Skip to comments.KATHLEEN PARKER: Armed, Dangerous, and Dead
Posted on 06/13/2014 9:21:53 AM PDT by China ClipperEdited on 06/13/2014 9:24:49 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON -- So much for the argument that having more people armed in public places will result in fewer gun deaths.
One of the three killed recently by a Las Vegas couple, Jerad and Amanda Miller, was an armed civilian, Joseph Wilcox. Two police officers who were also killed, Igor Soldo and Alyn Beck, were ambushed while having lunch. Seated in a booth, they had no chance to defend themselves, according to witnesses.
(Excerpt) Read more at journalstar.com ...
Two cops were also shot. Following the article's line of reasoning, armed police aren't effective either.
Kathleen Parker should STFU !
A brave man confronted a shooter ... he didn't stop to ask, "Are you alone?"
At one time, kathleen had a salient thought. But that was a long, long, long time ago.
Yet, over one case of failure she extrapolates that being armed is of no value.
Yep, and so much for our failed experiment with armed police.
Do these idiots think before making laughably stupid arguments?
-One person surprises a gunman using pepper spray. Liberal gun grabber: See? you don’t need a gun to stop a mass shooting!
Anybody with a sense of logic: would the probability go up or down of stopping the mass shooting with a gun or with pepper spray? DUH!
-Some people with guns get killed because they never see the gunman coming, 2 of them are police officers, and therefore the element of surprise is with the perpetrator, not with the police officers. Liberal gun grabber: so much for guns reducing the number of people killed!
Anybody with a lick of sense: would they be any less dead if they didn’t have guns? Woulnd’t one person with a concealed have had at least a chance to stop the shootings?
Kathleen Parker: Idiot.
WASHINGTON — So much for the argument that having more people armed in public places will result in fewer gun deaths.
There are no details at the site but two cops, also, presumably armed, were killed. The title draws the conclusion that its useless to be armed because an armed civilian was also killed. I point out this. Chris Kyle, the author of the best-selling “American Sniper,” and Chad Littlefield, also a veteran, were gunned down Saturday afternoon on the grounds of the expansive Rough Creek Lodge and Resort in Glen Rose, Texas, southwest of Fort Worth, law enforcement officials said.
If somebody just walks up and shoots you it doesnt matter if youre armed, as Kyle was (he was at the range) and that youre a recent former Seal. Nobody can protect themselves from an assault like that. Its the gun equivalent of the knockout game. If you just walk up and punch somebody with no warning chances are theyll go down no matter how good a fighter they are.
I have my CCW and I’ll carry when and where I legally can.
Quite true, but something that is unfortunately often forgotten by those who seem to think guns are magic talismans that protect against all evil.
The big problem, of course, is that the only way having a gun prevents you from being shot is if you shoot the other guy first. Which will get you into really serious trouble unless you can prove you were justified in doing so.
In practical terms, most of the time this means an attacker will get one free shot. Which is fairly often the only shot needed.
Logic and reasoning isn’t one of the liberals’ strong points.
I guarantee the CCW slowed them down, if only for a few instants. These two were out to kill many.
One data point is CERTAINLY enough to draw such conclusions with such certainty...
It’s not an argument. It’s a fact. Open carry states, and non-muslim countries with mandatory conscription policies have vastly lower rates of crime.
Robberies at gun stores during working hours are nearly zero. Robberies of liquor stores in states that ban gun ownership is stratospheric.
These guys LOOK for gun free zones, theaters with gun free policies, restaurants and malls with gun free policies.
Just another true believer with unshakable faith that government, especially American government, is a force for good.
Doesn't WALMART prohibit CCW in their stores ?
Ambush means attacked by surprise with no chance to defend yourself, armed or not...................
Can anyone manage a coherent thought or argument these days?
In OR, I have never seen a "no guns" sign on a Walmart. If the sign is not there, concealed carry is legal by state law.
I have not seen OC inside a Walmart in OR. Don't know if they have a policy against it of if I just haven't seen it.
Lately I have seen a few people open carrying revolvers with 8" to 12" barrels. I don't know what's up with that, but they are doing it.
12” barrel is one heck of a statement.
NO! THEY DO NOT!
Agreed — the CCW guy made them reconsider the extent of their rampage. He was a hero. We will never know how many lives he saved.
I was at a WalMart in PA a few months ago. I saw a man open-carrying a holstered pistol, walking his cart down the aisle. Nobody bothered him.
Friday, April 16,1999 2:13 PM
Subject: RE: Firearms
Thank you for contacting Wal-Mart regarding our concealed handgun policy. Wal-Mart was founded by Sam Walton on three basic principles. Strive for Excellence, Service to our Customers, and Respect for the Individual. It is that respect for the individual that led us to create the current policy pertaining to concealed handguns.
The following is our policy......If a Wal-Mart customer has been awarded a concealed handgun license by the state government, Wal-Mart will follow the direction of the state. However, if at anytime while on Wal-Mart property, that customer's concealed weapon becomes visible to Wal-Mart associates or customers, Wal-Mart reserves the right to ask the customer to either reposition the weapon so that it will not be visible, to remove the weapon completely or to leave Wal-Mart property, With the exception of law enforcement personnel, Wal-Mart does not allow any exposed weapons to be worn or carried in public view on Wal-Mart property or in Wal-Mart stores. Customers other than law enforcement personnel wearing or carrying a weapon in an exposed manner will be asked to leave the property immediately.
We appreciate your concern and trust that this message has addressed your concerns regarding this issue.
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc."
Yeah, Parker is looking at a single datapoint in a single scenario (spree shooting) that is used to support CCW and gun rights.
First, there are LOTS of other scenarios, including self defense against an individual attack (assault, rape, robbery, carjacking, etc) and home invasion.
In the case of spree killing chances are CCW isn’t going to act as a deterrent to the shooting. In all likelihood the spree killers have already made a decision to die. So CCW is a limiting factor that prevents further loss of life once a spree killer starts shooting. Either by killing the spree killer, convincing them that it’s time to off themselves, or by buying time for the cops or other armed citizens to show up.
By that logic, cops are twice as ineffective as a CCW.
Yes the armed citizen made a tactical error.
No one ever said that every armed citizen is a fictional Chuck Norris character.
No, and I know five of their employees who carry concealed while working.
No, and I know five of their employees who carry concealed while working.
I ask because my Walmart here in Taos NM
has "No Guns" blah blah signs.
It sounds as if there is no official policy at the corporate level so it is the decision of every General Manager.