Once Again the Left is After Our Guns — Here’s Why We All Need to FIGHT BACK

Whether you own firearms or not, it is very much in your own best personal interest not only to FIGHT BACK against their incessant infringement on our right to keep and bear arms, but also to help educate them as to why it’s in their bests interests, as well.

Here’s the main reason:  Everywhere governments have curtailed the right of their citizens to keep and bear arms, the overall violent crime rate has skyrocketed.  Sure, murders by gun went down, but murders overall go up, along with all other violent crime.

Here’s another reason:  Fully HALF of all mass shootings are stopped by armed citizens.

Here’s a third reason:  Roughly 725,000 violent crimes are stopped by armed citizens each and every year. Some reports put that number far higher, around 1.3 million. Infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms will never — can never — reduce either crime in general or mass shootings in particular. The violent crime rate in the United Kingdom TRIPLED when their blitheringly idiotic government deprived the citizenry of their right to keep and bear arms, and those same blitheringly idiotic citizens LET them.

Consider:  In 2015, the United States of America had 13,286 gun-related deaths.  With a 2015 population of 319,929,162, that comes to 4.15 gun-related deaths per 100,000 people.  As a double-check of my accuracy, Nation Master lists that as 4.2 in 2010.  But the United Kingdom’s murder rate is 11.68.  That’s 2.8 — nearly three times — higher than the U.S.

The UK’s murder rate used to be on par with that of the U.S. before they banned most civilian ownership of arms.  This is what happens when you deny the ability of a private citizen to effectively secure themselves, their family, and their problem.

The same thing happened in Australia, when they infringed on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

This is not a new phenomenon.  All other things being equal, a well-armed citizenry always has a significantly lower violent crime rate than a disarmed citizenry.  This is WHY our Founding Fathers wrote “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” into our Constitution’s Second Amendment.

It just works.  Stop messing with it.

While you’re at it, stop comparing liberal hot spots like Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans, and St. Louis to the rest of America.  The right of the people to keep and bear arms is seriously infringed in those locations, and it shows.  Liberal policies do not bring about security, and that shows, as well.

How to Stop Mass Shootings

Once again, a mass shooter got away with killing a significant number of people, this time in a Pittsburgh synagogue.
One would think the Jewish community would understand Nehemiah and the necessity God taught his chosen people to build and maintain a strong defense. The entire book is about obedience, trusting God, and doing so by following God’s commands to secure the city against enemies.  In fact, Nehemiah 1:7 clearly indicates failing to provide proper security is both “wicked” and “disobedience” toward’s God’s “commands, decrees, and laws.”
 
God allowed early Americans to create a great nation. Early Americans knew their Bibles through and through.  They carried their rifles to church. In fact, it was a law in Virginia for many mass shootingsdecades that all church attendees had to carry their firearms to church.
 
Security during worship begins when we exercise our First Amendment rights by carrying firearms in churches and synagogues. It certainly stopped a mass shooting here in Colorado Springs on December 9, 2007. Only two people died before the shooter was STOPPED by an armed member of the church.
 
Clearly, however, the people in Pittsburgh were not thinking straight, as evidenced by the headlines which read, “Former Synagogue President: Working With DHS on Exit Routes Likely Saved Lives in Shooting.” Says “security was a ‘major concern’ for the building.”
 
While cover, concealment and escape are indeed security concerns, How to Stop a Mass ShootingRETURNING FIRE TO STOP THE THREAT should ALWAYS be your number one security action, and had it been exercised, it would have saved lives.
 
“…leaders’ react to tragedy with sorrow, anger and frustration…”
 
I’ll BET they’re frustrated.  I’m frustrated. I didn’t spend the last thirty years supporting and defending our Constitution only to watch people ignore their Constitutional rights of self-defense and be slaughtered. That’s INSANE, people. Same goes for the church in Charleston on June 17, 2015. Nobody was armed except for the shooter. Nine people died.
 
You can NOT prevent people from committing mass shootings.
 
You CAN, however, stop mass shooters in their tracks by RETURNING FIRE. More commonly, it’s called SHOOTING BACK. Had the members of that synagogue returned fire, perhaps only 3 would be dead instead of 11. Perhaps no one would have died, except the shooter.
Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf wrote:  “The shooting in Pittsburgh this morning is an absolute tragedy…”
The real tragedy, Governor Wolf, is that most of those deaths were preventable.
 
This is how you stop mass shootings:
1.  STAY ARMED
2.  CARRY EVERYWHERE
3.  WHEN SOMEONE OPENS FIRE ON INNOCENT PEOPLE, RETURN FIRE, using cover as required.
There’s only one option remaining for those who refuse to exercise their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms:
Here’s what happens when people exercise their Second Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms:

Short story:  “A brave dad armed with a pistol stopped what could have been a mass shooting Saturday inside an Alabama McDonald’s when he took down a masked gunman who had stormed in and opened fire.”

 

Palm Beach Atlantic Lacrosse Coach Bans Gun Pics

I’ve been a Christian since I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior at age 15.  Since then, I have participated in thousands of worship services, Bible studies, and scriptural studies.  I have three degrees, two in science, two graduate, and two summa cum laude.

I attended and graduated from Virginia Tech in the middle 1980s.  Virginia Tech is, as you may well know, the location of the massacre perpetrated against fellow students and teachers by Seung-Hui Cho.  The heinous nature of that incident affected all students, including we alumni.

At age 25 I became a U.S. military officer, serving our nation honorably for more than 20 years, beginning with the same oath of office as taken by every public servant including all judges, law enforcement officers, legislators and members of the executive branches (mayors, governors, the president):

I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Please keep the aforementioned facts firmly in mind with respect to my credentials across several fronts backing up what I am about to say below.  Put simply, this is not an “opinion piece.”  These are facts:

In a flagrant violation of both the First and Second Amendment U.S. Constitutional rights of its students, the lacrosse coach of Palm Beach Atlantic University forbade a student, Zach Scholl, from posting pictures “guns and this stuff.  Specifically, the coach said:

“You want to play lacrosse, you won’t post pics of your guns and this stuff.  That’s simple.  You want to continue to post this, you don’t play.”

Young Mr. Scholl displayed an exemplary level of mastery in his response to the coach’s flagrantly un-Constitutional mandate:

“As a citizen of this country, I have a second amendment right to keep and bear arms and a first amendment right to post the pictures of my firearms and photos from my hunts on my various social media accounts.

“These are my rights as a U.S. citizen and I’m not going to throw them away just to play ball under you.  As much as I love the sport it is not worth it to me to surrender.  So, thank you for the opportunity, but someone else will have to be wearing #40 this year.”

It’s more than a shame Mr. Scholl had to quit the team.  It’s a crime, prohibited by federal law, for a coach to force any student to forfeit their Constitutional rights in order to play on the team.  Now, to be fair, coaches, universities, and athletic organizations such as the NCAA can impose a very few limitations, such as maintaining a reasonable QCA/GPA, eating at an athletic dining hall, living in athlete dorms and maintaining a curfew during the season.  They absolutely can NOT, however, force a student to pick between posting tasteful pictures of a lawful and Constitutionally-protected activity — by two Amendments, no less — and playing a collegiate sport.

Fortunately, the university published an official response to this incident in the clearest of terms:

“As a Christian University, PBA strongly supports our Constitutional Republic, the U.S. Constitution and all individual rights protected under the Bill of Rights, especially freedom of religion, freedom of speech and the right to keep and bear arms.”

Such an outstanding official position needs no explanation or interpretation, and neither do the two Amendments from which it was derived, Amendments with which the lacrosse coach is in sorely need of  review:

Amendment I:  Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II:  A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

But hey, let’s watch what Dana Loesch has to say in her NRA video:

Well said, Dana.  Well said.

In light of the coach’s heinous actions violating the Constitutional rights of he student as well as official university policy, three things must happen:

  1.  The coach needs to be officially reprimanded, and if he insists on repeating his erroneous ways, he needs to be fired for wrongly imposing his NPOV (narrow point of view) i.e. political bigotry on his players.
  2. Palm Beach Atlantic University needs to issue an official and public apology to the student
  3. The student needs to be invited to re-join the lacrosse team, without prejudice, and in the same position and degree of play he held before.

If you would like to contact PBA’s Athletic Staff Directory, you can reach them, here.

If you would like to contact the university directly, their contact information is listed on the bottom of their home page.

