Another Mass Shooting in a ‘Gun-Free Zone’
The Minneapolis killer made the point in his manifesto. The media insist on ignoring it.
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/another-mass-shooting-in-a-gun-free-zone-55e29255
[archive link:
https://archive.ph/DsVvN]
{John R. Lott Jr. & Thomas Massie | 28 August 2025}
Another mass shooter has struck and the media is again refusing to say why he chose his target. Like other killers, he openly admitted that he sought out “gun-free zones.” Yet mainstream outlets refuse to acknowledge it—and thereby ignore a policy solution that could save children’s lives.
The Annunciation Catholic School shooter in Minneapolis spelled it out in his
manifesto: “I recently heard a rumor that James Holmes, the Aurora theater shooter, may have chosen venues that were ‘gun-free zones.’ I would probably aim the same way. . . . Holmes wanted to make sure his victims would be unarmed. That’s why I and many others like schools so much. At least for me, I am focused on them. Adam Lanza is my reason.” (Lanza committed a mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.)
Many of these attackers may be crazy, but none are stupid. They plan to die, but they want to die with attention. They know that the more victims they kill, the more coverage they’ll get. That’s why they target places where no one can fight back.
Yet searching media coverage, we turned up no articles mentioning that the Minneapolis killer picked a school because it was a “gun-free zone.” The media clearly read the passages the shooter wrote. CNN
highlights his “obsession with school shootings.” The Washington Post
describes the manifesto’s “reverence for other mass shooters.” But instead of reporting the killer’s own words about the vulnerability of gun-free zones, the media infers that he targeted the school because his mother was a former employee at the parish.
Everyone wants to stop mass shootings, but we need solutions that work. Having someone on site who can quickly intervene and stop an attack is crucial. Gun-control advocates push background checks on private transfers of guns and red-flag laws, yet Minnesota has both. The Annunciation Catholic School shooter still obtained three firearms legally. These limits didn’t keep the children of Minneapolis safe.
Neither did Minnesota’s law banning guns in schools. The attached penalty of five years in prison is a strong deterrent for a law-abiding American, but not to a shooter who is going to face multiple life sentences anyway. And that assumes the killer lives. Some 60% of these attackers—including the Minneapolis shooter—
die at the scene. Many seem intent on ending their lives in the attack. They don’t care about more theoretical prison time.
Far from making people safer, in practice these bans guarantee that only the attacker will be armed. That’s why such places are targets. It’s no accident that
92% of mass public shootings occur in gun-free zones where civilians aren’t allowed to carry firearms. The Nashville Covenant School shooter
admitted she avoided another site because it had too much security. “There was another location that was mentioned, but because of a threat assessment by the suspect of too much security, they decided not to,” Nashville Police Chief John Drake explained. No one at Covenant carried a gun to fight back.
The Buffalo, N.Y., supermarket attacker in 2022 made
the same calculation, writing in his manifesto: “Areas where CCW [concealed carry weapons] permits are outlawed or prohibited may be good areas of attack.” Many other killers have written
nearly identical words.
So why not station more police officers at schools? Sheriff Kurt Hoffman of Sarasota County, Fla.,
explained why that approach
falls short: “A deputy in uniform has an extremely difficult job in stopping these attacks. These terrorists have huge strategic advantages in determining the time and place of attacks. They can wait for a deputy to leave the area, or pick an undefended location. Even when police or deputies are in the right place at the right time, those in uniform who can be readily identified as guards may as well be holding up neon signs saying, ‘Shoot me first.’ My deputies know that we cannot be everywhere.”
Arming teachers and other employees with concealed firearms deprives an attacker of those tactical advantages. He can’t tell which teachers or staff are armed. More than
21 million people hold concealed handgun permits, and in the 29 constitutional-carry states no permit is even required. Across America when you stand in a grocery store, there’s a good chance someone nearby carries a concealed handgun. The same should be true of schools. More than 20 states and more than 10,000 public schools already allow armed teachers under various rules. Other than suicides and gang violence at night, not a single death or injury has occurred in a school that permits teachers to carry.
One of us, Rep. Massie, continues to reintroduce the Safe Students Act to repeal the 1990 federal Gun-Free School Zones Act. We shouldn’t make the national default one that advertises children as defenseless targets.
If the media ever reported why these killers consistently choose disarmed victims, the push for more gun control would collapse and more lives would be saved. It’s time to take these killers at their word.
Mr. Lott is president of Crime Prevention Research Center. Mr. Massie, a Republican, represents Kentucky’s Fourth Congressional District and is a co-chairman of the Second Amendment Caucus.
