It’s frequently a variation of the same story time after time. In these scenarios, the police are only there to document the scene and take photographs. Marylanders constantly elect politicians who deny them the right to carry firearms and defend themselves. The criminals have the advantage in these scenarios. If the girls weren’t rushed at the door, then they absently did not take the 5 seconds to throw the lock on the door once they entered. Based on what I see on the internet, Jayna was no sissy. If either of them had had a gun, and it’s not unrealistic to think one of them might, given their late hours closing the store, they would have had at least one last chance to fend off the criminals. But they should have at least had the choice. But they did not. It is almost impossible to get a permit to carry a firearm in Maryland unless you meet one of the strictest defined criteria. Think about it, from the very moment this crime plan went into action, these girls had no opportunity whatsoever to defend themselves; they were going to be victims. They were not going to be able to affect the course of events. I think that is pretty profound. Why should that be ok with all of us?
There’s an old saying, “better to be judged by 12 than carried by six.” This refers to people who will potentially break a law defending themselves, but preserving their life. If either of these girls was illegally carrying a hand gun, that illegal weapon, might have saved Jayna’s life. But why wouldn’t we give law abiding citizens the option to legally defend themselves?
We are conditioned to watch a news conference and feel empathy for victims and just accept the outcome of such crimes. We need to stop accepting these outcomes.
Here is one organization that works towards the goal: http://www.marylandshallissue.org/
Very good short recent article on the subject including discussion. In Maryland, you essentially have to first be a victim of a crime (and survive I guess) before they will issue a permit to carry.