A good guy gets shot.

Chris Grant

Chris Grant- Flexing for a laugh

A little over a month ago- I was helping the people of PUSH- Professionals United for Sexual Health- work on a charity auction. They had 18 bachelors (including Greg Hunter) volunteer to be “auctioned off” to eligible women for a date package.

I took the pictures of most of the bachelors- and got to meet some amazing people. One of whom was Chris Grant who works at Wright State in the Athletic Department for my college friend, Athletic Director, Bob Grant.

One of the ways I judge people’s competency, is by what kind of people they hire. Two of Bob’s new hires were in the auction- and both were just absolutely amazing guys. Polite, bright, interested in the community- and- jocks (it is the athletic department after all). I even tried to fix-up Jack Leopard with my girlfriend’s co-worker.

Today I hear that Chris got shot yesterday:

An employee of the Wright State athletic department is recovering in Tuscaloosa, Ala., after suffering a gunshot wound early Sunday, May 16, in an incident that left one dead and eight injured and is being called one of the worst shootings in that city’s history.

Chris Grant, special assistant to the athletic director at WSU, was attending a high school graduation party for a younger sister when the shooting occurred, said his father, Michael.

Michael Grant, the men’s basketball coach at Stillman College and the former coach at Central State, said a bullet entered Chris Grant’s right side, passed through his liver and exited his body. Chris Grant also suffered a cracked rib and is breathing with the assistance of a breathing tube, his father said.

Michael Grant said Chris’ liver has started to heal and that doctors were performing more tests Monday morning.

via WSU athletic department employee victim in mass Ala. shooting | Wright State University sports.

And no, he wasn’t shot in Dayton.

So far the news indicates that Chris will pull through- but, if you’d like to say a prayer for a really nice guy, who deserves a ton of support- please join me in rooting for a full recovery.

For all of you 2nd Amendment lovers- I’d rather have a few less guns- and an intact Chris Grant any day. A well regulated militia doesn’t let the good guys take a bullet at a graduation party. That’s not the America I believe in.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! If you wish to support this blog, please head over and use our services at The Next Wave Printing for all your printing needs. We have 4 Color Business cards starting at just $13.50.

19 Responses

  1. Hall May 17, 2010 / 3:13 pm
    Don’t bring the 2nd Amendment into this. Unless, of course, the person who used the gun had proper permits and what-not related to that gun or possessing a gun. We could outlaw guns but some people just don’t give a rat’s ass about “laws”.
  2. Robert May 17, 2010 / 3:34 pm
    Prewitt (the shooter) has been arrested twice for carrying a gun without a license, once in 2008 and again in April.  He is a  lowlife gangstra punk. 
  3. Jesse May 17, 2010 / 3:50 pm

    I would rather have an intact Chris as well.  Isn’t shooting Chris illegal even if guns are legal?  What makes you think it is likely that the person who shot Chris would have respected the restriction on having a gun more readily than the one restricting him from shooting Chris?
    I would also rather not have to keep discussing the terror that gun restrictions have meant for civilian populations.
    Governments have wiped out 170,000,000 innocent non-military lives in the 20th Century alone after passing gun control measures.

