There is an obvious reason upon which we can rest most of the “common sense conversations” and their lack of their titular common sense.

Semantics.

Words mean things.

The more you try and change what words mean, the less they mean… because the less anyone cares.

We know that ignorance is bliss among gun controllers. From the Twitter activists capitalizing on their blue check mark (or even victim/survivor status) when it comes to “gun” violence, to the lawmakers that are crafting the rules for implementation to reduce deaths from homicide, suicide, and accidents, one thing becomes glaringly obvious whenever they open their mouths…

They don’t have the ghost of a clue what they’re talking about… The ones that do don’t make headlines.

Contextual Thought Exercise

Imagine with me, if you will, a heart surgeon trying to explain the risk and reward analysis of common heart surgeries in fairly broad terms. The doctor is doing so in order to convey why or why not someone might undergo the surgery. But the audience keeps interrupting and asking why the heart that the surgeon is showing isn’t shaped like this ❤? Or asking where all the blue blood is inside the body, because all the real life pictures the surgeon is using only shows the red blood? They darn well know there are blue blood veins in the body too, they claim they saw them in pictures.

Now imagine that the doctor has patiently explained that the heart, the muscled organ of the body that circulates the blood is, in fact, the shape it is. The doctor also patiently explained that the red/blue color scheme that they use is only an indicator color to tell the difference between blood that has oxygen in it and is delivering to the muscles, and blood that has delivered oxygen and is circulating back to the heart and lungs to do it again. The colors in the diagrams are not accurate representations of reality, they are just a simple way to distinguish between the blood paths. Additionally because nonoxygenated blood is much darker than oxygenated blood, blue was a good choice that had some indicative color reference to work with.

Now, imagine… that after taking the time to patiently, and as succinctly as possible, explain all these things to educate the audience (who are allegedly curious about hearts and surgery) since these two things are required basic understanding for a further understanding of the topic of heart surgery… the audience proceeds to argue with the doctor about both the shape of the heart and the existence of blue blood… and that the basis for both their arguments are solely the facts that we draw a heart like ❤, and that illustrations of the circulatory system they have seen “showed” blue blood. That’s it, that is the depth of their understanding and they are challenging an expert in the field, a heart surgeon, on those facts.

Now imagine… yes, we are four imagines deep… that not only is the audience arguing with the surgeon about the shape of the heart and the color of blood, but that part of that audience (and some of the loudest voices arguing these asinine ‘facts’ about the heart) are in charge of the rules governing heart surgery. That people loudly and implacably claiming the human heart is shaped like ❤ has control over and is actively working to change the rules surrounding how to take care of the heart medically. They then passionately describe the one time they played a game of Operation, and how harrowing and life like an experience it was, and how that they have since dwelt on that game for a very long time and they feel strongly and passionately about heart surgery because of that ‘lifelike’ board game experience.

You now possess the frame of reference to understand how depressingly and mind-numbingly stupid activism like the following is…

Yes, this does get worse every time you read it. Yes, this person believes their opinion should be considered when making policy involving firearms. They believe so as passionately as the folks who believe in the blue blood… or for a more real world example, they believe as passionately that their opinion should be taken seriously as a flat-earther believes the earth is flat.

So let’s break down that post piece by piece into its stupid parts… and ask ourselves, “If this were someone making rules for medicine, getting this much basic information so abysmally wrong, would we trust them to make those rules?”

An AR-15 is a semi-automatic rifle.

Alright, we’re off to a good start. Factual statement there.

It shoots 13.4 bullets per second, 800 rounds per minute.

That’s.. um.. the cyclic rate, yes. It cycles at the rate of 800 cycles per minute. But it, being semi-auto, also only completes one cycle before being interrupted by the disconnector. Otherwise it would be fully-automatic, not semi-automatic.

It was created for the purpose of hitting multiple targets in a short amount of time, making it ideal for mass murder.

That was not why it was developed, and that is an easily checked and well documented fact. It was developed to be a light weight infantry rifle stemming from the AR-10 design, originally to replace the M1 Carbine. In fact it was never meant to be a primary infantry weapon at all, it just worked so well once it made it into service (and the kinks got unkinked) the military bought into the design. The Air Force bought them to replace M1 carbines with something more suited, but it was still replacing the M1 carbine which is a support personnel’s personal weapon.

