The scientifically interesting aspect of modern violence is that we have many instances each where a killer went to a place where there were no armed innocents, and instances where the killer went where an intended victim was armed.
The same lesson [of allowing people to arm themselves in self-defense] should have been learned after the December 9, 2007 incident at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colorado, where 7,000 parishioners came under attack by Matthew Murray, a 24-year-old armed with a semi-automatic rifle, two pistols, and hundreds of cartridges. He fatally shot two church goers and wounded three others before Jeanne Assam, a church member who carried a concealed firearm, drew her pistol and shot him until he fell incapacitated. Murray then took his own life.
More recently, when a gunman opened fire with a stolen rifle in the Clackamas Town Center mall in Portland, Oregon, on December 11, 2012 killing two people and wounding another, it was the appearance of a shopper with a concealed handgun which ended the violence. Twenty-two year old Nick Meli pulled out his pistol, and as he was about to shoot, the gunman spotted him and shot himself fatally. Twenty-two minutes after the first 911 call, police found the dead shooter. Thank God Meli was there with his gun, or there would have been more dead and wounded.
Despite this and countless other examples of ordinary citizens defending themselves and others with firearms – up to 2.4 million each year according to researchers – gun control advocates continue to call for more gun control laws. There are approximately 20,000 federal, state, and local gun control laws throughout the country, none of which prevented the recent episodes in Newtown and Portland, the one last summer at the Aurora theater in Colorado, the massacre at Columbine high school in 1999, and similar incidents. Why? Because bad guys don’t obey gun control laws, only law-abiding people do.
Isn’t it interesting that when shootings occur, whom do we call to end the violence? Armed men and women in the form of police, who usually arrive too late to prevent massive casualties. If armed people not at the scene are expected to end the violence, why not armed people at the scene?
For whatever reason, the media and Democrats ignore every instance where someone was armed and able to act in self-defense and save their own and the lives of others, and then claim “if it only saves one life” they will happily disarm us all, so that criminals can have an easier time of attacking the disarmed masses.
Why does anyone listen to them?
via The Price of Infringement by Benedict D. LaRosa.