Virginia Tech Killings and Gun Control
As expected, since the Virginia Tech killings, many of the same old un-informed voices have been calling for gun control... Rosie Odonnell was on "The View" flapping her oversized mouth around painting this as a gun control issue...
Today I noticed the following article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=593348
In it, the author asks:
The author of the article also discards the notion that had students been able to carry concealled weapons (Virginia allows concealled carry with a permit, but weapons are banned from the campus itself) lives would not have been saved. This rampage would NOT have been ended sooner.
I have a few open-ended questions for those who think gun control would have prevented this tragedy, and for those who don't think armed citizens could have and would have ended this massacre with a fraction of the bloodshed.
First, lets just ASSUME that it is actually possible to prevent these "sullen loners" from obtaining firearms. (which of course its not) Guns were banned on campus, but this psycho brought one. So clearly the law would not deter him. And having seen his psychotic manifesto on the news... I'm quite certain he would have found a way to obtain a firearm even if he had to wack an unsuspecting cop over the head with a louisville slugger and steal his gun. Regardless. Lets live in the world of the ignorant for a while and PRETEND that he wouldn't have been able to get a gun.
Do you really believe that if this kid had no access to guns he wouldn't have found a way to create as much death and destruction as possible?
Perhaps it would have been smashing his car into a big crowd of kids (very easy to find on a college campus) and killing dozens, perhaps it would have been a bomb (Tim McVeigh did it with fertilizer). Perhaps it would have been chaining up exit doors and lighting a dorm building on fire during the night.
On Sept. 11th thousands died, and not a single gun was used.
I watched this kids psychotic manifesto on television. I assume you have seen the video also. Is there any doubt in your mind that if not for a gun he would have just found another method to inflict his psychotic episode with?
Do you really believe that if he hadn't been able to get a hold of a gun he would have given up his psychotic intentions?
And how can you brush off the suggestion that if guns were not banned on campus, and students had been allowed to carry guns, that wouldn't have stopped his killing rampage sooner... Yet when the authorities were summoned to deal with a "school shooter" they arrived on campus by the dozens, perhaps hundreds EACH AND EVERY ONE of them running around with AR-15's and other semi-automatic weaponry to deal with this threat?
If having weapons available wasn't a solution to neutralizing this threat... why did the police show up armed to the gills with guns to deal with the situation?
And the bigger picture... When are people going to realize that there are some things you just can't prevent. Especially in a free society. Those with no regard for human life (theirs or anyone elses) will always find a way to kill, and there will never be a way to prevent every incident like that.
Today I noticed the following article in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=593348
In it, the author asks:
"What remains to be seen is whether the really big question ever gets addressed: What are we going to do about all the guns out there in the hands of all the sullen loners who are looking for a way to make the rest of us realize what's really important and what's not?"
The author of the article also discards the notion that had students been able to carry concealled weapons (Virginia allows concealled carry with a permit, but weapons are banned from the campus itself) lives would not have been saved. This rampage would NOT have been ended sooner.
I have a few open-ended questions for those who think gun control would have prevented this tragedy, and for those who don't think armed citizens could have and would have ended this massacre with a fraction of the bloodshed.
First, lets just ASSUME that it is actually possible to prevent these "sullen loners" from obtaining firearms. (which of course its not) Guns were banned on campus, but this psycho brought one. So clearly the law would not deter him. And having seen his psychotic manifesto on the news... I'm quite certain he would have found a way to obtain a firearm even if he had to wack an unsuspecting cop over the head with a louisville slugger and steal his gun. Regardless. Lets live in the world of the ignorant for a while and PRETEND that he wouldn't have been able to get a gun.
Do you really believe that if this kid had no access to guns he wouldn't have found a way to create as much death and destruction as possible?
Perhaps it would have been smashing his car into a big crowd of kids (very easy to find on a college campus) and killing dozens, perhaps it would have been a bomb (Tim McVeigh did it with fertilizer). Perhaps it would have been chaining up exit doors and lighting a dorm building on fire during the night.
On Sept. 11th thousands died, and not a single gun was used.