In its semi-automatic ‘civilian’ configuration it was meant as a light weight mildly recoiling rifle for any and all reasons a person might need a light mild recoiling rifle. It isn’t designed to hit “multiple targets in a short amount of time” it is designed to automatically reload itself from the magazine after your fire the shot.

It is far from ideal for mass murder, there exist far more efficient mediums. Ask anyone with IED experience.

It’s been used in the military to clear out areas in the Middle East for the reasons above.

High explosives, heavy machine guns, medium machine guns, light machine guns, armored vehicles with cannon, artillery, mortars, precision guided bombs, aircraft cannon, guided missiles, aircraft mounted rockets, shoulder launched rockets, and launchable grenades would all like to have a word with you, Rin Lynn. You may be oversimplifying a bit and ruining any point you were trying to make.

Yes, the AR-15 is a good fighting rifle. But when compared to the pallet of available destruction of combined arms doctrine, it is nothing.

The rifle is largely a defensive weapon, by doctrine. In the attack, in most attacks, heavier weapons will be brought against the target. The heaviest weapons that can be used will be used, this keeps our troops safer. Rifles may be used in conjunction with the heavier weapons, but rarely (only if there is no better option) will they be the main effort of an attack.

They aren’t lethal enough to control a combat environment effectively on their own on the larger scales of military combat. That’s why heavier weapons are brought into serious fights, especially offensive actions, and used against the enemy. If I have a medium machine gun to use against the enemy, it beats the hell out of my M16. So the M16 becomes the supporting ‘just-in-case’ item. If I have a JDAM and can use the JDAM, then the enemy is getting 500lbs of precision guided kaboom and not semi-auto 5.56x45mm.

In the defense, the enemy attacks, troops defend themselves with their personal weapons (those AR-15’s) and as quickly as possible bring heavier weapons into action against the attacking enemy. Then they use their rifles to support the heavier weapons employment against the enemy, but wherever possible the heavier more effective weapons carry the fight to a successful conclusion.

By all things militarily available, the AR-15 sucks at mass murder. It’s a very good individual weapon though, especially to protect oneself.

Compare it to, say, a Glock 19 (a popular handgun, since you are confused about it).

I am most certainly not confused about it. The G17/G19 are probably the world’s most popular handgun, that’s a rough one to assume people don’t understand. Maybe throw out something more niche, like the Nambu. I’ve owned 7 G19 variations, including the 19X (which is my favorite) among the many Glocks I have owned in total.

This gun is small and holds a chamber big enough for 10 rounds of ammo.

It is not an automatic or semi-automatic weapon,]

It is absolutely a semi-automatic weapon. It is the definitive semi-automatic pistol, an international standard of semi-auto pistols. It also has a fully-automatic variant, the Glock 18, which fires faster than 800 rounds per minute.

[which means it takes more time in between shots before being able to shoot again.

The cyclic rate is upwards 1100-1200 rounds per minute (Glock 18), that is upwards of 50 percent faster than the AR-15 to mechanically prepare the next shot. It is not slower.

It is used in homicides and burglaries, crimes with singular victims.

This is in no way accurate… Not even a little bit…

It is not ideal for mass murder because of its inability to target multiple people at once.

In the 2019 Mass Attacks in Public Spaces (MAPS) survey, 71% of mass attacks involving firearms involved only handguns.

Virginia Tech involved only handguns, a Glock 19 and a .22 with only 10 and 15 round magazines. 32 people killed, 17 injured.

But you know what can?

I do. You don’t.

A fucking semi-automatic weapon.

2014 was the last year that the humble j-frame was a legitimate contender at the IDPA BUG Nationals. In early 2015, the rules were changed in order to make Back Up Gun a full on division, and to do that meant making it a mandatory six shot division. The justification for this was that classifying with a five shooter would have been a nightmare, and while that’s true, it’s sad that IDPA killed the only place where the old-school king of carry guns could play. With the rise of the 9mm pocket gun, what is to become of the humble Airweight?

