Guns in America are what made America what it is today. Last weeks attack at Virginia Tech by a likely deranged individual has created an atmosphere of terror around the country at campuses. All over, there are discussions to “bring back gun control”. A student in Colorado was arrested at CU Boulder the day after the V-Tech Massacre. He was merely in possession of weapons, planning to go target shooting that afternoon. He had a legal right to own those weapons and yet his university had him arrested. Police were quoted as saying he had “illegal weapons”.
Turns out this was a lie. He was 19, and had a shot gun and a small caliber handgun. According to both Colorado state and Federal laws He is well within his rights to own those weapons. The point is that this attack has caused people on campuses to be terrified, thus other campuses across the country are going “stupid”. What Cho did was terrorize universities across the country by doing this evil deed, thus logically, he was a terrorist.
The WORST part about this, the deaths of 32 innocent lives. The worst part of the aftermath, is the grieving 32 families, and thousands of classmates. The second worst part about the aftermath is that we now have anti-gun people calling for more gun control.
Alright, let’s look logically at what we have right now.
1) Virginia Tech was a “gun free zone”
2) People in Virginia are able to purchase weapons based on the laws of the state and Constitution.
3) Cho was able to purchase a weapon even though he had been “adjudicated” as “mentally unstable” (suicidal, depression)
4) Cho was able to walk into a “gun free zone” and murder 32 people, then take his own life.
What do we have here?
First of all, Virginia law already prohibits students and visitors from carrying guns onto the grounds of public and private K-12 schools. The state also prohibits concealed weapons in courthouses, places of worship during a service, jails and on any private property where the owner has posted a “no guns” notice. State employees are barred from possessing guns while at work unless needed for their job. Nowhere in the law does it state “college campuses” or “Universities”. Virginia Universities tend to ban weapons, but, nowhere is there an authority to do so. Basically, they are using the “Posted: No Guns Allowed” clause in the state’s laws.
Nevertheless… guns were BANNED on Virginia Tech campus which makes it a “gun free zone”.
Secondly, we have the legalities of purchasing a weapon. Virgina allows you to purchase only ONE hand gun a month. That essentially means if you want to legally buy, sell or trade you can’t do so easily. Supposedly. Virginia does require that you go through a background check to purchase weapons. Well, actually, I believe all states have this requirement, because it’s a requirement placed by Federal laws on the states. In any case, Cho had to go through a background check to purchase his weapons.
Thirdly, Cho was apparently adjudicated as being suicidal and suffering from depression at one point. Also, quite apparently this information didn’t make it to any sort of records, perhaps due to “doctor-patient privacy issues”? I just don’t know in this case. Even so, if you’re in any other state and accused of “domestic violence”, especially Michigan and Colorado (two examples that I cite because I’m familiar with the laws in those two states) that information is sufficient to prevent you from even owning guns, let alone purchasing them.
Fourthly, Cho committed no crime in purchasing his weapons, or did he? No matter what, the information about his mental “issues” didn’t make it to authorities, thus he LEGALLY purchased those weapons. Oh wait, on the Federal forms he had to fill out about “being adjudicated” he lied. That is a crime. That made Cho a criminal before he ever even loaded his guns, before he ever had them in his hands, before he ever gave money to the pawn shop that handed him the guns.
Next he was able to bring the weapons on campus, against campus policy (no, not LAW, POLICY). That made him both a criminal and subject to expulsion from the University. But, the University was apparently negligent in knowing he had guns. So were his room mates for that matter.
Finally, he walked through this “gun free zone” knowing full well he was going against policy, and began shooting people, one by one. Cho systematically, and from descriptions some of the witnesses have shared with the media, coldly shot people multiple times. Not only did he kill them, he came BACK to some of the rooms and shot people again, perhaps to ensure they were dead. One young man was faking being dead and was shot again two more times after Cho walked back into the room.
It is my contention that gun laws simply do not work, “gun free zones” don’t work, and being disarmed as a citizen does not work.
College students and professors that day were disarmed by an idiotic belief that “If we disallow guns, we will prevent gun crime and murders on campus”.
Gun laws on the books, both State and Federal, did not stop an obviously deranged individual from getting guns. Anti-gun people will tell you that the easiest fix is to destroy all guns, but that is a ridiculous concept from the get-go.
Criminals and even the criminally insane, terrorists and people who just want guns for no other reason than to want one, WILL GET A GUN IF THEY WANT ONE. One of the posters on Reality Check said, “Where I’m not with you is on the carrying guns point. The shootings happened *because* guns were so very easy to obtain. Don’t get me wrong, I can get a gun here in Canada but it’s a lot more difficult and you never know who’s watching.”
Guns are pretty much completely banned in Canada, yet this individual states if he really wanted one he could get one. More difficult, but he STILL CAN GET A GUN. Let me get this straight. You have a person in another country claiming they can get a gun (where I remind you they are BANNED) if they want one. Banned. But, he can get one. If this sounds repetitive, it is. It’s the same words that anti-gun people keep repeating.
