It happened again. It’s an old story. Bad people being bad. Police too far away to matter. Armed citizen saves the life of one person by having a gun and using it. Then gets punished.
“Had it not been for his quick action and quick thinking, pulling out his concealed weapon, she might have been murdered on site,” Fouts said.
No. That’s not how it happened. Quick thinking had nothing to do with it. This was premeditated, prepared and trained. This man went to the trouble to buy a gun, ammunition and a holster. He got the training he needed to qualify for a permit and jumped through the hurdles to get his permit. Then he went to the pain in the ass of carrying his gun every day, on days when no one needed or wanted him to. THEN HE JUST HAPPENED TO HAVE IT WHEN IT WAS NEEDED.
This is the way it always happens. If you don’t prepare ahead of time, you won’t have the option of “quick thinking”. Guns don’t just happen because you need them. They happen because you plan ahead. An in every case, you are planning ahead, when no one is actively trying to kill you, so you look like a paranoid psycho for even wanting to do it.
I would also like to point out that there is a missing piece to this story. I want to know why the tow women were arguing and why one deserved death by stabbing instead of the other deserving death by shooting. Right now there is a moral dimension being left out of the discussion. If this man pulled his gun, he must have been willing to use it. He had decided that the attacker “deserved” to die. How is he then different than the attacker deciding that the other woman deserved to die by stabbing. This is a life for a life exchange. Whose life is more valuable? Whose life deserves to continue at the expense of the other? Did the woman who was stabbed contribute to her own condition? I want to know. There used to be a profession of people who would look into this for me and let me know. We used to call them “reporters”.