Senseless violence stirs two Ohio newspapers from pacifist dreamland

By Chad D. Baus

Two Ohio newspapers seem to be finally grasping the reality that senseless violence can happen. But don't be surprised when they continue to oppose your right to defend against it…

An op-ed from the Akron Beacon Journal's David Giffels has been published, exploring the writer's feelings as he watches a horrifying video of a man and woman violently attacking a person in line at a restaurant.

You're waiting for the justification.

You watch this videotape of the guy getting the snot beaten out of him in a pizza shop, and you're looking for some sign that maybe he deserved it, or at least did something -- anything -- that would suggest the beating made sense.

Strangely, you realize, you want there to be a reason the 6-foot-4, 320-pound man walked into the pizza shop at his girlfriend's behest and started wailing on a stranger.

That's a very strange thing, you realize -- to want a reason for this brutal act.

But the alternative is worse -- no reason at all.

And that's what it seems to come down to.

Last week, Mark Jones of Akron was found guilty of felonious assault and sentenced to four years in prison for pounding on Joseph Scarpino.

You know that meaningless cliche about "senseless violence?'' This one sort of gives it meaning.

There are several things Giffel did NOT address:

1. This violent assault has hate-crime implications, since the woman can be heard on the tape instructing her boyfriend to "take care of this white mother (expletive).''
2. In a situation like this, police cannot arrive in time. Bystanders may not intervene. Only you can protect you.
3. Crimes like this can happen anytime, anywhere, including places where weapons are banned. As such, The Ohio Constitution recognizes a citizens' "right to bear arms for their defense and security". Ohio law provides a mechanism for self-defense - the Ohio Concealed Handgun License.

Farther south, another liberal newspaper editorial board has come home to the fact that something more than another safety policy is needed to deter crime at a "no-guns" bus stop.

A Dayton Daily News editorial screams that, in the wake of what WDTN called a "near riot" involving some 50 people at a "no-guns" downtown bus stop, officials should do something(!).

Interestingly, the DDN makes note of the fact that political-correctness is to blame for the lack of corrective action for this issue in the past:

The main reason downtown businesses and elected officials have been slow to absolutely demand that Dayton schools and RTA change the arrangement is that they don't want to be seen as picking on black young people.

There is another form of political-correctness that is exacerbating the problem with the Greater Dayton Regional Transit Authority (GDRTA), and which the newspaper has never bothered to address:

For the past year, the GDRTA has illegally posted signs discriminating against CHL-holders, who simply wish to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms for self-defense in an environment where it is obviously more likely to be needed. Despite the fact that CCW is not banned on city busses, and despite the fact that the Ohio legislature expressed its intent that political subdivisions not expand upon the places where CHL-holders may not carry, this newspaper has never addressed the issue of these illegal signs. Nor did it recognize that the no-weapons policy did nothing to stop these rioters from reportedly having and using knives during their attack.

It is encouraging to see two newspapers with a history of pacifist and anti-self-defense editorial-writing coming to the realization that criminals can attack without reason, and that political-correctness should not stand in the way of effective solutions that will protect innocent citizens.

But will they also recognize that the very reason why concealed carry is necessary is so law-abiding citizens can defend against senseless, random acts of violence? Will they now agree that posting "no-guns" signs is a dangerous form of political-correctness that only disarms those who are most in need of protection?

We won't hold our breath.