A body is taken from the scene where multiple people were shot at a FedEx Ground facility in Indianapolis, Friday, April 16, 2021. A gunman killed several people and wounded others before taking his own life in a late-night attack at a FedEx facility near the Indianapolis airport, police said. (AP Photo/Michael Conroy)

A witness who was outside the FedEx facility in Indianapolis when Brandon Scott Hole, a former FedEx employee, opened fire in the parking lot late Thursday night said one of the victims retrieved a gun from his vehicle and tried to stop the Hole before being shot and killed.

As the New York Post reports . . .

Levi Miller, who works at the plant in Plainfield just outside Indianapolis, was on break when he heard the quick succession of gunshots in the parking lot.

“My friend at the time witnessed a man who was not part of the incident but also pulled out a gun from his truck to try and engage the shooter and he died because of it,” Levi Miller said Friday morning on NBC’s “Today” show.

Hole was previously known to law enforcement. His family was concerned about his behavior and called authorities who confiscated a shotgun he owned in 2020.

This photo released by the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department shows Brandon Scott Hole. Authorities have identified Hole as a former employee who shot and killed at least eight people late Thursday night, April 15, 2021, at a FedEx facility in Indianapolis. (Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department via AP)

Paul Keenan, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Indianapolis field office, said Friday that agents questioned Hole last year after his mother called police to say that her son might commit “suicide by cop.” He said the FBI was called after items were found in Hole’s bedroom but he did not elaborate on what they were. He said agents found no evidence of a crime and that they did not identify Hole as espousing a racially motivated ideology. A police report obtained by The Associated Press shows that officers seized a pump-action shotgun from Hole’s home after responding to the mother’s call. Keenan said the gun was never returned.

Witnesses describe the firearm used Thursday by hole as “an AR” but the type of gun and how he obtained it have not been released by investigators.

 

 

134 COMMENTS

  1. They will use this as another reason to outlaw the A R and other semi-autos. All this really proves is that gun ” control ” doesn’t work and that ” gun free zone ” aka ” mass murder zone ” draws evil people bent on murder . Fed Ex should be held partially responsible for this incident.

      • Not just the Republicans, some Democrat senators and representatives think all their constituents agree with the MSM. They need to hear from you. Tell your Democrat friends to call. Be polite but firm.

      • Generally businesses in Indiana are prohibited from issuing discipline to employees for having lawfully possessed firearms in their vehicles, even on company parking lots. They can and generally do prohibit employees from concealed carry on premises. As it should be. I’m all for 24/7 CC, but businesses have rights too. Don’t like the policy, don’t work there.

        • “but businesses have rights too.”
          True, butt do they have the right to limit the rights of others to self preservation?

        • If the company doesn’t have armed security on hand, they shouldn’t be allowed to prohibit the employees from providing their own.

        • I disagree, I am all for private businesses being able to make certain rules, protecting my own life should not be one. Just as they cannot discriminate based on many other things, so should it be for my CONCEALED carry.

        • That’s bullshit. Nobody can tell me what I am or not able to defend myself with. Nobody. If you carried non lethal and it was and most likely would be acceptable to use then carrying a gun should also be allowed. As soon as you say “but…” You contradict yourself and might as well throw your rights in the burn barrel.

        • I am fine with the business forbidding carry, concealed means concealed. And if they catch me they can fire me. But state LAW has no such leeway, the state has zero authority to interfere with my carry in any way. I have to say, if I took a job I would not inquire as to the company’s firearms policy, if any.

        • Businesses absolutely do have rights, and they can prohibit whatever they like within the bounds of the law. However, when they deny a person their right to self preservation, the consumer has two choices. They can patronize that business or not. If a person decides to enter the establishment with a prohibition on self defense, that business should legally assume all responsibility for that individual’s safety. If something happens, the business should be held legally and financially liable. This is the path to remove gun free zones. Make sure these business owners have skin in the game when they decide to implement these policies.

      • Not just the Republicans, some Democrat senators and representatives think all their constituents agree with the MSM. They need to hear from you. Tell your Democrat friends to call. Be polite but firm.

  2. A good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun, but proper training increases the chances of success and survival. In the end, it is still subject to random luck and not everything goes in your favor. Training improves the odds.

