Well, they’re at it again.  Their egos deeply invested in their narrative that “guns are bad and so are the people who own them,” we now hear prohibitionists telling us that no mass murder has ever been stopped by a “good guy with a gun.”

Au contraire.   Here are a dozen cases where armed good people of both genders stopped massacres by drawing and if necessary, firing their own guns.

To this list I would add the Aurora, Colorado church shooting which, ignored by the media, happened within two months of the mass murder in the “gun free zone” theater in that same community.  The perp opened fire at the church, killing an innocent woman; before he could claim any more victims, a parishioner drew his own legally-carried concealed handgun and shot the murderer dead.  Didn’t read about that in the mass media, did you?  Or the incident some years ago in Cape Town, South Africa where organized terrorists attacked a church and opened up with machine guns and grenades, but were routed by a single parishioner who returned fire with a five-shot snub-nose .38.  And shall we remember the many armed citizens who saved people at the Westgate Mall terrorist attack, while soldiers and police fibrillated outside?

Note that from the monster at Sandy Hook to the one in the Aurora theater to the latest at the Oregon campus, these punks have surrendered, suicided, or gone down in front of righteous gunfire as soon as good guys with guns entered the equation.

The mayor of Bethlehem has recently called on more citizens to carry guns and stop terrorist attacks, recognizing that armed citizens have done so before in his country . Said the mayor, “If we look at the statistics in Jerusalem and elsewhere, we see that aside from the police, civilians carrying weapons have foiled terror attacks. They will increase the likelihood of fast intervention.”

I wish American politicians and pundits could face reality so.

58 COMMENTS

  1. Since mainstream media is ignoring “cases where armed good people of both genders stopped massacres by drawing and if necessary, firing their own guns,” where can one go, besides this blog and the NRA’s “Armed Citizen” to find these cases? Mas and others, would you mind listing where you go to get your news? Thanks.

  3. Mas, all:

    A bit of research has brought me to this article for a simple question. The Pearl High School shooting (which is first in the linked list) is widely referenced in relation to campus concealed carry, and whether or not Myrick “saved additional lives” by stopping Woodham as he was leaving the campus largely hinges on whether or not the shooter was heading to Pearl Junior High to continue his spree.

    Pro-gun sources about the incident will almost inevitably include some form of the following: “His plan, authorities subsequently learned, was to drive to nearby Pearl Junior High School and shoot more kids before police could show up” (http://www.davekopel.com/2A/OthWr/principal&gun.htm). Anti-gun sources never mention this subsequent intent, and sometimes “forget” that Myrick was even armed.

    I am searching for a contemporaneous news source that refers to the shooter’s future plans. This is made more complex thanks to the Satanist aspect of the case, which captured most of the attention in major media. However, if authorities learned after the shooting that Woodham planned to kill more people at PJHS, surely that revelation made the news in 1997. Unfortunately, the Rankin County News — the local paper — has archives online only back to 2008.

    Any sources for this information?

    Regards,
    Paul

  4. I met and interviewed Mr. Myrick when he was still in Pearl, a few years after the incident. All input at that time was that Woodham had more ammo and the gun still with him and was heading for the Junior High when interdicted.

  5. While I appreciate your reply, Mas, was this fact not reported somewhere in contemporaneous news? As I understand it, Myrick stopped Woodham on his way driving _out_ of the high school, which makes it unclear how he would know where the shooter was headed unless told so. PJHS, while not a long distance from PHS, is several turns away after exiting the PHS grounds, on a campus area shared with an elementary school (these locations have not changed in the intervening 18 years).

    I have read/viewed every story and news clip I can find and many quote Myrick discussing the events, but none include him identifying the shooter’s future plans on that day or the day after… nor at any point frankly. The references I do find, which tend to be 2009 and later, claim that “authorities subsequently learned”. This implies (to me at least) that police or the DA’s office made some statement — either a release or at a press conference — revealing this new knowledge. Where is the news coverage of this? This plan is not in the killer’s own writings, and was not introduced at his trial.

    Honestly, if there isn’t news of the time supporting the contention that Woodham was heading the PJHS to kill more people, we should not be claiming that this was the case. There are many contemporaneous reports that _do not_ reference this future intent… of course, we can point to the bias of CNN and People Magazine as a reason for that, but this approach is pretty hollow if we cannot produce a shred of positive evidence. Having the gun and additional ammo in his possession makes the shooter a very dangerous person when Myrick stops him, period. At the very least, to police and himself. Adding claims to the situation without any support for them simply provides a hole the anti-gunners can poke.

    Regards,
    Paul

  7. It’s not a matter of doubts, Mas, it’s a matter of evidence. Of course without evidence I have doubts… I trust everyone would. I do have an inquiry in to the Rankin County News and I’ll try the Pearl PD as well. Should anyone read this and have a relevant contemporary reference, I would appreciate the information.

    Regards,
    Paul

« Older Comments

Comments are closed.