Milwaukee, WI Mayor Tom Barrett was leaving the WI state fair on Saturday night when he heard a woman scream for help. Barrett began calling 911, at which point the suspect turned on Barrett and began beating him with a metal pipe. The suspect then fled, and Barrett was taken to a local hospital. Barrett was listed in stable condition at the hospital, and police are seeking the suspect. The woman was unharmed.
I would like to start by offering my best wishes for a speedy recovery to Mayor Barrett. His willingness to come to the aid of a stranger, and endanger his life in doing so, should be commended.
However, as this case shows, heroic intentions are not enough to stop a criminal. Criminals, who by definition don't care about the law, are quite willing to illegally carry and use deadly weapons, such as metal pipes, guns, bats, knives, etc. Laws that restrict the carrying of guns for self defense just ensure that law abiding victims and Good Samaritans (like Mayor Barrett) are defenseless against the still-armed criminals. Indeed, even when criminals don't happen to be armed, they still tend to be able to overpower those unarmed victims and Good Samaritans. That is because criminals tend to be strong young males, who intentionally target physically weaker victims. Even if Mayor Barrett had been able to complete his 911 call, it is unlikely that calling the police would have really helped. Under even the best circumstances, the police are likely minutes away, while a violent criminal can complete their attack in seconds. On top of that, the sad fact is that the police often fail to respond in a timely fashion, due to negligence or a lack of resources.
When citizens are armed, they are in the best position possible to defend themselves and other innocent people. This armed citizen stopped a bank robber. This armed Idaho woman defended her young children from 2 home invading prison escapees. This armed man saved the life of a store owner from attack by a violent armed robber. This armed homeowner saved 3 people from armed home invaders. This armed college student saved 9 other people from rape and murder at the hands of armed home invaders. I could go on giving more examples, but the point should be clear: armed self defense is a crime victim's (and a Good Samaritan's) best chance at surviving a violent attack.
Wisconsin and Illinois are the only 2 states without any provision to allow law abiding people to carry a gun for self defense. It seems to me that it is time for the residents of those to states to take a long hard look at whether they want to keep those victim-disarming laws on the books.
Comments
Well put. It's time for the bad guys to be afraid of the good guys.
Actually, it's long overdue.
It is a sad fact that a majority of criminals will choose women as their victims. These people are cowards and of course will usually be armed, since cowards live in fear of others. I, however, am a very large, very strong man who is not a coward. As such, I choose not to carry a weapon, and would remain weapon-free even if it were legal to carry one. That's the difference that you don't seem to understand. I am wise enough to realize that being armed gives one a false sense of security and even superiority, and would probably end up causing me to harm myself or someone else. Your apparent support of the NRA and guns-for-all is clear, but you fail to address the reason that criminals have such access to weapons- the lack of strong laws that would keep weapons out of criminal hands. The fact is that when citizens are armed, they almost always end up doing something stupid. And an armed citizenry will merely lead to better-armed criminals. So please stop advocating for lax gun laws.
Joshua, don't judge others by your self. If you don't feel competent, you are welcome to be unarmed. But you cannot speak for me or for millions of others.
There is absolutely not a shred of evidence anywhere for your claims that most armed people "end up doing something stupid." You have not really researched this, or you would know that where ordinary people carry openly and without restriction, there are far,FAR fewer criminals or crimes, and almost no "accidents" either.
Criminals are armed whether you like it or not, and regardless of any "laws" you could ever think of. Criminals do not obey "laws."
Get your head out of your armpit and really look at the truth before you spout your pontifications.
I am 62 years old, and I carry a gun every day, everywhere. I teach armed self defense. I am also the survivor of a violent attack 30 years ago in California. I had to shoot a man to save my life. With your "laws" in place there now, I would be unarmed... and dead.
Joshua,
Thank you for the comment, however I completely disagree with your conclusions (and don't see any facts that support them):
Firstly, armed citizens can and do successfully defend themselves every day. This website, and the links along the sidebar of this page have statistical information and studies showing those facts.
Secondly, such armed citizens rarely misuse guns. Indeed, millions of Americans carry guns legally every day without incident. Studies also show that armed citizens are more law abiding than your average cop, and less likely to shoot an innocent person.
Finally, strict gun laws don't disarm criminals, either in the US or even in countries where gun laws are strict at the national level.
Note: I had prepared about a half dozen links proving up each of my points, but the Examiner website won't let me insert them into a comment. However if you spend a few minutes on the sites linked in this sidebar, you'll find the proof I wanted to insert.
Look I live in WI and I would support a gun carrying law. However your suggestion that introducing a gun into this situation would have been helpful is a big ***ing stretch.
