Uber and Lyft prohibiting firearms for drivers, riders

After an Uber driver in Chicago used his gun to stop a mass public shooting and save lives, the company is moving to ban guns in its cars?  Uber has posted the above policy note on its website.

We have adopted a no-firearms policy to ensure that both riders and drivers feel safe and comfortable on the platform. We made this policy change after assessing existing policies and carefully reviewing recent feedback from both riders and driver-partners.

Uber has learned nothing from all these attacks that keep occurring where guns are banned.

With 11.1 million concealed carry permit holders last year, that is a lot of potential customers that Uber and Lyft are turning down.

Kroger's stands up to Bloomberg's Moms Demand Action, Kroger's Michigan representatives say Bloomberg's group won't get them to change policy

In Lansing, Michigan, Kroger's stood up to Bloomberg's Moms Demand Action and asked them to leave the store.  From the Lansing State Journal:

A group protesting Michigan's open-carry gun rules hope a Lansing Kroger store's grand re-opening today will spur a new policy barring guns in the Holmes Street store. 

Michigan Kroger representatives said that's not likely. The Cincinnati-based grocery chain is sticking by Michigan law, which doesn't prohibit openly carrying guns in public. Michigan gun owners have to have a concealed-pistol license, however, to carry guns concealed in public. 

Kroger's stance won't stop Moms Demand Action's ongoing protests at Kroger stores, however, said Linda Brundage, who heads the group's mid-Michigan chapter. Brundage led a group of about 12 women at this morning's protest. 

The group was initially asked to leave the parking lot . . ., but was then invited inside to speak with store management. 

"You don't need a gun to buy a box of cereal," Brundage said outside the store. "Kroger would not be breaking any laws by saying to their customers, 'Leave your guns locked in the car.'" 

Chris Albi, Kroger's vice president of merchandising for Michigan, said the company's Cincinnati headquarters was aware of today's protest, but isn't expected to change its policy. . . .

For more on Bloomberg's push to ban guns in stores and the inaccurate way that the discussions are portrayed in the media follow this link available here.

Thanks to Tony for the link.

Bloomberg's groups continue to push to ban guns in businesses, but nothing is really changing

Bloomberg's groups have been pushing for sometime to get businesses to ban guns in their facilities.  On Monday, Panera Bread announced that it was asking customers not to bring guns to its restaurants" ((314) 984-1000).  But much of the media coverage has been misleading and simply asking people not to bring their guns with them won't have any legal effect.  The question is if Panera Bread will be posting signs and it doesn't appear to be the case.  Still, that gives Bloomberg's groups another PR boast.  From CNBC:

"We are thrilled that after months of discussions between Panera and Moms Demand Action, Panera is taking a proactive position in favor of our families' safety by putting a new gun policy in place. Moms are the consumers-in-chief of our households and we will reward companies that take a stand for our families' safety. We urge other national companies follow suit," said Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, in an email.  . . .

Yet, note that as in all the other announcements that Bloomberg's groups have been trumpeting for sometime, this new announcement changes absolutely nothing.  From CNNMoney:

The news is another victory for gun safety group Moms Demand Action . . . The company first announced the decision during a CNBC interview with Panera CEO Ron Shaich. He said during the interview that the company would not post anti-gun signs in its stores or require employees to confront gun owners. . . .

Given this, what exactly is the point of the news stories on this announcement?  The company is asking people not to bring guns with them, but it also is going to continue allowing people to bring their guns with them.  So how is this a victory for Bloomberg's groups? Bloomberg's groups are now spending "six figures" in ads to force Kroger to also announce that they are not welcoming people who carry guns.  You can see their ads here.

Georgia dad files lawsuit to allow him to carry gun when visiting his daughter's school

Georgia's current law about schools and gun-free zones seems pretty clear, but there was sufficient ambiguity that a court decision is necessary to clear things up.  Well, it looks like that such a legal challenge might be at hand.  From Fox News:

A Georgia father has filed a lawsuit after he says the principal at his daughter’s elementary school told him he was not allowed to bring his gun on school grounds. 

