search
top

More Gun Bias

This time from Colin McEnroe of the Hartford Courant:

I agree that it was a lucky thing that Jeanne Assam was there in church in Colorado Springs with a gun she used to stop a homicidal maniac; but only in America’s completely crazy gun culture would this be cited as proof that the system works. A guy shows up at a church with two handguns, an assault rifle and 1,000 rounds of ammuition, kills two young women and wounds their father; and we’re supposed to think that’s a good day in the life of Gunfighter Nation because somebody else had a gun too?

I’m seeing this theme a lot “I agree what this woman did was good, but guns are bad!” So clearly the solution is to make sure women like this are defenseless? The guy in the Omaha shooting was prohibited by federal law from purchasing a gun, but he got one anyway. Here’s what he would like to see from us:

“Hey, I’m not really down with gun control, but I can see, lately, that assault weapons are getting into the hands of crazy people, and maybe we need to take a look at that.”

I don’t disagree, but first you have to tell me what an assault weapon is? Seems simple. Kind of like what Justice Potter Stewart said of Pornography “I know it when I see it.” But how to define it? Assault weapons function the same as other ordinary firearms. How do you make a legal distinction between a “dangerous assault weapon” and a self-loading target or hunting rifle?

How about “Why are there so many crazy people and people with long criminal histories roaming our streets in the first place?” Is that something to look at as well?

7 Responses to “More Gun Bias”

  1. Weer'd Beard says:

    I do disagree. What makes assault rifles and handguns dangerous in the hands of criminals makes them useful as tools of personal protection. There’s no two ways about it. The best arms for CCW or personal protection are also can be used for bad. Its like SUVs. Yes they are more likely to kill the other person in a crash…but you’re more likely to survive.

    Is the solution to make cars less safe for everybody?

  2. straightarrow says:

    Actually if this happened on a regular basis for a while, then he would be correct in that it was a good day for Gunfighter Nation.

    We have become so far removed from the society we used to be, where gunmen such as this church shooter could rely on being downed quickly that it will take, unfortunately, a number of similar circumstances with similar results before monsters such as this realize that they can rely on being downed quickly should they try the same misdeeds.

    How long will it take to amass a number of similar circumstances with similar results sufficient to so inform these killers and would be killers? I don’t know. Months, or maybe years. It took us about 70 years to get in this shape once we started down that wrong road. So anything less than that is a victory. It shouldn’t take nearly that long depending on two things. How consistent such results in similar circumstances are, and how much display the media provides showing it to be dangerous and most of all, doomed to failure to achieve the desired outcome these monsters want.

    It will take much longer than it should so long as the MSM declines to play up stories about successful self defense and defense of others.

    However, if we all do our part and defend ourselves and our neighbors to the detriment of marauders and either force the media to display these facts or bypass the media altogether and make them impotent,and get the message across in other ways we can turn this thing around in short order. If we accomplish that then it was a good day for Gunfighter Nation, despite the sarcasm intended in that appellation, I like it. Nothing wrong with knowing how to use your tools properly.

  3. jetfxr69 says:

    What exactly were the weapons? 1000 rounds of ammo? I’m thinking that unless it was .22LR, he couldn’t have been particularly mobile. Even 1000rds of 9mm is HEAVY!

  4. Ian Argent says:

    I’m still bemused by the attempts to paint this person as “a trained security guard”. The “narrative” demands that righteous shoots only be the province of “specially trained” people.

    Anyone want to bet the “training” is the state-mandated training for a CCW.

    Not to denigrate what this lady did – she volunteered to be a guardian, in addition to whatever else she’s done; and good for her.

  5. Weer'd Beard says:

    Ian, it turns out she’s a former Cop. So the “magic training” could be pointed to that.

    Of course I don’t think she called on much more skill than the average CCW holder. MAYBE her use of cover, but that’s a BIG Maybe.

  6. Sebastian says:

    The main thing you need training for is overcoming tunnel vision. The other guards were pretty clearly frozen into inaction. This happens to police officers and soldiers too. Training can help, but no one knows how they’ll react to being shot at until it happens to them.

    The veteran mentioned in that one press article had pretty clearly been shot at before, and, interestingly enough, reverted back to his training as well, which was indicated in getting his fellow “soldiers” out of their fear and into action.

    Was her training as a police officer material to this? Maybe. She had never been shot at before. Different people are more easily able to act under fire. Women particularly, have much stronger protective instincts to men. Faced with people she loved, and who she probably considered family, being killed, she found it in herself, and she was going to drop the bastard, or die trying.

  7. Ian Argent says:

    I had seen that she was a former cop; and it’s possible that was the source of the “Training” referenced – but the MSM is really pushing the “trained and screened” angle for her. All of which could be applied to any CCW holder in CO. As for the “selected” part – she was the one who came up with the security plan, and the pastor “selected” it.

    So she’s forward-looking as well as has good reflexes. Possibly as a result of he LE training, but that’s neither necessary or sufficient to be able to come up with a plan and execute it.

    They can’t attack her as a redneck mouth-breather, so she must be an “Only One”?

    (Let me re-iterate – I have NOTHING against her, and am very glad she was there and successful – I am merely commenting on the MSM treatment of this issue.)

top