"We have lost our ambition, our imagination, and our willingness to do the things that built the Golden Gate Bridge" - Barack Obama (aka President Malaise)
Pitch in with the Prince William Young Republicans and help defeat Obama in 2012!
No Guns, More Crime
By Greg L | 9 March 2007 | Crime | 1 Comment
From the “Department of I Told You So” comes yet another Manassas Journal-Messenger report that a branch of BB&T Bank in Woodbridge was robbed at gunpoint this week. Long-time readers may recall numerous other recent instances of this bank, which prohibits customers from carrying their legally-permitted firearms into their branches, being robbed by criminals apparently intelligent enough to recognize that this policy significantly reduces a criminal’s chances of being apprehended or shot while committing their crimes. At some point a customer is going to be injured or killed partly as a result of this policy, and BB&T might finally realize how counterproductive their devotion to political correctness really is.
BB&T Bank at 13920 Noblewood Plaza in Woodbridge was robbed at gunpoint around 2:50 p.m. Monday, said Officer John Bogert, Prince William police spokesman.Police said a man entered the bank and displayed a handgun, demanding money, Bogert said. After getting an undisclosed amount of cash the robber fled on foot.
None of the bank employees was physically injured, Bogert said.
The gunman is described as a thin, light-skinned man between ages 18 and 25 and approximately 5 feet 7 inches to 5 feet 8 inches tall, Bogert said. He was wearing a black jacket, black pants, a black ski mask and black gloves.
On a related note, a Federal Appeals Court has overturned the District of Columbia’s ban on private firearms ownership, which may soon provide relief to citizens there who are being subjected to horrifying crime levels while having their best means of self-defense severely, and unconstitutionally restricted. The dissenting judge in this 2-1 decision makes the laughable argument that the 14th Amendment doesn’t actually apply to District residents, which would have made for some interesting unintended consequences had she been in the majority.
Judge Karen Henderson dissented, writing that the Second Amendment does not apply to the district because it is not a state.
Fascinating. The lengths to which the “I’m terrified of guns” crowd will go is just unbelievable.
The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.
You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed.
1 Comment
Views: 797
Loading ...
While I agree that policies such as that of the bank in question are idiotic and fail to contribute to public safety, I do not believe that the rule makes it any more likely that a criminal will rob the bank. So few people carry personal weapons (unfortunately) that it’s usually a safe assumption almost anywhere on the part of a violent criminal that he will be the only one packing.
Consider how deeply stupid all bank robbers are. Bank robberies actually net less cash typically than robberies of many retail outlets. I won’t name any names, but I happen to be aware that certain well-known chain stores in the greater Richmond area typically close on a Friday night with up to $5,000 on hand. So the bank nets less money, even while it is automatically a federal crime that gets the FBI on your tail and poses far greater consequences for the criminal than robbing almost any other business.
I don’t care how desperate someone is; robbing a bank is a sure sign of total incompetance on the part of any criminal. Such people, unable to do a basic calculation of risk versus reward, would not be swayed from their purpose by the removal of the ‘no guns allowed’ sign and in fact probably can’t read it in the first place.
It’s nice to hear about that appeals court ruling, on the other hand. I wonder if that same dissenting judge would be willing to uphold a ban on all free speech in the Capital on the same basis. No more marches, no more protests, no more right to petition the government for redress of greviances. The Capital is pretty much the last place where we could bear a suspension of any portion of the Constitution.