“Clackamas mall shooter faced shopper with concealed weapon”
It’s amazing what kinds of things the national media — in their haste to generalize a narrative and create a “moral imperative” that seems always to redound to the implementation of some policy on their political wishlist — leaves out of their reporting.
But that’s for our own good. Because we can’t be expected to understand the moral of any story if it isn’t shaped for us and presented unencumbered by messy, competing facts that might just ruin what is otherwise a perfect little gem of truthiness. KGW, Portland:
Nick Meli is emotionally drained. The 22-year-old was at Clackamas Town Center with a friend and her baby when a masked man opened fire.
“I heard three shots and turned and looked at Casey and said, ‘are you serious?,'” he said.
The friend and baby hit the floor. Meli, who has a concealed carry permit, positioned himself behind a pillar.
“He was working on his rifle,” said Meli. “He kept pulling the charging handle and hitting the side.”
The break in gunfire allowed Meli to pull out his own gun, but he never took his eyes off the shooter.
“As I was going down to pull, I saw someone in the back of the Charlotte move, and I knew if I fired and missed, I could hit them,” he said.
Meli took cover inside a nearby store. He never pulled the trigger. He stands by that decision.
“I’m not beating myself up cause I didn’t shoot him,” said Meli. “I know after he saw me, I think the last shot he fired was the one he used on himself.”
I mentioned this to my wife this morning, and though she keeps up on national news with fidelity, she hadn’t heard that the mall shooter was confronted by an armed concealed carry holder. And that’s because such a detail detracts from the left’s larger narrative about the dangers of the “gun culture.”
But here’s the actual takeaway, which countermands the narrative the left wishes to push: the concealed carry owner acted responsibly, holding his shot to protect bystanders who may have been in the line of fire; and the fact that the attacker, who was using a stolen gun (quick! Congress needs to pass a law banning theft!), saw the concealed carry owner armed and training a gun on him in a “gun-free zone,” may have precipitated his decision to finish off his suicide “mission” without trying for any more human targets: his plan was always to kill others than himself, and to kill himself he was going to have to beat the concealed carry owner to it. “Only” two died. While the potential for carnage was far far greater.
Did a responsible gun owner prevent a number of additional deaths? Hard to know for certain. But the facts are the facts.
And yet here’s a perverse twist to an already perverse story: the attacker isn’t the only criminal in this scenario. The mall is itself a gun-free zone, and should law enforcement wish to do so, they can prosecute Meli and revoke his carry permit for carrying illegally in a zone where firearms are disallowed. Though that same restriction shockingly didn’t faze the attacker, who may or may not have been thwarted by the criminal behavior of a concealed carry permit holder.
That’s the society we now live in.
Up is down. Black is white. Earl and Cornbread? Are actually me.