|
|
Back to UserFriendly Strip Comments Index
|
Ordnance-Corner for UFies | by Ordnance_Corner | 2007-02-16 10:09:25 |
| Thoughts on the Mall Shooting in Utah |
by DesertRat66 |
2007-02-16 10:41:37 |
The Mall Shooting in Utah, and Concealed Weapons
Once again the United States has witnessed a mass shooting. Just this last week 5 people in Salt Lake City lost their lives to a mad gunman, with no fear for his own life, armed with a shotgun and a handgun.
Predictably the hoplophobes were quick to pick up on this tragedy. Weeping and wailing about how the easy accessibility of firearms were to blame for the problem, while at the same time pointing out that Utah's concealed weapons law had obviously not kept anyone safe. They are horribly wrong on both counts.
We may never know why Sulejmen Talovic decided to murder innocent people. Post Traumatic Stress from his childhood in war torn Bosnia, and Sudden Jihad Syndrome from his Muslim upbringing are two theories being batted about. One thing that is a little more clear is why he may have chosen the target he did. The Trolley Square mall is one of the few malls in Utah with signs posted stating "NO GUNS ALLOWED." Proponents of concealed carry laws are quick to point out that such "victim disarmament zones" make it easier for those intent on causing mass carnage to do so. Even in this case, they are proven right.
Unknown to Sulejmen Talovic someone was in the mall that day that, because of his unique social status to hoplophobes, was armed with a concealed weapon. Off-Duty Police Officer Ken Hammond of the Ogden Utah Police Department was in one of the malls restaurants having an early Valentines dinner with his wife. Officer Hammond is credited with using his firearm to limit the damage the gunman could cause before he could be neutralized.
Will the hoplophobes re-examine their faulty thinking in light of this fact? Highly unlikely. Even though anyone in Utah with a concealed carry permit has the same level of training, the same clear background, and is required to demonstrate the same proficiency they are not a "Police Officer." An individual who, because he collects a paycheck comprised of their tax dollars, is an agent of the nanny state they rely on for their needs. The hoplophobes do not lament that someone with a firearm could have been closer and could have possibly saved even more lives than Officer Hammond. Instead they wallow in the blood and gore of the carnage and loudly proclaim that "this is why we should all rely on the nanny state for protection." In the past some hoplophobes have been known to opine that even off-duty officers shouldn't be allowed to be armed. Talk about out of touch with reality!
In the mean time, thanks to a recently enacted Federal Law, one brave individual was allowed to be armed and a tragedy's effect was minimized.
|
|
[ Reply ] |
|
uhhh... | by plblark | 2007-02-16 10:44:05 |
|
Almost | by DesertRat66 | 2007-02-16 11:20:30 |
|
Oh and | by DesertRat66 | 2007-02-16 11:34:28 |
|
BUT | by plblark | 2007-02-16 12:38:48 |
|
Could they? | by hyzenthlay | 2007-02-16 12:51:50 |
|
I am not knowlegeable on Utah's laws | by DesertRat66 | 2007-02-16 13:04:20 |
|
|
[Todays Cartoon Discussion]
[News Index]
|
|
