.

Evil Ran Unimpeded

Last week evil ran abhorrently free. There were three tragic events, here is the case of Jacob Tyler Roberts, who killed two people in the crowded Clackamas Mall in suburban Portland, Ore.

Last week evil ran abhorrently free.  As expected it has been instantly grasped by those opposed to self defense with klaxon calls for yet more redundant government control, rather than moral control.  Effective solutions will never come from denial and violations to constitutional rights.  Only further advancement of authoritarian central control will be achieved! There were three tragic events, here is the case of Jacob Tyler Roberts, who killed two people in the crowded Clackamas Town Center mall in suburban Portland, Ore.

ABC News

Clackamas County Sheriff Craig Roberts said earlier today on "Good Morning America" that he believes Roberts went into the mall with the goal of killing as many people as he could.
"I believe, at least from the information that's been provided to me at this point in time, it really was a killing of total strangers. To my knowledge at this point in time he was really trying, I think, to kill as many people as possible."
While his  stolen AR-15 rifle had briefly jammed, police said he had quickly gotten it working again.  So there was no apparent reason for his rampage to have stopped.  Add yet another count to the number of laws he broke without being impeded in his intent.  So much for laws stopping him.  However there was an armed legal carry citizen there.

http://www.kgw.com/news/Clackamas-man-armed-confronts-mall-shooter-183593571.html
http://www.nwcn.com/home/183609901.html
"As I was going down to pull I saw someone in the back of the charlotte move and I knew if I fired and missed I could hit them."
Meli took cover inside a nearby store.  He never pulled the trigger.  He stands by that decision.
"I'm not beating myself up cause I didn't shoot him," said Meli.  "I know after he saw me I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself."
The gunman was dead, but not before taking two innocent lives with him and taking the innocence of everyone else.
"I don't ever want to see anyone that way ever," said Meli.  "It just bothers me."
The fact that this even occurred was completely lacking from almost all main stream media accounts (exemplifying the meaning of "low-information" voters).  Of course the official reason will never be stated that a legal carry citizen was what stopped or might have stopped a rampaging lunatic criminal.  So the "official statement" reads:
http://news.msn.com/us/man-accused-in-ore-mall-shooting-wanted-to-travel
Clackamas County Sheriff Craig Roberts said the fact that more people weren't killed was due to several factors. The suspect's gun jammed at one point; the mall implemented an immediate lockdown; and a large number of officers arrived on-scene quickly, "curtailing the suspect's ability to move around the mall."
"Ten thousand people in the mall at one time kept a level head. They got themselves out of the mall. They helped others get out, and there are just a number of heroes that took the time to help people get out," the sheriff said. "It was really about a full group of people coming together to make a difference."
Perhaps the new law in Michigan, if it gets signed, might help prevent mass shootings from ever happening in School's there.  It has specific additional training requirements for the specific permit extensions.  But then would the media ever report it having been a success?  Or will it be the flaming target of every self defense opposition member of the main stream media and politicizing pundit/politician? Is that a redundancy?  Evil prevails when good men do nothing.  Fortunately for those in an Oregon Mall, there was a man who didn't "do nothing".

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Liberaltarian December 23, 2012 at 10:20 PM
You're right - If Meli says the killer saw him, there's no reason for me to doubt that statement. But certainly, there's no reason to think that Meli had anything to do with stopping the killer. Meli says he went to another store and hid after the killer saw him. You're also right - I incorrectly thought you meant that implementing gun control laws would lead to central authoritative control. I was responding to the argument that "if only the police / military have guns, then citizens won't be able to protect themselves from their tyranny." You apparently weren't making that argument. So many people do, that I assumed you were too.
woodtick December 23, 2012 at 11:07 PM
The only way to stop a "bad guy " with a gun , Is with a " Good Guy," With a gun. There are no gray areas here. Truth is the truth. Fact is fact and history is history. There is no way discussion or pleading or psychology used on a shooter will stop him from his mission. Take guns away from us good guys and the evil will run free everywhere. I wont leave home without it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Never have. NEVER WILL.
Liberaltarian December 26, 2012 at 03:19 AM
There's actually a great big gray area. Good guys with guns sometimes turn into bad guys with guns. Sometimes bad guys don't have guns and they take them from good guys with guns. I'm sure people thought that the Kansas City Chief football player was a good guy - the neighborhood security guard guy in Florida too. The mother of the guy who killed all those kids was probably a good guy too and the Columbine dad. Evil already runs free. The issue is in how it manifests itself. Does the angry drunken husband beat his wife, or with a gun in the house does, does he shoot her? Those are the deaths that I think could be prevented - and I think a lot more people die that way than from being killed by "criminals". You can keep your gun woodtick. But in general, that gun is more likely to kill an innocent person than an evil one.
Stafford Christensen December 26, 2012 at 08:16 PM
Gun control is motivated by good intentions; people are fed up with mass shootings. But prohibition always fails. The Temperance Movement too was motivated by good intentions; there was a general concern for the spiritual and physical health of others and women were rightfully fed up with being beaten by drunken husbands. However, things always find their way to those who desire them. When the government bans marijuana, people who want marijuana can easily obtain it. If the government bans guns, law-abiding folks will not have guns but the people who want to shoot others will still have them. Gun control is just another proposed prohibition that is set for failure - and a particularly deadly failure, as it takes a defensive tool out of the hands of law-abiding folks. The government reacted poorly to 9/11 by creating martial law at airports rather than working to understand why people were blowing themselves up in foreign lands. Similarly, I think the discussion should not revolve around how people kill other people but rather *why* people kill other people.
Liberaltarian December 26, 2012 at 10:38 PM
The idea that guns are an effective defensive tool for law-abiding folks is incorrect. Far more deaths of innocent people come as a result of law-abiding folks having guns than are ever prevented by law-abiding folks having guns. This is the fact that we need people to be more aware of. VERY FEW people that currently own guns have the skills and nerves to safely use their weapons for this purpose. Police officers and soldiers practice these scenerios over and over. These guys who buy a pistol and load it up to "check out that noise in the garage" are much more likely to kill an innocent person or get themselves killed - or have a family member use it for suicide or psychotic rampage. That said, I agree that a ban on guns would cause more enforcement problems than it's worth. Too many people want to own guns for a ban to work. The black market would explode if hunters, target shooters, and collectors, were unable to aquire and trade their guns legally. Like I said, woodtick can keep his gun. But the NRA and other anti-gun control organizations need to help discourage the general public from owning guns. And, guns should never be promoted to the general public as a means of protection. Responsible gun owners should take more of a lead in this regard.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »