Gun Free Zones are the real problem.

[Zundfolge]

Virginia Beach shooting victim considered taking gun to work over concerns about colleague, lawyer says

Kate Nixon had considered taking a gun to work on May 31, the day a co-worker killed her and 11 others in the country's deadliest mass shooting this year, a family attorney said on a radio show Monday.
The public utilities engineer was concerned about DeWayne Craddock "as well as one other person," said Kevin Martingayle, an attorney working with Nixon's family. So on the night of May 30, Nixon had discussed with her husband, Jason, "whether or not she should take a pistol and hide it in her handbag," Martingayle said. She decided against it because of a city policy that prevents employees from bringing weapons to work.

The next day, Craddock, who had worked as a city public utilities engineer for nine years, used a .45-caliber handgun with a legally purchased silencer to fire at colleagues in Building 2 of the city's Municipal Center in Princess Anne.

...

source

[Skip]

Yup.

And it sounds like, just like in many other "mass shootings," that people knew the shooter was a threat long before the murders took place.

Horrible position to be in to have to decide between keeping your job and being able to protect yourself, but we've all been there.

[Gman]

Libtards think that if you make a policy to remove guns from the situation, there's never a gun problem. They also can't grasp that criminals don't follow the established 'rules'. Their desired vision of what they want the world to be is unrealistic/unsustainable.

[Skip]

Libtards think that if you make a policy to remove guns from the situation, there's never a gun problem. They also can't grasp that criminals don't follow the established 'rules'. Their desired vision of what they want the world to be is unrealistic/unsustainable.

What is interesting to me is that when a freedom oriented policy fails (abuse of rights) the Left will call it intolerable and the system of values that created it "broken." Even when that failure is statistically irrelevant. There is no forgiveness.

When a collectivist policy fails, and fails to a greater degree, they will ignore it and continue to promote that policy. And they expect everyone else to forgive that failure.

[Zundfolge]

What is interesting to me is that when a freedom oriented policy fails (abuse of rights) the Left will call it intolerable and the system of values that created it "broken." Even when that failure is statistically irrelevant. There is no forgiveness.

When a collectivist policy fails, and fails to a greater degree, they will ignore it and continue to promote that policy. And they expect everyone else to forgive that failure.

Its because leftists are emotion driven and the "good" intentions behind a policy or law are more important than the actual real world consequences.

[Erni]

Hope the husband ends up owning half the city when this is done.

[Bailey Guns]

It almost seems that being a law-abiding citizen is the real problem.

[Little Dutch]

It's starting to look like being part of an unarmed group of any significant size is the problem.

[Irving]

Sorry, but I have zero fantasy that this outcome would have been any different if this lady had a gun in her purse. I could be wrong, but I bet I'm not.

A lot of factors could have changed the outcome of this event, but to focus so heavily on the presence of a gun, gives legs to the argument that "guns kill people," because it's the opposite side of "guns save people."

[Skip]

Its because leftists are emotion driven and the "good" intentions behind a policy or law are more important than the actual real world consequences.

Sure but this is only possible because the rest of us agree to insulate feels from consequences. And then we go the extra mile in allowing Libs to dominate us using our own resources.

In nature, this would be a fairly short lived experiment as the feels people suffered those consequences and/or the objective people separated themselves from those consequences denying the feels people resources/protection.

Sorry, but I have zero fantasy that this outcome would have been any different if this lady had a gun in her purse. I could be wrong, but I bet I'm not.

A lot of factors could have changed the outcome of this event, but to focus so heavily on the presence of a gun, gives legs to the argument that "guns kill people," because it's the opposite side of "guns save people."

The ability to project violence against violence absolutely matters in an active shooter scenario and a handgun offers an efficient way to respond. Any round she could have fired could have given him pause, given time for others to escape, or pinned him down while LE responded. This is the conscious/unconscious calculation in choosing "gun free zones." If these monsters want high body counts, they pick a GFZ.

In this case, that monster had a personal beef with the location which happened to be a GFZ but I'm not unconvinced the values employed to create a GFZ don't extend to other bad decisions and policies (i.e. keeping a problem employee for 2+ years). Public schools have been notorious for this as well.