I'm seeing news reports, as of 11 AM Central time, saying that the guy has been caught in North Carolina.

First random thought: His parents named him "Dylann". Because apparently plain old "Dylan" wasn't precious enough.

Church is a house of peace. It doesn't allow guns. Psychopaths know that they can carry out their plans with no severe threat to themselves. The psycho has the only gun, and may feel that he is the servant of God.

If guns were accepted as a normal part of self-defense, then the psycho could never be as sure of his safety. Sometimes, he would be stopped by a good person with a gun.

An aversion to guns expresses a wish. The psycho understands reality.

A similar but contrasting event.

Andrew, is the lesson you think we should take from this really that everyone should be packing in the house of God?

(I actually support 2nd amendment rights but I don't think that is quite the most salient lesson to come out of this event.)

This type of incident statistically is not frequent, however there does seem to be more hatred and division today than in yesteryear.

Every church meeting should have at least one concealed carry person in attendance. Especially those that attract those that hate.

A gun is a tool not a thinking 'evil' being. Like a flashlight, you need a gun for those times when darkness occurs unexpectedly.

Astra,

I would allow guns in the congregation. I wouldn't require them.

Do you feel safer with no guns allowed in the hands of the usual church member? Why?

What is the lesson that you get from this tragedy?

--
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/01/hilarious-james-okeefes-project-veritas-punks-lib-hypocrites-with-gun-free-home-signs-video/

Prominent liberals want to disarm the public, but have guns of their own and will not advertize their homes as "gun free". Why is it good to declare a church as gun free, but bad to declare your home as such?

=== ===
Hilarious! James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas Punks Lib Hypocrites With “Gun Free Home” Signs (Video) None will take our signs that say “THIS HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE.”

Since these reporters and editors did not consider it a violation of the privacy and safety of others to reveal which homes have guns and which homes don’t, we went to see which of them would be willing to put a sign up publicly declaring their homes to be gun-free zones. While we didn’t find any members of the media with the strength of their convictions, we did find quite a few guns, and some good explanations for why they might be necessary….. Guns for Me, but not for Thee.
=== ===

Astra, do you think people should not? God gave us our life; protecting it, and our children, is certainly something we should take some responsibility for, don't you think?

Gun issue aside, whackos have always been around, and will always be around, and the media sensationalizing each one of them only leads to more of them.

My husband carries almost everywhere. Exceptions being places he will be consuming alcohol. Which is almost never done with our kids in tow, which mans our kids have an armed guard a pretty good proportion of the time. Getting my CHL renewed is on my summer to-do list, because cowering in fear and praying I get passed over is not my idea of an acceptable response to a psycho.

I'm with Astra.

Having guns is meaningless. These are rare random occurances. Bringing this topic up is like saying we should ban guns to prevent shootings.

This is about young men with poor mental health. Guns have nothing to do with preventing their actions, because I could argue they innocently get killed more than they kill.

Unfortunately in these types of occurances you will be unprepared because they're unpredictable. Many people would see a gun in a church as distasteful no matter how stupid or naive you think they're being I would agree with them.

My guess: shooter is from a broken home, raised by a single mom.

That guns are icky should not be, but unfortunately is, a basis for policy.
Kip Kinkel, a school shooter at Thurston HS in the northwest, was given a gun by his father, a school counselor so he could feel better or something. He'd been having some emotional issues.
Adam Lanza's mother took him shooting, presumably during the time frame she was working to have him committed.
This clown's dad gave him a gun. Be nice to know if he has a mental health history. Probably.
Thing is, a bad guy with a gun requires a good guy with a gun. That's why cops are armed. They're usually there in time to draw chalk lines around the bodies.

Honestly, I don't think my church has ever said anything about not bringing a gun. I wouldn't be shocked if some people do bring them. And as long as they are responsible with them I doubt any of us would say anything about it.

As for why Andrew's second amendment comments are appropriate, look to President Obama. He is already stumping for more gun prohibition laws. And even lying that things like this don't happen anywhere else.