    • Having to waste energy and precious seconds running to your vehicle to retrieve your firearm contributes to more dead and injured. To comply with idiotic laws and company policies perhaps training should include the 100 yd. dash. Better yet, every decent person is armed and let some hole make a move.
      Bottom line…It does not matter if the perverted perp uses his manscape shaver, a dump truck or a firearm to go on a murderous rampage. What matters is your choice to stand there and die or have the means on hand to fight back.

      • In my CC class I would say that 23 out of the 25 could not shoot effectively.
        I was having a very bad day at the range but I was the best shot there. Some are just wasting their time and money on guns.

    • This is going to be used against us. I have seen some”training” that would be almost impossible for the average citizen to afford or complete.

  3. Wait What ? You mean the Red Flag law that confiscated his weapon, Didn’t stop him From acquiring a weapon ? that makes him a criminal and the law, like All laws, Subject to the will of the governed and in the case of the Malcontent or the Mental, NOT likely to obey laws.

    • “You mean the Red Flag law that confiscated his weapon, Didn’t stop him From acquiring a weapon ?”

      Wait – Do we actually know if a ‘RFO” was issued by a judge?

      And why did I hear the the theme to ‘Deliverance’ when I saw his pic?

    • While Indiana was one of the first states to sign red flag confiscation orders into law, it hasn’t yet been announced whether the killer’s shotgun was taken by police under the red flag law.

  4. More proof that their laws will not protect us. Therefore we need guns to protect ourselves. Carry always.

  5. I’d be interested to see when the shooter took the cowards way out. Studies show that mass shooters often take their own lives within minutes of confrontation by an armed opponent. The unnamed hero who tried to stop him may very well have succeeded in ending the eattack early and saving countless lives.

    • No, the “HERO” was outside, one of the first four killed, shooter then went inside and killed four more… Might have run into an armed guard, a secured hard point? Don’t why that was the moment…

  6. While the gun control lobby’s propaganda is bobbins scatology, the fact remains that except at close range, a good guy armed with a handgun is at an extreme disadvantage against a bad guy with a rifle. The only factor that would mitigate this disadvantage is if the bad guy with the rifle is a graduate of the Sarah Brady Spray and Pray of gun fighting that taught him to use the pistol grip to fire from the hip.

    • “bobbins” = “bovine”

      Damn spell checker substituting a more common word for a correctly spelled word that is less common.

      Did I ever mention that I dispose techie nerds? Real soon now our computers will be programmed to evaluate the content of what we write to either censor anything they don’t like or report it to the Jack booted thugs.

    • whomever takes a biologically significant hit first is at a severe disadvantage. I’d put odds of ambushing a mass shooter, expecting meek unarmed victims, to be high.

      from there, it’s shot placement, shot placement, shot placement.

    • What the fuck are you babbling about? “The only factor”? There are literally millions of scenarios.

  7. It’ll be news when one of these guys isn’t “known to the FBI”. I think they grow them on trees somewhere.

  8. Wait, they confiscated his gun and he got another one? Isn’t that illegal?
    But but but… gun laws were supposed to stop him. They are very powerful words on extremely tough paper, how can they not work? Why wouldn’t this criminal care about the law?!?!

    • “Wait, they confiscated his gun and he got another one?”

      It’ll be interesting to find out if a ‘Red Flag’ edict was issued, or if the paperwork hadn’t been processed yet.

      Doesn’t change the fact that that pic creeps my ass out… 🙁

      • Pic makes me think of an enhanced red flag law, to include hands cuffed behind his back for life. Scary crazy.

  9. “…his mother called police to say that her son might commit suicide by cop.”

    Why would you value the life of others if you don’t value your own? If they truly wanted to prevent this, then the Party of Science would study what was different about this kid. But they aren’t interested in solving problems, only power grabs.

    • We can thank Reagan for making it almost impossible to put someone away on a mental hold. Yes, the patients have rights, but there should be laws forcing them to take the meds or they get violated and put back in.

      It is cheaper to drug them and have them in a hospital setting, than it is to jail them. But it is cheaper still to just ignore the minor crimes they commit and just dump them back on the public.

      • You just can’t force someone into a mental institution or force drugs on them against their will when they haven’t committed a crime. I’m all for chemically castrating rapists and child molesters.

      • “You just can’t force someone into a mental institution or force drugs on them against their will when they haven’t committed a crime.”

