Concealed Consumers

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I HATE shopping. Truly. I own more guns than pairs of shoes. Guns and ammo, books, music, home improvement stuff, now those are things I'm happy to shop for. But shopping for the stuff some women seem to want to amass and collect bores me to tears. And I hate stores and crowds. Clauswitz would be proud. I have my list, I do a field study, the layout of the place. Then I dive in unexpectedly, averting near collision with someone spraying samples of perfume by going for a flank position. There they are. Boots. Brown. Size 7. I'm out the door with my spoils in five minutes.

THIS IS HOW MOST WOMEN VIEW SHOPPINGTHIS IS HOW I VIEW SHOPPING

The difference though, is unlike these Celtic guys I'm not allowed to shop armed. The mall is a "gun free zone". So I avoid it like the black death and hit locally owned places, smaller stores that appreciate my business, concealed or not. Malls are scary enough as it is, sale racks of ugly ties, teenagers with credit cards, tacos at the food court. Go there without a gun? No thank you.

Gun free. Think about it. Think about some famous gun free places.

Columbine High School.
New York City pizza shop.
Pearl Mississippi High School.
Luby's Cafeteria.
New York pizza shop.
The Amish school in Pennsylvania.Virginia Tech University.
and more. . . .

Heller is a step in the right direction but we still have a long ways to go, and we need to continue to educate and inform. Guns aren't the evil here, people are the evil. Certainly the media didn't fault Ryder truck regulations or ammonia nitrate restrictions, or a "cult of agriculture fertilizer" following Timothy McVeigh's horrific crime in Oklahoma City. No one debated the essential dangers of hardware and kitchen appliances after Jeffery Dahmer mutilated and consumed his victims.

I believe it was Albert Einstein who said- "The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."

Nobel Economist Friedrich Hayek termed it a "fatal conceit" and some politicians have had a bad case of it, believing they can change the world with their God- like legal attestation as to what THEY think our rights are. But the fatal conceit is not metaphoric, it's literal. People die because social-control laws do not stop criminals but simply prevent law abiding citizens from protecting themselves and those under their care.

The crime records in cities that outlaw handguns to law abiding citizen speaks clearly. When I have been in Europe, where controls are strong, I. heard on the news of more than one break in urban areas involving a criminal and a weapon, including an illegal gun, the residents raped, robbed or beaten, no chance to defend themselves. The criminals have guns, that is a given.

So "gun control" only "controls" law abiding adults who don’t need to be controlled. Arguments for gun control build their basis on a lie. The National Coalition to Ban Handguns claims, "most murders are committed by previously law abiding citizens," and there are other articles asserting such falsehoods without any supporting references other than going back to their own earlier articles. University of Colorado criminologist Desmond Elliott summarized violent crime studies dating back to the 1800s: "the vast majority of persons involved in life-threatening violence have a long criminal record". Professor Elliott’s summary was written in he 1990s.

More recent recent criminological studies from the Hastings Law Journal (University of California at San Francisco): "Only 15% of Americans have criminal records. But more than 90 percent of murderers do. Murderers’ crime careers average six or more years’ length and including four major adult felonies, not counting their often extensive juvenile records".

In summary, guns or no guns, those that commit the more serious violent crimes are not the ordinary law abiding responsible adults. This is so invariably found by homicide studies that is is considered a "criminological axiom" that almost all that commit violent crimes are long term criminals.
But people still wish that many public retail, worship or gathering places be gun free, saying "it's a better place without guns". How is a place better where the weak have no chance against predators? There are places like that, I've visited them throughout the world, places without guns for self defense for survival, where women and children huddle in the back bedrooms in terror, surviving only by submission to their degradation.

When only the peaceable people obey the gun laws, the law's protection is futilely limited.

So until the next step is taken, I will not shop in gun free malls or gun free stores. I may be one lone woman, but I'm a lone consumer with a six figure income and a platinum credit card. Businesses may not care for my views, but they DO care about my buying power. They may not care if they lose the business of one, but I am one of many. I won't take my money any place that has the audacity to demand unarmed helplessness. I won't spend my money for businesses that support, even if indirectly, those that would take those rights from us. Guns themselves in the malls aren't going to cause my demise, any more than Ryder trucks cause terrorism, water causes drowning and forks cause obesity. Guns in the malls, guns in a store, only make me a victim when I'm the one that doesn't have one. They're not "gun free" they are "good-guy gun free" zones.

Academically and professionally, I've studied the insanity of fate and the methodology of greed and evil. It has a profile, a plan and a preferred environment where its prey can not fight back. Embrace the facts and spread the word, take your business elsewhere. And tell them why.