Fox News says something so stupid you almost have to wonder if all of Fox News isn't a false flag operation from MSNBC.

mediamatters.org/video/2015/06/18/foxs-steve-doocy-its-extraordinary-that-charles/204043

It's at 2:50 in the clip.

Paraphrased:

"Maybe it wasn't a hate crime by a white guy against blacks, maybe it was just a crime against Christians!"

Astra, do you think people should not?

I think people have a constitutional right to gun ownership and carrying in public. I think if they do, they have a strong responsibility to be well trained and extra-cautious about safe handling. I took a CC course to become more familiar with firearms but I don't own a gun because I am not willing to regularly shoot with it and make sure I could use it in an emergency. Without that training, a gun is worse than useless.

However, Ppen conveyed my overall point. When shootings happen, everyone has a root cause: lack of gun control, lack of gun ownership, male violence, lack of female support for men, anti-depressants, etc. Perhaps I'm a fatalist, but I think that these types of events will happen and can't be solved via simple policy change.

Exactly.

Imagining that having a gun will somehow save the day from a random nutjob is the stuff of daydreams. Imagine being a black male and carrying a gun in SC? Yeah good luck with that. There's a bigger chance I'll get my rights trampled on by a cop than ever meeting a psycho. I'd rather not end up in jail.

(And guys that do end up saving the day in situations like this are military trained and military trained as a long term career choice)

There are various reports using the numbers
18-4
14-4
14-2

In each case, the larger number is the dead in mass shootings ended when the cops showed up and the lower number when ended by an armed civilian on scene.
Pick one.

So sorry for the losses suffered here.

On the gun issue:

I guess the question is which situation do I want to be in:

a) a shooter present w/all the time in the world

or

b) a shooter present who is distracted by someone w/a gun.

I'm pretty selfish so I'm going w/b even though that means 2 guns firing in my vicinity.

Depending upon my location friendly fire is less likely than the shooter walking up to me asking if I feel lucky.

Unfortunately in these types of occurances you will be unprepared because they're unpredictable. Many people would see a gun in a church as distasteful no matter how stupid or naive you think they're being I would agree with them.

Posted by: Ppen at June 18, 2015 12:08 PM

You know what else is really unpredictable? Rare and random things that we insure against, such as lighting striking our house, or getting run over by a guy on a bicycle.

While the chances of my needing to use a gun in defense of myself and others is vanishingly small, I recognize that guns are more like vaccinations.
When it becomes common knowledge that a large percentage of the population is armed, there will be no more "soft targets" and sitting ducks, except in the blue state liberal gun free zones.

This is the case in Wyoming where your odds of getting shot breaking into an occupied house, are probably about 75 percent, and home burglary is a very rare event.

I know of at least two cases in Colorado where an active shooter is a church was killed by an armed member of the congregation.

(And if you can see my gun Astra, before I take it out, and use it, I would be the idiot. ) Concealed carry means exactly what it says.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Colorado_YWAM_and_New_Life_shootings#Arvada_missionary_shooting

Churches with no gun policies should advertise that fact, up front, for two reasons. The mentally disturbed can pick those churches to shoot up, and the rest of us, who are not deluded idiots, can avoid those places like the plague.

Without that training, a gun is worse than useless.

Not really, given the number of shooters who kill themselves or surrender, I'm guessing even if you shot your gun at the floor (and assuming they didnt see yu shoot at the floor) a large number of these guys would give up or kill themselves

Switzerland shows us how to have guns and use them responsibly. Of course, they also have no inner cities. However, I believe the content (societal pride in gun ownership and safety) applies and would hopefully curb young white wackos such as here in SC, or Newtown, or the teen shooters in schools.

http://world.time.com/2012/12/20/the-swiss-difference-a-gun-culture-that-works/

Don't know about curbing young whackos. Those we know of are all mentally ill. One of the Columbine shooters was seeing a shrink for, iirc, depression and brought the other one into his dreams.
Culture doesn't affect these guys.

"(And guys that do end up saving the day in situations like this are military trained and military trained as a long term career choice)"

Hasty generalization. Fallacious. Fail.

As well as demonstrated otherwise by actual events.

if you can see my gun Astra, before I take it out, and use it, I would be the idiot.

