http://www.patrickkphillips.com/2012/07 ... t=32621099" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Is it an “anti-self-defense” sign? Or an “anti-offense” sign?
More at link above, and commentsA sign is never going to stop a would-be mass murderer from carrying out his plan.
But, then, that fifty-cent sign isn’t meant to stop a would-be mass murderer.
It’s designed to stop the crackpots among gun owners who don’t want to kill anyone, or even hurt anyone, but who just aren’t as responsible as they ought to be.
I have some friends who are gun owners, and because of specific training they’ve gone through, I’d have no problem being around them if they were carrying a concealed weapon. And I may well have: if their gun were properly concealed, I wouldn’t have known they were carrying to begin with, would I?
But I know them and I know they’ve been trained, drilled and trained some more.
If I’m in a crowded theater, or a restaurant or a stadium, I have to hope that everyone who might have a concealed weapon is just as responsible and well-trained as people I know personally and trust. I have to hope that none among them is the kind of guy (or gal) who’d react first and think later, who’d take an unwarranted action against what might look like a threat but really isn’t. I have to trust that none among them would make a severe tactical mistake that would only make someone else with a gun make a mistake of his own in a chain reaction. Particularly when chain reactions in which guns are involved always carry the possibility of ending very badly.
I have to be willing, in every public place, to put my lives in the hands of everyday people I don’t know and who aren’t highly-trained law enforcement officers. That’s a bit much to ask in my book.
If someone in that Colorado theater had been armed, it is unquestionably possible that he could have ended the threat sooner.
Oh, please...