MyFoxAtlanta.com reported Friday that the lawsuit claims that the principal told Hugh Myers that he could not bring his gun onto the campus of Beulah Elementary School other than when he is dropping off or picking up his daughter. The principal allegedly threatened to have him arrested if he did so. 

Myers’ attorney John Monroe is arguing that Myers is allowed to bring his gun under a new Georgia law that took effect last month, according to MyFoxAtlanta.com. . . .

Newest Fox News piece: Media feeding frenzy over open carry guns in restaurants much ado about nothing

My newest piece at Fox News starts this way:

The NRA’s strong statement reprimanding a few people for carrying long guns into restaurants was bound to get media attention. Bloomberg’s Moms Demand Action and much of the media quickly jumped in and described various restaurants as “asking customers to leave their guns at home.” But their assertions couldn’t be more misleading. 

The headline at USA Today saying “No Guns Inside” or at MSNBC and Huffington Post saying “No-Gun Policies” are simply wrong. 

A big deal has been made of Starbucks, Jack in the Box, Chipotle, Wendy's, Applebee's, Chili’s and Sonic’s supposed bans on guns, with Bloomberg’s groups declaring “victory.” 

Yet, Starbucks “respectfully requesting” customers no longer bring in openly carried guns is not a ban on guns. 

Jack in the Box’s statement “we would prefer that guests not bring their guns inside our restaurant” refers to open carry.  Neither restaurant forbids customers from carrying concealed handguns and comments like “request” or “prefer” are a long ways from bans. 

Calls to all these restaurants revealed that none of them have changed their policy about posting any signs banning either generally banning guns or permitted concealed handguns. 

With 11 million concealed handgun permits in the United States, it is understandable why none of these businesses want to risk losing that many customers. 

From a general crime-deterrence perspective point of view, . . .

The rest of the piece is available here.

Continued media misinformation on gun-free zones at restaurants? Have Sonic and Chili’s really banned customers from bring firearms into the restaurants?

The problem with these stories (such as ones I read at MSNBC, IBTimes, or other places) is that they don't make it clear whether the stores will actually post that people aren't allowed to carry in their restaurants.  The stories seem more aimed at pushing gun control than actually informing readers.

The changes at Starbucks, Jack in the Box, Chipotle, Wendy's, and Applebee's have changed in practice.  The same may be here too, but from the way the stories are written you would never know.

However, I will say that I actually believe that those who are carrying long guns into restaurants really want to try to have guns banned.

Front door sign banning guns apparently didn't stop three armed robbers from taking their guns into this restaurant

The problem isn't just that the criminals ignored the crime, the problem is that it probably created an incentive for them to pick that place to rob.  Knowing that the victims are defenseless makes it more attractive for criminals to pick that as their target.  From ABC TV Channel 11 in Durham, North Carolina:

Police are searching for three suspects involved in an armed robbery at Durham's newly-opened barbecue restaurant, The Pit, at 321 W. Geer Street. 

Authorities said just before 9 p.m. Sunday, three men wearing hoodies entered the restaurant through the back doors with pistols, and forced several staff members to lie on the floor. 

The bandits assaulted two employees during the crime, but they were not seriously injured. 

"They're doing great," restaurant owner Greg Hatem said. "One of them actually went to the hospital and was released. They took a good look at him, he's fine." 

Hatem also said there were a few patrons in the dining room while the robbery was happening in the kitchen area. Workers were able to ask them to leave, and got them out safely through the front door. . . .

NCGunBlog is the source of the picture of the restaurant's front door. 

Thanks to Tony Troglio for providing this information.

