UPDATED: Vince Vaughn explains the obvious: how mass killers pick out venues where their victims are sitting ducks

1 Jun , 2015  

Vince Vaughn

From Vaughn’s interview in the UK edition of GQ:

It’s well known that the greatest defence against an intruder is the sound of a gun hammer being pulled back. All these gun shootings that have gone down in America since 1950, only one or maybe two have happened in non-gun-free zones. Take mass shootings. They’ve only happened in places that don’t allow guns. These people are sick in the head and are going to kill innocent people. They are looking to slaughter defenceless human beings. They do not want confrontation. In all of our schools it is illegal to have guns on campus, so again and again these guys go and shoot up these f***ing schools because they know there are no guns there. They are monsters killing six-year-olds.”

Media Matters attacks Vaughn by pointing to a flawed report by Bloomberg’s Everytown, but of course, Media Matters doesn’t respond or even acknowledge all the errors that have been previously pointed out with Bloomberg’s report.  See also here.

Killers often openly talk about their desire to attack where no one is there with a gun to stop them.

UPDATE, ADDED EXAMPLE: In the planned Church attack in Detroit, the person planning the attack note one reason to picking his target:

Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church.” . . .

UPDATE, ADDED EXAMPLE: Regarding the Charleston Church shooting:

“I don’t think the church was his primary target because he told us he was going for the school,” Scriven said Friday. “But I think he couldn’t get into the school because of the security … so I think he just settled for the church.” . . .

Last June, Elliot Rodger, who killed six people in Santa Barbara, Calif., explained his own choice. In his 141-page “Manifesto,” Rodger turned down targets because he worried that someone with a gun would cut short his killing spree.

That same month, Justin Bourque shot to death three people in Canada. His Facebook page made fun of gun bans, with pictures of defenseless victims explaining to killers that they weren’t allowed to have their guns.

This past week we finally got a look at the diary of the Batman movie theater killer, James Holmes, and it was clear that he was considering both attacking an airport and a movie theater.  But he turned down the airport option because he was concerned about their “substantial security.”  Beyond that, only one of the seven movie theaters near the killer’s apartment had posted signs banning permitted concealed handguns and that was the theater that Holmes picked to attack.

In February 2016, there was another planned mass public shooting on one of the largest churches in the Detroit area that the FBI stopped.  Their tape of this individual’s phone calls is chilling: It’s easy, and a lot of people go there. Plus people are not allowed to carry guns in church. Plus it would make the news.

Of course, there are numerous other examples such as the Columbine killers opposing the concealed carry law that was then working its way through the state legislature.  The Majority leader of the state House at the time, Doug Dean, told John Lott that Klebold had written his state legislators opposing the legislation.  The bill would have allowed people to carry permitted concealed handguns on school property.  The killers timed their attack for the very day that final passage of the law was planned for in the legislature.  (Dr. Lott had been brought into Colorado by Dean to talk to legislators the morning of the vote, and was flying back to Chicago when the attack occurred.)  Their attack derailed the passage for years, but few talk about the fact that their attack was timed for just hours before the final vote.

NYTimes on Keybold opposing Concealed Handgun Law

For those interested, here is a list of concealed handgun permit holders who have stopped mass public shootings.  This is not the first time that Vaughn has made comments on guns, though it is probably the most forceful that he has been on the topic. Here is his interview from earlier in the year for Playboy.

Do you own a gun?
I do, yeah. I believe in the right to defend yourself if need be. Hopefully you’re never in that situation, but I think you’re fairly naive to believe there will never be a cause for self-defense. But again, I believe it’s up to the individual. I don’t believe rights come in groups. You shouldn’t get more or fewer rights because of what you believe in or what nationality you were born into.

 


3 Responses

  1. […] Contributor and President of the Crime Prevention Research Center President John R. Lott recently explained how actor Vince Vaughn’s defense of the Second Amendment was spot-on, in particular about how to […]

  2. […] It is hard to ignore how these mass public shooters consciously pick targets where they know victims won’t be able to defend themselves (here, here, and here). […]

  3. Rick Warren says:

    Terrorist’s and unfortunately psychos tend to think more like military personnel than ordinary people. I was Marine Infantryman so I know. You pick targets based on weakness and the potential worth to you (potential to generate terror, fame or chaos if you are a terrorist or psycho). The most appealing target is the weakest one that has the highest potential worth to you. The risk to reward ratio is in your favor. The worst target is the strongest because the risk to reward ratio is against you. If your a nut job or terrorist, it does you no good if you get killed as soon as you pull your weapon out. You have to be able to kill people before you get killed. That is why they attack gun free zones! Don’t just accept what liberals tell you, use the brain God gave to you to think logically about it. If you can be honest with yourself, you will see that the Bloomberg arguments are flawed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *