THE BODIES AREN'T EVEN COLD YET
... and the ghouls at Students for Concealed Carry on Campus are already making political hay of today's shootings at Virginia Tech:
Breaking: Shooting at Virginia Tech Proves Need for Self-Defense
Earlier today (12/8/2011 @ noon ET), a routine traffic stop at Virginia Tech turned deadly. A police officer conducting the stop as well as a second individual were shot and killed, apparently the same assailant. At the time of this post (3pm ET), the status of the assailant is unknown and Virginia Tech remains on lockdown.
Students for Concealed Carry offers our condolences the victims, and deepest hopes that the suspect(s) responsible be brought to justice.
SCC also sadly recognizes this incident proves yet again that nothing has changed at Virginia Tech. The college still entertain delusional beliefs that signs and stickers will prevent illegal weapons on campus, even as they protest paying fines for their failing to notify students of the initial murders preceding the worst shooting spree in history three years ago.
This latest event shows evil people still exist in the world and all the laws in the world will not stop them from committing violent crime. Guns are not the solution to every problem, but they are a solution to some problems -- a solution completely ruled out by college campuses in Virginia and nationwide.
With licensed campus carry now a successful policy at over two hundred campuses in six states without incident, it is time for Virginia Tech and colleges nationwide to end the ban on campus self-defense.
Expecting a sign saying an area is a "gun free zone" is a dangerous and deadly fiction.
(Gleefully linked by Michelle Malkin as she sheds crocodile tears for today's victims.)
I actually think there's an element of truth to what these people are saying, however: just as gun laws in D.C. or New York City can't be truly effective so long as neighboring states (cough VIRGINIA cough) are few-questions-asked flea markets for guns, campuses can't be safe as "gun-free zones" if they exist in what are effectively "all-the-guns-you-want-even-if-you're-crazy" zones.
Since these guys have politicized this tragedy, I'll keep going and politicize it further: I don't think we could ever possibly achieve sanity on guns in this country without first reframing the issue. The real problem is the toxic effect of the entire gun-loving subculture. As long as vast percentages of us believe gun ownership is good for practically everything that ails us as a nation -- in other words, as long as we believe that guns are super-special magic wands of freedom and fun rather than tools used for hunting and for certain necessary self-defense situations -- then we're going to be so awash in guns, and so determined to protect gun access, that lots of people we don't yet realize are dangerous are inevitably going to find it ridiculously easy to become armed. That's why I don't care how responsibly legal gun owners use legal guns -- the cornucopia of guns in this country is, the menace, because, inevitably, it's easy pickings for evil and insane people. And they insist we maintain that cornucopia just the way it is, or make it more abundant.
****
Now I'm counting down to the first GOP presidential candidate who responds to what happened today by calling for greater freedom to own and carry guns, especially on campus. That candidate, if there is one, will get an instant bump in the GOP polls. My money's on Perry.
(X-posted.)
7 comments:
Update: Apparently second dead person was the shooter. The only victim was the (presumably armed) police officer.
Gee, I wonder what that does to the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, Malkin, and everyone else who jumped on this bandwagon to give the NRA their full support.
I Googled this -- it does look as if the campus cops at the time of the first VT shooting were unarmed.
http://www.masscops.com/f31/universities-rethink-unarmed-police-38128/
I don't know about now. The right-wingers are certain they aren't armed. And they think that explains everything -- the guy would never have done this, they say, if he'd thought he might be facing armed cops (or students or faculty members).
So someone who's screwy enough to shoot a cop (or massacre a couple dozen students) is presumed to be 100% rational on that score. Even shooters who die at the end are supposedly too interested in self-preservation to shoot someone who's armed.
I think this is more fun than any college sports.
With everyone armed, we can look forward to the gunfight at the OK at the VT corral.
Or, the gunfight at USC at the UCLA corral.
And, let's not forget - WOLVERINES!!!
Surprise! The wingnuts are wrong.
http://www.police.vt.edu/VTPD_v2.1/crime_stats/clery_report/2008_clery_switzerland.html#a_3
The officers are state-certified and empowered to enforce all federal, state, and local laws on university property. They have full authority to make arrests and carry firearms.
So, let me see if I understand this clearly:
For safety, everyone on a campus should carry a concealed weapon.
But if you've got a rubber in your wallet, you're out there with bad intent.
Ok, got it. Thanks!
Steve, I predict you'll win your bet - Perry's also my pick to make this a "guns-for-all-24/7" touchstone. My Gov-for-Life seems to be in classic flailing-campaign-resuscitation mode now, so this would fit right in.
What Monty said (both times).
Seriously? The answer to someone shooting an armed police officer is for civilians to carry firearms?
"Cognitive dissonance" is woefully inadequate to describe this kind of insanity -- and I use that last word literally.
Who knew there were so many out there with such woefully tiny penises that they need to compensate this much?
Post a Comment