| The Westroads Shooting December 5th 2007 Removing the PC lenses to expose another failure of "no guns" policies Despite the vigils and remembrances, the (media ignored) lessons herein still ring true. Our hearts weep for those affected by the tragic events that Wednesday afternoon. May the families of lost loved ones find peace, those left with scars find a strength within to go on and prosper. Our hearts also go out to those who simply wanted to shop but were forced to witness the evil that occurred that terrible day. Yes, evil happened even when the "no firearms" signs adorned the mall entrances. Evil can and sometimes does exercise its horribleness in "gun free" zones. If a person believes that schools, for example, like Virginia Tech or Columbine High are safe places simply because of a "no guns" policy then that person must believe that these and many other shootings did not happen! Gun control works to keep us safe from gun (or any other kind of) violence, right? Perhaps it was the "no guns" signs posted at the Westroads that made those who arm themselves and train to shop elsewhere that Wednesday thereby helping give the societal trash six full minutes of uninterrupted killing at Von Maur. Nobody else other than Hawkins was armed there? Shame on the "no guns" policy of the Westroads. While it may be a subject of endless debate as to whether or not anybody would have, or could have stopped the killer after the first few shots if they happened to be carrying in Von Maur at that time, the fact remains that many of just such attacks have been thwarted by an armed person. It comes to the chagrin of the (elitist) local police departments when an armed citizen stops an attack. Whether the attack has been halted by a gun owning person in their own bedroom or in a parking lot or restaurant, it has happened. The media is slow to report such, if it cares to report it accurately and completely or at all. Why? Maybe it's because the good news of an attack being stopped by an armed and trained citizen doesn't hold our interest. Perhaps it is under or misreported by various media because it simply doesn't fit the anti-gun, left leaning play book. Did you realize the church shooting that happened in Colorado a short time after the Westroads shooting was stopped by an armed civilian female who possessed a carry permit? Yup, the media reported her as a "security guard". She was "allowed" to carry at that church due to the church officials desiring a measure of security, but the news reports purposefully conjured up an image of a badge carrying, cop-like image of a "security guard". It was in fact a brave, yet normal and "regular" member of the congregation! Anybody else out there understand the implications there? "Only the police should have guns" a well meaning yet decidedly under informed blond female coworker recently said. That comment would be funny if wasn't so ironic that Hitler passed such laws in the 1930's. All those in favor of "gun control" raise your right hand and shout "Zieg Heil"! American gun control has its roots in keeping our freed slaves unarmed! She knows not what she speaks of in this regard, obviously. The likes of CNN, ABC, etc, along with a dose of public education have fooled her into an innocent "anti-gun" mindset. "They'll protect us", she continued. Really? Where were they during the Columbine shooting spree? Virginia Tech? Any number of home invasions or parking lot attacks? Where were the police during the six plus minute rampage at the Westroads? (Another side note: Some will recommend armed guards at the malls. Fine, as long as the guard does not carry the weapon in plain view so as to simply be the first target. Our advice would be to NOT shop near openly armed security personnel be they police or a private service) Anyway, our police and other law enforcement personnel showed up at Von Maur to divert traffic, openly carry weapons, escort medical personnel, put up yellow tape, write reports and give press conferences all AFTER the violence! "Dial 911" you say? Sure, many at the mall did that day as we've heard the recordings! The recordings of the shooting and killing went well into the third minute, the fourth minute and so on and are proof to us of the futility of calling for help in a dire situation such as that. We do recommend calling 911 ultimately, but only after the threat of immediate bodily harm or death is over, obviously. How many minutes did the thugs get to kill at Columbine? Cell phones are not good substitutes for a handgun in a trained individual's hands when it comes to stopping a violent attack no matter how hard you throw the phone! One can only imagine the horror of trying to dial a phone while a thug or two are advancing quickly with a knife, gun or baseball bat! You might, if still alive afterward, remember how the fine motor skills left your adrenaline soaked, shaking body as you thought: "This can't be happening..." The 911 operator will likely have listened as you were raped or killed if you were able to dial and get connected using a land line. The violence will likely have been over by the time a cell connection would have been established, again, assuming you were the one in ten thousand who could actually dial a phone during an attack. Then again, perhaps the thug(s) attacking you or your family will be polite and allow you or your loved one to complete the call. Either way, the police will arrive after the violence. The upside there is they will write a really