  4. truth May 17, 2010 / 3:55 pm
    My prayers are with this young man.  However, if someone was hell bent on shooting up a house…they are going to do it no matter what laws are on the books.
    Tightening up the 2nd Amendment will not prevent gun crime to the extent that some of you think.  You can throw out all the huggy guns kill people BS and it isn’t going to cut it.  Stricter gun laws only inhibit those that follow the gun laws.  Criminals will have access to guns no matter what laws are on the books.  They won’t lower crime, which is evident in DC and foreign countries that don’t allow firearms.  Illinois is not a gun friendly state and look at their firearm related crime stats.  We can’t protect our borders from illegals and drugs.  Do you think that the flow of black market weapons will stop either?  Nope.
    Look in the Dayton area recently.  CCW permit holders have been able to defend themselves.  The first one was about 10 months after Ohio’s CCW laws were passed on Philadelphia when he shot armed robbers attempting to rob him as he walked down the sidewalk.  This older man had a small frame Glock in an ankle holster.  It may have saved his life.  There are other stories like this.
    On the contrary.  A few months ago, an idiot fired off a round inside Frickers on Miller Ln., striking his girlfriend in her leg.  Her cell phone stopped the round.  He was intoxicated and breaking the law by showing off his gun in a liquor establishment.  This idiot probably was carrying a weapon long before the laws were passed.  I wonder if anyone ever carried a gun into a bar before the CCW permits were issued?  Uhhh, yeah. Deal with him, not the firearms.
    If I take one of my firearms and place it on the kitchen counter.  It isn’t going to go bang unless I, or someone else pulls the trigger.  You say criminals will break into my house and get my gun.  Have fun with the safe homie.  Teach firearm safety and be responsible in the care and security of your weapons.
    I am curious to know what kinds of laws or changes to the current laws you profess.  Don’t get me wrong, I am for gun laws regulating felons, those with DV and TPO violation histories, and violent misdemeanors, from being able to legally go out and purchase a gun legally.  But, these laws aren’t going to stop gun violence.  I am not game for a lawless gun society.  The solution isn’t new or tighter laws, it is a prosecutors office that won’t take gun pleas.  Getting rid of judges that let guys off with community control for gun charges.  And getting rid of judges that amend charges that deal with mandatory gun specs.  Let’s start by incarcerating gun crimes to the extent that the law allows.  Recently a man who had a gun on him, fought with police to obtain that gun after it was taken from his person, and had a prior felony conviction…was given community control (probation).  Prior to this case even being closed, he was charged again with possession of a firearm.  Had the first judge handled the case like he should have, the second charge wouldn’t even have occurred.  He may have gone out and killed someone.
    Is a robber going to commit a crime at the the local NRA meeting or office park?  Is the direct target of a DV murder going to be shot at work (with a “no gun zone” sign on the door), or in the gun section of the local Gander Mountain?
    To the pacifists:  When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
  5. David Esrati May 17, 2010 / 4:03 pm

    @truth- I believe in passing gun safety courses before being able to buy one. Period. End of Story.

    No certification- we get to use it on you.

    You have a felony- you have a gun- we get to use it on you.

    You shoot someone- not in self-defense, we get to use it on you.

    Get my point.

    @Robert- if you could link to your sources, my readers would appreciate it. I didn’t have time to dig. Thank you.

    And- I say we use his gun on him.

  6. truth May 17, 2010 / 4:32 pm
    @David…your first comment dealt with the fact that you want less guns on the street.  I assumed you threw that out there for some debate.
    You mention the same things that a supporter of the right to bear arms does.  We obviously have the same views on that.  But, in the end, how do you propose that we lower the amount of guns on the street?  How do we force the judicial system to uphold the penalties in the Ohio Revised Code?
    We can’t off all the law violators, no matter how much we want to.  Yes, if we hung law violators to death at Courthouse Square the criminal element would be dead and we would be in good shape.  But that is a dream, not a reality.  Instead of a calling out the Second Amendment supporters, call out those responsible for not upholding the current laws on the books.  This doesn’t just have to do with gun violence, it has to do with everything that has a legal basis.  Everyone wants to reform or create new laws instead of actually reading, studying, and applying the ones we have.  The less legal jargon and loopholes in new laws, the less room for creative application and interpretation by our judicial system.
  7. David Esrati May 17, 2010 / 5:11 pm

    @Truth- I believe a lot fewer guns would be bought if there was mandatory training requirements.

    Most 2nd amendment supporters don’t support mandatory training – or any delays in selling. I threw it in- just because I think the implications of what guns do aren’t taken seriously by many. And right now- Chris Grant is paying the price.

