Greg Gutfeld of Fox’s “The Five” is just thrilled that a store posting a “no guns” sign was robbed at gunpoint.
A smirking Gutfeld says:
“So with every issue both sides pick stories to support their own opinions. But sometimes it’s just too easy, in fact, it’s like stealing candy from a baby – or from a store that advertises its gun-free status. A restaurant in North Carolina was robbed at gunpoint on Sunday, two pistol-packers assaulted two workers, but thankfully no one died. Oddly, the store had a sign on the door [smirk] clearly stating, no guns, including concealed weapons. I know! The robbers totally ignored the sign! Well, they really didn’t ignore it at all. They saw it as an invitation, suggesting that the only guns there at the restaurant squirt soda. Hell, why not make a sign that says, “robbers welcome, the cash register’s up front, the safe’s in the back, the combination is Shakira’s birthday . . . touting gun-free zones only makes you a richer target . . . .”
Here’s the video:
Is Gutfeld equally thrilled that a bunch of liberal, likely unarmed, California kids were recently gunned down by Elliot Rodger?
It’s hard not to laugh at Gutfeld’s desperate attempt to tie lack of artillery in that NC restaurant to inviting a robbery, but it’s scary sad too. First of all, Gutfeld is part of the same group of rabble-rousing gun-toters who tout 2nd Amendment rights based largely on the premise that the bad guys aren’t going to follow rules; and yet, by Gutfeld’s twisted logic, any store, restaurant, gas station, fast food restaurant or other business that doesn’t post a sign stating “Don’t rob us, we’re armed,” has put itself at risk of armed robbery because, of course, robbers read, believe and heed every posted sign. For Pete’s sake, has Gutfeld never heard of banks being robbed despite armed security, cops being killed despite guns on their belts, mass murders being committed despite armed civilians in the vicinity? In fact, a Mother Jones investigation revealed that “not one of 62 mass shootings in the United States over the last 30 years” has been stopped by an armed civilian – and that’s not because of the lack of armed civilians during some of these rampages. It’s the ineffectiveness of armed civilians that tell the tale. As Mother Jones noted:
“And in other recent (but less lethal) rampages in which armed civilians attempted to intervene, those civilians not only failed to stop the shooter but also were gravely wounded or killed. Moreover, we found that the rate of mass shootings has increased in recent years—at a time when America has been flooded with millions of additional firearms and a barrage of new laws has made it easier than ever to carry them in public places, including bars, parks, and schools.”
The recent spree by misfit Elliot Rodger at University of California Santa Barbara points to the grave lack of logic in Gutfeld’s premise. This young man was armed with three 9mm pistols, along with 49 ammunition magazines. Who should have stopped him? What kind of sign would have stopped him? Were the sorority girls murdered in cold blood wearing signs saying, “Kill me?” Should Rodger’s three apartment mates have worn t-shirts with “don’t kill me” logos in order to have their lives spared? Does Gutfeld – and others like him – really believe that something as simple as a sign claiming arms on board would deter an ambitious armed robber or determined mass killer?
What would Gutfeld have had the NC restaurateur do, besides posting a sign claiming an armed premises? Frankly, the patrons of the NC restaurant would likely have been placed at greater risk from a bunch of gun-slinging customers who decided to be heroes and tried to stop the robbery in progress. Greg Gutfeld, and others like him, can mock unarmed business people and gloat about their unarmed premises being robbed, but what the gun nuts are really doing is jacking people up to carry guns, and getting people, mainly innocent civilians, killed.