1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

(MN) Editorial: Guns at work/A recipe for danger, not defense

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Drizzt, Sep 19, 2005.

  1. Drizzt

    Drizzt New Member

    Editorial: Guns at work/A recipe for danger, not defense
    September 19, 2005 ED0919

    Neil Mahmoud had every reason to live. Newly married and on the verge of a career as a computer programmer, the 23-year-old student saw little peril in his job at an Apple Valley convenience store. The job entailed ejecting the occasional troublemaker, of course, and just this July Mahmoud tossed out two young men who tried to rob the place with a pellet gun. But the neighborhood was regarded as supremely safe, and locals were shocked late last month when Mahmoud was found on the shop floor bleeding to death from a gunshot wound. How could such horror invade a tranquil town?

    It invaded not because a criminal came to call, but because the store's owner had recently purchased a gun. The weapon was meant to deter robbers and protect employees, but -- as too often is the case -- ended up underwriting a tragedy. The person who shot Mahmoud, police have determined, wasn't an intruder. All evidence suggests that Mahmoud shot himself -- accidentally.

    The accident may seem a fluke, a rare and unfortunate happenstance hardly worth a second thought. In truth, Mahmoud's needless death vividly illustrates the folly of counting on guns for safety. Thousands of accidental gun deaths occur in this country every year. The key to reducing the number is clear.

    More than a decade ago, a study from the New England Journal of Medicine found that private gun ownership heightens a household's risk of homicide threefold and raises the likelihood of suicide five times above that of a gun-free household.

    In short, having a gun close at hand is generally more dangerous than not having one. Plain logic suggests that this is true not just on the home front but in the workplace as well -- and research bears out the speculation. Workplace violence has become an American commonplace, and those who study it insist that blessing the presence of guns on the job can only bring more bloodshed.

    As researcher Dean Schaner has argued in a book about employer liability, "It is far more foreseeable that an employee will be injured in a workplace full of guns and an environment reminiscent of the Old West, than one in which weapons are prohibited."

    All tragedies give rise to a flood of "if onlies." Surely all who cared for Neil Mahmoud are consumed with thoughts about how his life might have been saved. Yet such thoughts should preoccupy not just those mourning this charming young man, but all Minnesotans. This tragedy teaches a lesson to which employers -- and all of us -- should hold fast: To keep the workplace safe, banish weapons.


    ...and what else would you expect from the Minneapolis Red Star?
  2. psyopspec

    psyopspec New Member

    A less rigid brand of paper for their printed "news" would be nice for those occasions when my apartment runs dry of TP.
  3. LiquidTension

    LiquidTension New Member

    I thought the number of accidental firearm related deaths was below 800, not in the "thousands." Bah, wouldn't want facts to ruin a perfectly good opinion now, would we? :rolleyes:
  4. El Tejon

    El Tejon New Member

    Oh, my goodness, I just realized that cops have all kinds of guns at their work! :what:

    Someone call the Star and demand the disarming of all police officers. This will make them safer for their own good, and for the good of the children and fluffy bunnies.
  5. Andrew Rothman

    Andrew Rothman New Member

    Yup, in 2002, 762 people were killed in firearm accidents.

    767 died on bikes
    3,261 died in fires
    4,146 drowned
    45,380 were killed in car accidents
  6. GTSteve03

    GTSteve03 New Member

    In short, having a car close at hand is generally more dangerous than not having one. Plain logic suggests that this is true not just on the home front but in the workplace as well -- and research bears out the speculation. Car accidents have become an American commonplace, and those who study it insist that blessing the presence of cars on the job can only bring more bloodshed.

    In short, BAN ALL CARS! :banghead: :cuss:
  7. Janitor

    Janitor Senior Member

    The article says weapons.

    That mean anything that can be used as a bludgeon?

    How about fertalizer?

    Cars allowed?

    Uh-oh. Sharp edges. Better make sure all glass is tempered and all credit cards are shredded then melted down.
  8. Moondoggie

    Moondoggie New Member

    This editorial is so full of slanted statements (similar to the editorial page of USA Today) and inaccuracies that it's a waste of time to analyze each one.

    According to the author's logic, gun stores must be the most dangerous place on the planet. Not to mention the sporting goods section of WalMart. Let's not forget the military.


    The good news is that it won't change anybody's mind. The libs will blindly swallow the pablum..."That's right, uh huh". The pro 2A folks will dismiss the author as FOS.
  9. Spot77

    Spot77 New Member

    Matt Payne,

    Could you give me the source for the number of deaths? I'm not calling you out or anything, I just want to be able to use it later.

  10. Andrew Rothman

    Andrew Rothman New Member

    I wrote a letter to the editor. I'm sure they'll publish it. :rolleyes:
  11. Andrew Rothman

    Andrew Rothman New Member

    CDC's WISQARS -- http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_sy.html

  12. Waitone

    Waitone New Member

    Yea, I like the part in the article where they disclosed all the training the victim had. How he had access to the gun and knew how to use it in a safe and / or lethal manner.

    What? I missed something?
  13. Andrew Rothman

    Andrew Rothman New Member

    Dang. They published it. Well, half of it, anyway.

    Here's what I wrote. They killed the first part, in italics:

    Here's what they ran:
  14. chaim

    chaim New Member

    Looks like they cut out the part that most people most need to see, what a shock :scrutiny:
  15. Andrew Rothman

    Andrew Rothman New Member

    I'm shocked they printed it at all.

    I wish they had included my slam on their editorial, but at least the gun safety message got out.
  16. Waitone

    Waitone New Member

    Nooosirrrreeeee! We can't let them pesky lill' facts get in the way of solid advocacy urinalism.

    Everybody is happy. Paper can claim it covered both side. Antis are not bothered with facts. Pro side can strut its stuff about safety. Trouble is everyone is still ignorant of the debate. Ain't a free press wonderful?
  17. Bruce H

    Bruce H New Member

    With the half truthes and outright lies that newspapers print I can see the editorialists point. If everybody at the paper was armed there could be a fast turnover of editoralists.
  18. entropy

    entropy Active Member

    Strangely enough, I don't feel threatened at work with all the guns around, I feel at ease knowing they are there.

    Surprising the Red Star printed any of your letter, Matt, considering it contained truth, something the Pravda of the Prairie knows nothing about. ;)
  19. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    If you retell a lie enough times, it becomes a fact, right?

Share This Page