        Almost makes one wish for the Islamic practice of ‘Honor Killings’, where a parent could kill a child that dishonors a family, doesn’t it? Mom was worried the kid would kill, and could tell Dad to take Jr. behind the barn or over to the pig sty to “Restore Family Honor”…

        • Right, your child has a mental illness that makes him a danger to himself or others, and your response is to take him behind the barn and shoot him?

          Yeah, some more of that compassionate conservatism.

          I certainly hope you have no children.

        • Miners lack of sarcasm and attempt to blame conservatives for everything dishonors famiree. Fetch my coal boy.

      • No don’t thank Reagan. You can thank the ACLU for suing gov Reagan and others. To force these now terrible results onto the entire nation.

      • Only issue is your costs of housing, typically psychiatric hospital or semi secure facility care is multiple times more expensive than a prison setting. For NY a jail bed occupant costs the state annually around 45k while a low security psychiatric patient (can include those who are there instead of prison) will start around 100k and go up to 160k in the same low security psych center. The higher security psych hospitals start around 200k. With that said bail reform and covid have thoroughly ruined our ability to project per client costs for many of our facilities so assume these numbers are approximately accurate up to 2019 for NY. Numbers will likely vary widely from state to state but the staffing level and doctors/drugs/specialized treatment will usually make psychiatric care more expensive than a prison sentence.

      • That wasn’t Reagan, it was a SCOTUS ruling in the early ’70s, and it seemed pretty correct. But it was (like so many other things) taken to extremes, with no oversight or sense applied.

  10. Once again it seems authorities failed to follow through. Once they took the shotgun he should not have been able to buy another. There are enough gun laws….they need to enforce the ones they have.

    • “Once they took the shotgun he should not have been able to buy another.“

      You might consider the possibility that this gun purchase was not from a retail establishment or FFL, but rather from a private seller without a background check.

      In that case, this incident might be solid evidence to support the idea of background checks on private sales to prevent prohibited persons from gaining access to firearms.

      I wonder if he attended any gun shows in the past few months…

      • Or at least open up the NICS database to private citizen queries. I still don’t understand why that hasn’t been the middle ground that left and right could compromise on…

        • Absolutely, I agree 100% with your post.

          I believe there should be a national Registry of prohibited persons as well as stolen guns, accessible to the ultimate sovereign in our society, We the People.

        • Good! And all costs of NICS checks should be borne by the taxpayer. If the value of this info is so high that should be easy. But just as soon as the taxpayer learns how little he gets for his NICS dollar it will be gone, and possibly ATF with it. The entire purpose was to force purchasers of firearms to pay through the nose to be massively inconvenienced.

      • its still illegal for a private seller to knowingly sell to a prohibited person. If you sell to someone with the “ask no questions” mentality don’t be surprised if the 5-0 have some questions for you after they find out you sold it to a guy who did some illegal shenanigans with it. Again, existing law is adequate provided its actually enforced.

        • “Again, existing law is adequate provided its actually enforced.“

          “its still illegal for a private seller to knowingly sell to a prohibited person”

          The keyword is ‘knowingly’, the prosecution would have the burden of proving an individual knew he was transacting with a prohibited person.

        • As it should be, I see no problem with that.

          If you “ask no questions” and sell to someone who uses it violently then its on the person who did it. The seller isn’t legally liable per se, but he does have to deal with the moral implications. In the instances I’ve sold guns to people other than family or friends, 3 times total, I always ask if they would get denied a background check. They told me no, and I sold it to them. If they were lying to me, the onus is on them, and I have their names and the dates of sale for the police.

          You don’t chill a right just because people misuse it, that’s a good way to end up in a lowest common denominator society. Put in adequate laws with appropriate punishments and accept that nothing you do will ever stop immoral or unscrupulous people from criminally evading them. Certainly you don’t make a near-impossible to enforce universal background check law that does nothing but tack on another worthless charge when someone criminally misuses a gun, or worse, charge someone with an empty charge that did nothing to put anyone in danger or at risk.
          Open up NICS, or an equivalent non-FFl version for people to opt to use if its such a big deal. I know some won’t opt in, but many will, yet its never even discussed by Dems.

        • Clearly, you have lost touch with reality and therefore should not be allowed unfettered access to lethal weapons.

          Bailiff, whack him on the pee-pee!

