I’ve been silent long enough regarding the self-defense
incident involving Elijah
Elliott, a Kroger store manager who shot and killed a thug attempting to
rob the store. Most of you who follow www.thePoliPit.com know our position on
the validity and necessity of protecting our 2nd Amendment right to
“keep and bear arms.” That being said, I
understand why a company would establish certain workplace rules limiting their
employee’s ability to carry a loaded firearm while working. Businesses have every right to restrict their
employees from possessing guns inside their privately owned property; however I
don’t think it necessarily the wisest policy to enact. I don’t want to debate Kroger’s policy
restricting their employees’ ability to carry a specific self-defense tool, a
gun, but I do want to discuss the more general unalienable right of life and
liberty secured by the 2nd Amendment.
Liberals love to play
“what if” games, so I’ll offer a question for them. What if Mr. Elliott had thwarted the violent
robbery attempt by grabbing a pocket knife and cutting the thug into little pieces;
would we be having a similar discussion about knives in the work-place? I suppose some liberals might clamor for a
sharp object ban or that Kroger update its policies. If deadly force is warranted based on the
crime being committed - a crime where death and/or serious bodily injury is
possible to the victim or a third party – what is the difference if a bat,
knife, rock or gun is used? Mr. Elliott
used a very effective tool available to him and, in my opinion, successfully
and safely ended a violent life threatening crime. The bad guy is dead and the good guys are
alive – good job! “Let’s go
Kroger’ing’…for the best of everything…including your life.” Please insert the appropriate catchy Kroger
commercial jingle.
A few weeks before the Kroger Life and Liberty Defense Event,
I had a discussion with a German immigrant that has lived in the U.S. for a
number of years. I always enjoy my
conversations with this older lady, and I think it’s because she has yet to
comprehend the American Culture of independence and liberty and I like
explaining it to her. She commented that
she doesn’t understand “America’s infatuation with guns.” She proceeded to tell me about observing a young
teen and his father walk into a rural McDonalds dressed in hunters orange, and their
shotguns slung over their shoulders. I attempted
to explain the hunting culture and the value of doing this type of activity
within a family, especially a son. She
was befuddled when I told her that the father and sons’ armed presence inside
the McDonalds would have made me feel safer and more secure, not less. Predictably, this discussion quickly turned
to the 2nd Amendment and concealed carry laws. She brought up the most recent state law that
allows concealed handguns in state parks; and stated she didn’t understand the
need for such a “ridiculous law.” I
asked her, “If law abiding citizens aren’t allowed to carry guns, then who will
carry guns unopposed?” She replied that
she had heard this argument before about “good guys not having guns and
criminals having them”, but she didn’t really “buy it”; mind you she cited no
reason for her “not buying the argument.”
She then quipped, “Wouldn’t this world be a much better place if there
were no guns!?” I quickly interrupted,
stating, “….and no sticks, bats, knives, rocks, hands, and people for that
matter.”
I now digress to the December 27th, 2011 Indy
Star article, and the comments of Indianapolis Lawyer Michael
Blickman. He stated, “Gun owners aren’t
necessarily trained in how to deal with dangerous situations…” (Although it sure seems Kroger Manager Elijah
Elliott did just fine) Numerous other
blogs have stated similar reservations of “armed citizens” taking action
against violent criminals. Sheila
Kennedy said, ”…what if a trigger-happy employee misconstrues a ‘situation’ and
starts shooting?” What is the common
thread among liberals, other than ignorance, who frightfully oppose armed citizens? Trust! Liberals always assume the worst intentions
of individuals and always assume the best intentions of government; while
conservatives like me assume the exact opposite. Ignorant gun-haters seem to think an American
citizen isn’t smart enough to formulate a proper plan of action to ensure their
own safety and the safety of others, but the government always has our best
interest in mind?
A citizen that cares enough about his family and co-workers
to arm himself with the proper tools to protect them, gathers much more
confidence and trust in me than a government that is always trying to restrict
liberty and freedom, and rarely in a position to properly help. “I’m from the government and I’m here to
help” frightens me far more than Bubba with a shotgun in McDonalds, or Elijah
Elliott with a handgun in Kroger.

No comments:
Post a Comment