Mass shooting yesterday at FedEx facility in Kennesaw Georgia to place in yet another "gun-free zone"

When are news reports going to mention the simple fact that yet another attack has occurred in a gun-free zone?  The above picture is from the Kennesaw facility for Fedex.  Six people are listed as wounded from the attack.  From Fox News:

KENNESAW, Ga. –  The father of a gunman who wounded six colleagues in an Atlanta-area rampage says his son didn't seem enthusiastic about his job but never mentioned problems with co-workers. 

Geddy Kramer showed up with a shotgun early Tuesday morning at the FedEx package-sorting center where he worked. He shot a security guard, then fired on those working in a large warehouse before killing himself. . . .

What possible reason could there be to ban off-duty police from carrying guns at NFL games?

AWR Hawkins notes that there are at least two stadiums where off-duty police will be able to carry guns (both in Texas), but why the NFL would want to ban off-duty police from carrying is beyond me.  Would the NFL ban on-duty police from carrying?  No.  So why don't they trust off-duty officers?  From Breitbart.com:

On October 7th, Breitbart News reported the NFL's ban on off-duty officers carrying their sidearms into NFL stadiums. On February 18th, Breitbart News reported the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association was suing the NFL, claiming the ban on off-duty officers carrying guns "violates state law." . . .

South Carolina: Concealed carry in Restaurants that serve alcohol and bars, ONLY two states will still ban guns in restaurants that serve alcohol

From The State newspaper (South Carolina):

Gov. Nikki Haley has signed a bill allowing people with concealed-weapon permits to bring their guns into restaurants and bars in South Carolina, if the businesses do not prohibit it. 

The law took effect with Haley's signature Tuesday. 

The Republican governor stresses it is illegal for people to drink alcohol while carrying a gun. Under the law, anyone caught would have the permit revoked for five years, plus face up to two years in prison and a $2,000 fine. 

Businesses can post a sign barring concealed weapons. . . .

North Carolina now allows concealed carry in restaurants serving alcohol and bars and in March Illinois will soon allow it also.  With South Carolina's new law, only two states will still have such a ban.  The map below doesn't show these changes.

All the "pro-gun" Democrats on US Senate Homeland Security Committee vote against amendment to end gun-free zones in US Post Offices

I watched the C-SPAN rebroadcast of Thursday's Homeland Security Committee's vote on amendments.  Unfortunately, the "pro-gun" Democrats unanimously voted against ending the gun-free zones in US Post Offices.  And the reason for keep gun-free zones at Post offices is what?  Does Fedex or UPS have a problem with permit holders?  Do other places of business report problems with permit holders?  The answer to all those questions is "no."  Yet, this is how the 4 "pro-gun" Democrats voted:

Mark Prior: No
Jon Tester: No
Mark Begich: No
Heidi Heitkamp: No

The vote was 9 against - 6 in favor.  If just two of these "pro-gun" Democrats had supported the amendment, it would have passed.

Over all, all the Republicans who voted supported ending gun-free zones at post offices and all the Democrats voted to keep them.  Even John McCain voted to end these gun-free zones.  The one exception to this pattern was Porter from Ohio (R) who was absent.

Democrat Mark Begich tried to give Democrats cover for their opposition by having a vote on allowing permit holders to lock their guns in their cars while they are in Post Office parking lots, though Begich himself said that his amendment was merely codifying recent court rulings on this point and not changing anything.

UPDATE:  An additional discussion is provided here.

Absolutely surreal: Chicago school officials hate guns so much that they object 'no guns' stickers because they picture guns

Chicago school officials are worried that a picture of a sign banning guns might "alarm" people because it is a picture (!) of a gun.  Public school officials apparently think that the students and others who visit their schools must be really dumb to get confused by the sign and "misinterpret the new signage."  Yet, possibly people do understand and appreciate the problems with gun-free zones and that is what is upsetting people.  From the Chicago-Sun Times:

School officials want the public to know that in compliance with state law (House Bill 0183), schools, churches, government agencies and liquor stores statewide will be posting 4-by-6-inch stickers reminding the public, particularly those with a concealed-carry license, that there are limits on where a gun can be carried. 