Not sure what you're arguing with here. The deterrent effect of CC is the strongest evidence IMO in favor of an armed population.

Not really, given the number of shooters who kill themselves or surrender, I'm guessing even if you shot your gun at the floor (and assuming they didnt see yu shoot at the floor) a large number of these guys would give up or kill themselves

I'm thinking of all the yahoos who don't treat their guns with care and who shoot themselves or others while cleaning them (recent incident with a retired cop!) or leave them where their kids can get at them. There are more deaths in those types of cases than in Charleston.

I'm also thinking of the time I played paintball and was shot while fumbling with the safety. If I owned a gun, I would feel the need to be smooth and automatic enough with it that I didn't fuck up in an emergency and handled and stored them with care at all times. An unsurprising amount of my fellow Americans do not exercise such care, and even do things like buy their mentally ill son a gun for a birthday present!

A trained shooter at Charleston would have been wonderful, of course, but these events are rare (and, I agree, are more rare with CC) and it's hard to imagine people keeping their guard up after praying with the guy for an hour. (Or if they did, what the quality of the prayer would be.) Did the guy reload a few times?

Whoops, left a new thought hanging there. I do think it's sad if the shooter had time to load three rounds and everyone was just trapped.

I'm also thinking of the time I played paintball and was shot while fumbling with the safety. If I owned a gun, I would feel the need to be smooth and automatic enough with it that I didn't fuck up in an emergency and handled and stored them with care at all times. An unsurprising amount of my fellow Americans do not exercise such care, and even do things like buy their mentally ill son a gun for a birthday present!

A trained shooter at Charleston would have been wonderful, of course, but these events are rare (and, I agree, are more rare with CC) and it's hard to imagine people keeping their guard up after praying with the guy for an hour. (Or if they did, what the quality of the prayer would be.) Did the guy reload a few times?

Posted by: Astra at June 19, 2015 6:11 AM

A safety is unnecessary, and an impediment. Unless you train all the time to disengage it automatically.

The wrong assumption here, is that a CC holder, is less well trained than the police.

Most of them spend far more time at the firing range than your average police officer.
And the possibility of being confronted with a gun deters mass shootings.

Yes, people are stupid, and don't always exercise due care when handling dangerous stuff, especially automobiles, swimming pools, bottles of Tylenol, and alcohol,

It is impossible for any law to keep guns (or anything dangerous) away from the mentally ill without creating so many restrictions that the sane can't acquire them either.

This is the real issue here.

I really wish all the people who think you ought to have lots of training, and vetting to own or carry a gun, also thought, that some of the same requirements should be put in place to buy a car or cast a ballot.

"Maybe it wasn't a hate crime by a white guy against blacks, maybe it was just a crime against Christians!"

Every time one of these things happens, groups start lining up for special-victim status. Beyond the need to demonstrate mens rea, I don't give a damn what his motivation was. The results are the same.

The wrong assumption here, is that a CC holder, is less well trained than the police.

You keep arguing with things I'm not saying. I certainly don't think cops are better trained than CC holders and that's a scandal against cops. I am also not mandating training, I'm asserting a moral responsibility on the part of gun owners. AND I'm not arguing in favor of laws to restrict ownership of guns for the mentally ill; I'm pointing out that the benefits of broad gun ownership are counter-balanced by the sort of idiot who buys a mentally ill son a gun (not in SC, I gather, but the woman in CT).

"I'm asserting a moral responsibility on the part of gun owners."

Sounds like the most futile argument I have ever seen in print.

Morality is such an ephemeral thing. A bit like arguing for a moral responsibility on the part of politicians, or parents, or swimming pool owners.

How do you quantify something like that, and what would be evidence of it?

Further more, what possible application does this *moral responsibility* have to a discussion on mass shootings?

Further more, what possible application does this *moral responsibility* have to a discussion on mass shootings?

Well, exactly. My whole point from the beginning is that people trying to draw lessons from this shooting case and others like it are having to stretch the point and frankly not making much of a case out of it.

exactly. My whole point from the beginning is that people trying to draw lessons from this shooting case and others like it are having to stretch the point and frankly not making much of a case out of it.