good looking report! No, not everyone should be armed! This discussion is in regard to those willing to assume the responsibility of carrying a weapon and receive training for stopping such attacks during the immense confusion, horror and unimaginable adrenaline surge therein. Many families now wish such an individual was nearby at Columbine, Virginia Tech, the Westroads, etc. ...Like at the Church in Colorado! "That will never happen, you are paranoid" I've heard people say. Well, there is a mall full of people right here in Omaha that after December 5th will think twice before uttering such nonsense again! You must understand that I do wish the shooting at the Westroads never happened. It did, and therefore unfortunately gives us yet another argument for self defense. It gives us a chance to look at our Second Amendment freedom, or what's left of it, and be able to say "told you so". We simply cannot ignore what the anti-gunning, turn the other cheek, it will never happen to me, liberal wingnuts hate: Reality. The idea of armed (effective) self defense will be avoided by our media in general, or simply be skirted around. If the subject is taken up it will likely be mocked or trivialized. What might be discussed as an (ineffective) alternative will be anti-gun legislation or "gun control". This will help some misguided folks who falsely believe that such laws reduce violence or accidents feel better. Hawkins violated no fewer than twelve 'gun' laws as it was! By the way, Isn't murder against the law? Our own Department of Justice reviewed the findings of several studies analyzing the effect of "gun control" laws over a 10 year period, including the 10 year long Clinton "gun ban" that recently expired and found these laws have "no effect on gun crime or accident rates". Bet you didn't hear that on NBC! Read all about it at saf.org or gunowners.org It is realized however, that the real agenda on the 'left' is to erase the Second Amendment and other freedoms. In other words, to increase governmental power and further socialistic ideals over the citizenry. Jumping onto an emotional bandwagon after a shooting such as at Westroads makes it easier to push those laws due to the misguided support of emotional people. This "misguidedness" results from the ever so subtle efforts of our liberally biased media over time along with the leftist-agenda based public education which is usually continued at our universities. These gun control laws, as demonstrated at any of these shootings, are useless in preventing tragedies or accidents. These laws do further erode our Constitutional rights/freedoms and ultimately increases governmental 'rule' over us. Thus, our society is subtly moved "left" toward a socialistic, governmental nanny state (doomed to fail financially) and THAT is the real purpose of these and similar laws despite the pretense of "safety", even if the CNN watching blondie's don't understand that or even care. ...Yet. If you listened to the press conference on the afternoon of 12/6/08, at the Creighton Medical Center regarding the Westroads shooting victims being cared for there, you will have heard the surgeon discussing "assault weapons" or "assault weapon wounds" and how horrific they are in particular. What is the medical term for working in an anti-gun agenda into a press conference? The surgeon is of course an expert in the emergency repair of gunshot wounds and other trauma, but If the doctor was knowledgeable at all regarding firearms in and of themselves he'd know that the weapon/caliber combination Hawkins used is actually LESS powerful than most hunting rifles! The AK style "assault" rifle that Hawkins used at Von Maur is available in either .223 or .308 caliber. Either way and regardless of bullet type used, these calibers create a smaller temporary and smaller permanent wound cavity than any number of more powerful hunting rounds/rifles. Why do you think an elk hunter would NOT use .223 or .308 caliber but would instead use .30-06, .270, .300 win mag, etc? Because there is more tissue damage, more power delivered with a much larger temporary and permanent wound channel, and is much more effective than the calibers available in your scary "assault weapon"! Actually, the surgeon likely knew this, but was successful in his attempt to scare the mommies on the couch watching him on channel 7 and the mommies listening to the radio while picking up kiddie from his or her public school (guns are evil indoctrination center). Anyway, the external cosmetic features of any rifle can be changed to fit the stereotype of the "assault weapon" image! Yet, because the doctor knows that media sound bites have become successful over the years in making the term "assault rifle" mean something special and scary to the unknowing, he took an opportunity to provide another barrage of scary anti-gun buzzwords designed to further the ignorance and fear regarding "guns". We feel this is an abuse of his respected position as a surgeon. A question for you. Seriously. If you or your family were assaulted by a baseball bat wielding thug, would the weapon in this case be classified as an "assault weapon" or would the bat have to be cosmetically altered to fit that description? ...Yeah, silly isn't it? Do you have a "no guns" policy at your place of employ? Do you have a cute sign on your doors that show a pistol or revolver with a slash through it thereby forbidding firearms there? Does that make you feel safer or something? If you do, why