      • “In that case, this incident might be solid evidence to support the idea of background checks on private sales to prevent prohibited persons from gaining access to firearms.”

        Rejoice! For we would then finally have a law that criminals obey!

      • Right, Miner. Now would you care to explain just who or what entity should be empowered to determine just who a “prohibited person” might be? Do you think a weaponized DOJ, FBI, ATF, Homeland Security, etc, etc, should have the power to make a decision like that? Or, how about a smaller-time local bureaucrat who just thinks all guns are evil and gun-owners too mentally unstable to own firearms? I might remind you that the 2nd means exactly what it says. There’s a reason the kind of prior verification you are talking about isn’t found in the 2nd Amendment.

      • “I wonder if he attended any gun shows in the past few months…” The real question is have you attended any gun shows recently? With the shortage of ammo and guns in certain areas, do you think that a private seller at a gun show would sell a black rifle for a price that the common person could afford?

        • I don’t go to gun shows because you have to be disarmed, at least the ones in my area. How very hypocritical, selling firearms but requiring that patrons not be armed. No thanks, I’ll support my local gun store instead. They don’t have such a stupid policy. Yes, I understand that sometimes it is the location, but I would find somewhere else to have it.

  11. Well, here is solid proof that four of these killings were not in a gun free zone.

    The first four killings were in the parking lot, and now we know that at least one individual in the parking lot was armed and stood up to try to stop the carnage.

    • Wrong. The parking lot is a GFZ unless you can tell me how someone can park their car and enter their work area in a GFZ building while being armed.

    • Well, here is solid proof that four of these killings were not in a gun free zone.

      WRONG again… The fact that one person cared more about his safety than how FedEx feeeelz does not mean that the parking lot is NOT a GFZ… I carry in GFZs ALL the time because none of those people trying to disarm me have demonstrated an ability or willingness to protect me OR any real concern for my safety… OBTW: ALL FedEx property is a GFZ, so unless this was a public parking lot (doubtful) it WAS a GFZ, which does not necessarily prohibit a gun from being LOCKED in a vehicle…

      • Indiana prohibits employers from issuing discipline to employees for having lawfully possessed concealed weapons in their vehicles, even in company parking lots. They can prohibit employees from carrying within their facility though.

        • RESEARCH THIS MINERVA…

          It was not MY opinion..
          Apr 12, 2018 · FedEx Express, 114 A.3d 424 (Pa. Super. 2015), the Superior Court upheld the right of FedEx to terminate the plaintiff for carrying a handgun in the glove compartment of his personal vehicle while performing work for FedEx. Id. at 424. FedEx’s policy PROHIBITS employees from having FIREARMS or WEAPONS on COMPANY PROPERTY, in company vehicles or in company buildings, unless authorized by FedEx security.

        • Don’t feed the trolls max.

          He never accepts that he’s been proven wrong. Typical progressive trolling.

        • “Apr 12, 2018 · FedEx Express, 114 A.3d 424 (Pa. Super. 2015)“

          You know, you may want to re-read the news article because this shooting did not happen in Pennsylvania, but rather Indiana and once again you are full of shit, Maxine.

          “Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels recently signed a law allowing employees to have guns on company property, even if the employer prohibits it.

          The new gun control law permits Indiana employees to keep lawful firearms and ammunition in their locked cars on company premises. The guns must be legally owned, and the owner must meet all applicable licensing requirements, and must not be stored in plain sight in the vehicle.“

          https://www.laborlawcenter.com/education-center/indiana-take-your-gun-to-work-law/

        • “The guns must be legally owned, and the owner must meet all applicable licensing requirements, and must not be stored in plain sight in the vehicle.“

          Florida has the exact same law…

          (Thankfully!)

        • AND, MINERVA (you ignorant slut), I was not using that to point to ANY particular state, BUT you totally missed the part about FedEx company policy about halfway through the paragraph which is your “pick and choose” method… The fucking reality IS that FEDEX still has a COMPANY POLICY that PROHIBITS firearms and weapons on FedEx PROPERTY and in FedEx BUILDINGS… The fact that a FEW states prevent them from enforcing THAT POLICY under certain circumstances in certain areas does NOT change the fact that the POLICY still exists… Reiterating for you more dense individuals, FedEx COMPANY POLICY “PROHIBITS FIREARMS and WEAPONS” on FedEx PROPERTY and in FedEx BUILDINGS… which was my initial observation for which YOU thought the label “NUMB NUTS” was appropriate… State laws do NOT CHANGE FedEx COMPANY POLICY, it merely prevents them from ENFORCING “COMPANY POLICY” in that State… I cannot state it any simpler than that so IF you still fail to grasp that reality you can go fuck yourself before your ignorance digs you into a hole you can’t climb out of… FINI..