Posted by: Astra at June 19, 2015 8:10 AM

I disagree.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/06/18/gun-free-zones-easy-target-for-killers.html

People in designated gun-free zones are an easy target, but as Ppen pointed out, what is the alternative? That we see a very rare occurrence and take from it that we should meet in loving fellowship while fully armed, praying together with one hand on our guns? It's like a helicopter parent protecting against kidnapping by not allowing their child outside: there is a price to be paid by over-estimating the danger and many people aren't going to want to pay it.

"People in designated gun-free zones are an easy target, but as Ppen pointed out, what is the alternative? That we see a very rare occurrence and take from it that we should meet in loving fellowship while fully armed, praying together with one hand on our guns? "

This is a straw man. Any Church or other institution in my state, could easily come up with *one* volunteer armed guard on a rotating basis.

That is all the deterrence most would be shooters need.

Why do comfortable well feed Americans assume that somehow either the rest of the citizens, the government itself or the Easter Bunny should provide them with a *safe space* so they can continue to pretend that the world is not a dangerous place, and you don't need to provide for your own security?

Just because there is no absolute safety doesn't mean, that I personally am going to throw up my hands, and say *shit happens*.

I am going to do what I can to mitigate risks.

For me, that means staying out of gun free zones, biker bars, TSA security lines, and off the highway in bad weather, unless a real need forces me into them.

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/208856/
=== ===
[edited] John Lott: The horrible tragedy last night left nine people dead at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, S.C. It probably could have been avoided. Like so many other attacks, the massacre took place where the general public was banned from having guns.

The circumstantial evidence is strong that these killers don’t attack randomly; they pick the few gun-free zones to do almost all of their attacks.

Many of these killers tell us that they pick soft targets. From 1950, all but two of the mass public shootings have occurred in gun-free zones. Mass killers in Santa Barbara and Canada, and the Aurora movie theater shooter, wrote in their diaries or on Facebook how they avoided targets where people with guns could stop them.
=== ===

Astra,

Why do you even need a designated guard? Just stop forbidding people from carrying weapons. There will be the same statistical likelihood that a responsible gun owner will be there as there is anywhere else. Just stop identifying soft targets. It only invites attack.

I read he reloaded 5 (5!!!) times while vinctims "pleaded with him to stop". Granted this was in the MSM and thus suspect at best. But WTF?? Someone is RELOADING: mass of bodies can take him down!! This is (if it's true) what's wrong with this country-far too many people sitting on their ass waiting for others to take care of things for them.

You'll notice in TX, when a crazy dude started shooting at people recently, his ass was killed posthaste. By someone with a gun. No pleading necessary.

"This is a straw man. Any Church or other institution in my state, could easily come up with *one* volunteer armed guard on a rotating basis."

For something that isn't going to happen?

I mean firstly everyone on here likes to prattle on about how blacks don't care about black on black violence (whatever). But advocating that brining guns will save the day in a black or Hispanic church really antagonizes the church goers exactly because they experience too much gun violence.

And all I'm getting is a ton of examples where someone had a gun and saved a day and I can come up with a ton of examples where someone was too trigger happy. But you'll ignore the latter because such things happen and that's the price to pay for personal gun rights, right?

I get it you all love your guns and think they'll save the day Hollywood style during an event that in all likelihood will never happen. You can try to prepare for an event like THIS ONE all you want but it just makes gun advocates come off as paranoid and more unlikeable than you already do. People just want to grieve. There is no point in coming up with preventive measures because then you're gonna get metal detectors on the other end.

Ppen: "I can come up with a ton of examples where someone was too trigger happy."

I would be interested in a few of those examples to understand how you have formed your opinion.

"I get it you all love your guns and think they'll save the day Hollywood style during an event that in all likelihood will never happen."

Sigh. Another fallacious statement.

Can you address the issue logically at all?

Or is this a complete non-starter, a personal "BSOD" moment akin to being confronted with the horrifically radical but completely true statement that gun bans are only obeyed by the law-abiding, and that this is the reason crime rates are higher where the law-abiding cannot defend themselves?