Everyone thinks that the Police will be there to save you..The police themselves will admit that it is not their responsibility to save everyone..It's IMPOSSIBLE..Hence the reason for the SECOND AMENDMENT..The framers of the Constitution weren't as foolish as these ANTI-SECOND AMENDMENT bleeding hearts...
I read in the previous article that the mayor's only regret was that his family had to witness it. True.... but I think of it differently. I'd rather my family see me be harmed doing something right, than see me safely do something wrong.
"Men" like Joshua don't seem to get it. Carrying a weapon isn't about being a cowboy, it isn't an extension of your manhood, and it isn't something that will wind up harming yourself or others. Its about protecting your life, your property, your country, and your family.
If Mayor Barrett were armed, or if the female victim were armed, someone likely would have been shot and killed in this situation. As it is, everyone lived.
Even if Wisconsin had a concealed carry law (PS - the 2nd Amendment does NOT provide for the concealed carry of a weapon - hence the term "bear") it is highly unlikely that the mayor of a major city would be carrying one around at the State Fair, or anywhere for that matter since I'm quite certain firearms would not be allowed at such an event even if they were legal.
Every time there is any sort of a violent attack on anyone, bleeding heart gun nuts start moaning about how everyone should be packing. It is a senseless argument.
Open carry is legal and I can say I would encourage those who are frightened enough of the rest of society to take advantage of their open carry rights. Concealed carry is an unsafe measure that will do far more harm than good.
the other 48 states will loose c.c. before il. wis. ever get it, with the dems. in charge, thats just how it is
Mayor Barrets police cheif said if you carry a gun in Mil. we will take you down, after a beating like that I think I would replace my cheif and buy me a gun
I believe an honest armed citizen could have helped in this situation by threatening the attacker criminal. No honest armed citizen should ever bluff. If the attacker criminal continued, the recourse is to shot the criminal with a consideration of the surroundings. In such situations, an attacker criminal may try to take a hostage. In fact, honest armed citizens and the intended victim have won in this situation. Granted there are laws that unjustly penalize the honest armed citizen in using force and shooting, but it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. In addition, my conscience would not rest if I was in a position to prevent further damage by such an attacker criminal. Such laws that penalize honest armed citizens are deterements to justice and suspect for job protection of police and protection of violent criminals. I support Vermont no-license concealed carry as our God given right and protected by the 2nd Amendment.
State Fair, I would expect lots of bystanders. Anyone of which could have become involved if they had a firearm to back themselves up. Now days it's too dangerous to confront a loon with mere good intention. Legalize concealed carry.
The Governor took theproper action. Kudos!
"The fact is that when citizens are armed, they almost always end up doing something stupid"
I would need to see some hard evidence supporting to this accusation. Good, responsible people use guns for good, responsible means.
Wisconsin's open-carry law is absurd and stupid. If some piece of human garbage wants a gun, all they need to do is sneak up behind someone who is open-carrying and just take it - it's that simple. Hence, with this open-carry law, human garbage now has EASIER access to guns. If Wisconsin had a conceal-carry law, more human trash may think twice before committing an act of violence because they wouldn't know if their target was armed or not. It is a proven fact that states which allow their citizens to conceal-carry have realized a measurable reduction in violent crime. But, just like our lame drunk driving laws, Wisconsin prefers to enable human trash and doesn't give a rip about its law-abiding, tax-paying innocent citizens. Does anyone honestly think that Barrett is sitting in the hospital thinking to himself, "Boy, it's a good thing I didn't have any way of protecting myself!" Please. Wake up Wisconsin!!!
Guns are dangerous and should be only available to law police people. Its simple and obvious.
Let me see if I've got this: Eric you've got a dozen links to your pro gun site and you STILL would like to add more "victim fought back successfully with his gun" links. Listen friend that level of overkill doesn't prove your point it just makes you look like a fanatic.
Now I happen to live in Illinois-in fact, the heart of the south side in Chicago. You've seen our murder rate right? So you know we're close to being no.1. Hurray. And you actually think MORE guns would help the situation? Really? Because the "criminals already have guns." Wow. I mean, wow. That is some logic.
And you're talking about the right to carry, not in the home, but out in the streets? Really? Because this worked out so well in the Old West.
And you say police often don't respond fast enough-I don't know, there are a WHOLE LOT of Black men dead because police arrived and ASSUMED there was a "black man with a gun." I'd be careful if I were you; what if you are "defending yourself" and the criminal is w
Dave, Wallyer, Joshua
Again, opinions but no facts from independent sources not affiliated with either sides (NRA vs Brady Bunch) to support your positions. Still waiting to see these hard facts, or experiences that helped form your opinions unless you believe evrything you hear?
I have defended myself and family four times in my life, three times flashing, one time drawing my pistol but never firing it once, was sufficient to end the episodes. Being that they were carrying a ball bat, tire irons, and knives, no doubt as to their intention. I was at home twice, on the street once, and hiking another time, never once was I doing anything illegal, just minding my own business as one who concealed carries does.
