An armed robber came in a Chicago neighborhood store and announced to an employee there that he was robbing the place. He ordered one of the workers to the back of the store at gunpoint, presumably to steal the cash that was in the safe.
Unfortunately for the robber, there was a customer who had walked in during the robbery who also was a licensed concealed carrier. He sprang into action, pulled his firearm, and shot the armed robber, killing him. No one else was hurt.
This is how things play out when there’s at least one law-abiding citizen around carrying a gun. If the armed customer had not been there to defend the others and himself, this would have been yet another crime in Chicago. If the suspect had shot and killed the employee or other customers during the robbery, this would have been yet another murder in the city. In a violent city like Chicago, neither of those things would be news. People are used to hearing about violent crimes in Chicago.
But since this crime wasn’t able to be completed because of a law-abiding citizen carrying a gun, this is a different kind of newsworthy that perhaps we’re not used to. This is Chicago after all.
I wonder what Obama would say about an incident like this. He’d have a choice between two opinions. He could take the concealed carrier’s side, and thank him for using his firearm to protect those around him by taking out the bad guy.
Or, he could say that we don’t need more guns, we need fewer guns, and the fact that this customer had a gun in a store put everyone else at risk. Instead of arming more people, we need to focus on getting guns off the streets. If we could focus on that, perhaps that robber wouldn’t have been able to get his hands on a gun.
And besides that, according to the suspect’s stepson, “there must be more to the story,” because the suspect used to work at this store, and he knew the owner well. So, maybe this armed customer wasn’t so innocent after all. Obama would likely take the armed robber’s side.