ESPRESSO SHOTS, NOT GUNSHOTS

I just finished reading an AP article about how retailers, specifically the coffee chain Starbucks, are finding themselves caught in the middle of the gun control debate. The trouble stems from the increasingly militant stance that members of the so-called "open-carry" movement have adopted in recent months. 43 states now have laws permitting gun-owners to brandish loaded guns in public, and many of them have interpreted that right to include carrying the weapons into places like stores and restaurants. And, if local laws do permit open-carry, the law does extend to retailers and the like, unless the business decides to ban the weapons from their establishment. But, that is a position that many retailers are reluctant to take, presumably out of fear of offending some well-armed potential customers.

Starbucks attempted to take the mushy middle of the road approach (we obey all local laws), and predictably, ended up pleasing neither side. Gun-owners insisted on bringing their weapons into the coffee shops, and gun-control activists began pressuring the chain to ban customers carrying guns. And while I find the idea of armed customers sipping their coffees around me, as I get my morning cup, somewhat disconcerting, I did think of a specific gun-related incident that took place in a coffee shop and that got me to thinking.

This past November, a man walked into a Lakewood, WA coffee shop and methodically gunned down 4 local police officers as they sat drinking coffee and working on laptop computers. I do seem to recall that one of the officers managed to return fire and wounded the gunman, but the officers essentially didn't stand a chance. They were totally unprepared for what happened and all 4 were killed. Now, would the outcome have been any different had there been an armed customer on the premises when the shooting started? That is impossible to answer obviously, but it is worth considering. A lot of variables come into play. If 4 trained and armed law enforcement officers were unable to save themselves, how likely is it that a plumber with a pistol strapped to his hip would have fared better? My personal opinion is that our hypothetical armed customer would have become victim number 5 in short order, had he tried to intervene.