not place those very signs on your doors at home! It's the idea that firearms might be in any given home, concealed or not, that keeps a lot of thugs second guessing! Gun owners on any given block should charge the idiot anti-gunners a security fee for that very reason! Be aware, lawless thugs see your "safe" gun-free work area as nothing more than a safe work zone for themselves! Such "gun-free" zones are monumentally stupid! Ironic, however, that well educated business types still fall for this artificial security idea. Maybe just their way of stamping their anti-gun feelings publicly? It cannot be that these educated folks actually believe door way signs are effective! If mandated by insurance requirements it would simply show that common sense may have been (liberally) educated out of insurance company executive staff. Remember 1930's Germany history lesson? Or did our public education system become successful in erasing such "unproductive" information during your schooling? Ever wonder why the German people, Jewish or otherwise, didn't care while firearms were being registered and ultimately then confiscated? Why did Hitler want an unarmed populace? The people then did not have the advantage of hindsight. We do. Yet most are either blind to it or just plain spoiled to the extent they (we, as a whole) don't believe our government would lie to us, would legislate the people right out of our own Constitutionally given freedoms one "safety" oriented law at a time... Visit jpfo.org and learn something. Get the information you need to start fighting with us damn you, before it's too late for your kids. It is possible, you must realize if the Obama's, the Hillary's, Omaha Mayor Fahey or New York's Bloomberg's of the world get their way your grand kids might just wonder about our country as it "used to be" and ask you something like: "My friend Billy said his dad told him there was a time people could own guns, and that people could say what they wanted to, even something bad about the federal rulers without being badly punished. Is that true?" He might go on to ask you also: "And why is Johnny's dad in trouble and in prison just for stopping the shooting murderer at the mall? Is it because he used a gun? Why did the Federal Information Channel (formerly NBC) say only that he killed a man with what they said was 'an unauthorized, illegal, banned, horrible and evil gun' but did not tell the public he saved innocent lives daddy, why? My teacher at the Ted Kennedy Federal Leftist Indoctrination Center says we should never act to save ourselves or others, but to just turn the other cheek and hope the uniformed protectors magically appear to save us instead." Ok, a bit over the top to be from a kid, but don't you see how elements of that very scenario are incrementally being installed one law at a time? Do you know about the McCain/Fiengold restriction on free speech that eliminates radio/TV political discussion before elections? Can you spell "First Amendment shredding"? This is John McCain we're talking about! A republican perhaps but no Constitutionally oriented, freedom loving conservative to say the least. Yeah, he voted to raise YOUR taxes as well! The scenario above is not that far away folks. Keep voting for your left wing loonies, either party in some cases, and your grand kids will have questions. Will you have an answer? Will you like the truthful answer, regardless of the answer you actually may give? Maybe NOW is the time to consider the questions! Or just stick your head in the sand while the rest of us fight for YOUR freedoms. Next time you might be at the Westroads, walk into Von Maur and listen to the piano, see the wonderful merchandise perfectly displayed. Notice the nicely appointed people as they stroll. Certainly violence of unimaginable magnitude cannot happen here. Prior to December 5th, 2007, most people would argue against the need for effective personal protection against evil in such a place. The rest of us live in a more realistic world and realize such things are possible and has happened before. Columbine and Virginia Tech just to name two, never mind the countless home invasions, etc. We train. We mentally consider "what if" scenarios here and there and at least try to be prepared. When at the store we note where the exits are, where the fire extinguishers are, what structures nearby offer cover. We often try to note who is around us and what are they doing. We hope to not be a swivel-headed paranoid type, nor do we pretend we are anything special. We just like being aware and possibly-maybe-hopefully a bit more prepared for the unthinkable than your average unaware, untrained, ignorant and yet typical shopper. It is hoped nobody, none of us, would ever have to use a weapon to defend our lives or lives of someone we love. We pray to never ever have to be put in the awful position. The legal problems, the horror of potentially taking a life, even if to defend your own would be unthinkable and we, again, pray it never happens. Anyway, due to the "no guns" policy at the Westroads there were no persons other than Hawkins armed at Von Maur that day it would seem. Those who carry concealed weapons, and hopefully train, were spending dollars elsewhere. They likely shopped where they are not 'forbidden' to be. For that the Westroads management/ownership owes the families of the victims and those forced to watch a 'gunman' kill without restraint much more than most people could have imagined. -Steve |