        • “The fact that a FEW states prevent them from enforcing THAT POLICY under certain circumstances in certain areas does NOT change the fact that the POLICY still exists… “

          You continue to give the room temperature equine a thorough drubbing, to no avail.

          The fact is, under the laws of the state of Indiana, firearms are permitted in the FedEx parking lot where the perpetrator began his rampage.

        • Except Maddmaxx you are completely fucking wrong about Florida. An employer may not ask if you have a gun or do anything about it if the find out you have a gun in your car.

          An employer may not “condition employment” on the fact that an employee owns a legally licensed firearm.
          An employer may not prohibit an employee from “keeping a legal firearm locked inside or locked to a private motor vehicle” parked in the employer’s parking lot, so long as the firearm itself is “kept for lawful purposes.”
          Similarly, a business cannot prevent a customer or invited guest from keeping a “legally owned firearm” locked in their car while on the business owner’s property.
          A business also may not make any “verbal or written inquiry” about the presence of a firearm inside of the car of an employee, customer, or invited guest.
          A business may not search vehicles in their own parking lots for firearms. Only “on-duty law enforcement personnel” may conduct such searches “based upon due process.”
          Employers cannot fire or “otherwise discriminate” against any employee based on his or her decision to exercise their “constitutional right to keep and bear arms or for exercising the right of self-defense,” provided that the employee does not “exhibit” a weapon on company property “for any reason other than lawful defensive purposes.”

        • Except Maddmaxx you are completely fucking wrong about Florida.

          First of all KLAUS I didn’t say a FUCKING thing about FL., I Fucking live in FL AND I am very familiar with FL Fucking laws… I just went through this shit with with Advent Health when they told my wife she could not leave a firearm in her “locked” car in their parking lot… The only time FL has been mentioned was by Geoff “adwadtiladws” PR… and all he said was FL has the same law as Indiana.. But thanks for the refresher course on FL gun law…

  12. I will be interested to know the particulars on Holes acquisition of the weapon used. If the shotgun was seized and not returned, that could be that Hole simply didn’t want to step though the necessary hoops to retrieve it, not that he couldn’t have. Kids are stupid and in his mind, getting it back was over his head and mommy dear obviously wasn’t going to help him get it, she knew the kid was bat %$#@ crazy.

    So was there an order in place, should there have been an order in place, did he buy the weapon, steal it, someone else bought it? Inquiring minds want to know.

    • mLee….Seems like where he got the gun is a deflection from the real issue, Fed Ex. should be held responsible for creating a dangerous work environment by not adequately protecting their employees.

      • Not a deflection at all, just part of the inquiry process. If he acquired the firearm unlawfully, then laws weren’t followed, if there were mistakes in law enforcement that allowed a purchase, those are important facts that must be considered when others are calling for bans. The counter argument can ask why weren’t these laws followed or why wasn’t the red flag entered into the computer database etc.

        We will never be able to protect everyone from everything. No matter how safe you create vehicles with SRS, ABS, traction control, crumple zones, no matter how safe you make highways, straightening out dangerous curves, burying guardrail ends, putting flashing lights at intersections, fatal and serious injury accidents are going to happen. Humans by nature are unpredictable and capable of evil acts.

        • They don’t like to honestly report on the failings of existing laws. It doesn’t fit the narrative.

  13. Before all you sterling individuals attack my character, sexuality and rugged good looks, here is the exact proof that the parking lot of the FedEx facility in Indianapolis was not a gun free zone, as claimed by just about everybody.

    The fact is, this mass shooting event began in a firearms permitted area where four innocent people were killed.

    “Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels recently signed a law allowing employees to have guns on company property, even if the employer prohibits it.

    The new gun control law permits Indiana employees to keep lawful firearms and ammunition in their locked cars on company premises. The guns must be legally owned, and the owner must meet all applicable licensing requirements, and must not be stored in plain sight in the vehicle.“

    https://www.laborlawcenter.com/education-center/indiana-take-your-gun-to-work-law/

    • Idiot.

