Every time there is a mass shooting, whether here or abroad, pro-gunners are quick to bemoan, “If only someone had been armed.”
We’ve just had two mass shootings within 12 hours of each other, the first at an El Paso Walmart in which 20 shoppers were killed and the second on a street lined with bars in Dayton, Ohio that left nine people dead.
Let me concentrate on the El Paso shooting. There were more than a thousand shoppers in the Walmart store and many more in the adjoining mall. With more than one million concealed carry permit holders in Texas and way more people who carry guns illegally, it stands to reason that a significant number of the Walmart shoppers were armed when the lone gunman started shooting.
So, what did the armed shoppers do when the gunman started shooting? They ‘jackrabbitted’ in every direction just like everyone else did to get away safely. As for the gunman, he gave up as soon as he was confronted by the police.
I’m a pro-gunner and an ardent defender of the right to bear arms, but I have to laugh every time I hear some idiot say, “If only someone had been armed.” There have been instances in which a private citizen with a gun stopped a gunman from killing other people, but those instances have been almost non-existent.
In response to the 2012 theater shooting in Aurora, Colorado and the 2015 shooting at a Paris concert hall, I heard the same laments from pro-gunners about the absence of an armed citizen who could have stopped the carnage. I wrote that even if there had been an armed citizen at the venues in Aurora and Paris, he would have to have been within very close proximity of the gunman to have had any chance of stopping him. And I also pointed out that with all the panic-stricken people scurrying in all directions, the armed citizen was more likely to shoot one of them rather than the gunman.
Unfortunately, it looks like we are going to experience more shootings like those in Aurora, El Paso and Dayton. And while some of the shootings will be carried out by home-grown Islamists, almost all of those shootings will be carried out by domestic terrorists of the white supremacist genre.
To stop such shootings, the anti-gunners would disarm America, and barring that, they would ban the possession of semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15 and the AK-47 And of course, there is a renewed call for universal background checks despite the fact that Patrick Crusius, the El Paso shooter, obtained his AK-47 style gun legally after passing the required background check..
Crusius issued a 2,300 word anti-immigrant manifest shortly before he began his attack. He worried about Hispanics taking jobs from Americans when automation was eliminating many jobs. He also feared that the growing Hispanic population would turn his ‘beloved’ Texas into a ‘Democratic stronghold.’
As might be expected, the Trump-haters were quick to blame the President for the El Paso and Dayton shootings. Beto O’Rourke directly blamed Trump and Fox News for encouraging mass shootings, saying:
“We’ve got to acknowledge the hatred, the open racism that we’re seeing. There is an environment of it in the United States. We see it on Fox News, we see it on the internet, but we also see it from our commander-in-chief. He is encouraging this. He doesn’t just tolerate it, he encourages it, calling immigrants rapists and criminals, warning of an invasion on our border …..”
Although his rhetoric is not helpful in reducing or preventing shootings like those in El Paso and Dayton, President Trump is not to blame for these tragedies!
First and foremost it’s the shooter who is to blame. But if you want to lay blame on something other than the perpetrator for mass shootings where the shooter intended to kill Hispanics like Crusius set out to do, then blame the internet. Yes, I said blame the internet. There are a number of neo-Nazi and white supremacist websites that inspire nutjobs to carry out deadly attacks against people they perceive to be a threat to America.
In his manifesto, Crusius said:
“My death is likely inevitable. If I’m not killed by the police, then I’ll probably be gunned down by one of the invaders. Capture in this case if far worse than dying during the shooting because I’ll get the death penalty anyway. Worse still is that I would live knowing that my family despises me. This is why I’m not going to surrender even if I run out of ammo. If I’ m captured, it will be because I was subdued somehow.”
Yeah, right. Crusius surrendered the moment he was confronted by the police.
And in Dayton, the shooter was wasted by the cops within 30 seconds because they happened to be in the immediate vicinity. He was about to enter a crowded nightclub with a rifle equipped with a 100-round drum magazine when he met his end.
So, when the shooting starts, it’s not ‘If only someone had been armed’ that’s going to stop the shooter, it’s the fast response of the police that’s going to do it.
lorensmith says
Beto looked presidential through this. He has taken a stand with courage and grace. He called out Trump’s racism and republican unwillingness to go against gun lobbies. Tragic as it was, the stars are aligning for the tall candidate from El Paso.
Fat Albert says
“Never let a disaster (or tragedy!) go to waste”. Yep Beto is just one more politician who never misses a chance to turn tragedy into political gain. He and the rest of the current Democratic pack of fools will use this as one more try at countering evil by stripping innocents of their rights.
As for the “stars aligning” – Beto has a better chance of winning the lottery than winning the Presidency.
