School is getting ready to start, and parents are already concerned. The nation is facing its first real pandemic in many years and once again there has been nothing done to prevent mass shootings in schools. Mass shootings in schools have pickup popularity amongst the crazies over the past few decades. We don’t blame the crazies though, we blame a mislabeled assault weapons.
Each mass shooting is appears to be worst than the last. The mass shootings that take place in schools tend to attract those looking to kill as many people as they can with little to no resistance. The shooters often are trying to make some kind of statement. Some are even trying to repeat columbine by attempting it on the anniversary. We have seen mass shootings by those who have mental illnesses, want fame, been bullied, failing school, and those that wanted control.
The reasons never end but the goals stay the same. They all want to kill more than the ones that came before them. The idea seems to be, the more you kill the more famous you become.
HOW ARE MASS SHOOTINGS COUNTED?
We will start by looking at how they count mass shootings. It is considered a mass shooting if at least 4 people are killed not counting the shooter. Most mass shootings take place in a home environment 79%. Next 13% is those that start or end in the home but also in some public place. The final 8% happen in public places like schools, businesses, or in public in general. Mass shootings in schools are the most publicized but the rarest. The FBI goes one step future in their data by eliminating those that happen in the home environments. They also eliminate gang related shootings and other factors that are used to pad these statistics.
However, many of the anti-gun activist use those stats, they claim more people die from assault weapons with larger magazines. If more people die from assault weapons and larger magazines. Then clearly we should ban larger magazines and assault weapons, right? Unless you realize that there is not the same amount of people in homes as there are in public places. Meaning we’re counting those in homes the same way we are those in schools and other public places.
If there were 100 people in those homes that were attacked would the numbers still be so far apart? Mass shootings in schools have a lot more deaths because they have a lot more people. The assault rifle they are referring to is the Armalite rifle(AR)15 which is a semi-automatic sporting rifle. It fires at the same rate as a revolver. Meaning it can only fire one shot per trigger pull. The bullets travel at a higher velocity but let’s face it even the slowest bullet is a killer.
So how does it kill more than any other gun? That’s simple, it doesn’t. The larger magazine must make it more dangerous then, right? The theory behind it is because the shooter doesn’t have to reload as often he can kill more people. In every mass shooting in schools, the killer was able to take his time.
It has also been stated that if a person has to reload, it will give the police time to take out the shooter. I decided to look into that as well. It takes an average person 1.5s to reload a gun with a magazine. I doubt that buys more time for the police. The mass shootings in schools didn’t have a police presence for at least 9 minutes and in some cases over 30 minutes before entry. So what does that mean exactly?
If I shot a handgun that holds 10 rounds 100 times, it would take me 150s or 2 1/2 minutes to fire and reload. With a 30 round magazine, it would take me 115s or 1 3/4 minutes. I estimated 5 seconds a reload just to account for lots of errors and 1s a shot(which is slow). So how many lives would be saved in 35 seconds? Where no-one was there to stop the attacker, it likely took more than 35 seconds for the shooter to walk around and find more victims.
We know that it takes the police and an average of 9 minutes to arrive. They then have to access the situation, put together a team, determine a point of entry, and then go in. There is more to it than that but you get the point. In theory, everyone but the shooter could be killed in that amount of time.
We know that the shooters are not shooting at the rate above or the deaths would be a lot higher. Even a bad shooter shooting wildly into a crowd is going to do a lot of damage. How much are they shooting during a Mass shooting then? The average rate of fire is less than a 5 round magazine is capable of. Below I will show you the work Michael Martin the author of Countering the Mass Shooter Threat. Along with his results on mass shootings.
Mass Shooting Statistics
By Michael Martin
|School||Number of Kills||Rounds Fired||How Long it Lasted||Rounds Per Minute||The Equivalent Rate of Fire|
|Columbine||13||188||47||4||Same Rate of fire as a Muzzle Loading Flintlock Kentucky Rifle. Used in the American Revolution.|
|Virginia-Tech||30||174||11||15||1848 Sharps single shot rifle|
|Sandy Hook||26||154||5-9||15-31||1860 Lever Action Henry Rifle|
|San Bernardino||14||65-75||5||7-14||1848 Sharps single shot rifle|
|Fort Hood||13||214||10||21||1860 Lever Action Henry Rifle|
|Binghamton||13||99||4||25||1860 Lever Action Henry Rifle|
|Aurora||12||70||5-9||8-14||1848 Sharps single shot rifle|
|Umpqua||9||85.5||9||9||1848 Sharps single shot rifle|
|Charleston||9||74||7||11||1848 Sharps single shot rifle|
|Red Lake||9||45||9||5||Same Rate of fire as a Muzzle Loading Flintlock Kentucky Rifle. Used in the American Revolution. |
|Parkland||17||136||4-6||22.667||1860 Lever Action Henry Rifle|
I want to point out that I added the Parkland stats from public safety commission report. Meaning that if there is an error in that stat, it is my error and not Mr. Martins. The reason I pointed out the rifles that had the equivalent rate of fire was for two reasons. One, to show it wouldn’t have matter what rifle or magazine the shooters would have used. The results would have been the same. The shooters could have used rifles made in the 1800s and still had the same results. The second reason was to put in perspective what is happening in mass shootings.
