The mall is owned by Simon Property Group, a company whose corporate policy prohibits the carrying of weapons in their malls by anyone other than law enforcement.
On the Blue Lives Matter Facebook page, I posted the following question:
"Simon Malls has a gun-free policy. Had the good guy followed it, more would have been killed by the bad guy. Will Simon Malls thank the good guy for breaking their policy?"
A Greenwood Mall Spokesperson stated the following: "We are grateful for the strong response of the first responders, including the heroic actions of the Good Samaritan who stopped the suspect."
In Indiana, it is not a state law weapons violation if a lawfully armed person ignores a gun-free sign on private property, as this young rescuer had done. He likely saw one of their gun buster signs, but carried on anyway. His probable reasoning was that signs don't save lives, and he should not render himself incapable of defending himself or others just because he was in a mall. Not to mention leaving his gun in his vehicle would place it at risk for theft, you know, by a bad guy.
His actions very likely saved many lives that day, as the gunman had several ammo magazines, with plenty still loaded when he was taken out, having fired 24 rounds. No innocent bystanders were hurt, no police (or anyone else armed) confused the good guy for a bad guy.
Imagine that, a young private weapons carrier with no badge, and no "special ones only" training saved multiple lives, using a pistol against a rifle, within 15 seconds of the start of the attack, from 40 yards away, with 8 out of 10 shots hitting the perp! He showed more courage against a mass murderer than the entire Uvalde police force did at Robb Elementary School.
No one needed to dial 911, no one had to wait several minutes or longer for help to arrive. A First Responder was ALREADY ON THE SCENE, in a supposed "gun-free" zone. Thank goodness for that rascal hero who disobeyed a "No Weapons" sign!
More often though, it's police (on or off duty) and armed private security that stops active mass shooters, tragically after many victims have died. When a regular guy or gal stops one, it does highlight the value of being armed in the critical moment when it's needed. I recall reading somewhere years ago that even licensed carriers do not consistently carry their firearms as they go about their daily business; perhaps 10-15% of them do. Don't pin me on those numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if that was still true today. People just don't want to bother with the inconvenience or extra weight of a gun on their hip.
I've heard that a gun doesn't have to be comfortable to carry; comforting should be good enough. Elisjsha Dicken, the hero in the mall, certainly could relate, especially now that he has gone through this experience.
We regular folks are far greater in number than public or private hired guns. Imagine the additional lives that could be saved every year if we all carried our weapons wherever we need to be all the time, wherever carry is legal?
It's ironic that now with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the NYSRPA vs. Bruen case forcing states to issue a license to carry a firearm to everyone who applies and qualifies, that Democrats are moving with light speed to devalue their carry license with making as making places off-limits to carry as possible. This is far worse than walking past a gun buster sign on private property in a state that doesn't prosecute that.
Violating these laws would mean spending years in a concrete and steel box, being vulnerable to being raped, maimed, or murdered by actual criminals. In my opinion, the politicians who pass these anti-liberty laws should be the ones in prison for treason.
Republican majority states also still have their share of off-limits places for licensed carry of firearms. After 2017, with the passage of limited college campus carry, my home state of Georgia has done nothing further to remove additional off-limits places from the books. Why should I have to disarm in a K-12 school, polling place when voting, certain state and local government buildings, and churches? Mass shooters don't disarm in those places.
Why do Republicans, who claim to support our carry rights, drag their feet in either slowly opening up more places to carry, or simply stop the progress altogether?
These same Republican state politicians also repeat the statement that it takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun. Why are they then keeping these prohibitive laws on the books, that were placed there when Democrats had control? Be sure to ask them, and demand your right of armed self-defense.
No comments:
Post a Comment