While schools didn’t allow guns even before the concealed-carry law was passed, they still are required to display the reminder. Some officials are questioning the mandate, and some find the sticker image disturbing. . . . 

While complying with state law isn’t a point of contention, some school administrators find the sticker’s image to be a bit alarming. 

“One of my biggest concerns as a principal is safety and security,” Tinley Park High School Principal Theresa Nolan said. “It is bothersome to have to post a sticker of a gun that says, ‘Hey, folks, leave your guns at home.’” 

Nolan said she is not opposed to posting it, she’s just worried that not enough people are aware of what it means and could misinterpret the new signage. 

“I think the general public will be alarmed by it and wonder if people have been allowed to bring guns to school in the past,” she said. In her 22 years with Bremen Community High School District 228, she said, “I have no knowledge of guns ever being in this building.” . . .

I do agree with this sentiment, though not for the same reasons as the person making the statement.

“You can’t look at this (sticker) and not think about Sandy Hook,” she said, referring to the 2012 school shooting in Newton, Conn., in which 20 children and six teachers were killed. . . . 

Does anyone think that metal detectors at Major League Baseball parks will make people safer?

I recently wrote about the head of Interpol discussing how impossible it is to really secure soft civilian targets.  When you ban guns from areas it is only the law-abiding who will obey the rules.  From the Associated Press:

Entering a big league ballpark will be a bit like going through an airport by 2015.Major League Baseball has told its 30 teams they must implement security screening for fans by then, either with hand-held metal detection or walk-through magnetometers.
"This procedure, which results from MLB's continuing work with the Department of Homeland Security to standardize security practices across the game, will be in addition to bag checks that are now uniform throughout MLB," baseball spokesman Michael Teevan said Tuesday.
The Seattle Mariners announced Tuesday that fans entering Safeco Field will have to walk through metal detectors starting with this year's opener.
Boston, the New York Mets, Oakland, Pittsburgh and San Francisco were among the teams that experimented with screening at times last year. Security gained more intense focus after three people were killed and more than 260 wounded in when two bombs were set off at the Boston Marathon finish line. . . .

Toby Keith restaurant in Virginia posts ban on concealed carry guns? Keith has strongly supported Concealed Carry in the past

Back in 2011, Toby Keith was quoted as having quite strong views supporting concealed carry laws.

 “I’m all about good people, licensed and trained, carrying a concealed weapon,” Keith said. “The bad guys are always gonna be carrying guns. There are so many guns in the US and so many bad people that do harm with ‘em. If just one percent of the non-felons would go get their concealed weapons license and carry a gun where they can, one percent puts you in a pretty good position of being somebody that could save a bunch of people’s lives.”   “If somebody asked me ‘Why do you have one? What are you afraid of?’ I’d say, ‘I ain’t afraid of nothing. I carry so I don’t have to be.’”

Yet, Keith has a new restaurant chain where he has a "NO GUNS PERMITTED" sign at the door.  From Fox's DC affiliate:

A big country star opened a huge, new restaurant last week in Woodbridge, Va. But a house rule for the new establishment is roiling some Virginians: no guns are allowed inside.
Toby Keith is not only a hugely successful country star (and actor), he also has personally opened a couple of restaurants, and through other companies, has now expanded those establishments into about a dozen cities.
The latest Toby Keith restaurant opened in Woodbridge. Prominently displayed on the front door is a sign saying: “NO GUNS PERMITTED.”
Virginia happens to be a gun-friendly state, where it’s quite permissible for citizens to strap on a weapon and go into a bar or restaurant, as long as the weapon is clearly visible. State law is silent on the issue of drinking while openly carrying a gun. (State law does prohibit most citizens who are legally carrying a concealed weapon from consuming alcohol, but they, too, are allowed to go into a bar or restaurant.) . . .

Might this simply be because Keith hired someone to run the restaurants for him?