  8. hall May 17, 2010 / 6:45 pm
    Fewer guns bought if training was mandatory ? What part of this don’t you get ? I’ll venture to say that 90+ % of the guns used to murder someone this year, last year, and so on was NOT bought legally nor was the shooter legally allowed (permits) to own the gun. How will “mandatory training” factor in then ?
  9. truth May 17, 2010 / 7:10 pm
    Right now in Ohio to be covered legally, there are mandatory training requirements to legally carry that firearm.  That doesn’t hurt gun sales, it sparks them.  Ohio gun sales are up and very consistent.  Ohio CCW permits have tapered off, but are still being issued.  However, the first cycle of permit is over with and most are now renewals which also require a requalification after the second expiration.
    Look at when the new President took office.  Gun sales skyrocketed.  Not by staunch 2nd Amendment supporters that think there should be no guidelines or regulations whatsoever, but by Joe Blow who never owned a firearm, said this may be the end as we know it as being able to buy a firearm without having a chip implanted in their head, and they went to the local retailer and purchased a firearm.  I run into CCW permit holders and discuss the responsibility associated with it as well as the reasons for having it.  Most are Joe Cubicle and simply state, “The law allows me to protect myself and my family, I am going to.”  They also almost always state that they don’t carry on an everyday basis, just when they feel like they are going to be in a dangerous neighborhood or travel to places unknown.  You wouldn’t believe how many are female as well.  Not your usual “pro-gun” person according to statistics in relation to the topic.
    I will disagree that MOST of your 2nd Amendment supporters don’t support training or a little background prior to a purchase.   Most believe it is a right to have a gun and be able to protect themselves in deadly force situations.  However, not many are all out NRA fanatics.  Just to throw some numbers out there.  There are 4 Million NRA members.  Say…at the low end, 30% of the US supports the right to carry a firearm (roughly the number of registered republicans as well)…That puts over 100 million Americans in support of the right to carry a firearm or possess one.  That also places 4% into the “fanatic” category that hates any and all firearm legislation. (Brady Bill, etc…)  This is a very small percentage of people that could be lumped into MOST.
    Most law enforcement officers also support CCW.  I find it funny that the people responsible for enforcing firearm laws, and the ones that are most likely to have an armed encounter with one of these fanatic 2nd Amendment people, support citizens legally carrying firearms.  You would think that law enforcement would want any amount of firearms on the street to be reduced.  That isn’t the case.  OACP and the OTC hold administrative opinions based on the Patrol and lobbyists, not the general consensus of police officers working the streets.
    IMO the idea that people don’t understand the “implications” of guns is insulting.  It appears that some don’t understand the implications of not having guns.  I am curious to know how countries and areas where guns aren’t allowed have more violent crime.  Why states that have enacted CCW laws have seen a reduction in crime.  Why laws like the Castle Doctrine have so much opposition.  Etc.
    This young man didn’t die because of a lack of firearm legislation or the piece of steel that fired the projectile.  This man died because of the individual that is responsible for the actions and an apparent system that failed to take care of the problem when it presented itself twice prior.  Your solution can’t be to take guns from people.  It doesn’t work.  Criminals aren’t going to be hampered by ANY legislation meant to keep guns out of their hands.  You can’t keep guns from criminals.  You can keep criminals away from guns.
  10. truth May 17, 2010 / 7:15 pm
    And I misquoted…he was seriously injured.  Point still the same.
  11. Will Brooks May 17, 2010 / 10:38 pm
    David – don’t use this man’s tragedy as your soapbox to talk about less guns. A criminal shot him, the gun is just a mindless piece of metal. I’m done here, I can get this kind of mindless droning about gun control from the main stream media.
  12. Sandy May 17, 2010 / 11:36 pm
    This is crazy! This article is about a wonderful young man who was shot. Chris used to be my neighbor and has a great family and they must be terrified right now.  They need our prayers – not some discussion about gun control. 
  13. truth May 18, 2010 / 9:35 am
    @Sandy…David brought it up or gun control would not have been brought up….Don’t poke the bears unless you want to wake them up.
  14. Greg Hunter May 18, 2010 / 10:29 am
    For all of you 2nd Amendment lovers- I’d rather have a few less guns- and an intact Chris Grant any day. A well regulated militia doesn’t let the good guys take a bullet at a graduation party. That’s not the America I believe in.

    This is crazy! This article is about a wonderful young man who was shot. Chris used to be my neighbor and has a great family and they must be terrified right now.  They need our prayers – not some discussion about gun control.

