria saw a 300% jump in homicides.

I believe crime in the UK jumped 89% since their ban.

Jon Harrison

Yes, I always point to Switzerland, where I believe every adult male has an assault rifle (Army issue) which he keeps at home.

The San Antonio incident is not particularly relevant to the author's argument, however. The shooter at the theater was armed with a Glock, but did not have a Bushmaster or other assault rifle, as the Connecticut shooter did. Morever, he didn't attempt to stage a mass killing. He fired several shots in the air before running into a bathroom, where the deputy cornered and shot him. Had the shooter intended to kill in mass and had he been more heavily armed, he undoubtedly could have caused a massacre, deputy or no deputy.

Vermont has a strong gun culture and very liberal gun laws, comparable to Texas. In my village there is no police force, yet the only burglaries that occur are "between friends" -- that is, some schmuck breaks in to steal his neighbor's change jar, jewelry, and electronics when he's sure nobody's home. Professional burglars stick to toney towns like Norwich and Woodstock, where upper-class Democrats who don't own guns reside. In my village anyone who walks in uninvited will meet the business end of a shotgun or pistol. The bad guys know this, and so they stay away.

That said, the local paper carried an interesting letter from a hunter and gun-lover who questioned the need for automatic and semi-automatic weapons in citizen hands. He has a point: we aren't Switzerland, and as we've got more than our share of nut cases, we'd be better off without citizen access to automatic weapons. Whether the toothpaste can be put back in the tube is, of course, the $64 million question. Maybe we just have to live with nutjobs who are armed to the teeth and likely to go off at any time. Sounds like a sick society to me, though.

© Copyright 2013 Liberty Foundation. All rights reserved.



Opinions expressed in Liberty are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Liberty Foundation.

All letters to the editor are assumed to be for publication unless otherwise indicated.