The other day, I popped into Twitter to see what was
trending. I noticed the NRA tag was
trending so I bit and took a peek.
Wow. What a mess. It is amazing how many really stupid people
there are out there. One tweet in
particular caught my eye. I’ll
paraphrase here:
To the NRA: If a kid
hits another kid with a rock, does that mean we should arm all kids with rocks?
I had to chuckle.
Really? So let’s play this game
out a bit:
"If all the good kids had rocks, would the bad kids hit good
kids with rocks knowing that the good kids would hit them with rocks?"
Oh – how about this one:
"If we allow good kids to carry concealed rocks, will bad kids be afraid
to hit other kids with rocks?"
And maybe just a bit further: "If you were a bad kid with a rock, where
would you go to hit other kids with rocks?
A place where the kids may have rocks or a place where you know NO kids
have rocks?"
And one more: "In a
world with rocks, would you rather your child go to school where an adult with
rocks will protect them against bad people with rocks, or would you rather they
go where the only rocks were wielded by bad people wanting to hurt them?"
See? I LIKE this
analogy! It really helps put things into
focus for me.
Let’s try another tack:
If you send your child to Karate or Tai Kwan Do or Judo or other ‘self-defense’
classes, it’s obviously not just because of exercise. Kids can get exercise doing a lot of other,
non-violent things. What if your kid is
a jerk and uses that training in a wrong way; say to beat up other kids at
school to steal their lunch money or sneakers?
The question then has to be asked:
Is the child to blame or is the martial art to blame? To remain consistent with the anti-gun crowd,
you would have to say that the child is not to blame – the martial art is to
blame. We should then ban all dojos and
fight training of any kind, regardless of the reason.
Many times the argument about guns is that since nobody with
a legal carry permit prevented the crime, that obviously guns are not the
solution. The thinking is that since it
wasn’t stopped, that it couldn’t be stopped, and therefore guns can’t be part
of the solution. The other argument I
hear is that the legally armed citizen could wind up killing or injuring other
innocent folks if he/she gets into a gun battle with the crazy. History seems to tell us something
different. There are many times when a
citizen has stopped a rampage by simply pointing their firearm at the nut
job. Even if the wacko intends to kill
himself, it seems that they don’t want to take the chance that the other person
might make a mess of it and leave them suffering and alive.
The first example that springs instantly to my mind is the
Pearl High School shooting in Pearl, Mississippi. One of the main reasons that this one sticks
out for me is that Pearl High School is where I went to school. You may remember the story - a 16 year old
student slit his mother’s throat, then went to school with a .30-30 rifle (not
an ‘assault rifle’ or AR-15 – a hunting rifle) and started shooting folks. The assistant principle, Joel Myrick, ran to
his truck to retrieve his .45 caliber pistol.
He then chased the student down and held him at bay by pointing the pistol
at him. He then forced the kid down on
the ground and held him down by putting his foot on the kid’s neck. Two female students and the shooters mother
were the only deaths. Seven others were
wounded. But because of his actions,
which did NOT include any shots fired, nobody else was killed and the shooter
was arrested.
The shooter had planned to kill a bunch of kids at the High
School, then go to the Junior High and do the same thing, but an armed citizen
stopped the rampage. Basically, the
good-guy with the rock stopped the bad-guy with a rock, and a lot of good-guys
are alive today because of that.
An interesting aside is that the hero, Assistant Principle
Joel Myrick was treated awfully and was roundly criticized by gun control
advocates for pointing his gun at a student (it doesn’t seem to matter that the
student was killing folks) and for holding this nut-job down with his foot on
the kid’s neck.
Another example of this is Nick Meli. He is the gentleman who, in December at the Oregon Clackamas Town Center mall shooting, brandished his weapon at the shooter and likely ended the rampage. What? You didn’t hear about that? Huh. I wonder why? Anyway, the official report says that the shooter likely stopped shooting other people and shot himself when his gun jammed.
Now, I don’t know everything about everything, but normally
when guns jam, they don’t do it in a way that allows you to shoot yourself and
not others. As reported by KGW, a local
television station in Portland, Oregon, a citizen with a concealed weapon’s
permit, Nick Meli, drew his firearm and pointed it at the shooter, Jacob
Roberts, but held his fire for fear of hitting other innocents. The shooter was having problems with his
rifle and saw Meli, and it appears that when he cleared the gun, rather than
shoot other folks in the mall, he decided to shoot himself.
Obviously, we won’t ever truly know what led him to shoot
himself instead of continuing with his rampage – However, it seems odd to me that
he went to the mall to kill lots of folks, was heavily armed with multiple
magazines so he could accomplish that task, and after shooting only three
people, has gun problems, cleared those problems and then decided to shoot
himself instead of continuing what he came there to do. I tend to believe that he thought it likely
that if someone else started shooting at him, he might be injured and taken
alive, so he killed himself to make sure it was done right with the least
amount of pain on his part. It’s also
possible that he may have intended to kill himself when the police arrived, and
may have mistaken Meli for an officer.
We’ll never really know.
What we do know is that a citizen with a firearm was present, and contrary to everything the left wants us to believe, there was no bloodbath caused by the law-abiding citizen. In fact, this seems to be another case of a major bloodbath being prevented by the ‘rock’ carried in the hands of a citizen who hopes sincerely with all his heart, that he never has to ‘throw’ it.
No comments:
Post a Comment