UPDATE: A couple of days after the original post, the restaurant offered an explanation for their policy:

The Facebook page of Toby Keith's I Love This Bar and Grill in Woodbridge posted on Saturday:

"While we understand and respect every person's right to own and bear arms, we at Toby Keith's I Love This Bar and Grill, with guidance from the State of Virginia and based on insurance regulations, have adopted a no weapons policy. It is our desire to provided a safe, enjoyable and entertaining experience for our patrons and staff."

This type of posting is extremely unusual.  I have lived in Virginia for some years now and I can't recall a time when I saw such a posting. That is important because it gets to the perceived risks. Why is Toby Keith's restaurant so different? The statement issued doesn't really explain this difference in any way.

Gonzaga students who used gun to defend themselves will not be expelled, will be put on permanent probation

This is one school that I would appreciate the chance to debate at, especially given that they are reconsidering their policies on guns on campus.  Despite the pressure put on them, the student with the gun still said that he was glad that he had it and would rather be expelled than not have had the gun to protect himself.  From KREM.com in Spokane, Washington:

Gonzaga University will not expel two students for using a gun to defend themselves in an off-campus and Gonzaga owned apartment.  They will be placed on probation for the rest of their time at the university. Students Erik Fagan and Dan McIntosh were originally threatened with expulsion after they flashed a gun at a man with outstanding felony warrants who came to their door asking for money. That man was later arrested. Fagan and McIntosh were told by campus security that they violated school policy by having a firearm on Gonzaga University property. . . .

Possibly the most important part of the news is the last sentence.

The Gonzaga President sent an open email to students on Saturday acknowledging calls to reevaluate the school’s rules on guns.

Here is a slightly stronger statement about the Gonzaga policy review from the New York Daily News.

Gonzaga University has agreed to review its weapons policy as two students who used a pistol to drive an intruder from their apartment appeal their probation for having guns in their university-owned accommodation. 

"As a Jesuit institution dedicated to thoughtful evaluation of complex social issues," Gonzaga will use the incident to re-examine its policy, President Thayne McCulloh said in a weekend statement. . . .  

Gonzaga should consider student safety above all else, said their lawyer, Dean Chuang.  

"We're glad that it didn't have to end in tragedy for them to consider changing the policy there," Chuang said. "Our boys were armed and stopped a home invasion here." . . .

UPDATE: If a robber wants to rob people, where should he go?  You might think that a University would be an attractive target, right?

Officials at the University of Minnesota have lifted a warning for students to take shelter after man with a gun tried to rob a student on campus. 

University police say the armed man tried to rob a student of her laptop in Anderson Hall on the West Bank of the Minneapolis campus Monday before fleeing into the tunnel system between buildings. . . . 

 How does a university solve the problem?

After the attempted robbery, the university sent a text alert at 3:20 p.m. Monday warning students on the West Bank to stay in a safe place. The alert was lifted about an hour later. . . .

Seattle Mayor McGinn launches "Gun Free Zone" campaign to push businesses to ban concealed handgun permits from premises

Can the mayor understand the difference between criminals shooting others and concealed handgun permit holders?  Will a sign in front of the shop stop one gang member from shooting another gang member there?

From King5.com:

Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn is partnering with Washington CeaseFire to launch a new program designed to help local businesses become “Gun Free Zones.” 

Businesses will be able to opt into the program by visiting www.washingtonceasefire.org, signing the pledge to participate, and placing a “Gun Free Zone” decal in their window. 

“We are here to support businesses that do not wish to have guns on their premises” McGinn said in a statement. “The police department regularly enforces trespass laws when a visitor to a business violates that business’s rules. We will continue to do so, and I thank these businesses for standing up for the safety of their customers.” 

Dozens of businesses, including Neumos, Oddfellows, Elliott Bay Books, Cupcake Royale and Café Racer have reportedly signed up to participate. 

"I think we've all been disappointed that, in the wake of Sandy Hook, nothing got done in Olympia, But what we're trying to do here today is address the culture of gun violence," said Washington CeaseFire Board President Ralph Fascitelli.