      Did you even read what you posted about “in their locked cars “.

      If somebody worked there how would they be able to carry their gun on their person through the parking lot and then enter their work area that is a GFZ? The parking lot to pedestrians is essesntially a GFZ.

      • “The parking lot to pedestrians is essesntially a GFZ.“

        No, it is not.

        Have your old lady drop you off at the door if the 30 feet to the door concerns you that much.

        The fact is, the entire parking lot is clearly firearms permitted under state law.

        Even more interesting, a strict constitutionalist would view any law that allows the government to dictate whether or not a person is armed on private property is clearly an overreach of federal powers.

        If a private property owner (FedEx) wishes to forbid the carrying of firearms on their property, what authorizes the government to intrude upon their private property rights to force the owner to accept unknown people carrying dangerous weapons on their property?

        I thought the conservative ideal was to encourage private property rights, smaller government and less intrusion into private lives?

        • The same reason that not hiring people of certain races, ethnicities, creeds, or disability status is illegal and the government makes private employers follow EEO laws. Individual rights trump corporate policy.

          Yes, private property owners should have the right to dictate who or what comes onto said property, however that right is (or should be) limited when running a public enterprise. Providing services is similar, with some very few notable exceptions such as sincerely held religious convictions. (Why militant gays can’t wage lawfare against a private business, and why some religions such as Islam and a few other Abrahamic religious sects are exempt from vehicle insurance policies)

          If you’re going to try to catch people in a logic trap or use the Socratic method, make sure you know what you’re talking about and actually have the available facts supporting the supposition/attack.

        • “public enterprise”

          Sorry, your premise is flawed, the FedEx processing facility is not public, entrance is restricted by the property owner to a very select set of individuals.

        • Should have known a leftist would be too dense or too petty to engage in anything other than silly sematic games. The fact I was talking about EEO law should have clued you in, but I’ll explain why you’re stupid, and we’ll play the semantic games out so you won’t have that avenue to retreat and you seem to like them anyway. Don’t let this blow your socks off but FedEx isn’t private, its privately owned. These are two different things.

          The FedEx processing facility is, to be fair, not a public enterprise/venture (government owned business). Its a public business, a publicly traded business specifically. Like all publicly traded businesses, as well as LLC’s and other for-profit ventures, how its sets policy and manages its work and workforce is dictated by law (the reference to EEO should have made this apparent to you). The same logic that makes EEO laws applicable, the protection of individual rights, should make the exercise and protection of other individual rights applicable too, insofar as they don’t interfere with the private businesses ability to function.

          EEO laws can dictate how a for-profit business, be it public company (FedEx), LLC, et cetra, because EEO laws protect individual rights (mostly the 14th in this case) and making companies not hire based on immutable characteristics doesn’t interfere with the success of the venture. By that same logic, allowing those who wish to CC in compliance with applicable law protects an individual right (2nd) and doesn’t interfere with the success of the venture. At the same time, if employee’s wanted to have a strike, demonstration, or protest, doing so in the business wouldn’t be allowed since that would interfere with the success of the venture. The owner would have the right to tell them to leave/remove them, although they would be free to strike outside as is always the case.

        • “The same logic that makes EEO laws applicable, the protection of individual rights, should make the exercise and protection of other individual rights applicable too”

          “should”?

          You are creating a new legal doctrine out of whole cloth, one that is never been litigated in any court.

          “The FedEx processing facility is, to be fair, not a public enterprise/venture (government owned business).”

          You are proposing that a public enterprise/venture is a government owned business?

          “FedEx isn’t private, its privately owned. These are two different things.”

          What? Regardless of its the details of its private ownership, it is still a private business that has much control over its private property.

          “The FedEx processing facility is, to be fair, not a public enterprise/venture”

          There it is, end of story. It is a private facility that restricts access to a very select group of individuals, who voluntarily submit to these restrictions in order to gain employment.

          A private property owner has the right to decide the conduct of those on its property (unless they discriminate against a very small set of protected parties as prescribed by law).

          A private property owner can ban any individual for any reason other than those mentioned above, don’t like red hats, don’t let them in. Don’t like people with blonde hair, don’t let them in. Do you really think they shouldn’t be able to ban individuals who are carrying firearms?

