I am truly saddened when I hear about any kind of violent crime that leaves people either dead or injured. I feel sorry for the folks that were gunned down during church service in Brookfield, Wisconsin, a couple of weeks ago.
But I really doubt that the violence would have been prevented or minimized if any of the victims had a gun. Death is death, plain and simple, and even one death is too many in my book. Even if Ratzmann had to face an armed victim, how would that victim know what was happening until after Ratzmann started shooting people? By then, the person would need time to react, pull out his or her concealed weapon, and take action if Ratzmann hadn’t gunned that person down.
Waukesha County District Attorney Paul Bucher, running for Wisconsin’s Attorney General, stated that he supports a concealed carry law. He claims that it would level the playing field. I see a huge flaw in his thinking.
Here’s a case-in-point: In December 2004, Damageplan was playing in a small Ohio club when Nathan Gale, a devoted Pantera fan (Darrell’s former band), opened fire on the band and audience. Darrell died on the scene with three others before Gale was shot down by an off-duty police officer that was attending the concert. My point is that even a fully-trained and legally armed professional cannot prevent the kind of carnage that we’ve seen lately. What makes Bucher think that a citizen with a concealed weapon could do better?
I don’t believe that anyone can truly predict who will initiate this kind of violence. According to Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel columnist Laurel Walker, “And come to think of it, Terry Ratzmann… seemed to be the very definition of law-abiding. At least, until the moment he snapped and shot seven people, then himself, during church services at a Brookfield hotel last month.” Even if one person at the service had a gun, that person still wouldn’t have had any time to see Ratzmann come in, pull out a weapon, and shoot his first victim.