Virginia Tech and Gun Control
Our good friend Janet Levy of Jihad Watch had this outstanding article in the American Thinker entitled, “The Fight to Bar Arms.” It is a must read for anybody who believes that the Va Tech shooting is evidence that we need “stricter gun control laws.” In fact, this tragic incident demonstrates just the opposite. The last thing we need are more restrictions on law abiding gun owners. There are over 20,000 laws on the books already. And we all know that crimminals don’t obey laws in the first place. None of the calls for “longer waiting periods,” “assault weapons bans,” “increased registartion” etc…have ever led to less gun related crime as I document thoroughly in my book “Conservative Comebacks to Liberal Lies.”
With the notoriety of its no-gun policy as a backdrop, the Virginia Tech campus thus ensured that students and faculty were practically sitting ducks, stripped of their ability to defend themselves during Monday’s tragic sniper shooting. Who can say if the methodical shooter, Seung-Hui Cho, a senior who was a Virginia Tech student during the 2005 student-disciplining incident, was aware of the school’s reputation and took it into account? What can be said, however, is that this most recent disaster, featured prominently on the national stage, underscores for many how necessary is our constitutional right to bear arms.
Read the entire article here.
May 1st, 2007 at 4:15 pm
I am pro-gun (a strange description. Pro-Second Amendment sounds better.) Don’t own one, but am definitely of the pro-NRA mindset.
But I still see no real problem in waiting periods or some of these restrictions. I just don’t see the danger is putting some logical steps behind buying and owning a gun, as long as you are able in the end to own it. And these restrictions have to be within reason. 30 day waiting period is fine (if you need a gun right away, you probably shouldn’t have one. Call 911 instead.)
As for the UN stopping us from having guns, that is laughable. The UN has no, and will never have, any real control over how the US governs itself. The gun lobby is too strong. And heck, most democrats own guns themselves. That threat I consider conspiracy theory fodder. Yeah, I know that they will try. They won’t get anywhere with it.
Although I do find it fairly disconcerting in this article where they talk about the students being sitting ducks. Does anyone really want college kids to all have concealed weapons?
May 1st, 2007 at 5:59 pm
Optimist to your pts…
“(if you need a gun right away, you probably shouldn’t have one. Call 911 instead.)”
No actually, many people whose lives are threatened don’t have time to “wait 30 days.” The gun is “instant 9-11″ for an elderly person living in a high crime neighborhood for example.
The bottom line is that there is already a background check which is an instant FBI background check that is already done nationally. Waiting periods as I document in my book have never reduced gun related crime.
Waiting periods only delay law abiding citizens from being able to obtain firearms for self-protection.
“As for the UN stopping us from having guns, that is laughable. The UN has no, and will never have, any real control over how the US governs itself. ”
Not laughable if we have a Dem president and Dem Congress who could ratify the treaty which is supported by the “Open Society” which George Sorros founded, ownes, and runs- one of Hillary’s major supporters and contributors. Janet makes a very valid pt and is disconcerting enough that Wayne LaPeirre who runs the NRA is concerned about it.
“Although I do find it fairly disconcerting in this article where they talk about the students being sitting ducks. Does anyone really want college kids to all have concealed weapons? ”
These “kids” already have the right to own and carry a permit for a gun. And yes, if there had been a few students who were licenced and armed perhaps they could have killed the sicko prior to his murdering 32 students. But the administration decided to make it a “gun free safe zone.” Who was it “safe” for? And “dialing 9-11″ didn’t seem to help either…
Gregg
May 1st, 2007 at 8:19 pm
I am sorry, I just am going to have a very hard time believing an organization as inept and ineffectual as the UN will ever hold any real power regarding internal US law. I have way too much faith in the US. It won’t happen.
And can you picture 10,00 college kids with concealed guns. Sure, they might have killed that sicko. But 90 percent of them aren’t mature enough to handle a paintball gun, much less a loaded weapon. If you have to be 21 to drink, you have to be 21 to own a gun is my opinion (with the exception of military personnel of course.) Place armed guards all over the place and have big metal detectors in schools. There is a certain amount of maturity that has to come with owning a gun that most college students don’t have. JUst my opinion.
I’ll trust you on background check info. My point is that I don’t mind a little extra caution when selling guns. I don’t see that as really that threatening to the 2nd amendment.
May 2nd, 2007 at 7:59 am
Optimist,
You state,”If you have to be 21 to drink, you have to be 21 to own a gun is my opinion (with the exception of military personnel of course.)”
The min age to carry a gun in Virginia is 21. So we should be in agreement. Were you aware that the min age to carry in Vriginia was 21? That is state law, and if there had been at least some 21 year olds and older including teachers who had been allowed to carry on campus, then perhpas this guy would have been dead instead of the 32 innocent victims who were sitting ducks.
As to your comment:
“I’ll trust you on background check info. My point is that I don’t mind a little extra caution when selling guns. I don’t see that as really that threatening to the 2nd amendment.”
The problem in the Va Tech case was not about the waiting period being too short or background checks in general. What more “caution” can you have then a federal law that mandates an FBI instant background check? The problem with the Va Tech case was that because of political correctness many of the shooters’ teachers and admin failed to act on Cho’s dangerous mental and warning signs that celarly demonstrated that he was a very high potential danger on campus. And his mental state is well documented. The admin failed to get this guy off campus and are, in my opinion, largely to blame for the tragedy.
Gregg
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:44 pm
No arguing your last point. As a parent, when I found out what he was writing and what was known about him, I was just appalled that he wasn’t locked up already.
And yup, I knew the age to buy guns in Virginia. I was thinking of the majority of college kids who are under 21. So, yes we are in agreement. My brain was thinking underclassmen, when it should have been considering the entire student body.