Luckily, the Airweight j-frame is here to stay, and the 638 is one of the best examples. It’s absolutely simple: fixed gutter sights, shrouded but not fully enclosed hammer, just meat and potatoes. The hammer is probably the most interesting feature, because it offers all the advantages of a DAO shrouded hammer gun, and yet retains the ability for single action fire. Regular readers know that I’m not really a huge advocate of SA on defensive revolvers, but in a lot of ways this kind of makes sense. I accept that while I, and others like me, regard J-frames as “expert’s guns,” the vast majority of the shooting public does not. So I actually think that retaining the SA function in a way that doesn’t impede the ability of the gun to be fired through a coat pocket or jacket pocket is actually a pretty good idea.

For carry and practice, I recommend loading the Smith & Wesson 638 with 148 grain full wadcutters. My preferred brand are the Federal Gold Medal Match, which is what this gun was tested with. The 148 grain Federal rounds shoot directly to the front sight at 15 yards, and will easily keep all five shots in a 3×5 card at the same distance. The reason I recommend this ammo is written out in detail in this post, but the short summary is that wadcutters are easier to get hits with, and only hits count. Remember that.

Once you get past the 638’s party trick of retaining SA fire, it becomes much like any other Airweight j-frame. It’s light, it is easy to carry, it is easy to conceal, and it is hard to shoot well. While this gun is completely stock, I always recommend the following modifications for any j-frame:

• Crimson Trace LG-405 laser grips
• Apex Duty/Carry spring kit

I’ll get around to dropping those mods into this gun sooner than later; I genuinely believe that the combo of a laser and slightly better trigger makes the j-frame a lot easier a gun to shoot for a newbie. Of course, you’ll get objections from people who don’t want to drop more than the gun’s retail price on aftermarket accessories, and I get that, I really do. But again, this is an expert’s gun. If you want to really maximize its potential, the laser is a must, and the Apex kit helps a lot as well.

Ultimately, the verdict for the Smith & Wesson 638 review is simple. It is a no-nonsense carry gun, and if you buy one you’re not making a poor choice. Sadly, it’s largely outclassed by the current crop of pocket 9mm guns such as the M&P Shield or the Glock 43. The ready available of easier to shoot, easier to operate, and just as easy to carry pocket 9mms will probably what eventually kills the j-frame, if such a thing is possible. Until then, us revolver guys will keep holding on.

Ed: This is reposted from BearingArms.com with permission, where it originally appeared April 6. DRGO sees suicides as the greatest issue in “gun violence”. This shows that, just like homicides, their incidence does NOT correlate with the prevalence of gun ownership.]

Over the last couple of years, there’s been a concerted push by anti-gunners to argue that suicides really should be included in firearm fatalities because gun control would prevent those from happening. It’s an insane argument, of course, because if you made firearms disappear tomorrow, you’d still have a ton of suicides.

Suicide is a mental health issue, not a gun issue–which makes it odd that we’re having to tell the people who think violent crime is a public health issue, but here we are–and as such shouldn’t be in the same camp.

But for the sake of argument, let’s say the anti-gunners might have a point. If more guns mean more suicides, then 2020 should be the worst on record for suicides, right? After all, people were locked in their homes, their lives upended, financial concerns looming over everyone, and couple that with more guns and it’s a recipe for disaster, right?

Well, not so much.

You see, suicides actually dropped in 2020, despite all the drama that made up the worst year most of us have had in a while.

According to numbers from the Journal of the American Medical Association 2019 saw 47,511 suicides., In contrast, 2020 saw just 44,834. This despite month after month of that same year setting records for gun sales. If the doom-and-gloom of gun ownership was to be believed, suicides should have skyrocketed as well.

And, frankly, if they had, we’d have pointed to people being locked down for months on end.

No, I’m not going to say I predicted this. I actually thought there would be more suicides, as did Amy Swearer from the Heritage Foundation, apparently.

Swearer guesses that people being in close proximity to one another made it more difficult for people to have the privacy needed to carry out a suicide, as well as making it more likely people saw the warning signs. She makes a fair point and I think all of that contributed.

