Reginald Gildersleeve, 55, is dead. He was shot in the chest around 7 P.M. at a small store on the Southwest Side of Chicago, a rarity in this bastion of gun control.
Why was he shot? According to Chicago Police, Mr. Gildersleeve felt it necessary to mask himself and walk into this store/currency exchange house and rob the 55 year-old woman and the 17 year-old girl assisting her.
According to authorities, Gildersleeve walked in and pulled out some kind of firearm or replica firearm, using it to menace the sales staff; whereupon he was promptly shot by that Chicago rarity: a legally armed, legally carrying, regular Good Guy With A Gun with no known ties to the Chicago government.
Sadly, while the facts are pretty clear, the family of the deceased are laying the groundwork for some sort of future legal action by expressing doubt about the police version of events.
Mr. Gildersleeves’ stepson, Igbinosa Oronsaye, feels that something is lacking, stating, “Something doesn’t seem right. Reggie doesn’t even own a gun. He couldn’t own a gun if he wanted to.”
Apparently, Mr. Oronsaye doesn’t read the papers. Mr. Gildersleeves did not have a gun. What he had, though, was sufficient to make everyone around him believe that the replica he was holding was the real deal which, even in a place like Chicago, is sufficient grounds to justify a lethal response.
The victims were all unharmed.
What does all of this have to do with our usual subject of what went right/wrong?
This is something you need to prepare for. When you engage in a use of force such as a shooting, you will be dealing with not only the trauma of having just shot someone, possibly fatally, but all of the attendant drama that comes with it and you, as the shooter, can’t really respond until the courts have had their say.
You get to deal with you assailant’s family questioning your use of force and whether or not the assailant was doing what he was doing.
In this day and age, where people believe the cops are out to get them, the evidence from the authorities will not be believed. Between the morons pushing these families into frivolous, politically-motivated lawsuits and Hollywood’s inability to accurately depict a shooting, you have Gildersleeve’s stepson saying idiotic things like, “Some people don’t actually know how to use guns. They go to firing ranges, but it’s not the same as a bullet going into somone’s body, it’s not the same as a bullet going into flesh. They should be able to wound first, kill next. He didn’t deserve to get shot multiple times.”
He continued saying, “[The shooter] just took a brother, [the shooter] just took a father from a lot of people. Somebody’s got to answer for that.”
You, as the victim in this, get to deal with all of this being hammered into your head from every media outlet until the next criminal gets shot. And even then, it’ll all come right back to you at the trials.
YOU are not responsible for Mr. Gildersleeve’s actions. YOU did not force him to commit yet another robbery. YOU we’re placed in a position where, for lack of police presence or time to summon them, you had to be Your Own First Responder.
Gildersleeve’s stepson is correct, though. Someone DOES have to answer for this. But the revolving-door justice system which permits violent criminals the opportunity to re-offend will never be found liable.