Bill says
Beto and his fellow socialist stars, ESPECIALLY Elizabeth Warren, need to be prostrating themselves and apologizing to whoever will listen for their complicity in the Ohio shootings. The Ohio shooter was a self avowed socialist that couldn’t wait to impose socialism at the ballot box, so he chose to impose it with the cartridge box.
If the left really wants to go there, then they need to take ownership if their true believers, like the Ohio shooter, the congressional baseball game shooter, etc. The left blames the El Paso shooter on Trump, but his ‘manifesto’ shows him to be an environmental wacko who also happened to be a racist. He even states clearly he’s not a Trump supporter, and that he hated both Dems and Pubs.
I’m calling for Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Beto to end their campaigns, and work to stop the violence committed in the name of their ideals. They are culpable for the Antifa violence, they are directly responsible for the police shootings, like their cut out that killed 5 Dallas cops, etc.
The leftists are inciting violence in America, and in typical propaganda style, trying to push that on Trump. No. That dog won’t hunt. The concerted, coordinated, violence is from the left.
Let’s look at recent history. What did leftists do this week? Shot up cities like Dayton, Chicago, and Baltimore. What did Trump supporters do this week? Picked up tons of trash in Elijah Cummings district, the trash that Elijah is happy to just leave there. See the difference?
DanMan says
Howie do you actually know there were armed shoppers or just projecting based on specious national stats?
You say the guy was worried about Hispanics taking jobs when automation is doing that. Really? From where I sit illegals are treated quite differently when it comes to law enforcement. Do you put legal immigrants and illegals in the same category for your discussion? I can certainly understand US citizens getting fed up to their necks with illegals getting by with multiple DWIs, courts siding with open border advocates and the general disgust with seeing laws being set aside for various groups like illegals, well connected politicians and wealthy political contributors while the rest of us have to toe the line. What laws can we regulars openly violate?
This idiot, like just about every other idiot (except for muslim extremists who have hate pounded into them from childhood) that does this has deep seeded family problems. What party hates, hates, hates normal intact families? What party has control of education, entertainment and media? Watch this develop. I will bet this ‘tard has deep seeded daddy issues. Same with the Ohio loser.
Howie Katz says
DanMan, what “specious national stats” are you talking about? DPS reports that more than a million Texans have obtained concealed carry permits. And with so many Texans carrying guns without those permits, it stands to reason that there were armed shoppers in that Walmart. The earth must truly be flat if there were no armed shoppers in that store.
And where did I say “the guy was worried about Hispanics taking jobs when automation is doing that.”? I did not say that. I was merely describing what Crusius said in his manifesto.
Furthermore, why did you refer to yourself as an idiot? I never inferred that. I called people idiots who say “If only someone had been armed” every time there is a mass shooting.
DanMan says
Crunches numbers…28 million Texans…divide by 2.8 about 10 million adults…1 million divided by 10 million…0.00001% chance of of…oh nevermind Howie
Bill says
One million concealed permit holders in 38 million Texans times 2,000 shoppers in the store says there would have been, on average, 71 concealed permit holders in the store, where their guns were at the time is something we can’t know. Most were probably at home.
Warren Fawcett says
Doesn’t Walmart ban guns even with a CC permit? Soft targets and gun free zones need to be eliminated. They’re one common thread for most shootings.
Jim Burgess says
Respectfully, I think your premise about the number of armed shoppers likely present in that Walmart and how they may or may not have reacted is probably off base. There’s even some unverified statements out there that this particular Wal-Mart posted 30.06/30.07 signs. I will go with the default assumption that this Wal-Mart didn’t prohibit concealed or open carry, however:
Unfortunately, even in Texas, a given Walmart could be a soft target. As of the end of 2018, there were 1,362,945 (Source: Texas DPS) active LTC’s in Texas. The whole vast state. Out of 28.7 million people. That’s almost 5% but those are really and truly “rookie numbers”, especially since (and this is important) not all of those license holders actually train and carry everywhere. If even 50% of LTC holders actually carried every day and everywhere they could legally go, I’d be very surprised. Further, take into account that LTC isn’t as prevalent in the big blue cities in this state. If I gave El Paso County the benefit of the doubt and say that the proportion of LTC holders in that county is the same as the rest of the state, a 2018 population of 840,758 in El Paso County means there would be roughly 42,000 LTC holders in that county. And remember, many of those don’t carry everywhere, and some of the rest of them would say “Eh, I’m only going to Wal-Mart, I don’t need to carry”.
With all that, there’s a decent chance that 1 or maybe even 0 people within actual shooting distance of the killer was even in the same store.
There was Glendon Oakley Jr. but he was in another building and did what he could to help but realistically he never had a shot at the killer, and it would have been actually foolish for him to go charging into the Wal-Mart and try to find him unless perhaps his wife was in there or something.