Additionally, though, people were more aware that mental health issues were likely. People aren’t meant to be herded into homes and forced to stay there week after week. It’s why jail and even house arrest are punishments in our system. They’re not supposed to be pleasant, and yet pretty much everyone was on house arrest. We knew that would mess with people, so we were more tuned into the mental health of our families.

Yet there’s a broader point to be made here, one that gun control activists aren’t going to like.

If we can see such a drop in suicides with no new gun control laws, but instead because people started looking and watching, it proves that much of the problem isn’t because of guns, but education. People need to learn and understand the warning signs and not be afraid to act on those warning signs. We can cut down on suicides by our deeds, not with laws that treat the people in distress like they’re criminals.

Oh, and since some of you are wondering about homicides, I’m afraid the JAMA numbers don’t include them. You see, it’s about the leading causes of death, and as per usual, homicides aren’t remotely up there, despite what the media may want you to believe.

–Tom Knighton is a Navy veteran, a former newspaperman, a novelist, and a blogger and lifetime shooter. He lives with his family in Southwest Georgia. He writes for BearingArms and is also the host of Unloaded TV on YouTube.

All DRGO articles by Tom Knighton

The Biden Administration has listed their intended actions to push gun control forward.

Today, the Biden-Harris Administration is announcing six initial actions to address the gun violence public health epidemic. The recent high-profile mass shootings in Boulder – taking the lives of 10 individuals – and Atlanta – taking the lives of eight individuals, including six Asian American women – underscored the relentlessness of this epidemic. Gun violence takes lives and leaves a lasting legacy of trauma in communities every single day in this country, even when it is not on the nightly news. In fact, cities across the country are in the midst of a historic spike in homicides, violence that disproportionately impacts Black and brown Americans. The President is committed to taking action to reduce all forms of gun violence – community violence, mass shootings, domestic violence, and suicide by firearm.

President Biden is reiterating his call for Congress to pass legislation to reduce gun violence. Last month, a bipartisan coalition in the House passed two bills to close loopholes in the gun background check system. Congress should close those loopholes and go further, including by closing “boyfriend” and stalking loopholes that currently allow people found by the courts to be abusers to possess firearms, banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines, repealing gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability, and investing in evidence-based community violence interventions. Congress should also pass an appropriate national “red flag” law, as well as legislation incentivizing states to pass “red flag” laws of their own.

But this Administration will not wait for Congress to act to take its own steps – fully within the Administration’s authority and the Second Amendment – to save lives. Today, the Administration is announcing the following six initial actions:

The Justice Department, within 30 days, will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of “ghost guns.” We are experiencing a growing problem: criminals are buying kits containing nearly all of the components and directions for finishing a firearm within as little as 30 minutes and using these firearms to commit crimes. When these firearms turn up at crime scenes, they often cannot be traced by law enforcement due to the lack of a serial number. The Justice Department will issue a proposed rule to help stop the proliferation of these firearms.

The attack against so called “Ghost Guns” isn’t unexpected, but I do not think the ruling coming out of DoJ will be to our liking.

The Justice Department, within 60 days, will issue a proposed rule to make clear when a device marketed as a stabilizing brace effectively turns a pistol into a short-barreled rifle subject to the requirements of the National Firearms Act. The alleged shooter in the Boulder tragedy last month appears to have used a pistol with an arm brace, which can make a firearm more stable and accurate while still being concealable.

The absolute crock of hogwash bullshit that this statement represents is jaw dropping. The Boulder shooter made no attempt that we know of to “conceal” his firearm, but they are using it to attack braces anyway. Expect heavy legal action here.

The Justice Department, within 60 days, will publish model “red flag” legislation for states. Red flag laws allow family members or law enforcement to petition for a court order temporarily barring people in crisis from accessing firearms if they present a danger to themselves or others. The President urges Congress to pass an appropriate national “red flag” law, as well as legislation incentivizing states to pass “red flag” laws of their own. In the interim, the Justice Department’s published model legislation will make it easier for states that want to adopt red flag laws to do so.