For more information on Students for Concealed Carry, see:

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY — Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com or tweet @CampusCarry.

 

Appeals court: 2nd Amendment protects open carry of arms

“A federal appeals court ruled Tuesday that the Second Amendment protects the right to openly carry (aka “open carry”) a gun in public for self-defense.”

Good.  We the People have known open carry was not merely “legal” but “the supreme Law of the Land” for 229 years, since before the ink on our Bill of Rights was dry.  Same goes for concealed carry.  Never forget our Founders and Framers were “We the People” citizens, too.  It’s nice to see that the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals knows how to read the Constitution.  Well, two of them, anyway.

How to Read the U.S. Constitution

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

“Keep” means to “own” or “posses.” You can keep your firearm at home. You can keep it in your car. You can keep it about your person. You can keep it with you wherever you go.  In the context of the day it was written, it meant the people were not going to be required to turn them in to an armory, or worse, for destruction.  Instead, recognizing the God-given right to procure food, protect one’s self, family, and property, and in accordance with “the pursuit of happiness” and other freedoms, our Founding Fathers rightfully recognized, respected, and codified God’s inalienable right in the form of keeping arms.

“Bear” means to “carry.” You can carry it along with you on a hike, while shopping, getting gas, at the library…  Pretty much anywhere you want. Since the amendment doesn’t restrict mode of carry to either concealed carry or open carry, it’s both.

Moreover, since “shall not be infringed” is an absolute, lacking any restriction on the type of arms, or the location or manner in which people keep and bear arms, both open carry and concealed carry are equally and fully within the right of the people.  All other arguments to the contrary, including those stated in this pathetically biased article, are mute.  There are no “except when…” allowances in the Second Amendment, for very good reason.  Those who wrote it knew if they allowed even an iota of room for exception, that people and powers opposed to our Constitutional covenant between We the People and our Republican Government would indeed infringe on our right to keep and bear arms.

Why are these very straightforward concepts so difficult for liberals and Demoncraps to comprehend?

It’s because they don’t WANT to comprehend them, or, if they do, they want to advance their blitheringly idiotic anti-gun agenda.  For example, “Hawaii Attorney General Russell Suzuki said … ‘We are disappointed in the decision that would undermine Hawaii’s strong gun control law and our commitment to protect the public’ and ‘well-reasoned dissent supporting the constitutionality of this law.”

No, Suzuki, the dissent is not “well-reasoned.”  It’s an extreme violation of Constitutional law, quite alarming coming from a judge who swore to uphold it.  Furthermore, disarming honest, law-abiding citizens does not protect them.  England, also an island, tried that and their crime rate more than tripled.  It’s still 274% greater than it was before their ban.  Grow a brain, you blitheringly idiotic, anti-Constitutional fool.

Nope! Our U.S. Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Says so itself, right there in Article VI: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

IT’S THE LAW, people.

But it’s not just “guns,” there, Associated Press. “The right of the people to keep and bear ARMS shall not be infringed.”

The term “arms” is short for “armaments,” not “firearms.” Obviously, it includes firearms, but it also includes knives, machetes, spears, bow and arrow, rifle, handgun, revolver, pistol, AR-15, lance, sword… ALL ARMS. ALL forms of armament.

Why?  Because some people may not be able to afford  a firearm, that’s why.

“In 1623, Virginia forbade its colonists to travel unless they were “well armed”; in 1631 it required colonists to engage in target practice on Sunday and to “bring their peeces to church.”26 In 1658 it required every householder to have a functioning firearm within his house and in 1673 its laws provided that a citizen who claimed he was too poor to purchase a firearm would have one purchased for him by the government, which would then require him to pay a reasonable price when able to do so” (Note 1).

As I mentioned before, the article is chock full of liberal bias

Notes

  1.  William Hening, The Statutes at Large: Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia from the First Session of the Legislature in 1619, at pp. 127, 173-74 (New York, 1823), as referenced in the 1982 Congressional Report on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

On Banning Bump-Fire Stocks…

What do you think, folks? Should we ban bump-fire stocks?

 Or should we ban the blitheringly idiotic, mentally unstable liberals and/or Demoncraps who keep murdering people en masse?
 