I watched this kids psychotic manifesto on television. I assume you have seen the video also. Is there any doubt in your mind that if not for a gun he would have just found another method to inflict his psychotic episode with?
Do you really believe that if he hadn't been able to get a hold of a gun he would have given up his psychotic intentions?
And how can you brush off the suggestion that if guns were not banned on campus, and students had been allowed to carry guns, that wouldn't have stopped his killing rampage sooner... Yet when the authorities were summoned to deal with a "school shooter" they arrived on campus by the dozens, perhaps hundreds EACH AND EVERY ONE of them running around with AR-15's and other semi-automatic weaponry to deal with this threat?
If having weapons available wasn't a solution to neutralizing this threat... why did the police show up armed to the gills with guns to deal with the situation?
And the bigger picture... When are people going to realize that there are some things you just can't prevent. Especially in a free society. Those with no regard for human life (theirs or anyone elses) will always find a way to kill, and there will never be a way to prevent every incident like that.
posted by N1K | 12:30 PM
6 Comments:
Terrible tradgedy that couldn't be avoided. The arguemant that more people armed would have kept this action at some sort of minimum is also pure speculation "who's the better shot"? Unless those classrooms were filled with ex-swat, military etc...
The fact remains that even with legislation banning guns they are going to be out there and owned by both good and bad. Didn't we try this with alcohol? That didn't go too good did it? Again wasn't there an assault weapons ban? How did that go? Seems like all it did was increase the price to buy an assault weapon.
I don't know what the answer is but I do know that allowing everyone and there brother to be carrying a weapon doesn't mean things like this won't happen.
Yeah, I agree... Things like this will happen... To say they would be prevented by any measure is naive. People hell bent on causing mass casualty who don't mind dying doing it will likely succed.
I believe that teachers should be trained just like the airlines contribute to the training of the air marshalls. I don't think that arming students is the answer but I do believe a few armed teachers would have absolutely reduced the casualties. BUT....once a teacher is armed do they run when something like this happens or hit the situation head on? Bottom line...people who have a long proven track record of training should be the only ones to carry or be allowd to own. I have never taken a class but from what I understand you learn how to respect a firearm.
--people who have a long proven track record of training should be the only ones to carry or be allowd to own--
I do agree that people should learn and be trained with firearms. No question that is a positive action. However I believe that its in the best interest of EVERY citizen to educate themselves on how not to be a victim, and how to protect their family/their home/etc. And the best way to do that is by learning to effectively handle a firearm.
BUT... The Second Amendment to our constitution DOES NOT say that only people who take extensive training should be allowed to "keep and bear" arms. All citizens... extensively trained or not have the right to keep and bear arms.
The right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. Law-abiding citizens should not have to face ANY regulation or difficulty in exercising their constitutional right. I HOPE they choose to become even better trained, but to be honest... handling a gun safely is NOT rocket science.
People hell bent on causing mass casualty who don't mind dying doing it will likely succeed.
It was inevitable that this story would develope into pro-gun/anti-gun debate.
In my mind it really shouldn't as like n1k stated above these wackjobs would find other methods to get their intended mission accomplished.
And as far as arming teachers...My experience with teachers does not lead me to believe that this is any kind of viable solution.
Air Marshall's are an entirely different subject, they are law enforcement by choice in the first place. The teachers I have had contact with were more "tree huggin" and peace loving not to make a blanket statement on all teachers but bank tellers have guns stuck in there face all the time do we start arming them as well? If you get my point. I know it's easy to say this is a "gun" issue but really it's not it's a "nutcase" issue who would have went to other measures to get this done maybe even more catastrophic...just my .02..
--I know it's easy to say this is a "gun" issue but really it's not it's a "nutcase" issue who would have went to other measures to get this done maybe even more catastrophic...--
Exactly... and if he had chained every door and emergency exit in the place shut and lit the joint on fire and killed 30 people NOONE would be asking where he got the gasoline, or suggesting limiting gasoline purchase etc. When their are stabbings in the news noone asks where the knife came from.
Post a Comment
<< Home