Friday, January 3, 2020

Texas Church Shooting part I don't like

The Mainstream media always stress that the the effective good guy shooter hero was still former Law Enforcement.  So, he, in their liberal eyes, is more legitimate.  An "Acceptable Gun Toter" so it don't count when arguing for my gun rights.  I'm not with the In Crowd, in their eyes.  Off duty cop, toting while worshiping, good.  Off duty accountant, toting while worshiping, HORRIBLE!

It's like the anti-gunners have tapped into the "Only One" motif.  "The ex-cop was the only one qualified to have a gun in church... everyone else should be forbidden." 

Others point to other good guys that muzzled his congregants.  Yes, that's not good.  Yes, he should do better.  But not maintaining a level of skill and practice also does not disqualify you your rights.  It's a good idea to get training and practice, of course.  But not a requirement.  Also, notice, no negligent discharges, regardless.  People get muzzled every day to no ill effect.  I am horrified when I do it or come close to doing it (thankfully SUPER rare.)  Fight like hell to never muzzle anyone.  But...  all's well that ends well.

Not that all is well in this Church thing.  The preceding time, and the awful 6 seconds of the bad guy shooting two people is not 'well'.  But then the battle ended at 6 in a definitive way.  It is now all 'well.'  And thanks goodness it did end at 6.

1 comment:

Ritchie said...

I think this has to be scored as a security fail. They knew the guy, they knew he was wack, they knew he was wack when they let him into the building and into the main area. From my 2020 hindsight, there should have been a plan and procedure to divert wacks into a separate area and keep them secure. Church second place 2-1 with a magnificent save. To refer to the Star Trek world, who is the better security chief, Worf or Odo? Well, it's not Worf-he likes to fight. Odo arranged things so that
a fight never was possible. Things just didn't work out that way.