Posted on 06/16/2016 7:12:44 AM PDT by shortstop
It was a gun-free zone.
That gay bar down in Orlando. Hundreds of people obeying the law, one guy breaking the law, and almost 50 pay with their lives.
The state of Florida is partly to blame.
Don’t get me wrong. The jihad boy is the murderer. The responsibility is his.
But the state of Florida left those hundreds of people defenseless, and so a terrorist went through them like a knife through butter.
Here’s what I mean.
Florida is a pro-gun state. Not just in its laws, but in its culture. Rates of firearms ownership are high, rates of lawful concealed carry are high.
That’s a good thing.
But Florida isn’t perfect, and it is sometimes prone to put the Second Amendment on a leash.
Like the provision of law that meant the hundreds of people enjoying themselves at the Pulse were unable to defend themselves.
See, in Florida, it is illegal to carry a gun in an establishment which derives the majority of its income from the sale of alcohol.
Like a bar.
If it’s a restaurant with a bar, you can carry. If it’s a bar with a restaurant, you can’t.
And so the happy hordes packed into the Pulse, an establishment deriving the majority of its income from the sale of alcohol, were – under force of law – disarmed.
So they couldn’t fight back.
No one in that bar had a gun with which to fight to defend himself and others.
It was, under Florida law, a soft target.
And people died.
Like so many of the targets of mass shootings – schools, colleges, military installations and offices – this was a gun-free zone. Murderers and terrorists pick places where they know their victims are unarmed and unable to fight back.
These laws make innocent people sitting ducks.
Let’s talk guns in Florida.
The Sunshine State has some 1.3 million active concealed-carry pistol permits – the most in the nation – and a population of just under 20 million. If you round the number of permits down to 1 million – to allow for out-of-state holders of a Florida permit – that leaves you with roughly 5 percent of all Floridians having a license to carry a handgun. When you factor out children, it gets closer to 10 percent.
If there were 500 people in that bar that night, that’s between 25 and 50 licensed to carry concealed.
But none of them could, because of a law that arbitrarily says people in bars have neither the authorization nor the judgment to exercise a constitutional right.
Experience Sunday morning doesn’t bear that out. Faced with a rampaging murderer, the patrons of Pulse demonstrated in many instances courage, selflessness and compassion in heroic proportion. People helped people, escapes were crafted, and folks pulled together.
They showed responsibility, resolve and caring.
In short, they showed themselves to be trustworthy.
And Florida law should respect that trustworthiness by allowing its permit holders to decide for themselves where they will carry and, specifically, if they want to carry in a bar.
Because if just one of those potential 25 to 50 gun owners had been packing that night, things might have gone differently. If that terrorist had encountered a small cadre of armed civilians, instead of a mass of defenseless victims, lives could have been saved.
Florida should change its law.
And if gay people believe that they are the subject of violent hate crimes, they should be prepared to defend themselves. Like anyone, in any situation, the final task of self-defense is both a responsibility and a right. If the attack of last weekend means that jihadis or others might target gay bars or gatherings, it might be reasonable for members of the gay community to be ready to defend themselves.
Sometimes, gays are associated with progressive politics, which are anti-Second Amendment. Why does that have to be? What does one’s sexual orientation have to do with guns? Some will have one view, others will have a different view – you wouldn’t think sexual orientation would be a factor.
So gay people should think it over, and decide what they personally want to do.
In that crowd, there were courageous men and woman who would have fought back if they had had the means. Several of them, on staff and in the crowd, were former or current members of the military. They knew how to fight, they knew how to save themselves and their friends.
But the law didn’t let them.
Some seek to exploit this terrorist attack to advance their anti-gun agenda. They say that the availability of guns made the attack possible. I say that the ban on guns made the attack indefensible.
It’s not that one law armed the jihadi, it’s that another law disarmed his prey.
And that was a law that he, as a licensed security guard, was aware of.
Did he end up deciding to attack a gay bar because its clientele was largely homosexual – and because he knew they wouldn’t be able to fight back?
We can’t know.
But we can untie the hands of future targets of violence.
Florida should start honoring its own pistol permits – everywhere.
End gun-free zones, which have time and time again been turned into killing zones.
And people died.
Second amendment.
Florida, the GUNSHINE State! Yeah, but certain areas are controlled by former North Easterners who’s mind set should have remained back where they came from. Too many old pajama boys.
It’s a difficult situation. On the one hand, no guns equals a free-fire, free-kill zone.
On the other, a heavily crowded bar is a tough place to have fully weaponized, because heavy alcohol consumption and guns don’t mix well. Even in the Old West they used to hang up their belts when they entered some of the saloons.
Of course, it’s easy for me to say, since I don’t frequent heavily crowded bars, especially heavily crowded gay bars.
Even in the Old West they used to hang up their belts when they entered some of the saloons. ................................... But they had shot guns under the bar, and also posted guards in the balconies.
Has “Gun Free Zones” been thru SCOTUS? I think gun free zones would be a violation of the 2nd ammendment constitutionally. It is a public place not like a courthouse or school.
Agreed, that’s the other half of it.
I suppose the cover charge will have to go up to pay for more militarized security than unarmed bouncers and an off-duty moonlighting single patrolman.
All those who government hacks who willfully violated the Constitution and their oaths and forced these people live in gun free victim zones need to be tried as an accessory to this crime. They are complicit and created the condition ripe for it.
“heavy alcohol consumption and guns don’t mix well”
____________________________
I agree. But heavy alcohol consumption and driving don’t mix well, either. People are still allowed to drive to and from bars, even if they have a drink or two.
I don’t have more than 1 or drinks per night if I’m carrying. Some will say you shouldn’t have any, and that’s a personal choice, at least in my state.
Know your limits.
At least you know your history in regards to the old west.
Answer the questions in front of the clerk without a crib sheet, and if you pass (20 out of 20 suggested) .. he sells you the gun
MY experience is, every gun dealer knows how to "chat guns" and can spot someone that doesn't have a full and/or mature "air" about them concerning guns
Those people can't pass the test ... and no government was involved
or a warrior from giving up information if captured by the enemy
Is the same elemental with responsible gun owners
Orlando Police Chief ought to resign. 2 hours to take out one gunman?
“Gunman” is their word, though, isn’t it, like “gay” and “homophobia?”
We don’t say “knifeman,” “fistman,” or “brokenbottleman.”
Why “gunman?”
And now we have the newly coined “gun violence” to endure.
“like Viet Nam”
Don’t forget that we won the Viet Nam War militarily. We destroyed the Viet Cong, and readied the ARVN to defeat the communists on their own—which they did in two major battles, before Teddy Kennedy and other traitors in congress cut off the aid we had promised them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.