          To imagine otherwise is to say that I may carry a gun on your property and into your home without your permission and against your wishes, the proposition is patently ridiculous.

          Suck it, Socrates.

        • How do you breath without assistance? Do you dress yourself?

          Let me break it down for you and be done because you are lowering the net IQ of the internet. Truly and impressive feat.

          This started because you argued that the parking lot was not GFZ because of a law. When everyone called you out based on the fact that if you had to leave your gun in the car to go inside the parking lot because a De Facto GFZ even if it wasn’t De Jure GFZ because you couldn’t walk inside then transport you gun back to the car magically.

          As far as the “public enterprise/venture” statement, I clearly have to Google that for your dumb ass, so here

          “Public enterprise, a business organization wholly or partly owned by the state and controlled through a public authority.” – Britannica

          that was me clarifying my admittedly improper terminology. The fact you think it was just the opposite tells me you might be senile or have a 3rd grade reading level. Maybe both

          As for talking about CC laws, I’m not “making new legislation” I’m creating the argument, despite the fact you only seem interested in parroting the obvious everyone is aware of (FedEx get set rule for GFZ!!! I just owned the conservatives woot) that because EEO already dictates what businesses can do in regards to operation, because protecting individual rights is seen as more important, the same should apply to concealed carry. Hence saying “should”

          As for your completely inept comparison to coming into a residence with a gun vs a business with a gun against the wishes of the owner; EEO was used as an example for the specific reason that it applies to COMMERCIAL ENTITIES for the purpose of regulating their operation in favor of individual rights. I can’t tell blacks or whites not to come into my business because I don’t serve them, there’s litigation against that. Yet I can tell them or anyone else, or everyone else, not to come into my residence. That’s because they are two entirely different things and the laws that govern what property owners can do to restrict access or service in private commercial properties vs private residential/non-profit properties is completely different, as they should be.

    • Still the difference between having to retrieve the gun from the locked vehicle out in the open vs. finding cover and drawing it from a holster.

      • You can always ignore company policy and risk termination. Accepting a job for a company that prohibits CC is a personal choice, after all.

      • Not really, but facts do matter.

        Sad that these comments are so full of emotion, folks calling me an “idiot” because I pointed out the legal realities of the situation.

        But I welcome the free exchange of ideas, I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

        • Because you are an idiot.

          There is no fucking way that a person that works there can drive their car to work, park it, and walk into work carrying their weapon.
          That means the parking lot is EFFECTIVELY a GFZ.

          Your stupid fucking response of saying that your wife can drop you off at the door is a typical Leftist dodge you FUCKING MORON.

        • Making the business a GFZ means that the parking lot is De Facto a gun free zone even if it is not De Jure a GFZ. One can’t walk into work, then magically spirit the gun to the car, they must leave it there and walk unarmed through the lot to the building. Miner is rather slow, but he eventually figured this out when everyone started blasting it at him.

          He then switched to state the obvious that “Property owners have that right!” which everyone knows, and no one here agrees with, because governments dictate what privately owned public businesses can and cannot do all the time on the basis of protecting rights, just not for 2nd amendment rights (outside of select gun-friendly states).

  14. “Paul Keenan, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Indianapolis field office, said Friday that agents questioned Hole last year after his mother called police to say that her son might commit “suicide by cop.” He said the FBI was called after items were found in Hole’s bedroom but he did not elaborate on what they were. He said agents found no evidence of a crime and that they did not identify Hole as espousing a racially motivated ideology. ”

    Yeah, that right there. The future mass murderer did not fit any of the FBI’s predefined classifications so they walked away.

    How about a “Crazy as a fucking future mass murderer” classification?

    Maybe the FBI should work up some training on that one!

    • How about a “Crazy as a fucking future mass murderer” classification?
      Maybe the FBI should work up some training on that one!

      They do train for that one… You’ll find under “Gun Confiscation/Future Useful Idiot”…

    • I saw that on a sticker on the back of a vehicle today for the first time. Interesting coincidence. I took a picture.

  15. When everyone carry’s a gunm somebody is bound to get shot. That’s just the way it is.
    I’m not getting shot for lack of shootin back.
    So don’t take mine.

  16. fyi
    To everyone. If you carry everyday. You are wrong, if you are not watching Active Self Protection videos.

    “Prepared Defender Protects His Family” video 8 min long

    • These are always good and informative.

