Or at least that is what the press would have us believe.
The anti gun media, with their sensationalism will go on and on about how unarmed people acted bravely as they died at the hands of a lunatic, but nary a word about an armed person stopping a massacre before it barely begun.
I’m speaking of the actions displayed by Nick Meli. Actions that gun control zealots and the media would have you believe didn’t exist. You see, before the Gun Free Zone facilitated 27 murders in Newtown Connecticut, there was an attempted mass murder clear across the country in Portland Oregon.
A masked man stormed into the Clackamas Mall and opened fire, killing 2 and injuring 1. The shooter had no intentions of stopping. That is when Nick Meli made his move, drew his concealed pistol and lined the shooter up in his sights.
As with many of these rampage shooters, they are cowards. They will cull unarmed sheep, but when they find any resistance or have to look down the barrel f a gun themselves, their cowardice is revealed and they often times flee or shoot themselves.
In this case, it was the latter. Nick Meli didn’t fall into the caricature that gun control crowd draw of gun owners. He didn’t launch a salvo of bullets at the killer, he didn’t think himself some vigilante praying to use his gun. He was a guy just trying to help.
He saw that there was people behind his target and that if he missed he may hit them. He positioned himself in a store and waited for his shot. The killer opted to take his own life. Nick Meli saved countless lives that day. But apparently, that isn’t sexy enough for the national media.
And in ignorance and a bit of outlandish blind eye turning, the gun control zealots do not even allow that such a thing as using a gun to stop a mass murder is possible. Not only is it possible, but it happens, yet unless you live near and hear it on the local news, you would be led to believe that such things are a fantasy of gun rights activists.
I’m don’t want to take away any praise for a teacher who saved her students by shielding them, but why do we only praise unarmed victims who have to die for the propagation of Gun Free Zones? Why can we not also praise the good Samaritan, who was armed with a gun, who not only lived, but saved dozens (if not hundreds) of lives himself?
Pompous blowhards like Bloomberg contend that having a gun when someone is on a murder spree will have no benefit. Perhaps Bloomberg doesn’t view saving the lives of children at the cost of his own agenda as a benefit…but I do.
What can one sheep dog do when a wolf descends? More than the sheep can do alone.
Send this to friend