Heh. Gun-Free Zone Sign Prevents Dangerous Armed Robbery – Oh, Wait, No It Didn’t.
So a gun-free zone is robbed at gunpoint. How can that happen?
People enjoying some hot wings the other day in Colorado Springs, CO got a front row seat to proof of the efficaciousness of a virtue-signaling gun-banning sign. Buffalo Wild Wings is a gun-free zone. It says so right on the sign on the front door in big, bold letters: “Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc Bans Guns on These Premises.”
The sign is highly effective 99.9% of the time. Just hope that you’re not there and unarmed for the 0.1% of the time when the place gets robbed, like it did the other day.
One guy had a scary “assault rifle” and he “walked right past the sign that clearly bans guns.”
Do you really think putting up a “No Crime Allowed” sign would stop crime? (Hat tip MaddMedic and Never Yet Melted.)
I thought it was impossible to shoot someone in a campus-near gun-free zone. UNCC on high alert after two violent crimes near campus within 24 hours.
University Crossings sent Channel 9 a statement reading in part, “Firearms are not permitted on the property. We ask that residents notify the police immediately by calling 911 if they see anyone with a firearm.”
So how is it that firearms are not permitted when the place in question is NOT on a college campus? I guess the Constitution doesn’t apply wherever college administrators decree it doesn’t apply. Or something.
And while the advice that the college administrators give is almost sensible, letting law-abiding students protect themselves is of course out-of-the-question, given the gun-hating, constitution-hating, liberty-hating attitudes of colleges.
There is so much wrong with this story, but I keep thinking, imagine if she had been armed. South Carolina man charged with kidnapping, murder of college student activated child locks in car, police say.
The man accused of kidnapping and murdering a woman who got into his car thinking it was her Uber ride had activated the child locks in his backseat so the doors could be opened only from the outside, police in South Carolina revealed.
The sheriff’s statement on the scene, “This was a bad scene.”
I think of what would have been different if she had been armed, with anything. But she was probably a “proper college student” who would never in a million years think she might ever need a gun for something. Or a knife. Or self-defense skills.
Hat tip to The Other McCain, who notes this is “A story feminists are ignoring for some reason.”
Business people are disgusted with the situation they find themselves in. Seattle business owner frustrated over repeat offenders chases, tackles a gunman.
It’s the same business Q13 News talked to just last month about repeat offenders targeting their store. The significance of Friday’s incident isn’t just about the play by play of what happened, it’s a prime example of the mounted frustrations of business owners in Seattle who say the city is out of control.
He calls 911 nothing happens. Even if the cops show up and arrest people, in the end nothing happens. Now they feel like fools calling 911 hundreds of times.
And these people are not stealing candy bars. The guy he tackled stole a $3000 guitar last week. He was back this week. How much should the good-people of Seattle have to endure?
I’m dumping this into “Defenseless Victim Zones” because although Washington State has a long history of legally supporting self-defense, this situation is similar to leaving people with no means of defense. The courts, are supposed to help maintain law and order. That’s not happening in Seattle.
For the prior story on Seattle see “Seattle is Dying.”
It is unpleasant to contemplate. Welcome to The Real World™.How LE and school administrators can train together for active shooter response.
Nobody has been killed in a school fire in the last 50 years, yet we continue to practice fire drills in schools across our nation. It is long overdue that we apply the same preventative measures to a threat that has proven to be more prevalent in recent years. In reality, the greatest lethalness of an active shooter incident ends as soon as, or shortly after, the sound of sirens. So why aren’t we as a society focusing more on efficient training for those who would be involved in the incident prior to the arrival of responders? We absolutely should be.
School fires were once a problem. Hence the drills. And better construction. And sprinklers. And we stopped having kids die in school fires. School fires are an unpleasant topic. But we didn’t say “Wait for the Fire Department, they’re the professionals after all.” Teachers were there. There was a need to take immediate action. And so that duty fell on teachers.
And so we have substitute teachers who don’t know how to lock the doors to their class rooms (Sandy Hook), because that will never happen to us. (Bad things only happen to “other kinds of people” in “other kinds of places.”) And people who think dialogue is the answer, several people have died trying that approach.
New Yorkers – still not interested in getting involved. Man Brutally Attacked on Facebook Live As Onlookers Reportedly Do Nothing, Suspect Arrested.
A 62-year-old man was attacked by a 31-year-old man. No one called 911, though someone did stream it to F*c*book Live.
The Friday attack was streamed on Facebook Live as people can be heard laughing in the background. One of at least three witnesses to the attack on Arce reportedly made a “half-hearted” attempt to intervene but the victim was still brutally punched and stomped on.
And the “good people” of New York City love to look down on those of us who live in “fly-over country.”
But then WaPo hates the idea of armed peasants. Amid a spike in slayings, Brazil’s president loosens restrictions on gun ownership.
Brazil tired the Leftist dream of disarming the populace. It became the most dangerous – in terms of murders committed – country in the world. Now they will try something else.
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro signed a decree Tuesday loosening restrictions on gun ownership, a move that appeased his base but which critics say will worsen a crime wave that has already claimed thousands of lives.
Who are these critics? The same people who encouraged the disarming in the first place? Why should we listen to these critics (or the WaPo)?