      Learning from your own successes and mistakes is natural. Being able to learn from others successes and mistakes is great.

    • Weird the rear end got fcked up cause he hit the curb, didn’t look like it hit that hard either. That had to suck.

    • The perp isn’t in jail because they’re trying to figure out how to charge him?? Too bad he didn’t walk in to the Capitol Building, look around and snap some pictures. He’d be locked up indefinitely.

  17. I’ve watched Active Self Protection videos for 10(?) years now. CCW is serious business. This good guy with a gun was OPEN CARRYING when he and his family were attacked.

    “An Interview with Deverick Woodfork (from today’s ASP Main video)” video 22 min long

  18. Knowing that he got to his truck where his firearm was locked up before being shot makes it excessively clear that had he been allowed to have a firearm on his person he could likely have saved lives.

    • Maybe, maybe not. Will never know. If I were at my truck, I would have jumped in and taken off. Trying to be a hero can be deadly.

  19. It is certainly possible that this ex-employee perpetrator may have been motivated by anger/hatred of the Sikh employees at FedEx:

    “On Thursday night, a gunman killed eight people and injured several others before killing himself at a FedEx Ground facility in Indianapolis. Four of the eight dead identified as Sikh and the facility was known to employ a significant number of members of the Sikh community.

    Simran Jeet Singh
    Simran Jeet Singh
    The shooting came just days after Sikhs, who comprise the world’s fifth-largest religious community, celebrated Vaisakhi, the most significant holiday of our calendar, and also as the state of Indiana was honoring its Sikh residents with an awareness and appreciation month — one of several states to do so.“

  20. An interesting phenomena is that whenever the drumbeat of gun control radiates from Washington an increase of mass killings by use of guns occurrs. Meaning the killings start after the calls for gun control are heard. Yup. Its as if there is a secret organization that finds unstable individuals that own guns and incites them to kill others by using mind control techniques. Its not as crazy as it sounds. This is done to sway public opinion to the side of the communists.

    The CIA had a mind control programs to influence others to committ acts they would not ordinarily do. Drugs were often used on the subject, LSD being one.

    Obama ran a program to smuggle guns bought from US gun shops along the Mexican border to the Mexican Cartels with the intent Mexico would find the guns and demand the US ban guns. One of Obamas smuggled gun was used to murder a US Border Patrol Agent.

    The government also uses informants that encourage others to committ crimes, Randy Weaver was one who was encouraged to modify a shotgun by an ATF informant. The result became known as Ruby Ridge.
    In most every case the the killers that use the type of guns the government wants banned are already on the FBI radar. The FBI knew of the killers and of the guns they posessed long before the killers acted, they knew an “assault rifle” was posessed by the killer(s) and that they knew the killers were Islamic Terrorists or sympathysers, mentally disturbed, or easily manipulated.

    What I am saying is that the government is facilitating mass murders by the use of guns to sway public opinion against guns.

  21. Two points.

    1. Having a gun by itself doesnt make you prepared. You HAVE to train regularly.

    2. A handgun is no match for a rifle, all else being equal.

  22. He HITS just keep on coming..

    Shooting in Kenosha leaves 3 dead, 2 wounded; suspect at large.. Three people were killed and two others were injured early Sunday morning from a shooting in Kenosha, Wisconsin. The suspect is still at large.
    “The suspect is described as a black male over six feet tall wearing a light-colored hooded sweatshirt,” Sgt. David Wright said in the Kenosha County Sheriff’s Department’s media release. Sheriff David Beth gave a press conference on Sunday morning, and said the department wasn’t ruling out the possibility of more than one person involved in the shooting, according to WTMJ-TV.

  23. “Man With a Gun Tried to Stop the FedEx Shooter Before Being Shot and Killed”

    This is a reason to carry more than a sidearm in your vehicle. An AR, a PCC, a 12ga pump, a bolt or lever action rifle, anything with reach to it.

  24. Any one else notice that when the Democrats start to push gun control, these mass shooting nut cases seem to come out of the woodwork?
    We have had more incidences of reported mass shootings since Biden was sworn in than during the entire time Trump was president!

  25. Sorry, just looking out for me and mine. The rest need to take care of yourselves. I’m not playing the hero. My firearm will be to help me get out of Dodge, not go take some gunman on. It’s one thing when you have no choice. Something again when you do.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here