We've seen a number of high-profile shootings lately. From Manhattan to Fort Stewart, it's been a bit of a ride, to say the least. No one likes seeing this, besides maybe anti-gunners who see an opportunity to push gun control
But their efforts haven't helped. They've led to some of this.
See, both of those incidents were in areas where extensive gun control regulations were in place that, if they worked, would have prevented them from happening at all. Clearly, the rules didn't work.
And, as Jose Nino notes over at Ammoland, that's par for the course.
From schools to military installations, gun-free zones have a long history of turning otherwise secure places into hunting grounds for criminals.
The recent active shooter incident at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) headquarters in Atlanta on August 8, 2025, resulted in the death of one police officer and the gunman himself. Like all federal facilities, the CDC bans firearms on its premises, creating the type of target-rich environment that attracts mass shooters. Although this shooting did not turn into a mass casualty event, that risk remains high when gun-free zones remain in place.
The shooting at Fort Stewart further demonstrates the absurdity of disarming trained military personnel on their own installations. When Army Sergeant Quornelius Radford opened fire on his colleagues with his handgun, fellow soldiers were forced to tackle him with their bare hands while he continued shooting. These are the same warriors we trust to defend America overseas with sophisticated weaponry, yet they cannot defend themselves or their comrades on American soil.
The data on gun-free zones presents an undeniable pattern that policymakers and pundits continue to overlook. Research from the Crime Prevention Research Center shows that an overwhelming majority of mass public shootings occur in areas where firearms are prohibited.
According to pro-gun researcher John Lott’s findings, “since 1950, 94% of the mass public shootings have taken place in areas where law-abiding citizens have been banned from having guns.” Even more damning, Lott’s research reveals that mass shooters often seek out gun-free environments because they understand these zones guarantee minimal resistance. This pattern demolishes the naive assumption that posted signs and regulations deter criminals who are hell-bent on committing dastardly deeds.
This is, of course, nothing new to anyone who follows gun rights to any degree.
A friend of mine insisted on calling them "victim disarmament zones," which wasn't wrong at all. The rules in these places make it so that rule-following people don't have a firearm on their person.
This includes places like military bases, schools, bars, shopping malls, and other places. The rules vary from state to state, of course, which means some things are off-limits in one place and others aren't.
Either way, though, the rules keep good, decent people from carrying guns, which means people who might be able to meet threat on equal footing aren't able to.
Which isn't an accident.
If you're wanting to kill as many people as possible, would you take the risk of being shot right off the bat? The Greenwood Park Mall is a prime example of target selection--it had been a gun-free zone, at least at one time--and the problem of armed citizens thwarting someone's evil plans. If that were the norm for mass shootings, we'd have fewer of them because too many of these monsters want fame. Make their attacks amount to nothing except fame for the guy who killed them, and they'll abandon their so-called missions.
But the fear over armed individuals has been cultivated so that far too many are uncomfortable with anyone having a gun. The idea that they don't know who will start shooting is prevalent in many places, and I can't say that it's universal that a mass killer won't start off just being a gun with a gun on his hip. Unlike a lot of people, I remember the details of the Cafe Racer shooting in Seattle.
It's not typical, though, by any stretch.
Instead, though, anti-gunners have cultivated that fear in order to push for gun-free zones, all while ignoring the failures of their policies.
Then again, they've always ignored the failures of their policies.
Still, gun-free zones don't make anyone safer. They turn people into prey, and we should never tolerate such a thing.
Editor’s Note: The radical left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your VIP membership.