All this to say: I think you underestimate armed citizens and overestimate how many people in a given area are actually carrying. Of course, I’d define “armed citizen” as someone who carries everywhere they can, and bothers to go to enough trouble to train for defensive shooting scenarios. the number of people like that is pretty low, even in Texas.
Jerry E Patterson says
Your premise has merit. Armed citizens can and have intervened with success, but it’s much rarer than one would think, especially in Texas. However you err “bigly” when you suggest a good guy with a handgun would’ve had no value against a well armed shooter, possibly with body armor, such as the case in Aurora CO. Here’s why: Shooters in progress are in complete and total control. In that theater the perp was calmly walking down the aisle shooting cowering victims one by one. Had there been someone there to return fire, even missing the shooter, the dynamic would’ve immediately changed. The shooter, no longer in control and solely focused on calmly picking off folks trying to hide under their theater seat would’ve immediately have his attention diverted to the GGWAG (good guy w/a gun). He now has a threat, however minimal but that threat will likely totally capture his attention. Cowering victims can run. They can escape, lives are saved and without even a round impacting the perp. AND, if I remember correctly, in Aurora, when the police arrived the perp went out to his car and shot himself. That could’ve happened sooner and lives would have been saved. A competent armed citizen will make all around him or her safer. JP
Tom says
Howie: Again, we basically agree. Scares shit out of me.
It was just a few months ago that an Army veteran with a carry permit drew his gun to try to stop a shooter in a shopping mall. The police arrived and saw our would-be hero. What happened next? His mother or widow got the flag off his coffin.
When the police arrive at a mass shooting, they’re going to be looking for anyone with a gun and you can’t blame them. In those situations, with the police armed with pistols and maybe shotguns and a mass shooter with an AR-15, the police are outgunned and going to shoot first and ask questions later.
In my opinion, the best thing a licensed carry person could do is get people in a safe room with one door and from the inside guard that door very carefully. If someone not in a police uniform comes through the door with a weapon, that’s the time to fire away.
Also, most police are truly bad shots and the average citizen isn’t likely to be any better. I can remember situations where the Houston Police Department fired dozens of rounds and no one got hurt. The safest place was downrange. A citizen with a carry permit likely won’t be a better shot.
If a bunch of people at the Walmart had pulled guns and started shooting, the death toll probably would have been higher.
I agree with you that the president isn’t directly to blame for these shootings. First, we had them during previous administrations. Second, as much as I do not like what President Trump is doing, no president would want these kinds of mass shootings.
But his rhetoric is just awful. When he gets to a rally, he draws energy from the crowd and he plays to it. And, he says stupid things which people can use to validate their own racist and violent beliefs. And it doesn’t help when people like David Duke essentially say Trump is one of us.
As for the internet, you have stumbled onto an interesting split between what Americans think is free speech and what a lot of Europeans and others think is free speech. I am working on a law review article on the difference and it is rather amazing. In Europe, speech is free as long as you don’t hurt anyone’s feelings. In the US, we’re much more absolutist about free speech. Nazi slogans are outlawed in Germany (and you can understand why) and in some European countries, being a Holocaust denier is a crime. That would be unthinkable here.
The problem with regulating hate speech is that it is a really slippery slope. Who decides what’s hate speech. We’ve got a president who essentially says people who disagree with his policies aren’t good Americans. Do we let President Trump decide what is forbidden speech? How about a President Sanders or a President Warren?
Gun control isn’t a real answer. But some things are obvious. I spent most of my adult life wearing a uniform and I never saw a 100-round magazine for anything but a machine gun and usually those rounds were in belts. When I was carrying an M-16, we had 20-round magazines. Now, I understand the standard is a 30-round magazine. That’s for use in combat. Why does anyone need a 100-round drum magazine?
Banning assault rifles? What’s an assault rifle. I have a true assault rifle, an M-1 Garand. And based on its serial number it may have been used to assault Omaha Beach or Iwo Jima. But it only holds 8 rounds. It is semiautomatic. Should it be banned?
As for mental health, it isn’t often we get a mass shooter to have evaluated by mental health experts but you can bet that kid from El Paso is going to be meeting with a bunch of shrinks. If I were a betting man, I’d bet he comes back sane and competent.
He’s a hater and a racist who believes and has internalized a bunch of BS he got off the internet. Is that mental illness? I don’t think so. Most of the SS who spent WWII murdering Jews — or at least their leaders — tended to be well educated, smart individuals who just hated Jews. If you read the autobiography of Rudolf Hoess, the commandant of Auschwitz, you’ll see he comes across as a rational, sane antisemite who thought he was doing his patriotic duty murdering all of those people.
Is there a good answer to stopping these mass shootings? I don’t know of one that would be politically acceptable or constitutional in the US. But a good start would be toning down the rhetoric.
