Navy Yard Shooting Another Gun Free Zone Failure

Navy Yard Shooting Another Gun Free Zone Failure
Predictably, the shameless politicizing of a tragedy by the Progressive Left has already begun. Even as the situation at the Navy Yard in Washington DC continues to develop, Henry Winkler, the Happy Days has-been, has taken to twitter to call for more gun-control measures; completely ignoring the fact that today’s events represent yet another gun-free zone failure. David Frum, an alleged Journalist writing for the Daily Beast, also hit the social network to say “In wake of this most recent mass-casualty shooting, it is important that we all respect the feelings of America’s gun enthusiasts. Frum would do well to realize that if one or more of America’s gun enthusiasts had been allowed to carry a firearm into the movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, into the school in Sandy Hook, Connecticut or into the Washington Navy Yard, then numerous innocent victims would still be alive.

There is, of course, a legitimate argument that the very purpose of this editorial is to politicize the event. Although it is not easy, in truth, to deny this, it should be remembered that this article points out that existing rules – and those who wrote them – are responsible for today’s casualties, whilst – on the other side of the debate – people are advocating the strengthening of the very rules that allowed defenseless people to be shot. On a moral level, there is absolutely no comparison.

There is an appalling irony to the fact that innocent people in the United States continue to die because they work or study in facilities that deprive them of the opportunity to defend themselves and yet left-wingers use each mass-shooting – almost all of which in recent times, it is worth noting, have been carried out by registered Democrats – to push for more such rules. There is a very good reason that mass shootings do not occur in places where people commonly carry firearms; one can only shoot a large number of people when none of those people can shoot back. Statistics for active-shooter events show that an average of 14 people are killed when no weapons, other than the shooter’s, are immediately present. When others on the scene are armed, the average number of fatalities is two.

The fact that the presence of firearms deters the would-be active shooter or drastically reduces casualties in the event of an attempted mass-casualty attack is so obvious as to be beyond argument. Scenes of mass-casualty shootings have one thing in common; they are facilities in which the general public is not permitted to carry firearms and additionally, in most cases, no armed security guards are present.

The media continues to cover events in Washington DC. The number of casualties, as well as the number of shooters, has yet to be confirmed. Several reports are suggesting that there is more than one attacker. If this turns out to be the case, then this may be a terrorist attack; workplace shootings are always perpetrated by a single individual who is either a disgruntled employee or an individual who is specifically targeting an employee – often a current or former spouse or partner. Whether or not this incident turns out to be a terrorist attack, there is no denying the fact that, once again, one or more armed shooters have been able to target multiple individuals unopposed.

Regardless of where one works or studies, one has the basic human right of self-defense. This right is something of which no federal, state or local government has the constitutional or moral right to deprive anyone. As today’s tragic events at the Washington Navy Yard represent yet another gun-free zone failure, it is long past time that those who call for tighter gun laws present a logical explanation as to how such measures will make us all safer.

An op/ed by Graham J Noble

20 Responses to "Navy Yard Shooting Another Gun Free Zone Failure"

  1. Matt Dimock   September 18, 2013 at 9:51 am

    Would love to see some resources on your comment, “Statistics for active-shooter events show that an average of 14 people are killed when no weapons, other than the shooter’s, are immediately present. When others on the scene are armed, the average number of fatalities is two.”

  2. Douglas   September 16, 2013 at 5:47 pm

    From Singapore. I can tell you that gun control works extremely well in certain countries. It all depends on the society to impose the social order with the correct law. At some point your country need to have a consensus on issue like this. Either gun free or relax gun control law. You can’t have both cake and eat it. The recent spat of shooting is too much already.

    • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 5:51 pm

      A very good point, Sir…thank you.

      I do agree about not being able to have it both ways. For me, this is not about safety (there is no such thing as a completely safe society – guns or no guns), this is about the government not having the moral or legal authority to deny an individual the right of self-defense…especially here in the US where it is actually enshrined in the Constitution.

    • Cletus O'Bannon   September 16, 2013 at 9:42 pm

      If you aren’t American you don’t have a dog in the race… your opinion bears no weight.

      • Dan Sensale (@dsensationale)   September 17, 2013 at 8:00 am

        Perspective from countries with different gun laws definitely bears weight. It gives insight and examples as to what effect changing gun laws here in America (either tightening or relaxing them), may have.

  3. Lou Gagliardi   September 16, 2013 at 5:02 pm

    So you fully admit to politicizing an event to make your own agenda heard?

