But so might have a small handful of heroes without guns.

On March 13, 1997, a Jordanian soldier shot seven young Israeli girls to death while they were visiting Jordan’s “Island of Peace.” According to newspaper reports, the Israelis had “complied with Jordanian requests to leave their weapons behind when they entered the border
enclave. Otherwise, they might have been able to stop the shooting.”

Referring to the 1984 massacre at a McDonald’s restaurant in California, Israeli criminologist Abraham Tennenbaum wrote that: what occurred at a [crowded venue in] Jerusalem some weeks before the California McDonald's massacre: three
terrorists who attempted to machine-gun the throng managed to kill only one victim before being shot down by handgun carrying Israelis. Presented to the press the next day, the surviving terrorist complained that his group had
not realized that Israeli civilians were armed. The terrorists had planned to machine-gun a succession of crowded spots, thinking that they would be able to escape before the police or army could arrive to deal with them."

No, but any mental mas2rbation about an armed s2dent putting a stop 2 this massacre before it started is, because it didn't happen.

-ol' 2long

But they didn't do that either. They just STOOD there, darn it all. Why did they do that? Why would anyone do that?

During a shooting spree at a public school in Pearl, Mississippi, an assistant principal retrieved his gun and physically immobilized the shooter before he caused further harm (CNN, October 2, 1997, 2:40 PM EST). And in the public school related shooting in Edinboro, Pennsylvania, which left one teacher dead, a shot gun pointed at the offender while he was reloading prevented additional harm (Reuters Newswire, April 26, 1998).

Well, I may have not seen the reports of s2dents lining up 2 be shot until they were posted here, but you must have overlooked the reports of people shielding others and barricading doors. Heroic, even though they failed. My hat is off 2 them.

-ol' 2long

Violent crime rates are highest overall in states with laws severely limiting or prohibiting the carrying of concealed firearms for self-defense. (FBI Uniform Crime Reports, 1992) -

The total Violent Crime Rate is 26% higher in the restrictive states (798.3 per 100,000 pop.) than in the less restrictive states (631.6 per 100,000).

The Homicide Rate is 49% higher in the restrictive states (10.1 per 100,000) than in the states with less restrictive CCW laws (6.8 per 100,000).

The Robbery Rate is 58% higher in the restrictive states (289.7 per 100,000) than in the less restrictive states (183.1 per 100,000).

The Aggravated Assault Rate is 15% higher in the restrictive states (455.9 per 100,000) than in the less restrictive states (398.3 per 100,000). Using the most recent FBI data (1992), homicide trends in the 17 states with less restrictive CCW laws compare favorably against national trends, and almost all CCW permittees are law-abiding.

Since adopting CCW (1987), Florida's homicide rate has fallen 21% while the U.S. rate has risen 12%. From start-up 10/1/87 2/28/94 (over 6 yrs.) Florida issued 204,108 permits; only 17 (0.008%) were revoked because permittees later committed crimes (not necessarily violent) in which guns were present (not necessarily used).

Of 14,000 CCW licensees in Oregon, only 4 (0.03%) were convicted of the criminal (not necessarily violent) use or possession of a firearm. Americans use firearms for self-defense more than 2.1 million times annually.

By contrast, there are about 579,000 violent crimes committed annually with firearms of all types. Seventy percent of violent crimes are committed by 7% of criminals, including repeat offenders, many of whom the courts place on probation after conviction, and felons that are paroled before serving their full time behind bars.

Two-thirds of self-protective firearms uses are with handguns.

99.9% of self-defense firearms uses do not result in fatal shootings of criminals, an important factor ignored in certain "studies" that are used to claim that guns are more often misused than used for self-protection. Of incarcerated felons surveyed by the Department of Justice, 34% have been driven away, wounded, or captured by armed citizens; 40% have decided against committing crimes for fear their would-be victims were armed.

2L, I'm speculating a different course of action may have saved some or even most of those poor kids. I don't know why you ridicule other people's ideas so crassly. Can you not advance a theory without using that tactic?

Say what?

Look folks. Here we are. The massacre happened yes2rday. It's done. We can't change it with "what iffing".

I've been trained in firearms use - needed them for protection in the Arctic - and would consider myself a supporter of the right 2 bear arms. I just don't want one of my own. I like working on old cars and telescopes, not on limited-applicability 2ls like guns. That's just me.

I'd like 2 know how our society can deter murder-suicide in any number? At least in other si2ations, where the murderer remains alive, there can be punishment. How do you deter someone who doesn't believe they'll ever suffer any more if they kill a whole bunch of innocent people before they commit suicide?

That's the issue here. Not gun control.

-ol' 2long

I'd like 2 know how our society can deter murder-suicide in any number? At least in other si2ations, where the murderer remains alive, there can be punishment. How do you deter someone who doesn't believe they'll ever suffer any more if they kill a whole bunch of innocent people before they commit suicide?

Now we've got our armed hero stories. Okay then, that's something.

The hard part is the next bit: how many of those situations would not even have arisen if we didn't live in a civilization so in love with handguns?

Unanswerable.

I walk around unarmed because I'd prefer it if everybody did. This choice is based on a certain philosophical point of view which is not likely shared by everyone here.