Jay Karahan says
Spot on, Tom. The active shooter classes I’ve attended all say that the correct order of action is RUN, HIDE & FIGHT. If one can’t run, one should hide in a room like you described. If that can’t be done, then one should fight directly and smartly and with extreme prejudice, no holds barred.
As for CLH’s, every single one should take a series of tactical shooting classes and practice those skills. To not do so and think one is safe just because their favorite pistol is holstered to their belt is an exercise in self-deception.
As for non-CLH’s EVERYONE should practice situational awareness in every public place they go to. This concept is taught to children in Israel. That means asking the “what if” questions, identifying exits and hiding places, getting their noses out of their damned cell phones and pulling out their music ear plugs. Yes, I say UNPLUG while out in public and engage with people, look around and be prepared to survive. To do any less is to become a lemming en route to a slaughter.
Bob Walsh says
I am not 100% with you on this one Howie. Had a private citizen been present in Dayton and started blasting, in the dark, with the cops only seconds away, in an environment with good guys all over the damn place, the outcome would almost certainly have been bad for a LOT of people.
The El Paso shooting was different. The cops took something like nine minutes to respond. The shooter roamed much of the store. An armed citizen who was willing to engage (pistol against rifle takes some serious tactical thinking) might very well have done some good with little danger to others. There was in fact one armed soldier in there. He choose to escort a bunch of civilians, including small children, away and out the back. Good move on his part for my money.
Except for this particular quibble, you and I are pretty much in agreement here.
Bill says
If there was a CCW person in the store, the only reasonable chance that person would have is by getting behind the shooter and shooting him in the back. You’d have to follow the gunshots to hear where the shooter was, and try to place yourself behind the shooter.
howie katz says
Now Beto O’Rourke and Jerry Nadler go even further in blaming Trump for the El Paso and Dayton Shootings. On Monday they compared his government to Adolf Hitler’s, saying that Trump’s bigotry against Hispanics and Muslims is like the Nazis’ hatred of Jews.
O’Rourke and Nadler infuriate me. I grew up in Nazi Germany and Trump’s rhetoric in no way even begins to approach the hateful rhetoric of Adolf Hitler. Nor have we had a Kristallnacht where uniformed Nazi storm troopers torched synagogues, vandalized Jewish homes, schools and businesses and killed close to 100 Jews. Trump has not denounced Hispanics and Muslims anywhere near as much or as damnable as Hitler denounced the Jews. And the Hispanics and Muslims in this country have not been forced out of a good job like my father was or shipped off to a death camp like my grandparents were. O’Rourke and Nadler’s claim is far worse than AOC comparing illegal immigrant detention centers to concentration camps. These two Trump-haters should be ashamed of themselves, but then, they have no shame. And worst of all, that sorry creep Jerry Nadler is Jewish and as such he should damn well know better than to compare Trump’s government to Hitler’s.
Trey Rusk says
Concealed carry folks can shoot holes in a paper target. Just to get to the mass shooter you would be wading through floors slick with blood and bodies. They don’t possess active shooter training. The police have the training and mindset to eliminate the threat at all costs. Most people would be trying to get themselves and their loved ones to safety. However, I think that if directly confronted by a mass shooter, most concealed carry folks would shoot.
Jim in Conroe says
My training through multiple LTC classes was that an armed citizen has no obligation to attack the shooter in either a mass shooting situation or an armed robbery in the local stop-and-rob. An example given was that if you were in the restroom of a restaurant and someone started shooting, unless family members were at risk, your course of action is to remain in the restroom or use a back door to escape. However, absent the family consideration, it would be difficult for me to imagine that I would not attempt to intervene.
In the case of a mass shooting, several other comments address the confusion and crowd conditions that I would expect to encounter, plus the inadvisability of having a weapon in your hand, when the police show up. In such a case, I would consider my firearm a defensive weapon to keep myself and others nearby safe, as we evacuate the premises or take cover / concealment from the shooter.
Bob Walsh says
In this particular instance I am inclined to agree with Jim. I have had training (now very stale) on active shooter and entrance into buildings with armed badguys inside. I have had training shooting at moving targets in limited light with the possibilities of good guys in the background. If the bad guy is coming AT YOU with a weapon you have some moral and legal protection if you start popping caps and one or more shots miss and hits a good guy. If you decide for whatever reason, acting as a private citizen, to hunt him down and engage, with your pistol against his rifle, you are basically doing a sneak-and-creep and then backshooting the guy. I realize that in Texas you will have less trouble with this than in California, but if you shoot any good guys even by accident in the process you have a huge civil exposure. Also, even if you just birddog the guy and wait for the cops with a gun in your hand the possibility of misidentification of target is not insignificant. I am not saying it is a morally bad position. I am saying that it is legally very risky. The cops have significant civil and criminal indemnification in such matters. A private citizen does not. The private citizen that went up the tower at the University in Texas many years ago asked the cop he was with to deputize him in large part for legal coverage.