Irony is lost on VA Beach Leaders

Post Office Named for Hero

In a total blindness to irony, VA Beach is honoring a hero who died needlessly in a Gun Free Zone by naming another Gun Free Zone for him.

20 thoughts on “Irony is lost on VA Beach Leaders

      1. What’s truly ugly is that we have reached a point in our history when we are encouraging our people to arm themselves to go shopping, to school, to concerts, to work and anywhere else that we used to do without weaponry.

        And the irony is that we have some of the most draconian sentencing in the industrial world and one of the only ones with the death penalty.

        Plus by far the most aggressive policing with about 1000 deaths a year at the hands of law enforcement.

        And, just for added irony, we are considered the most religiously observant in the West.

        Liked by 2 people

          1. Are we the only country with a drug problem?

            Regardless of the reasons, it is still truly sad and a societal failure if the best we can do is encourage
            our citizens to arm themselves for daily life.

            This is not what “the security of the free state” was about.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Try to keep it in perspective. You don’t have to arm yourself if you are willing to accept the risk.

            If you are not in the drug culture. your chance of a violent death are about 1 in 100,000, about the same as in Australia or Europe. It is a truly low risk.

            So is a fire on a boat. They are rare, you could go a lifetime without a fire extinguisher on your boat and probably do OK. But I carry a fire extinguisher because it is a precaution I can take. It’s the same with my handgun, I choose to be prepared for an unlikely threat, but if you are willing to accept the risk, go unarmed and you’ll probably be OK. Just don’t tell me I can’t carry my fire extinguisher.


          3. No, it is you who refuses to look at the evidence.

            Maryland stats

            Virginia stats

            If your claim that guns are the controlling variable, the Virginia would have far higher murder rates than Maryland, which has very restrictive gun laws and an “Assault Weapon” ban, but the opposite is true, so guns ARE NOT the controlling variable.

            Note that prior to 2013 Maryland’s gun laws were not that different from Virginia’s but when they passed their restrictive laws, their murder rate jumped by 50% within a year.


          4. @Tabor

            You are good at cherry-picking “evidence.” You do it to support preconceived ideas about climate and about guns. Comparing the statistics from two states with very different issues and conditions is a good example of that cherry-picking.

            The far more meaningful evidence that we have a gun problem are the countless studies at the level of homes, cities, states and nations which show clear correlation between guns and gun deaths. As anybody with any common sense would expect – more guns = more gun deaths because guns are a necessary condition for gun violence not matter the cause. If your theories about guns saving lives were true we would have the lowest rate of gun deaths in the world instead of one of the highest.

            Take the UK for example. They are similar to us in many important ways including the same entertainment, video games, drug problems, disaffected immigrant groups and inner city dysfunction. But, because they have effective gun control their rate of gun deaths, all homicides and all suicides are significantly lower than ours. Where we have gun deaths at the rate of approximately 12 per 100,000 people, their rate is .25 deaths per 100,000. Our rate of gun death is about 50 times theirs. We have a gun problem.

            In fact, there is not one first world country that is even close to our rate of gun deaths. Not one.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. OK compare with Mexico. There’s only one gun store in the whole country and their laws are far more restrictive than Britain’s. It must be a violence free country.

            Go back and look at the stats for Virginia and Maryland and compare the homicide rate by race. In both, the homicide rate for whites is 1/100,000. That is comparable to the homicide rate in Britain(1.29/100K) It is deceptive to count, as you did, only firearms homicides, as in a country where people are disarmed it is much easier to kill them with knives and clubs.

            In both Virginia and Maryland, the gun laws for whites and blacks are the same, but in VA the homicide rate for blacks is 12 times as high for blacks and in Maryland it is 18 times as high.

            Again, the controlling factor is not gun laws, it is culture.


          6. Okay, I have looked at Mexico. Their gun death rate per 100,000 people is about 7 compared to our 12. And THAT is with the infamous violence of their drug cartels.

            Here is a study of the big picture from a peer-reviewed medical journal . . .


            “CONCLUSION: The number of guns per capita per country was a strong and independent predictor of
            firearm-related death in a given country, whereas the predictive power of the mental illness burden was of borderline significance in a multivariable model. Regardless of exact cause and effect, however, the current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer”

            But, hey, go ahead. Knock yourself out. Ignore this evidence too because . . Gee, you would never shoot somebody. And, of course, you are white.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. @Tabor

            So your theory is that the homicide rate in Mexico would be lower if they owned 1.3 guns per person as we do?

            That is, of course, nonsense. Guns are better killing tools than knives or machetes. Whatever the causes of homicidal behavior, guns would make it worse.

            But, if we are going to ignore cultural and economic differences as you do when citing Mexico then lets look at Japan which has almost zero guns in private hands AND the lowest homicide rate in the world.

            Your are undoubtedly familiar with this study which finds . . .

            “Examining violent crime,homicide, rape, robbery, and assault for 1,997 counties in the United States, the findings indicate that increased prevalence of firearms was associated with increased violent crime,
            homicide, rape, robbery, and assault. The results of this study suggest that a decrease in
            prevalence of firearms has the potential to decrease violent crime in the United States.”

            Click to access jpj_firearm_ownership.pdf

            Liked by 1 person

    1. No one can predict the past, but we know that there were a number of CHP holders in the building, at least one of whom was concerned that there might be a shooting, but they all left their handguns home because VA Beach’s employment policies prohibited their carrying on the job.

      Absent that policy, would one of them have stopped the shooting earlier, saving Mr Cox and others? We’ll never know, but whatever chance they had was lost to that policy.

      Making good people helpless does not make bad people harmless.


        1. Really? Then tell us with 100% certainty how the VA Beach shooting would have played out if Kate Nixon had brought her handgun to work.

          You could suggest probabilities, but you can’t say with certainty who and how many might have lived.


          1. I said I can predict the past; I cannot change it, i.e., if ifs and buts were… etc., etc.

            What I can say with absolute certainty is that as the number of firearms and their owners increases, so to will the number of mass shootings, as well as the number of mass shootings ended by persons who may have a firearm with. What I cannot predict, and don’t care to, is whether the second keeps pace with the first.
            What I can say with absolute certainty is that the converse is true all the way to the point of zero.

            Liked by 2 people

          2. Nope. California, with its restrictive gun laws, leads in mass shootings.

            What I can say with certainty is that zero mass shootings have been stopped by a gun free zone sign.


          3. @Tabor

            “Nope. California . . .”

            Typical Tabor “evidence.” Maybe put that California gun death “fact” on a per capita basis? After all, California is by far our most populous state.

            Here is a more meaningful comparison . . . gun deaths per 100,000 population.

            CA – 8
            NY – 4

            TX – 12
            LA – 22

            And so on. Blue states with more gun restrictions tend to have lower gun death rates. I understand why you continue to bring up Maryland – they are totally off the scale (48). EVERY state looks good compared to MD. At least in 2016 where this data is from.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s