Perhaps we should ban the Mudstream Media that continues to poison their brains with worthless crap that simply isn’t true.
 
We could ban Hollywood for giving these mass-murderers the ideas in the first place.
 
Maybe we ought to imprison the communist teachers who FAILED to teach our kids proper, helping them learn things like, “On my honor, I will do my best. To do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; To help other people at all times; To keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.”
 
But banning bump-fire stocks? What’s next, guns in general? Knives? Quarter-staffs? Socks full of pennies? Spears? Rocks?
 
I mean, seriously… Are you going to ban ROCKS? Because, as you know, there was a guy who was murdered less than a quarter mile away from where I lived. He was murdered in the parking lot of a sports bar when someone hit him over the head with a ROCK.
 
So, go ahead. Ban rocks. This is, however, the ROCKY Mountains, so it’s going to take you a few hundred (if not tens of thousands) of years to get rid of all the rocks.
 
Until you do, I think I’ll keep my knives, guns, and anything else I damned well please, thank you very much.

Mass Shootings and Random Acts of Violence

I’ve long been a strong advocate of an armed populace as the best means of self-defense. I also believe it is by far the best deterrent and way to stop both mass shootings and terrorist attacks involving firearms.
 
Back when I first became interested in the topic of mass shootings, however, there weren’t as many, and at least here in America. It was largely relegated to the occasional insane person run amok. Aside from 9/11, we did not yet have to worry Muslims conducting their own mass shootings in the name of terrorism.
 
Now we do, and it looks to get a whole lot worse before it ever gets better.
 
Society has several tools available to deter terrorism and mass shootings:
 
– Intelligence (costly, even when highly focused)
– – requirements
– – planning and direction
– – collection
– – processing and exploitation
– – analysis and production
– – dissemination
– Security (the physical deterrence and protection of people 
– – Law enforcement (federal, state, county, and local)
– – Personal protection (planning, training, and weapons)
 
So, should we make it more difficult for people to obtain guns?  Should we reduce magazine capacities?  Increase background checks?  Reduce calibers?  Limit ammunition capability?  Create more “gun-free” zones?  Mandate the use of “smart” guns?  Increase waiting periods?  Ban certain types of firearms based on their appearance or general level of public trepidation?  Put a cop on every street corner?
anti-gun desperation
No.  NONE of these measures has proven effective in either deterring or stopping mass shootings or random acts of violence, and most of them significantly increase the cost of obtaining a firearm to the average law-abiding citizen who seeks protection.
By far the most immediate and most effective deterrent against both mass shootings and random acts of violence, whether the result of insanity or terrorism, is a well-armed general populace comprised of law-abiding U.S. citizens who are both properly armed and well-trained.
 
The greatest threat to our security comes not from the lunatics and terrorists, but rather, from those second-guessers, the Monday-morning armchair quarterbacks who are NOT well-trained (if at all) yet who for whatever blitheringly idiotic reason feel like they’re *somehow* qualified to force their opinions down the throats of an otherwise free and well-trained general populace, usually in the form of ideas that sound good but either do nothing or actually do more harm than the harm they’re supposed to address.
mass shootingsThroughout history, a well-armed/trained populace has always been the most effective deterrent and counter to mass shootings and random acts of violence.

Orlando Shooting SHOULD Have Been Stopped

It is highly unlikely the Orlando shooting could have been prevented.  Even though the perpetrator had caught the attention of the FBI, so have tens of thousands of other people.  Out of all of these “possibles,” however, only a tiny fraction are ever moved up to “probables,” and only a small fraction of those ever go on to commit a crime.  Sometimes, the FBI’s hard work pays off, and they stop bad things before they happen, catching, for example, a bomb-maker in the act of making their bomb.
That, however, is the exception, rather than the rule.
In fact, most people who commit shooting sprees have never appeared on the FBI’s radar.  What the FBI cannot do is put the 99%+ of their “possibles” who would never have gone on to commit a crime behind bars.  “But we can deny them guns, right?”  Legally, yes.  Realistically, no.  Furthermore, that act alone may be what sends them over the edge, either from “possible” to “probable,” or worse, from either category to the category perpetrator.
The level of heinous behavior that deprives the innocent (until proven guilty) of their fundamental rights, including the right to keep and bear arms, is relegated to totalitarian governments such as existed under Hitler and Stalin.  Not only is fundamentally opposed by freedom-loving people throughout the world, but it flat out does not work.  I, for one, am sick and tired of watching brain-dead idealists impose “solutions” that miss by a mile while depriving honest, law-abiding American citizens their God-given and Constitutionally-protected rights.
Meanwhile, it remains highly doubtful the Orlando shooting could ever have been prevented.  It most certainly could, however, and should have been stopped.
The problem with the Orlando shooting wasn’t that the perpetrator was armed.  That is simply not a viable, achievable objective, and countries which try wind up leaving most of their citizenry in an unarmed, defenseless state.
The problem with the Orlando massacre is that of the more than 300 Americans who were present, NONE of them were armed. If only ONE American citizen attending the event had armed, they could have taken out the mass shooter.  If five had been armed, they almost certainly would have taken out the mass shooter.

This situation has been repeated time and time again throughout all mass shootings, including Orlando, Virginia Tech, Newtown, San Bernardino, Fort Hood, and Aurora. In every instance, not ONE of the intended victims was armed.  

Being unarmed in the presence of a mass shooter DOES NOT WORK.  Just look what happened in Norway:  One mass shooter.  Seventy-seven dead.  Why?  Because not a single one of the victims and many more people subject to Breivik’s attacks were armed.  They were unarmed.  They were defenseless, and they suffered the worst fate because of it.  

If that’s not a wake-up call, I don’t know what is.  

How many more wake-up calls must we suffer before those in power actually wake up and smell the coffee?  Before they realize that disarming the populace has ALWAYS resulted in a significant increases in violent crime?

Being unarmed DOES NOT WORK, America.

It doesn’t work in America.  It doesn’t work in Norway.  It doesn’t work in Nigeria, Chad, Niger, and northern Cameroon, where Boko Haram have killed 20,000 and displaced 2.3 million from their homes.  It did not work in Nazi Germany, when Hitler largely disarmed the general populace, restricting ownership of firearms to “…persons whose trustworthiness is not in question and who can show a need for a (gun) permit” i.e. card-carrying members of the Nazi Party.  Disarmament has not worked in the United Kingdom, where violent crime rose 250% after they disarmed the general populace.  Sure, it reduced firearm murders, but what Piers Morgan and the others refuse to tell you is that the overall murder rate increased.

An armed populace, however, does work.  During the last thirty years, firearms laws have been relaxed in nearly every state.  Also during that time, crime has dropped —  a lot — but the drop always followed the relaxation of firearms laws.

The trend in gun control relaxation began in the mid-1980s, but the overall trend in violent crime peaked around 1991, from nearly 800 per 100,000 population to less than 400 per 100,000.  That’s half, a huge reduction, throughout which firearms laws continued to be relaxed.  Put simply, the relaxation of gun control laws resulted in more American citizens being armed.  As a direct result, violent crime is about half of what it is today as compared to thirty years ago.

Being unarmed has never worked.  It never will.  Disarming Americans is a direct violation of our God-given, Constitutionally supported and protected rights.  Our Founding Fathers established the Second Amendment’s “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” for outstanding reasons, most notably of which is that a well-armed populace is the best deterrent against criminal activity.