    There’s a word for people like you, Graham. Can you guess what that is?

    • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 5:24 pm

      Yes, I do admit to it. I am merely doing what the Left always does. You could say I am lowering myself to their level, but I’m tired of losing the propaganda war to a bunch of fascists who think they have the right to dictate to everyone else what should, and should not be, allowed.

      …at least I’m honest about it.

  4. jcgmich29   September 16, 2013 at 1:28 pm

    Problem is that we do not live in a nation of white citizens. In the Washington DC area, there is a heavy black population. Blacks on average are very irresponsible with guns. They commit almost all the gun crimes. It’s safe to say 99 to 100% of DC area gun crimes are done by blacks. In a sane world without pc, we would ban blacks from owning guns, and allow white citizens to carry. But since we have to ignore race, everyone in the DC area is banned from owning guns. Many whites, and blacks, are dying from political correctness.

    • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 1:45 pm

      Banning black people from owning guns was one of the measures that was introduced (by DEMOCRATS!) in order to implement slavery. Whilst I would not deny that the majority of gun-crime in this country is committed by black youths using guns that they have obtained illegally, I find your suggestion abhorrent and completely ignorant. You are a Progressive who is posing as a gun-rights supporter and deliberately being racist in order to give the rest of us a bad name. The fact that you are a Left-wing Progressive is demonstrated by your racism, your disregard for the Constitution and your complete lack of understanding that passing more gun laws does not affect those who choose to ignore those laws.

      Skin color has nothing to do with whether or not people should be allowed to own guns. The black community has a very small percentage of legal gun-owners but the largest percentage of armed criminals, so how would banning black people from owning guns change anything?

  5. Rodney H   September 16, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    It is pretty clear when you have fun free zones and the only guns in the place are a couple armed guards, they are an easy target. Hell, a shooter can walk up behind them and take them out and then no more guns in the place. If shooters have no clue who has guns, they think twice about acts like this and if they do attempt then it does not get very far. Proven in so many situations.

  6. William   September 16, 2013 at 11:53 am

    Doug it is hard to take you seriously anyways. It is obvious you are calling for tighter gun laws, so in essence of the ending of this article please provide evidence of how you feel tighter gun laws will make us safer?

  7. Scott   September 16, 2013 at 11:46 am

    I thought I read that a base guard and a police officer were part of the victims list. Is there a reason these armed guards couldn’t take the shooter out? Maybe if they had 2 guns instead of just one?

    • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 11:55 am

      Very good point. In my opinion, an even more important ‘maybe’ would be ‘maybe’ if there had been more armed and trained individuals in this facility, fewer people – if any – would have been shot.

  8. Doug Winter   September 16, 2013 at 11:25 am

    It’s hard to take you seriously when you write something as moronic as this, “it should be remembered that this article points out that existing rules – and those who wrote them – are responsible for today’s casualties”

    • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 11:42 am

      Even harder to take you seriously when you merely post an insult, with no logical or factual argument to support your obvious point of view that private citizens – and military personnel – have no rights of self-defense.

      • Lou Gagliardi   September 16, 2013 at 8:36 pm

        Kind of hard to take you seriously when you censor comments and replies.

        • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 8:44 pm

          I have never censored a comment that has been submitted for any article on this site. We believe very strongly in freedom of speech, unless someone posts something that is very abusive. Please let me know what it is that you think was censored. I’ll look into it.

          • Lou Gagliardi   September 16, 2013 at 9:55 pm

            I posted a reply–two replies in fact–to your fascist comment and “mysteriously” they never showed.

          • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 10:04 pm

            Well, if you really did post them, they should be here. Comments are almost always posted automatically without moderation. Sometimes – because of certain words – they may get sent to a list of pending comments. I will look at the list right now. If they’re not there, then you didn’t post them, but you are welcome to do so again. I will have an answer for you within a few minutes.

          • Graham Noble   September 16, 2013 at 10:34 pm

            I do not see any comments pending from you. Once again, we do not censor comments unless they are very inappropriate. you and I may not agree, but I have no reason to prevent you from posting a comment. Many of us who work for the Guardian Express – like all journalists, columnists and bloggers – get our fair share of critical comments. You may say whatever you wish.

            Other than some bizarre technical glitch, there is no reason why two of your comments “mysteriously” disappeared.

            As say, you are welcome to post any comment you like than it not abusive.

You must be logged in to post a comment Login