Yet Another Mall Shooting
It appears that there was yet another graphic example this weekend in a Chicago mall of why the disarming of law abiding citizens is wrong. Our malls, churches, and anywhere else where large numbers of people gather is a prime target for some lunatic with a gun to come in and open fire. The lawmakers would have us believe that this shouldn’t have happened because they made a law prohibiting this from happening. Really? I guess the gunmen didn’t get the memo on that law. And what is really so painfully obvious, is that even if the gunmen know and comprehend the anti-gun laws – do you really think they care? It’s not as if they sit up watching CNN, CSPAN, or the local news to see what laws are in effect. How many times do we have to state that the only people these “feel good” laws really have an effect on are the law abiding citizens? And the effect is not a positive one – it is getting our citizens KILLED!
One obvious argument that the antigun crowd will give is: “Well what are the chances that someone (law abiding, concealed carry permit holder) would have even been in that mall and could have done any good?” We know for sure that because of the current laws there, the chances are absolutely ZERO! We have only to ask that same question: “What are the chances that an armed citizen will be in church when a gunman comes in and opens fire?” We know from the events in a Colorado Springs church in December 2007 that the answer is that only two people died. The rest were saved because of a brave (and armed) woman with a gun.
Or how about the argument that: “Allowing citizens to carry guns will only add to the potential for gun violence.” My reply to that is that several million law abiding citizens with guns killed no one today. Most people who carry firearms only do so because they have studied and pondered the profound responsibility that they now have by being willing to carry. It has been discussed and emphasized on numerous occasions that people who carry firearms will go out of their way to avoid confrontation. The stereotype that CCW holders go around waving their guns in the air and showing off their weapons is unfounded – and is just that: a stereotype. People who carry concealed weapons do just that – carry them concealed. It keeps the criminals guessing, and prevents those who do not wish to be around guns from being overly anxious. We seem to never hear in the news how a law abiding citizen with a CCW permit walked into a mall or church and started shooting. But we do hear of numerous accounts of a law abiding armed citizen who has thwarted an attack: Incidents of Self Defense
Chicago has some of the strictest anti-gun laws on the books, aside from Washington D.C. and New York. But yet those areas have violent crime rates that are still high. Obviously, taking handguns away from law abiding citizens didn’t help. And why is that? The answer can be found in at least one prison interview, in which convicted felons specifically stated that they are not afraid of the police. What they ARE afraid of, however, is the armed citizen. It doesn’t take an expert in human behavior to guess why that is. The criminals can see the police; they know for the most part where they are (and where they aren’t) and can plan their strategies accordingly. What makes the criminal’s job more difficult is that in areas where citizens with concealed weapons permits are common, they have no idea who is carrying or who is not? The risks of their carrying out a criminal attack and getting shot are greatly increased. With even the seemingly diminished mental ability of today’s common predator, their risk analysis skills are at least adequate. They are going to go after the low hanging fruit and commit their crimes in areas where they are least likely to be stopped. And right now, the areas of their perceived increased success in committing violent crimes are cities that prohibit citizens from being armed, and so-called “gun free zones.”
If I can hope for anything that comes out of a situation like this, it is that the people who make those stupid laws that disallow their law abiding citizens from protecting themselves are now in pure anguish over their stupidity and will move forward with reversing these ridiculous laws. A person living in the United States is supposed to be guaranteed that their right to self defense shall not be infringed, but yet the anti-gun crowd continues to infringe away. They do this all in the name of “feel good” laws that do nothing to protect people.
My right to protect myself and my family is non-negotiable.
One obvious argument that the antigun crowd will give is: “Well what are the chances that someone (law abiding, concealed carry permit holder) would have even been in that mall and could have done any good?” We know for sure that because of the current laws there, the chances are absolutely ZERO! We have only to ask that same question: “What are the chances that an armed citizen will be in church when a gunman comes in and opens fire?” We know from the events in a Colorado Springs church in December 2007 that the answer is that only two people died. The rest were saved because of a brave (and armed) woman with a gun.
Or how about the argument that: “Allowing citizens to carry guns will only add to the potential for gun violence.” My reply to that is that several million law abiding citizens with guns killed no one today. Most people who carry firearms only do so because they have studied and pondered the profound responsibility that they now have by being willing to carry. It has been discussed and emphasized on numerous occasions that people who carry firearms will go out of their way to avoid confrontation. The stereotype that CCW holders go around waving their guns in the air and showing off their weapons is unfounded – and is just that: a stereotype. People who carry concealed weapons do just that – carry them concealed. It keeps the criminals guessing, and prevents those who do not wish to be around guns from being overly anxious. We seem to never hear in the news how a law abiding citizen with a CCW permit walked into a mall or church and started shooting. But we do hear of numerous accounts of a law abiding armed citizen who has thwarted an attack: Incidents of Self Defense
Chicago has some of the strictest anti-gun laws on the books, aside from Washington D.C. and New York. But yet those areas have violent crime rates that are still high. Obviously, taking handguns away from law abiding citizens didn’t help. And why is that? The answer can be found in at least one prison interview, in which convicted felons specifically stated that they are not afraid of the police. What they ARE afraid of, however, is the armed citizen. It doesn’t take an expert in human behavior to guess why that is. The criminals can see the police; they know for the most part where they are (and where they aren’t) and can plan their strategies accordingly. What makes the criminal’s job more difficult is that in areas where citizens with concealed weapons permits are common, they have no idea who is carrying or who is not? The risks of their carrying out a criminal attack and getting shot are greatly increased. With even the seemingly diminished mental ability of today’s common predator, their risk analysis skills are at least adequate. They are going to go after the low hanging fruit and commit their crimes in areas where they are least likely to be stopped. And right now, the areas of their perceived increased success in committing violent crimes are cities that prohibit citizens from being armed, and so-called “gun free zones.”
If I can hope for anything that comes out of a situation like this, it is that the people who make those stupid laws that disallow their law abiding citizens from protecting themselves are now in pure anguish over their stupidity and will move forward with reversing these ridiculous laws. A person living in the United States is supposed to be guaranteed that their right to self defense shall not be infringed, but yet the anti-gun crowd continues to infringe away. They do this all in the name of “feel good” laws that do nothing to protect people.
My right to protect myself and my family is non-negotiable.
I am just an American citizen who is outraged by people who believe that the government is here to provide for our safety and every need. I know full well, and have taken ownership for the fact that the responsibility for the well being and security of my family is mine and mine alone. I do not need to live in a "nanny state" for my well being and that of my family.
0 comments:
Post a Comment