Think ”barrel,” as in ”fish in a.”
If just a few of those holiday shoppers in Omaha, Nebraska had been packing heat, they could have put a stop to Robert Hawkins’s disgusting rampage eftsoons and right speedily. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws and assorted other weirdos will have guns. That, in a nutshell, is precisely the problem.
— Roger’s Rules
A Google news search using the phrase “Omaha Mall Shooting” finds an incredible 2,794 news stories worldwide for the last day… But despite the massive news coverage, none of the media coverage, at least by 10 a.m. Thursday, mentioned this central fact: Yet another attack occurred in a gun-free zone.
— Fox News
...and the punchline:
[It]’s worth noting—since apparently most of the media reports haven’t—that this was another mass shooting in a “gun-free” zone. It seems to me that we’ve reached the point at which a facility that bans firearms, making its patrons unable to defend themselves, should be subject to lawsuit for its failure to protect them. The pattern of mass shootings in “gun free” zones is well-established at this point, and I don’t see why places that take the affirmative step of forcing their law-abiding patrons to go unarmed should get off scot-free.
— Instapundit
~click pic~
Quote of the Day:
I’m pretty sure that nobody in the Omaha mall was thinking, “Good thing the crazy guy is the only one here with a gun.”
— Instapundit (again)
DougM (commissarophobe) 
