Even with a divided opinion, many corporations are posting their support for Starbucks’ decision to ignore the Brady Center’s insistence that Starbucks throw customers out of their establishments. [See Part I.]
It’s great to see praise for standing your ground against a political nuisance. Brady, not open carry customers. Most of the opposition to armed customers or even armed students on campus has been that companies may be found liable if an armed employee goes postal, but it happens a lot with knives and brute force without guns. The preponderance is in more who are coming to realize that it’s safer to see armed students and armed workers than to be known as unarmed and defenseless.
Virginia Tech settled for $11 Million for a so-called ‘watered down’ alert system. Meanwhile, this month and last month, adult students protest being disarmed at Colorado State U where they had previously seen their second amendment rights affirmed, and they never gave the Trustees reason to regret it. That is a cause for litigation if you’re liability conscious.
Where you have a ubiquitous employee or student concentration of armed persons, you have a ubiquitous deterrent. The metric for this conclusion is that Security cannot be everywhere, and this absentee force creates an inescapable void on security in general. Thugs lurk and stalk within that void. Suddenly, the concept that the security is purely reactive clarifies the void’s reach: everywhere. And if the reaction time takes ten minutes, it arrives far too late. How about a much faster reaction time?
Creating such a void of response puts active shooters on the honor system that they will not act once security goes somewhere else. This seems rather indifferent to the needs of visitors and employees or students. The idea of refusing armed employees denies the company another layer of protection: the willingness of the employee or student to participate in their own safety and more effectively than a void.
Where you have a ubiquitous employee or student concentration of armed persons, you have a ubiquitous deterrent.
Students themselves or employees can fill that void created by police who leave the area to supervise other corners of campus. The plan of waiting for cops to leave (opportunity) then becomes neutralized and worthless to the would-be killer. There would still be a lethal presence on campus and the thug wouldn’t know where it really is. It could be the target herself. That’s deterrence.
Be sure to register for my Safer Streets Newsletter.
The second amendment is the better paper protection. Safe Streets In The Nationwide Concealed Carry Of Handguns is written for non-gun owner Americans, and is also available as an e-book.