Words may never change your opinions, so for your sakes, I hope you are all ninjas, super strong, or faster than hell runners with a guaranteed escape routes even in your own homes, as by your positions, it is apparent criminals have more rights than their intended victims
Yes Dave, criminals already have guns. Eric probably has a lot of links to pro-gun sites not because he's a gun fanatic, but because liberals are twisting and distorting the second amendment in the attempt to take away our rights as citizens to defend ourselves. People are fanatics about their rights, especially when someone tries to take them away. Bottom line, nobody is changing anybody's mind here so if you don't want to defend yourself, then don't. That's your RIGHT just as it is everyone else's RIGHT to bear arms and protect themselves. It's not the guns, it's the rights we have to protect ourselves with them. Period. By your logic, we should make cars illegal to own too because cars kill people as well. What about knives? Lead pipes? Alcohol? There you go Alcohol! Alcohol is the reason so many people are killed in auto accidents. By this logic, we should make alcohol consumption illegal. Would that be okay with you?
Many people think having a cell phone makes them "safe."
A popular saying is "When seconds count, the cops are minutes away."
What is the logic behind the cell phone? "Please delay swinging that pipe by 10 minutes until the police arrive?"
Criminals work to be opportunistic...to use the odds in their favor. Would a criminal rather attack an armed victim or an unarmed victim? If someone were swinging a pipe at you, would you rather be holding a phone or a firearm?
If more guns lead to more shootings, then police stations and military bases would be shooting galleries. Numerous studies using law enforcement data show concealed carrying citizens to be significantly more law abiding than the average citizen.
You are always at risk of an attack. You can acknowledge this and prepare for it - or refuse to prepare for it. You avoid dark allies, shady characters, etc. You carry a spare tire in your car - you don't expect to get a flat tire but acknowledge it happens and prepare
Many people think having a cell phone makes them "safe."
A popular saying is "When seconds count, the cops are minutes away."
What is the logic behind the cell phone? "Please delay swinging that pipe by 10 minutes until the police arrive?"
Criminals work to be opportunistic...to use the odds in their favor. Would a criminal rather attack an armed victim or an unarmed victim? If someone were swinging a pipe at you, would you rather be holding a phone or a firearm?
If more guns lead to more shootings, then police stations and military bases would be shooting galleries. Numerous studies using law enforcement data show concealed carrying citizens to be significantly more law abiding than the average citizen.
You are always at risk of an attack. You can acknowledge this and prepare for it - or refuse to prepare for it. You avoid dark allies, shady characters, etc. You carry a spare tire in your car - you don't expect to get a flat tire but acknowledge it happens and prepare
Many people think having a cell phone makes them "safe."
A popular saying is "When seconds count, the cops are minutes away."
What is the logic behind the cell phone? "Please delay swinging that pipe by 10 minutes until the police arrive?"
Criminals work to be opportunistic...to use the odds in their favor. Would a criminal rather attack an armed victim or an unarmed victim? If someone were swinging a pipe at you, would you rather be holding a phone or a firearm?
If more guns lead to more shootings, then police stations and military bases would be shooting galleries. Numerous studies using law enforcement data show concealed carrying citizens to be significantly more law abiding than the average citizen.
You are always at risk of an attack. You can acknowledge this and prepare for it - or refuse to prepare for it. You avoid dark allies, shady characters, etc. You carry a spare tire in your car - you don't expect to get a flat tire but acknowledge it happens and prepare
The right to keep and bear arms is supported by Republicans and Democrats. In general, the Republicans have a higher percentage supporters, but there are anti-gun Republican representatives like Mark Kirk of Illinois (he is also pro-abortion and pro-sexual-perversion and needs to be removed from office). Recently this year 65 house Democrats signed a letter opposing the Obama Administration on banning so-called assault weapons (which are ordinary semi-automatic rifles). I urge everyone to study the votes of candidates. If a candidate is new and never held office, listen to their words and read their writings carefully. Also the NRA, ISRA, and other organizations rate candidates.
If it were not for Governor Jim Doyle who vetoed the Personal Protection Act twice, the good citizens of Wisconsin would be able to carry conncealed and protect themself.
"John says:
If Mayor Barrett were armed, or if the female victim were armed, someone likely would have been shot and killed in this situation. As it is, everyone lived...
August 16, 7:33 PM"
People survive gun shot wounds all the time and people die from blunt force trauma to the head all the time. That nobody died in this particular attack may just be luck on the mayor's part.
This situation would have been a perfect example of 2A in action, IF the mayor had been armed. All he would have had to do was point his pistol at the perp, and have another bystander call the police.
INSTEAD, this is a perfect example that grabbing your cell phone and yelling "Stop; wait while I call 911!", whereupon he got beaten in front of his family.
