Virginia Tech – or, Why the 2nd Amendment Still Matters
Yesterday’s shootings at Virginia Tech were a horrible tragedy. One thought remained in my mind the entire time I learned more about it.
What if students, faculty, or administrators at Virginia Tech had been allowed to carry firearms using a concealed weapon permit?
Predictably, the gun control lobby was out in full force yesterday, calling for stricter gun control laws. But this is a great case in point of how gun control makes people vulnerable.
Just a few months ago, the Virginia General Assembly considered a bill that would have allowed students, faculty, and administrators who have a concealed weapon permit to carry weapons on state university campuses. It died in subcommittee. The state of Virginia ensured that no one on that campus would have the ability to defend themselves with lethal force when confronted with yesterday’s assault.
Cho Seung Hui, the 23-year-old senior who killed 32 people yesterday, didn’t bother to follow the law. But the fact is, all of his victims did. If one of his victims, or any of the other people within hearing range of the gunshots, had been in possession of a gun the massacre could have ended much sooner. It only takes one criminal with a gun to cause a massacre. It only takes one hero with a gun to end it.
When the bill that would have allowed concealed weapons on campus was defeated, the Roanoke Times reported that Larry Hincker, spokesman for Virginia Tech, announced that “I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.” No word yet from Larry Hincker that he wants to retract that statement.
Read more:
Boortz’ Comments Today: He rightly takes to task the gun control lobby, the “blame and fire” crowd, and the Virginia legislature. He also points out that “Do you know, for instance, that at least three shootings in high schools were stopped by civilians with guns? Civilians, not law enforcement.”
Gun Bans Are The Problem, Not The Solution: “When will we learn that being defenseless is a bad defense? All the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last ten years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen — a potential victim — had a gun.”
A Disarmed Campus: “Perhaps some school administrators still think that declaring a ‘gun-free zone’ makes a campus safer; that was what legislators thought when they started passing gun bans at high schools in response to the late-’80s youth-crime spike. But it’s likely that at the college level, fear of litigation plays a large role in shaping such policies.”
but if there was a gun ban to begin with there would never been a gun to initiate the conflict.
gun ban = no guns.
therefore no initial shooting that would necessitate everyone else needing guns to protect themselves.
Two problems with that:
1) There’s this little thing called the right to bear arms. Part of the bill of rights. It was put there for good reasons. Would you care to explain why it should not have been added?
The most important reason why it was added to the bill of rights is because the people are sovereign, not the government. Without the right to keep and bear arms, there is no protection against government tyranny.
2) If you ban all guns, do you seriously think that criminals would not still be able to obtain them?