Washington CeaseFire says in King County alone, more people die every year from gun violence than from motor vehicle collisions, and between 2007 and 2011, the estimated annual cost of firearms deaths and hospitalizations in King County was $177 million. . . . .

Mt. Juliet, TN City Employees may Soon Carry Guns At Work

By a 4 to 1 vote, the city gave its initial approval to letting city employees carry concealed handguns.  What is most interesting is how the bill changed through the process.  From a local TV station in Tennessee:

City commissioners in Mt. Juliet passed an ordinance that would allow employees with valid carry permits to bring a gun onto city property.
It was the ordinance's first reading.
The ordinance would permit all city employees to have a gun on their person while performing their city duties.
"Anytime that you can get in here, as government body, and remove any barriers to people's rights to self protection, and self defense, I think that's a good thing," said Mt. Juliet Vice Mayor James Maness.
He was one of four commissioners who voted in favor of the ordinance. The proposal started out to allow guns in parking lots, and was then amended to allow city managers to carry guns, and eventually was changed to allow all employees with a valid permit to bring a gun to work.
"We're not granting anyone extra rights, we're just choosing not to deny them the rights they already have," Maness said.
The ordinance raised red flags for Commissioner Jim Bradshaw, the lone no vote against the ordinance.
"I was just really, totally shocked the other night the way this ordinance started out and got turned and twisted," Bradshaw explained.
Bradshaw said his opposition has nothing to do with the right to carry a gun. He just does not feel it is sound policy to allow employees to carry guns while they are working. . . .

New Smart Phone App tells users what places are dangerous gun-free zones

If you are concerned about what places prevent victims from being able to defend themselves, this App might be for you.  Surely a lot of concealed carry permit holders are inconvenienced by going to a store and finding that once they get there they can't go inside.  This type of App might say people some inconvenience because they can check what places are safe before they go there.  A link to the App is available here.  If enough people use this App, it might also help me more quickly identify that another mass shooting occurred at a gun-free zone.

Another gun free zone, another shooting: Santa Monica College

Why won't these news stories mention that another attack has occurred where guns are banned?  I would be happy if even a 10th of the news stories mentioned this simple fact.  From Fox News:

Authorities say a man with a semi-automatic rifle who killed at least four people and wounded several others Friday as he carried out a deadly rampage in Santa Monica before police shot him dead had planned the attack.
Santa Monica Police Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks said Saturday afternoon the gunman had 1,300 rounds of ammunition along with a duffel bag full of ammunition magazines and extra weaponry. . . .

At some point everyone has to understand the pattern here (see also here and of course more detail here and here).

Mayors Against Illegal Guns gets supposed list of shootings where guns were allowed all wrong

I have previously noted that there were two multiple victim public shootings that weren't in gun-free zones.  Those were the Gabrielle Giffords and the Carson City, NV IHOP shootings.

In response to my statements, Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG) has put together a list of their own cases where they claim that more shootings have occurred where guns are allowed.  The group's chairman, John Feinblatt, had a relatively long 255 word letter in the Wall Street Journal publicizing this report.   What should be very clear to anyone who has worked in this area is that you can't simply look at a few news stories to determine whether an attack has occurred in a gun-free zone.  Indeed, as I have complained many times, the media virtually always refuses to mention whether the attack occurred in a gun-free zone (many of my op-eds have also made this point).  For those who follow this blog, it should be fairly clear that others and I do a lot of work in obtaining information about different attacks.  This includes calling the businesses or other facilities involved.  But many times those organizations are uncooperative and in those cases I have spent a lot of time contacting individuals in the area of the attack and asking them if they can provide pictures or other information on the facilities.  Dozens of individuals around the country can attest to me bothering them over the years after these incidents.

Unfortunately, Mayors Against Illegal Guns did not do this work, and they have also inaccurately stated, ignored, or simply missed material that is readily available in news stories.  Let me go through the cases in the MAIG report.