More feel good laws and this one is just “a model” for Red Flag laws that I’m sure won’t violate rights in the least… yeah… California and Illinois will eat it up while states like Georgia and Iowa reject the idiocy.

The Administration is investing in evidence-based community violence interventions. Community violence interventions are proven strategies for reducing gun violence in urban communities through tools other than incarceration. Because cities across the country are experiencing a historic spike in homicides, the Biden-Harris Administration is taking a number of steps to prioritize investment in community violence interventions.

I can’t wait to see what “evidenced-based” turns out to be.

• The American Jobs Plan proposes a $5 billion investment over eight years to support community violence intervention programs. A key part of community violence intervention strategies is to help connect individuals to job training and job opportunities.
  
• The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is organizing a webinar and toolkit to educate states on how they can use Medicaid to reimburse certain community violence intervention programs, like Hospital-Based Violence Interventions.
  
• Five federal agencies are making changes to 26 different programs to direct vital support to community violence intervention programs as quickly as possible. These changes mean we can start increasing investments in community violence interventions as we wait on Congress to appropriate additional funds. Read more about these agency actions here.

This all sounds very nonsensically impressive, I am sure…

The Justice Department will issue an annual report on firearms trafficking. In 2000, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) issued a report summarizing information regarding its investigations into firearms trafficking, which is one way firearms are diverted into the illegal market where they can easily end up in the hands of dangerous individuals. Since the report’s publication, states, local, and federal policymakers have relied on its data to better thwart the common channels of firearms trafficking. But there is good reason to believe that firearms trafficking channels have changed since 2000, for example due to the emergence of online sales and proliferation of “ghost guns.” The Justice Department will issue a new, comprehensive report on firearms trafficking and annual updates necessary to give policymakers the information they need to help address firearms trafficking today.

Operation… Fast… And… Furious…

The President will nominate David Chipman to serve as Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. ATF is the key agency enforcing our gun laws, and it needs a confirmed director in order to do the job to the best of its ability. But ATF has not had a confirmed director since 2015. Chipman served at ATF for 25 years and now works to advance commonsense gun safety laws.

I’m sure he likes civil rights…. *sigh*

Buckle up folks. The brace and “Ghost Gun” rules are likely to be the most disruptive but none of these are likely to look positive for 2A rights.

August 2020

This publication is in the public domain. Authorization to copy and distribute this publication in whole or in part is granted. However, the U.S. Secret Service star insignia may not be otherwise reproduced or used in any other manner without advance written permission from the agency. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, when quoting, paraphrasing, or otherwise referring to this report, the citation should be: National Threat Assessment Center. (2020). Mass Attacks in Public Spaces – 2019. U.S. Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security. <-Link to full report.

The U.S. Secret Service’s National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) is an integral resource for the agency’s no-fail mission to safeguard this nation’s highest elected officials. NTAC’s continuous efforts to ensure the informed development of prevention strategies through research has also enabled outreach programs and publications that assist our protective and public safety partners in their missions to prevent targeted violence in communities across the United States.

This latest study, titled Mass Attacks in Public Spaces – 2019, examines 34 targeted attacks that occurred in public or semi-public spaces (e.g., schools, places of business, houses of worship, open spaces) from January through December.

This report is the agency’s third in a series of annual reports that have examined mass attacks in the United States, during which three or more individuals were harmed. Since this project began in 2017, there have been 89 mass attacks involving 92 attackers that occurred in various locations throughout the nation. Understanding the key factors in preventing these attacks is even more critical this year with the COVID-19 pandemic causing additional stressors in the lives of our citizens.

To inform prevention efforts, NTAC researchers studied the tactics, backgrounds, and pre-attack behaviors of the perpetrators to identify and affirm recommended best practices in threat assessment and prevention. Implications include the identification of potential threats and individuals exhibiting concerning behavior. Strategic development of interventions and risk mitigation efforts tailored to those specific individuals are also a core aspect of this study. We encourage our public safety partners to review the information and apply it to their own best practices for providing a safe environment for communities across the country.