Shooters are taking their time because they know they have the time and they are the only ones with a weapon. Even though there are dozens of weapons that can be used in schools. Their goals are to kill as many people as possible and to get famous. I refuse to even acknowledge a single shooters name for that reason alone. Mr. Martin also points out in his book that 70% of school shooters kill themselves when they are done. Meaning they had no intention of ever surviving the attack or escaping.
Before going forward really ask yourself, knowing this information, would any law currently being looked at change anything. If the AR-15 was banned and magazines only allowed 10 rounds. Would that have made a difference in any single one of these tragedies. I will go one step further Mr. Martin looked at the rate of fire of today’s weapons. He looked at 3 different magazine sizes the 5 round, 10 round, and 30 round. As a result, he figured if a person fired 2 shots per second(which everyone can do) and took 3 seconds for each reload. A person would then only be firing 55 rounds per minute for a 5 round magazine. 75 rounds per minute for a 10 round magazine. Finally, 100 rounds per minute for a 30 round magazine. Meaning even a person with a 5 round magazine could do more damage than anyone did at the mass shootings above.
THE BACKGROUND CHECK
Well, what about the background checks? Do they really make a difference in a mass shooting? When I got my background check, it was unable to tell what I was going to do with the gun. I am not saying don’t do background checks. The majority of gun owners don’t want criminals to have guns.
No one wants people who are going to use guns violently to have guns. Most gun owners will even tell you they support background checks. I am just saying a background check can’t tell what someone’s intent is.
We know background checks help in preventing convicted criminals from getting firearms legally. We also know they don’t stop criminals who really want a firearm from getting one. A convicted felon just got pick up in our small town the other day with 2 45 semi-automatic pistols. In other words criminals don’t get background checks.
What will work
We know the gun is not making the difference. The magazine size is not going to make a difference. The background check can’t tell us someone’s intent. All the laws to change these things are not going to change it. So, what would make a difference?
Let’s look at what we did when terrorists used Airplanes to kill thousands. They stopped allowing knives and other objects to even get past the metal detectors. They then reinforced cockpit doors. Pilots are now armed and trained to shoot. They added bulletproof walls and security cameras on flights.
The crews were trained on how to respond in high-stress situations. They also set up code words they could use over the PA. Then of course they added armed marshals to each flight. Well, they must have done some of that in schools right?
1. Pass Extreme Risk Laws
2. Encourage Secure Firearm Storage
3. Raise the Age to Purchase Semiautomatic Firearms
4. Require Background Checks on All Gun Sales
5. Create Evidence-Based Threat Assessment Programs in Schools
6. Implement Expert-Endorsed School Security Upgrades
7. Initiate Effective, Trauma-Informed Emergency Planning
8. Create Safe and Equitable Schools
This is the plan after almost 30 years of school shootings. This came out in February 2020. Do you see the same problem I do? Notice the airlines banned box cutters from planes, but armed pilots. They didn’t pass laws banning box cutters. We have done almost nothing to protect our kids in schools. Even after the Sandy Hook massacre, they only went after the gun and magazine capacity.
Raising the age to buy a gun does what exactly? The kids from columbine weren’t old enough to vote. Pass extreme risk laws. Now what laws do your think those are? Are we talking about the laws that already exist that prevent felons, mentally ill, domestic violence, restraining orders, minors, dishonorably discharged from the military, convicted drug addicts, fugitives, and renounced U.S citizens from owning a gun. Or are we talking about something else they deemed evil. Wait, they are going to encourage secure firearm storage and create evidence-based threat assessment programs in schools.
As a parent you should be outraged that this has not been done and more. 9/11 got an immediate response but our children get half measures after decades of deaths.
So what is the solution
I am going to start by saying there is not a 100% solution to anything. We can’t prevent a mass shooting all around the nation from being attempted. Schools on the other hand can be protected. Schools at this point should only be allowing people to enter through the main entrance.
The main entrance needs to have metal detectors and shatterproof glass with a bulletproof rating. This will ensure that even if the window is shot. The shooter will still have to tear through the glass. The school can install a comm system and cameras at all entrances.
Classrooms should all have a way to lock the doors from the inside without a key. Teachers should be trained to handle the situations when a codeword is given over the PA. Plain clothed security guards with a concealed weapon in every school. They should be trained on how to respond to each threat.