Geneva County, AL, 3/10/09: The shooter killed ten, including four members of his family, before killing himself. 

Shooter Name: Michael Kenneth McLendon, 28 

Gun details: Bushmaster AR-15, SKS Rifle, Shotgun, and .38 Pistol 

Ammo details: Police recovered additional ammunition from his vehicle after the shooting. Gun acquired: Unknown. 

Prohibiting criteria: The shooter had no criminal record and there is no indication he was prohibited from owning a gun. 

Not a gun-free zone: It was lawful to carry a firearm in the public intersection and gas station where two of the individuals were shot.

Nine people were killed by McLendon. In the first shooting in a house on Pullum Street, five people were killed.  There was also a second shooting in another home that left two people dead.  Neither were public places.  It is true that two individuals were killed in separate public places as McLendon was driving along, but that is not a multiple victim public shooting in which at least four are killed in a public place.  However, MAIG’s report implies that all these shootings occurred in a public places.

Lakewood, WA, 11/29/09: The shooter killed four police officers in a Tacoma Coffee shop, eluding police for two days before being killed as he fled.
Shooter Name: Maurice Clemmons, 37
Gun details: When he was killed, he was in possession of the handgun of one of the officers he had killed.
Ammo details: Unknown
Gun acquired: Unknown
Prohibiting criteria: The shooter was prohibited from purchasing a firearm, having been charged with at least 13 felonies across two states. He had posted bail for raping a child just six days before the attack.
Not a gun-free zone: The police officers were armed at the time of the shooting.

I haven't defined gun-free zones in terms of whether police were allowed to carry guns, but whether private citizens are able to readily obtain concealed handguns for their protection.  What is important is that the coffee shop was posted to prevent concealed carry permit holders from carrying.  Presumably MAIG understood this point and that is the reason why they focused on police officers being able to carry in this venue.  Obviously, however, on-duty police can carry any place.  The problem for uniformed police is that they provide an easily identifiable target and it is easy to take them out.  Possibly if the attacker had to worry about permit holders who he could not identify, it would have dissuaded him from attacking.  While I had checked when this event originally occurred, I reconfirmed this information with Dave Workman who lived nearby via email on January 8, 2013.  

Carthage, NC, 3/29/09: The shooter opened fire at a nursing home where his estranged wife worked, killing eight and injuring three before he was shot and arrested by a police officer.
Shooter Name: Robert Stewart, 45
Gun details: .357 Magnum handgun and Winchester 1300 shotgun
Ammo details: Unknown
Gun acquired: The guns were acquired legally from a local sporting good store.
Prohibiting criteria: There is no indication the Stewart was prohibited from owning a gun.
Not a gun-free zone: We could find no indication that the property-owner forbid carrying of firearms on their property.

This facility informed me in April 2009 that they did not allow guns in the facility for either the people living there or the staff.  I called up asking what their policies had been before the attack.

Boston, MA, 09/28/10: The shooter killed four and wounded one during a drug-related robbery.
Shooter Name: Edward Washington, 33, and Dwayne Moore, 35, were both charged in the killings. Washington was acquitted. In Moore’s first trial, the jury deadlocked 11-1 in favor of his guilt, but he was later convicted in a retrial.
Gun details: 40-caliber Iberia handgun and 9mm Cobray semiautomatic. The Cobray has not been recovered, but the weapon was identified based on recovered bullets and shell casings.
Ammo details: 14 rounds fired
Gun acquired: Unknown
Prohibiting criteria: Unknown
Not a gun free zone: A person with a Massachusetts Class A license could lawfully carry a firearm in this area. 