Law enforcement officers, mental health professionals, workplace managers, school personnel, faith-based leaders, and many others all play a significant role in the multidisciplinary team approach that is the foundation of the field of threat assessment. The Secret Service is committed to facilitating information-sharing across all platforms of targeted violence prevention and public safety. Our longstanding collaborative partnerships with these valuable members of the community serve to enhance public safety, and strengthen our mandate to keep our nation’s leaders safe.

The U.S. Secret Service’s National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) was created in 1998 to provide guidance on threat assessment both within the U.S. Secret Service and to others with criminal justice and public safety responsibilities. Through the Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000, Congress formally authorized NTAC to conduct research on threat assessment and various types of targeted violence; provide training on threat assessment and targeted violence; facilitate information-sharing among agencies with protective and/or public safety responsibilities; provide case consultation on individual threat assessment investigations and for agencies building threat assessment units; and develop programs to promote the standardization of federal, state, and local threat assessment processes and investigations.

The MAPS report from the US Secret Service is the most accurate national report that covers events that we collectively think of when we hear ‘Mass Shooting’ or ‘Terrorism’ here in the United States. When looking for an accurate representation of the more indiscriminate attacks that lack the more common motivations of purely relational homicides, fights that escalated, or violence tied to for profit criminal activities directly and took place in public or semi-public forums.

These are the attacks that are most shocking, most jarring to our sensibilities because the motivations are the least understandable to us. The attackers themselves tend to embody the most inhuman traits humanity is capable of producing at the time of their violent lethal outbursts.

The MAPS report is also a stark indication of just why we cannot have a “reasonable discussion” over gun control. Gun control proponents do not argue for policy based upon these analysis and reports, at least not in their totality. They constantly reference just enough data to support whichever pet policy they are a fan of and will win them kudos and brownie points in the political sphere, regardless of the policy’s actual reasonable efficacy or its harmful impacts to the law abiding.

It is literally impossible to come to a “reasonable compromise” with someone or some group that is sitting down across the table from you with horrendously obfuscated data (under the best of circumstances) and who is unwilling to entertain physical security measures instead of harping solely on what amounts to a complete eventual prohibition on firearms. A policy that would only legally prohibit them, not in any way effectively remove them from the multitude of human violence equations.

Homicides, mass or otherwise, occur when the murderer feels they are necessary in some manner, not because there happens to be a tool at hand to commit them.. there is always a tool at hand if you have hands. Our most effective combined efforts for combating unjustifiable (and, by extension, justifiable) homicides has been reducing the instances in which homicide feels necessary. This is a complex social equation that seeks to collectively lower the stresses and offenses of the population and not a single thing about doing so is ever simple.

So now that we have the philosophical commented upon, let’s take a look at the MAPS weapon data.

Researchers identified 34 incidents in which three or more persons, not including the perpetrator, were harmed during a targeted attack in a public or semi-public space in the United States between January and December 2019. Three of these attacks were perpetrated by pairs of attackers. In this section, percentages are calculated based on the 34 attacks.

Most of the attacks (n = 24, 71%) involved the use of one or more firearms, which included rifles, handguns, and a shotgun. Other weapons used included bladed weapons (n = 6, 18%), vehicles (n = 4, 12%), and blunt objects (n = 3, 9%). Three attacks involved a combination of weapons, including a firearm and a knife, a firearm and a vehicle, and a knife and glass bottles. Several incidents involved the attackers bringing weapons to the site (e.g., additional firearms, pipe bombs) that were not ultimately used.

Attacks Involving Firearms

Percentages shown are out of 24 incidents involving firearms

Seventeen (71%) attacks involved only handguns, six (25%) involved only long guns, and one (4%) involved both types. In four attacks, multiple firearms were used. [Emphasis added]

In at least ten (42%) of the attacks involving firearms, one or more of the attackers possessed the firearm illegally at the time of the incident. In two incidents, an attacker was a minor in possession of a handgun, which is prohibited under federal law. In the remaining incidents, the attackers had prior felony convictions, had stolen the firearm, had not obtained a valid weapons license, had a previous involuntary commitment to a mental health facility, or had another factor present that prohibited them from purchasing or possessing a firearm based on federal and/or state laws.

