Saturday, December 09, 2006

Two Things, Dear Reader

First, please say a prayer for the families who lost loved ones in the tragic shooting yesterday evening in Chicago. That Richard Daley and the Chicago City Council have banned handguns in the city somehow didn't deter the guy who destroyed several families last night. One can only guess if the result might have been different if Illinois had concealed carry laws, but if I'm the shooter, I'm thinking twice about it. The Chicago Tribune reports that the perpetrator was actually escorted by a security guard to the offices. I'm sure that we haven't heard the last of the story.

Second, courtesy of the Federalist Society, you might enjoy this link. I haven't checked it out, but I've heard Scalia speak before and he's enjoyable, to say the least.

3 comments:

Daniel Webster said...

"The Chicago Tribune reports that the perpetrator was actually escorted by a security guard to the offices."

A tragic occurance indeed. :( The Chicago Tribune story also relates some interesting facts regarding the escorting security guard's immediate actions following the shooting - facts this particular story does not relate.

Not being one to read too much into the early reporting of such an incident, however, my only conclusion on those facts at this moment is that people kinda tend to lose their senses on the heels of things like this - particularly those who are closest to the actual events - and they sometimes react in a way that they normally wouldn't. But those facts the readers may find interesting nonetheless.

In any event my prayers go out to the victims and their families.

The Monarchist said...

This story becomes sadder. The shooter was turned away earlier in the day because he didn't have an appointment, only to return armed.

I'm doing my best to try and resist the urge to find someone to blame, but what's the point of security guards if what they're going to do is escort up armed people to commit a crime? After 9/11, Chicago high-rises instituted some very rigorous (at least by all appearances) security measures, but now this... well, this seems to show some very poor planning or personnel decisions. What would security guards do if three armed terrorists decided to go do the same thing? One man, disgruntled, or a dozen Islamic extremists - is there any difference in how the guards should respond? And according to today's article in the Tribune, the guy was reloading? Dear God, and it took 45 minutes for the police to respond??

Maybe they'll arm security guards now. Better yet, maybe the city will stop infringing on the Second Amendment.

Daniel Webster said...

Well, let's just hope that residents of the city, and business commuters are not subjected to the same procedural inadequacies which marked the criminal shooting of a judge and a police officer of recent antiquity.

Y'know, anti-discrimination laws often put unqualified, unfit persons in jobs they are absolutely ill-prepared to handle, mentally, physically, educationally, or whatever. If a gun-carrying security guard as a last line of defense against a murderous lunatic can easily be outwitted, overpowered, or what have you, then the occupants of the building in question are in more danger, not less.