He was brave, and I am glad that he will recover. But the lesson here is that disarmed citizens, even with the best of intentions, may be martyred on the alter of gun control.
Dave--
Your ignorance is showing. If there were more of the general public carrying concealed weapons in Chicago, there would be fewer 'unarmed victims' for the criminal element to prey on. It has been demonstrated accross the country that concealed carry DOES reduce the crime rate and does NOT increase the 'Wild West' mentality as you erroniously believe it was--because those of us that are permitted to carry concealed in FREE states must go to classes and go thru background checks to prove our worthiness.
And frankly--I've been to South Chicago. And it shows you went to a public school--because the "Wild West" was not as wild as your teachers and television have led you to believe. For the most part, the West was a VERY polite society. Would you get in my face over a trivial item if you thought for a moment that I may be armed?
I don't think you would.
Get educated as to how things really are and not what the MSM wants you to believe.
Wallyer, Yes guns can be dangerous. That's why I carry one 24/7. I don't take kindly to being beaten with a metal pipe. You dial 911, I'll dial Kimber 1911!
Hey Dufus, er I mean, Wallyer. Cars "are dangerous and should only be available to Law Police people. Its simple and obvious." Ban cars!!! Way more people are killed and injured by cars each year in America than guns! Besides there's certainly no constitutionally codified right to drive cars!
There are some real idiots out there!
Yes.. let's stop violent crime by carrying deadly weapons. While we're at it.. why don't we burn down California to prevent the wildfires that happen there every year?
I wouldn't want to live in a city where the mayor walks around a family event with a loaded weapon.
To bad Barrett was not killed that would have been justice for all of the victims that liberal policies cause. Liberal policies that do not allow good people to defend themselves is criminal. Barrett usually has a police escort at taxpayer expense, must be nice to have police coverage 24/7 on the taxpayer dime but deny others their right to protect their families and themselves. I hope all socialist lib politicans get the same treatment as Barrett and worse. Afterall, the fact he was beaten and had only his cell phone is a direct result of emboldened criminals knowing there are not those to defend themselves thru the direct policies of libs. If you believe there is good and evil in this world some are on the streets and some hold public office.
Eric before the passage of the 68 Gun Control Act and the Illinois FOID card people could buy guns through the mail NO back ground checks or 4473 forms. Yet crime was low.
Why?
Its because we had a checks and balance between the people and the bad guys.
All of these changes in the law came about after race riots in the summer of 1965 when Black men across the country began buying guns through the mail and standing against police brutality.
It was White anti-gun liberals that promoted and used racism to promote gun control.
Eric will you please encourage people to support a repeal of these racist gun control laws like the Illinois FOID card and 68 GCA in your writings?
We need to plant the seeds if were going to reap a harvest of Liberty
I agree that if more people start packing heat, a lot more innocent people are going to die, no matter what people's intentions are.
Rick, you're a prick. Let's get that out of the way first. I went to private schools. I didn't say "wild west" I said "old west." You had it in your mind to argue a "wild west" point. So how about you worry about your ignorance (verified since you can't possibly know how and where I was educated) & not mine. You've clearly got a pre-existing bug up your butt that I didn't put there.
But since you want to go down this path, let's do it. There USED to be carry laws in the "old west" and those gun loving people WILLINGLY outlawed the behavior. Now if those old timey, folk knew it was a bad idea THEN, what on Earth makes you think it would be better now? People had got shot;fact.
The carry laws that do exist today are restrictive and specific because it's dangerous. Most people are not careful.
Do you think the general public is going to attend classes, cross every T and dot every I? Please! We can't get people to do the most basic of essentials for themselves. Mandatory or not.
Dave April 23 1:23am:
You logic for punishing the masses for the actions of a few is a heavily flawed -using your logic, everything could be banned.
You wrote:
"Most people are not careful.
Do you think the general public is going to attend classes, cross every T and dot every I? Please! We can't get people to do the most basic of essentials for themselves. Mandatory or not."
People read and send text messages while driving - ban mobile phones.
There are 70,000 automotive related deaths annually - ban cars.
People are stabbed with knives - ban knives.
Some police officers commit crimes - ban police officers.
There will always be a people that do "bad" or "dumb" things.
Do you favor punishing the masses for the actions of a few?
If you do than everyone should be locked in prison, because some will commit serious crimes.
Society is based on the simple assumption that there are more "good guys" than "bad guys." That more people follow the law than break it.
Dave wrote:
"The carry laws that do exist today are restrictive and specific because it's dangerous. Most people are not careful."
Well Dave, there are approx. 80 million U.S. firearms owners with approx. 300 million guns. 99.9999% of them haven't done anything wrong, but I guess that means "Most people are not careful".
Whatever.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!