That is a telling paragraph, in my opinion. In nearly half the incidents gun laws already prohibiting the perpetrator from possessing their weapon were already in place and flagrantly violated… and in more than half the incidents the firearms was legally possessed so gun laws again failed to prevent the attack and had no hope of doing so. In 100% of these cases the intervention of written law, of prohibition specifically, failed utterly. That leaves social interventions, that of friends and family and the community, as the only effective means of mitigation.

MOTIVES

Motives for violence are often multifaceted. The most common motives identified for mass attacks in 2019 were related to grievances, mental health symptoms, and ideological/racial bias.

Of all the motives for the attacks given, despite what national and international media would have you think, a bias resulting in violence was less prevalent than common grievances were.

Biases still accounted for 21% of the attacks however, meaning it is a motivation to take seriously. But it is also not one demographic above others, all biases at the extreme edge are dangerous.

Seven incidents (21%) involved attackers who were motivated to violence by extreme or hateful views. Attackers targeted members of various groups including Jewish, Muslim, Asian, or Hispanic people, as well as police and U.S. soldiers. For three of these incidents, the attackers were also experiencing mental health symptoms that influenced their motives. [Emphasis added]

Seven incidents, six separate demographic targets. This isn’t #WhiteSupremacy or #AsianHate or run-of-the-mill anti-Semitism or anti-Islam. It is the whole umbrella of biases. They are all roughly comparatively dangerous, meaning extremely dangerous at the ragged edge of biases. It does not matter who the bias is against, its the extreme level of the bias the motivates the violence and modern media coverage is not structured to reduce the biases. It can and does actively inflame them.

Why? Angry people click things. The share, they rant, they comment. They do all the things that drive revenue that content people do less of since they’re basically just chilling out living their best lives.

Copycats

Nine of the attackers were influenced by, or showed interest in, past perpetrators of mass violence. Some attackers documented their admiration of past attackers in their own manifestos or in social media postings, while others spent time consuming information about past attacks. Five of these attackers referenced other attackers from earlier in 2019 prior to committing their own acts of violence. While three of them referenced other incidents contained in this report, the remaining two named a mass attacker who targeted public places outside of the United States. One additional attacker researched a female who was so obsessed with the 1999 Columbine High School shooting that she traveled from Florida to the Columbine High School area in April 2019. She purchased a weapon, but committed suicide prior to initiating an attack.

This is one of the more terrify aspects of mass attacks, the inspiration factor that the ties into fame or obsession regardless of fame that comes with such a formative traumatic event. These events will never stop being covered on a global scale. They will never cease to horrify the majority of the human race. They will never not cause a ping in the collective consciousness of the near entirety of the human race.

That is a sick and seductive level of power to the right mind. That seduction is strongest close to the events themselves. And no, “not saying their names” is a not an effective strategy. It’s more failure prone than the TSA. The events themselves will be covered, always, in great detail. In the places online where such minds visit, read, and absorb they are talked of with even greater fervor in many cases.

The main point I want to stress is that these attacks are complex events. They don’t just stem from white supremacy or gun access or racial inequity or any other single soundbite style motivational hashtag. They stem from all of them, and policies designed to overly aggressively target one of them have a adverse effect on others. Again, one of the leading motivations was purely grievance, not race. So if we hit racial motives hard and inflame grievance instead, what did we accomplish?

Nothing…

We need to stop oversimplifying this topic. It actively harms making progress toward reducing violence.

[Ed: And now for something not completely different. Going armed is fundamentally simply being prepared for dangerous emergencies; so is being equipped to fight fires. I’ve put out a couple of auto fires, and our author has stopped three or four. This is a more common hazard than most think, and deserves attention by all guardians and sheepdogs. Pictured is a McLaren — man, that hurts!]

Disclaimer:  I am not an auto mechanic, but have read the daily newspaper for over a half a century, and believe I have useful insights into the causes of auto fires.

I fought my first auto fire in 1981 while living in Madison, Wisconsin.  A battery in a woman’s car had exploded, and the entire ground under her car was burning, due to the battery acid.  She had run to a nearby apartment complex to ask that the fire department be called  (this was before we all had cell phones). At that time, the only equipment I was carrying was a 5-BC fire extinguisher.  Nonetheless, with this and the help from two other motorists who also had small extinguishers, we were able to extinguish the fire before the fire truck arrived.

