Gun-free zones don’t protect us
OK, now I’m really confused. Liberals have been telling us all along that if we just outlaw guns, there will be no more gun violence. Here’s the source of my bewilderment. There is a restaurant in North Carolina that has a sign posted in its front window that specifically prohibits guns. According to the liberal message, that sign protects everyone within that establishment from gun violence, right? How is it, then, that this restaurant was robbed on May 21 by someone carrying a gun?
In addition, how is it that people in an Aurora, Colo., theater, Sandy Hook Elementary School, Fort Hood, and the list goes on ad nauseam, managed to get themselves shot in gun-free zones? The liberals tell us outlawing guns (as in gun-free zones) will protect us because everyone will be disarmed. Are they lying to us? If they are lying to us, they are volitionally doing us great harm by prohibiting other people with guns in those places who could neutralize the perpetrators.
My question is this: why would the liberals wish us harm by taking away the only thing that could protect us, thereby leaving a clear, unimpeded path for wrongdoers?
From the May 28-June 3, 2014, issue