Buffalo, NY, 8/14/10: The shooter opened fire on a group of people outside a bar, killing four and wounding four others.
Shooter Name: Riccardo McCray, 24
Gun details: Unknown
Ammo details: Unknown
Gun acquired: Unknown
Prohibiting criteria: McCray had been arrested earlier that year on felony drug charges and the previous year for having a loaded rifle in his car. If he was found guilty of either crime, he would have been prohibited from possessing firearms.
Not a gun-free zone: We could find no indication that it was unlawful to carry a firearm in the area.

Both cities either forbid or make it incredibly difficult for law-abiding citizens to carry concealed handguns for protection.  In Boston it is so bad that even off-duty and retired police are regularly denied unrestricted license to carry permits.

Oak Creek, WI, 8/5/12: The shooter killed six people at a Sikh temple and injured three others, including a responding police officer, before killing himself.
Shooter Name: Wade Michael Page, 40
Gun details: 9mm semiautomatic handgun
Ammo details: Page reportedly bought three 19-round magazines when he purchased the gun.
Gun acquired: Page acquired the gun at a local gun shop a week before the shooting.
Prohibiting criteria: Page was involved with the white supremacist movement but he does not appear to have been prohibited from purchasing a gun. Federal officials investigated Page’s ties to supremacist groups more than once prior to the shooting, but did not collect enough evidence to open an investigation.

From FoxNews.com: “No guns [were] allowed in the temple,” Kulbir Singh, an attendee of the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin, told FoxNews.com. “Everyone knows that it’s not allowed, anywhere in the temple.” 

Norcross, GA, 2/22/12: The shooter returned to a Korean spa from which he'd been kicked out after an altercation, where he shot and killed two of his sisters and their husbands before committing suicide.
Shooter Name: Jeong Soo Paek, 59
Gun details: .45 caliber handgun
Ammo details: Unknown
Gun acquired: Police reported that he acquired the gun legally.
Prohibiting criteria: Paek does not appear to have been prohibited, although he had allegedly served two months in jail for assaulting his sister six years earlier.
Not a gun-free zone: We could find no indication that the property owner forbade possession of a firearm on their property.

In one of the more difficult conversations that I have had, I spoke with someone at the spa after the attack and they indicated that they were sure that neither the sisters nor their husbands had guns at the spa and that the killer who was the brother of the women knew that was the case.  I was told that the killer knew "nobody there had a gun."  While I don't know what the official policy at the spa was because the person that I was talking to was upset and didn't want to continue the conversation, the important thing was that the killer knew that there were no guns for people to defend themselves there.  This was a small family owned establishment so it is most likely that this was the official policy of the family.  Note that they have the wrong date on this event.  The event actually occurred on February 20, 2012.  Note also that the business has since closed.

Mount Airy, NC, 11/01/09: The shooter killed four people outside a television store before eventually surrendering to the police.  

Shooter Name: Marcos Chavez Gonzalez, 29  

Gun details: Assault rifle. 

Ammo details: Unknown 

Gun acquired: Unknown  

Prohibiting criteria: The shooter was a prohibited purchaser, having been convicted of kidnapping a minor in 2002.  

Not a gun-free zone: It was lawful to carry a firearm in the area of the shooting.

Indications are that the attack was part of gang related crime.  As I have explained before, that would exclude it from the cases that Bill Landes and I examined.

Just in case MAIG decided to rewrite their report, I have saved a pdf copy of it available here.  Possibly MAIG might have been more successful in their task if they had bothered to look up how my past research with Bill Landes has defined these gun-free zones is available here.

There are a few other cases that I have collected that I will link to here.

The Azana Salon & Spa shooting in Milwaukee, Wisconsin (November, 2012).
Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooting (July, 2012).
Another shooting in a another gun free zone: Binghamton, NY (April, 2009).
Trolley Square Mall in Utah (February, 2007).
Omaha, Nebraska mall shooting (December 2007).
I have about 327 postings on gun-free zones available here.

UPDATE: Unfortunately, the MAIG "report" has gotten coverage without those who have looked at it doing any additional research.  Here is something from the MinnPost by Susan Perry and the MinnPost kindly puts up the report on their site.