Stopping assault weapons from entering
Now, what would any of this solve? The office monitoring the cameras and intercom would be able to call 911 and alert the teachers. Before a shooter entered the building. The teachers would then be able to secure the students. Even if the attacker did get in, he would not be able to reach them.
The time it would take a shooter to clear out the glass and try to reach the students. Would now be more time the police had to arrive. Let’s not forget he would also be faced with a security guard he doesn’t know about. Instead of going in to kill people without resistance. He/she would now be fighting for their lives before anyone else was killed.
That alone would likely be the end of mass shootings in schools. Mass shooters don’t want a gunfight. They want people to fear them and they want as many kills as they can get. In every case where people fought back, the shooter either ended their own life or was stopped. Just to be clear here by stopping assault weapons. I literally mean any weapon you are going to use to attack someone.
For the rest of the world
The answer everyone is looking for with background checks could be solved with simple training. The one law that could make a difference. We pass a law that new gun owners would need to complete a basic training course prior to purchasing a gun similar to the hunter safety program. This would stop rash buyers from getting a gun just to go home and commit suicide.
It would give the angry buyer time to cool off before he got a gun in his hand. It would illuminate the need for a waiting period. The class would teach gun owners how to safely handle a gun. They would learn how to store it. Learn how to go about selecting their first gun. Along with learning the proper stance, hold, aim, and trigger control. They would learn the dangers of suicide to those in the home with a gun.
As well as the local laws. The course would include one hour of range time, to learn drills for dry-fire and live-fire practice. The instructors would be able to access each student and determine if they need more time to learn the information. Instead of having a bunch of new gun owners who could hurt themselves and others by mistake. Take one look at the difference the hunters safety course made on America, this would be the equivalent for the rest of us. How much could a small 3 hour course make over the next 10 or 20 years.
We would have responsible gun owners who are more likely to seek out further training. They would be meeting people in a similar position as themselves. We already know gun owners are more likely to follow the laws before and after getting a gun. They would now be armed with the knowledge of what the laws actually are. Not the one’s their neighbor told them.
Gun owners are working class middle american’s that simply want to protect their families. They don’t want to do the job of the police by any means. That said, we know that when attacked no-one will be there to help you. Even when there is a group of people. Many times when the cell phones come out, it is to record a video in hopes it goes viral, not to call 911.
Training is the only thing that separates the average gun owner from the unarmed family. Having the desire and ability to take responsibility for your families safety. Instead of waiting around hoping someone shows up to save them. Many gun owners not only take training they seek out more training, practice, and they learn the local laws. This is more than what the average citizen does.
Why laws banning assault weapons won’t work
The steps above won’t stop people who get guns illegally. It won’t stop criminals who will kill someone for their guns. It won’t stop criminals from attempting a mass shooting. Neither will any other law or ban. You can use any tor browser to order a gun, magazines, or even drugs off the dark web. Until you shut down the darknet, illegal just means law-abiding citizens won’t have it. On the right is a website from the darknet using a tor browser.
This will bring down accidental shootings, gun suicides, gun owners going to prison for breaking a law they didn’t know about. It will also educate more people on the dangers, and responsibilities of gun owners. Mass shootings will be harder to pull off, and other industries will likely follow the schools.
What you are being asked to do now is to pass laws that will prevent very little. I am not saying banning the AR 15 won’t make it so fewer people are using them. I am saying I can do the same thing with a little handgun that has a 7 round magazine, that has been done with the AR in mass shootings. We keep going after the guns over and over. Then we post stats that go look here it worked.
I saw two stats recently that showed suicide rates when down after passing high-risk gun laws. I couldn’t help but wonder how they think gun laws made fewer people want to kill themselves. The majority of people that really want to die, do. I’m not saying everyone who tried to kill themselves didn’t want to die at one time. I am saying that those that really want to, are not going to be stopped by a failed attempt. Mass shootings will go down but not because of a weapons ban.
Let’s face it we have had a war on drugs for 40 years now. Today there is still plenty of drugs to go around. I suspect it will be the same thing with banned guns. Unlike other countries that have had some success, they didn’t have a neighbor like Mexico. Mexico themselves limit the amount of ammo you can buy. They also only have two legal handguns.
With one of the largest supplies of assault weapons being assembled and sold by it’s criminals. We need background checks, and high risk laws to keep guns away from the dumb criminals and mentally ill. The truth is smart criminals know how to get weapons without following the laws.
No law is going to stop a mass shooter when killing someone is already illegal. We saw in the massacre of Sandy Hook, the shooter killed his own mother and took her guns. He broke multiple laws before getting to the school. It’s time we make real changes and stop blaming weapons for mass shootings and make the criminals fear us.
Thank you again for reading our post. If you want to check out more dangers to gun owners read carrying gun-dangers gun owners face.