If you’re a law abiding citizen, you’re not going to go out of your way to break the law, to get a gun. If you are afraid to go to jail, you’re not going to tempt fate. If, on the other hand you’re a criminal and you want a gun to commit a crime, chances are you’re not going to care one way or the other. That tells me that bad guys will get guns. Good guys won’t get them in a society where they are banned.
The Leftist-Liberal argument that “if we ban guns, then there won’t be crime” is just complete and total ignorance. The most ignorant of all of these are the people who belong to organizations like Handgun Control, Inc.
“Our main agenda is to have all guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn’t matter if you have to distort the facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.” –Sara Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control Inc, to Senator Howard Metzenbaum, The National Educator, January 1994, Page 3.
About guns, James Brady said, “For target shooting, that’s okay. Get a license and go to the range. For defense of the home, that’s why we have police departments.” — James Brady
Sarah Brady, who’s husband James Brady was nearly fatally wounded in an assassination attempt on President Reagan in 1982 has become one of the loudest, and obviously the most obnoxious of all anti-gunners. Her husband suffered from a bullet to the brain putting him in a wheelchair for the rest of his life. Yes, we can see she is emotional about this, as are all anti-gun people. However, the fact remains that she is on record saying that facts should be distorted, and lies told in order to ban guns.
It obviously doesn’t help much when the Left FORCES people to be unarmed in so-called “safe zones” like schools, and the bad guys know full well there is no one around to stop them if they want to commit murder, mayhem and terrorism.
It is only a matter of time before a “real terrorist” walks into a school, or several of them do so across the country on a planned, timed attack, to murder as many of our school children as possible. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened in a mall yet. Oh, wait, it did in Salt Lake City. But, as we all know, THAT wasn’t terrorism. The man who did it wasn’t Muslim, and didn’t yell “Allah akbar”. Oh, wait, I forgot, yes he did. But, THAT wasn’t terrorism.
Cho was, according to all the blogs I’m reading, including Free Republic, HotAir, Little Green Footballs and a few others, NOT A TERRORIST. There are people who are arguing vehemently against him being a terrorist, even to the point of telling ME that *I* am belittling the job our troops are doing overseas. What a crock of nonsense.
Too many people want to narrow the definition of “terrorism” down to “jihad” or “Islamics” and that’s plain wrong. McVeigh was a terrorist. So was Terry Nicholas. SO were the nineteen men that hijacked four aircraft on September 11, 2001. So too, in my opinion, was Cho. Perhaps he was NOT associated directly with Islam, but he was a terrorist plain and simple. Campuses all over this country are AFRAID, right now, about someone else doing this. They are TERRIFIED it will happen again. Thus, he accomplished one thing, he terrorized campuses across the United States by doing his evil deed.
And today, there are Democrats, Liberals, and Leftists calling for “more stringent gun controls”, and calling Virginia “lax” on gun control laws.
I submit that there is a failure in the system. As I’m sure you all know the Second Amendment says, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
I don’t care HOW you read this. But it is obvious to anyone who bothered in High School to actually LEARN the English language that the Constitution is very specific about “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. Honestly, I’m not sure what part of this the Left doesn’t get. They get stuck on the first part, before the first comma and try to make it sound as if guns are for the military only. No. Wrong. Dead wrong. In fact, 32 people are now dead because people want to believe that it means “military” only.
Let me ask the Left, the anti-gunners, the Democrats, the Senators and Congresspeople — WHERE was the militia? Where was the military? Where were the POLICE, Mr. Brady, when Cho kill his first two victims, IN THEIR HOME (dorm room)?
HOW would the police have stopped him? Let me ask everyone else a question.
Where were the many armed civilians, who have valid “carry concealed weapons” permits in Virginia? I know where they weren’t. They weren’t in a “gun free zone” on that campus that day.
ALL the law-abiding citizens that died that day, did NOT have to die. Just ONE professor, armed with one hand gun carried concealed under his jacket would have stopped Cho’s rampage. Just one. The hypothetical professor might not have stopped the first two murders, but he most likely would have stopped the rest of them — or at least most of them.
ARMING citizens is highly preferred over disarming those same citizens.
I’ll leave you with three last quotes to mull over.
“This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future!”
Adolph Hitler said that in 1933. You know the rest of THAT story. The real “Nazis” in this country are those that want to take your guns, folks.
“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
Patrick Henry, Virginian, American Patriot and American Hero made the above comments. He was against the Constitution and was one of the main people who forced the adoption of the Bill of Rights, which includes the Second Amendment.
In a deeply divided Legislature in Virginia on March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry urged the State to take military action against the British who were encroaching on Virgina that very moment. It is with that sentiment that I leave you with his words that pushed the Virginians into joining the Revolutionary War, finally tossing the British out of the United States once and for all. Anti-gun people… don’t try to use Cho as your reason for eliminating guns. We know better. Those people died in Virginia Tech because of Anti-gun people.
“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” –Patrick Henry
