Compare and Contrast

On the evening of May 17, a Pizza Hut delivery driver shot a robber – between 10 and 15 times. (“Why did you shoot fifteen times?” “That’s all there were in the magazine!”) He then picked up his assailant’s firearm and drove to his place of business where he had his supervisor call the police.

On Friday, May 28, the prosecutor’s office ruled that the shooting – and the subsequent actions of the shooter – were justified.

Contrast that to the piece two posts down. No charges of murder filed for “unreasonable force.” No seven-week investigation. The shooter had a licensed firearm. His assailant had an unlicensed one. The shooter wasn’t attacked in his home, but on the street – where, if you’re in England, you’re prohibited from carrying any sort of “offensive” weapon. If you actually obey the law, that is.

Now, do you think pizza delivery drivers in Indiannapolis will be more or less safe for a while?

Of course, this is just another example of the “blood in the streets” predicted by the anti-concealed carry crowd, right? Just one more example of how carrying a gun is useless, won’t make you safer, and only endangers innocent people.

Right?

Damn it’s tough being a “gullible gunner,” but I agree with Ronald Honeycutt, the shooter who lost his job because Pizza Hut requires its delivery people to be unarmed:

Honeycutt said he was fired from his job because he had violated the store policy against carrying a gun, which he was licensed to carry.

“It’s my life. I choose which policy to follow.”

That’s what free people do. And that’s what a free society defends.

Hat tip, Kim