GREENWOOD, Ind. (WXIN) — While police are crediting an Indiana man with shooting and killing a suspect in the Greenwood Park Mall shooting Sunday, mall policy prohibited him from carrying at all.
"These upgrades include license plate readers installed at mall entrances"
I sense an impending upgrade of the camera lenses with black paint. There was a story several years ago about one of those readers that had been installed at a U.S. Post Office parking lot entrance/exit several years ago. I think it was somewhere in Texas. Withing a day or two the reader was yanked out of the ground and disappeared while being towed down the street behind someone's truck.
The mall is a self-declared “gun-free zone,” but, in Indiana, gun-free zone signs do not have force of law, which means that it is not a crime to ignore them, but only to refuse to leave when asked by the owners.
For the moment, the area I'm in, those signs also don't have the force of law. The most they can do is ask you to leave or push for trespassing. Ironically, this will probably push laws in some weird direction based on the liberal tears about how we can't be grateful to this guy because he broke the rullllessss!
Indeed. And if anyone calls me on it, I'm going to question their ability to guarantee my safety, loudly, in front of other customers, before I go elsewhere. CC
I am in Michigan, and I believe that the signs are a two strike thing. First time, you get a warning, then if you do it again, you get cited for illegal trespass. As for this hero shooting a dangerous criminal, when I saw it, I wondered if it would hit the news cycle, on the MSM. After all it doesn't fit their agenda. Then, as I read this here, I knew that if it does hit their news, it will be heavy on the illegal actions of the gun carrier and how he should not have been carrying in the first place, etc. Little if anything at all will be said of the murder carrying a gun with the intent of committing a murder, no matter where he was carrying. Usually when a good guy with a gun gets buried as deeply as it can be. And yet again, the leftists wonder why the conservatives don't trust them.
Interesting that the New and Improved Assault Weapon Ban is scheduled to be marked up in committee this week and Pelosi has promised to bring it to the floor "by the end of July."
“Someone we are calling the ‘Good Samaritan’ was able to shoot the assailant and stop further bloodshed.”
Fake news! Impossible! We’ve been told over and over that armed citizens only *increase* the danger to others. The unwashed masses who carry guns everywhere are just dangerous rubes. /sarc
You can bet, if the perp had lived he would sue the mall because it was supposed to be a "gun free zone", then sue the "good samaritan" for deadly assault and demand he be charged with attempted murder.
I hope the shooting victims and families of those killed sue the mall owners. If they declare their mall a "weapon free zone" in a CCW state, then they assume responsibility for the safety of their patrons. And may the jury be generous in their award.
Seems like Greenwood Park Mall should change their rules. Phhtt! License plate readers? really?
ReplyDelete"These upgrades include license plate readers installed at mall entrances"
ReplyDeleteI sense an impending upgrade of the camera lenses with black paint. There was a story several years ago about one of those readers that had been installed at a U.S. Post Office parking lot entrance/exit several years ago. I think it was somewhere in Texas. Withing a day or two the reader was yanked out of the ground and disappeared while being towed down the street behind someone's truck.
Nemo
Anothre fine example of the effectiveness of Gun Free Zones.
ReplyDeleteThe mall is a self-declared “gun-free zone,” but, in Indiana, gun-free zone signs do not have force of law, which means that it is not a crime to ignore them, but only to refuse to leave when asked by the owners.
ReplyDeleteDid the first shooter break the rules too?
ReplyDeleteHe was OK on a technicality. The sign only had a handgun behind the red stripe, and he was using a rifle.
DeleteFor the moment, the area I'm in, those signs also don't have the force of law. The most they can do is ask you to leave or push for trespassing. Ironically, this will probably push laws in some weird direction based on the liberal tears about how we can't be grateful to this guy because he broke the rullllessss!
ReplyDeleteFuck them, I carry everywhere......
ReplyDeleteIndeed.
DeleteAnd if anyone calls me on it, I'm going to question their ability to guarantee my safety, loudly, in front of other customers, before I go elsewhere.
CC
Yup
DeleteI routinely disregard such signs, they're stupid and unenforceable. At my age I'm not going to allow myself or my wife to become a victim.
ReplyDeleteThe rule is that signs do not apply to illiterates. Or those imitating illiterates.
ReplyDeleteMilton
I am in Michigan, and I believe that the signs are a two strike thing. First time, you get a warning, then if you do it again, you get cited for illegal trespass.
ReplyDeleteAs for this hero shooting a dangerous criminal, when I saw it, I wondered if it would hit the news cycle, on the MSM. After all it doesn't fit their agenda. Then, as I read this here, I knew that if it does hit their news, it will be heavy on the illegal actions of the gun carrier and how he should not have been carrying in the first place, etc.
Little if anything at all will be said of the murder carrying a gun with the intent of committing a murder, no matter where he was carrying. Usually when a good guy with a gun gets buried as deeply as it can be. And yet again, the leftists wonder why the conservatives don't trust them.
Interesting that the New and Improved Assault Weapon Ban is scheduled to be marked up in committee this week and Pelosi has promised to bring it to the floor "by the end of July."
ReplyDelete“Someone we are calling the ‘Good Samaritan’ was able to shoot the assailant and stop further bloodshed.”
ReplyDeleteFake news! Impossible!
We’ve been told over and over that armed citizens only *increase* the danger to others.
The unwashed masses who carry guns everywhere are just dangerous rubes. /sarc
You can bet, if the perp had lived he would sue the mall because it was supposed to be a "gun free zone", then sue the "good samaritan" for deadly assault and demand he be charged with attempted murder.
ReplyDeleteIf their rules cause needless deaths, of what use are those rules?
ReplyDeleteThough the "Good Samaritan" violated mall policy, so did the murdering shooter; proving "gun free zones" are hazardous to the those within.
ReplyDeleteI hope the shooting victims and families of those killed sue the mall owners. If they declare their mall a "weapon free zone" in a CCW state, then they assume responsibility for the safety of their patrons. And may the jury be generous in their award.
ReplyDeleteExplains why the perp chose that mall. Expected easy prey.
ReplyDeleteNTS
This article is dumber than Biden.
ReplyDelete