    David drew “first blood”.  He could have taken the high road but again used a good story to sell the same old crap.  The constitution is clear and this is a democratic republic – shut up.
    Maybe they should ban knives in China.

  15. SheliaO May 18, 2010 / 12:22 pm
    “The constitution is clear and this is a democratic republic – shut up.”           I certainly hope Greg wasn’t telling someone who posted an opinion to shut up after he has posted his own many times.  If he was – then hypocrisy, thy name is Greg.
  16. Ice Bandit May 18, 2010 / 8:50 pm
       For all of you 2nd Amendment lovers- I’d rather have a few less guns- and an intact Chris Grant any day (David Esrati)

      Well David, how about a few more guns and an intact Chris Grant. The two are certainly not mutally exclusive. Consider the potentialies had even one responsible ccw permit holder had been packing at the event at that (apparently exclusive) country club near Tuscaloosa. The Old Bandito was recently at an event where every single person was carrying guns. An impromptu and early afternoon meeting of wild turkey hunters in Pike County. Complete strangers swapping stories, others offered advice while others showed off their trophies and commiserated the unlucky. And all of this with shotguns within reach. The Old Bandito never felt safer in his life…

  17. Max May 22, 2010 / 10:15 am
    David, I’ll listen to you and what you have to say that is different than Turner.

    At this point the political language seems the same with Turner, as the incumbent, having the advantage/disadvantage of a congressional record.

    As an Independent I totally disagree with your position on the GM bailout. To apply, in principle, federal intervention into the free market to that degree is as irresponsible as the unfunded mandate of ‘no child left behind.’ Succeses can only be measured by failures and that is a basic tenent of a free market.

    On the NCR issue I don’t think you, Turner, or Strickland are being completely forthcoming about that black-eye Dayton received because everyone knew or should have known of NCR’s intent at least 18 months before their announcement. NCR hasn’t the indentured confidentialty contract with its employees like Microsoft. Everyone, from city, to state, to Mike Turner buried their heads in the sand on that one and the blame is equally applied. It was even in the public record in the GA community. That the DDN is a progeny of the Atlanta Constitution also raises eyebrows why the story was killed over and over until it reached the front page. That’s the danger when a community such as Dayton is run and influenced by outside interests including banks.

    To connect Turner’s votes and earmarks for Wright-Pat with the GM and NCR issues is, in my opinion, connecting dots that aren’t there. Turner’s record is very clear from his position of working on the Bills before him to reduce ALL earmarks in a move- futile as it was – towards fiscal responsibilty at the federal level.

    My objection to Turner is the blind loyalty to his party over his constituents; the health care debate and banking reform.

    I will certainly give you a chance but remind you anyone who is elected in November has to carry Independents. To do that you must separate yourself from the incumbent based upon more than I have seen. It may be true the district is in need of new blood and eyes. Montgomery County does not need any more black-eyes or blood poisoning.

  18. David Esrati May 22, 2010 / 11:22 am


    Thank you for your insight and thoughts. I do realize that congressional representation requires compromise- and that many times, bundling of bills causes records to be reduced to a yeah or neigh- not, on the thoughts behind the vote. Soundbites don’t serve us well.

    However in Turner’s case, he’s not been a leader on the floor, hasn’t asked the substantive  national questions- that need to be asked-like why are any tax dollars going to private corporations to reorganize, move, grow- etc. Isn’t that what the capital markets are for? I’d call for an outright national ban of all “economic development” grants, tax breaks, relocation incentives- unless they were equally available industry wide. It’s time to stop playing crony capitalism. Turner isn’t wired that way.

    The real crime is that because of the false economy built based on the Wall Street Casino’s ever changing rules- we’ve seen NCR decimated by a lousy CEO who has lost 2/3 of the company’s value in 4 years. There has to be some accountability of these people- and Wall Street isn’t doing it.

    I’ve written about it extensively.

    And that comes down to- do you want a Congressman who has a discussion in the open with his constituents on a site like this- or- do you want what you have now: a sell-out?

    Thanks for joining in with the conversation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *