AR: Gunfight, two Permit Holders, two off Duty Police, one Attacker

It is commonly said by those opposed to the second amendment, that police will not be able to discern armed citizens who are legally carrying guns from criminals, and that armed confrontations will then result in widespread carnage.

Here is an example where it did not happen.  From fox16.com:

Investigators said Qandil confronted his estranged wife, Tabitha Qandil, 31, Grayson Herrera, 23, and Dustin O'Conner, 27, as the three were headed to the movie theater.

"The victim raised his shirt and showed a weapon within his waistband, began to pull the weapon. The other two were concealed handgun weapon carriers and they pulled their weapons, and there was an exchange of gunfire," said Grubbs.

An off-duty officer was working security inside the Malco, another off-duty officer was attending a movie, when both heard the shots and ran to the parking lot, according to Grubbs. The officers were able to disarmed Herrera and O'Conner.

 Note that there were two legal firearms carriers, one attacker, and two off duty police officers.  The officers arrived very quickly, and they were not in uniform.  The defenders did not shoot the officers.  The officers did not shoot the defenders.  The attacker was killed, and one defender was wounded.  The wounded defender was expected to be released from the hospital the next day.  No one else was hit.

Consider the implications.  You have all the potential for chaotic gunfire causing mass casualties imagined by those who want the public disarmed.  More than one defender.  The attacker starting with surprise.  More than one police officer.  Officers that are not in uniform.  Yet only  the attacker was killed, and one defender was wounded by the attacker.  The situation simply refuses to fit the anti-second amendment template, because the template does not fit reality.

When five bank robbers attempted to rob a bank in Eureka Springs, Arkansas, in 1922, dozens of shots were fired by numerous citizens.  Three bank robbers were killed and two seriously wounded.   Not one innocent citizen was shot.  The idea of multiple people being shot by citizen defenders in such a confrontation is simply a myth.   It, like most arguments used by those opposed to the Second Amendment, is simply a figment of the imagination of people who are proudly ignorant about firearms and self defense, and who want to insure that most citizens are disarmed.

Legally armed citizens are not gang-bangers who fire indiscriminately at houses to enforce their "turf".  Sometimes innocents are hit, but ordinary armed citizens have a better record of hitting the people that need to be stopped, and no others, than police do. 

©2014 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included.
Link to Gun Watch