In my opinion, there are three causes of auto fires:  1) electrical problems, 2) crashes (the most common cause), and 3) debris on the road that punctures the gas tank.  Recently, in the city where I live, a 2-year old was riding in her car seat of her grandparents’ car on an Interstate when debris punctured the gas tank and the car burst into frames.  A motorcycle policeman amazingly smashed the side window with his elbow, and pulled the grandparents to safety.  A female veterinarian driving by rescued the child, despite the smoke and flames, but sadly, the child died a few days later in a local hospital.

How common are car fires?  Here are the facts from the National Fire Protection Association:

• U.S. fire departments responded to an estimated average of 152,300 automobile fires per year in 2006-2010. These fires caused an average of 209 civilian deaths, 764 civilian injuries, and $536 million in direct property damage.
• Automobile fires were involved in 10% of reported U.S. fires, 6% of U.S. fire deaths.
• On average, 17 automobile fires were reported per hour (my emphasis). These fires killed an average of four people every week.
• Mechanical or electrical failures or malfunctions were factors in roughly two-thirds of the automobile fires.
• Collisions and overturns were factors in only 4% of highway vehicle fires, but these incidents accounted for three of every five (60% of) automobile fire deaths.
• Only 2% of automobile fires began in fuel tanks or fuel lines, but these incidents caused 15% of the automobile fire deaths.

If you are serious about being a volunteer first responder to car fires, I recommend being equipped as follows:

1. A pocket knife with a serrated blade, of the maximum length allowable by law – in my state this is 3 3/4”.  You will need this to cut seat belts that can become jammed after wrecks.
2. A NOMEX™ face hood that covers your entire face/neck except for the eyes.
3. Heat-resistant goggles.
4. Fireplace gloves:  These are made of heavy leather and cover your hands and forearms.
5. Some device to break out the side windows, e.g., a collapsible baton (I like the ASP™, a Life Hammer™, or a tire iron).  I recommend the first two as these can be stored next to you so as to be quickly accessible.
6. A minimum of a 2-A 10-BC dry chemical fire extinguisher (5 lbs), with a metal head and flexible rubber hose nozzle.  This is also what I have in my home.  Mine is 15” long and 4” wide.  They can be mounted in your vehicle’s trunk.

A quick review:  What do “A, B, C” ratings mean?  Here are the “official” definitions:

1. A-rated extinguishers will put out trash-wood-paper-plastics.  A 2-A extinguisher will put out a 10×10’ wood panel that is on fire.
2. B-rated extinguishers will put out liquids, like gasoline.  A 10-BC extinguisher will put out 31 gallons of Heptane.  According to Wikipedia, “n-Heptane is defined as the zero point of the octane rating scale. It is undesirable in gasoline, because it burns explosively”. 
3. C-rated means that the extinguisher is safe to use on electrical equipment.

Practical advice: 

1. Except for the fire extinguisher, knife, and breaker device, put your other items in an empty tool box, label it “FIRE EQUIPMENT”, and keep the box in your trunk.
2. Park your car far away from the burning vehicle, perhaps 100 feet.
3. Before you engage the fire, call 911 on your cell phone and report the situation and location.
4. You will probably not be fighting a vehicle fire alone.  It is my understanding that all DOT-regulated vehicles are required to carry fire extinguishers, e.g., trucks of all types, school buses, etc.  Ditto for ambulances and police cars.  And many motorists carry extinguishers.  There are many good Samaritans, as reported daily in the news media.
5. Be very wary of fighting fires involving tanker trucks!  The average over-the-road 18-wheeler carries 240 gallons of diesel fuel.  Secondly, you don’t know what they are carrying in the tanker:  Is it milk, gasoline, or some corrosive chemical that gives off deadly vapors if burning?  Best to leave these to the professionals.

— Warren Lind is a retired licensed clinical social worker and a full-time security officer who writes extensively about crime, survival, and self-defense.  He a long-time CCW holder and is a member of too many pro-2A organizations to list. 

All DRGO articles by Warren Lind