Armed American citizens are the solution.  Just look at the attempted Islamic mass shooting at the Mohammed cartoon event in Texas. Result: The two mass shooters were STOPPED.  They were SHOT DEAD, most notably, before they were able to fire into the crowd of attendees. As disquieting as this may sound to some, if they had not been stopped via armed intervention, there were some 200 people attending the event who would have suffered grievous harm if not death.  Many would have been killed.  Many more would have been injured.  All would have been emotionally scarred for life.
Various opinions claiming “armed citizens have never stopped a mass shooting” appear after every mass shooting.  They largely stem from a false claim made on the Mother Jone’s website just after the Newtown massacre.  Their “study” claims that out of 62 of the mass shootings that occurred over the last 30 years (1982-2012), “in not a single case was the killing stopped by a civilian using a gun.”
There are two glaring problems with Mother Jones’ “study.”
First, when armed civilians are present, they often stop mass shootings before it becomes a mass shooting.  The FBI defines mass murder as murdering four or more persons during an event with no cooling-off period between the murders.  A mass shooting, on the other hand, simple involves multiple victims of gun violence.  However, the U.S. Congressional Research Service has adopted the FBI definition for mass murder.
Second, whatever criteria Mother Jones used in their “study” has failed the reality test.  In fact, there have been twelve mass shootings stopped in their tracks by armed U.S. citizens:
1. Pearl High School:  Perpetrator Luke Woodham opened fire at his high school, killing two students and injuring seven others before being stopped by Assistant Principle Joel Myrick with his .45 caliber handgun.  Myrick lost valuable time responding because he was forced to retrieve his firearms from his vehicle due to the school’s “no firearms” policy and standing as a “gun-free zone.”
2. Parker Middle School:  The 14-year-old perpetrator opened fire at a high school dance, killing one teacher, wounding another teacher and two students.  James Strand, the owner of the banquet hall where the dance was being held stopped the shooter when he confronted him with his shotgun.
3. Appalachian School of Law:  The perpetrator killed the dean, a professor, and a fellow student, wounding three others, before being stopped by an armed law student, an off-duty sheriff’s deputy, and an off-duty police officer.  All three lost valuable time responding because they were forced to retrieve their firearms from their vehicles due to the school’s “no firearms” policy and standing as a “gun-free zone.”
4. New Life Church:  The perpetrator killed two members of the church, wounding 3, before being stopped by Jeanne Assam with her personal concealed firearm.  The perpetrator fired at her, missing her.  She returned fire, stopping the perp.
5. New York Mills AT&T Store:  The perpetrator fired inside the store.  Donald J. Moore drew his own personal weapon and stopped the gunman, killing him before he could murder the list of employees he planned to kill as he’d written on the list he was carrying with him.  Only one employee was wounded.
6. Sullivan Central High School:  The perpetrator entered the high school, but was stopped at gunpoint by a school resource officer and held for ten minutes.  When the perpetrator started firing, he was shot and killed.  No others were harmed.
7. Freewill Baptist Church:  The perpetrator pulled a shotgun from his truck and approached the church.  Aaron Guyton, the pastor’s grandson, spotted him and locked the doors.  After the perp kicked in the doors, Guyton stopped him, holding him at gunpoint while two members of the church took him to the ground.
8. Clackamas Town Center Mall:  The perpetrator opened fire in the busy food court, killing two people and seriously wounding a third before being stopped by Nick Meli who drew his own firearm on the gunman, when then retreated and killed himself.
9.  Mystic Strip Club:  The perpetrator entered the club and opened fire, wounding one bouncer and a waitress.  The other bouncer stopped the perp by drawing his own handgun and killing him.
10. Austin, Texas Construction Site:  The perpetrator irately opened fire on his co-workers.  The foreman stopped the perp when he opened fire on him.  Only the perp and the foreman were injured.
11. Cache Valley Hospital:  The perpetrator entered the hospital and began making demands while holding two handguns.  When the perp racked the slid on one of his handguns, he was stopped by two corrections officers who shot him dead.
12. Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital:  The perpetrator, a patient at the psychiatric hospital, killed his caseworker and wounded his doctor.  The doctor stopped the shooter by drawing his concealed handgun and shooting the perp dead.
In any given year, armed U.S. citizens stop anywhere between 650,000 and 800,000 crimes.  Many of those are violent crimes.  Some of those involved armed shooters.  We will probably never fully know just how many of those perpetrators would have created another mass shooting had they not been stopped by an armed U.S. citizen.
When well-meaning but idealistic and/or delusional idiots establish so-called “gun-free zones,” those zones become a hotspot for violence and aggression, a favorite target of the criminally insane.  More than three-fourths of all mass shootings this century have occurred in gun-free zones, despite the fact that such zones occupy way less than 10% of the places frequented by the people.
The solution to this madness is clear:  Stop establishing “gun-free zones.”  Even in countries where “everyone is disarmed,” there ain’t no such animal.  The idea that disarmament will keep people safe is repeatedly proven as fiction, and dangerous fiction, at that.
 
Our Founding Fathers wrote “the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” into the U.S. Constitution for a REASON, people. It was to keep blithering idiots from stripping Americans of the ability to DEFEND themselves.