And SO...It Begins...


Fast following in the wake of the Virginia Tech killings, the ANTI-gun folks are chomping at the bit, citing weak gun legislation which is being linked to the shooting spree.
Former Fort Wayne mayor, Paul Helmke, who now leads the nation's largest gun-control advocacy group stated that: "It's hard to stop somebody who is committed (or SHOULD be commited, or at least under observation, right Paul?) to a shooting rampage (gee, 'ya think?), but the weak gun restrictions in this country make it TOO easy for too many to get far-too-lethal firepower too quickly". (Gee, I don't know...I didn't have ANY problem...oh wait, I don't have any police record or mental history)

OK, Paul, lemme "splain" it to 'ya. You, or anyone else is NEVER, I repeat NEVER going to keep guns out of the hands of anyone who seriously will do anything to GET a gun...it's that simple. Whether it's at pawn shops, gun shows, the black market vis-a-vis the streets, or even a licensed dealer. People will find ways AROUND whatever law you put in place, short of a TOTAL BAN on every single item that can be used AS a weapon or turned into a weapon. And believe me, I could make damn near anything "lethal", if I wanted to. I just choose not to.

Cho Seung-Hui, the 23 year old who created his own killing field among the foothills of the Blue Ridge mountains met all the criteria when he purchased a Glock (and ammo) for $571 last month at a local gun store (not a bad price FOR a Glock 34, btw). And even if he had to WAIT a week, or even a month, this man would EVENTUALLY have gotten the piece, and went on with HIS plan. Neither you nor I have a crystal ball that we can gaze into and envision what this person was GOING to do.
One thing that "might" have prevented this act, would have been to call to attention the writings (violent and disturbing as his teachers have stated) he did for class assignments. MAYBE that would have prevented this. But any gun store owner is NOT going to ask for former writing projects as a precursor to either the purchase or denial of a firearm. Get serious, Paul.

And even if we do call into account every iota of what students write (no doubt born of some thought), or even say...can we begin a trip down a slippery slope of "thought policing" our youth? Can we, on the one hand attempt to head off a potential threat simply because a student wrote about something violent, which in many cases is a "release valve", allowing a person to deal with their thoughts instead of making those thoughts an action, or do we merely just toss into counseling every student that even hints at a violent action, thought, or word? Well, that would be GREAT for the American Association of Psychologists and Psychiatrists, but what would it do to health care costs, not to mention to the higher educational system.
It's like I said yesterday, do we start looking over our shoulder all the time, and perceiving things that might not really be there? Do we sacrifice living for cautionary protection? Do we become a nation of "scared rabbits", driven into a scenario of an inability to live our lives because we're too worried about everyone and everything? I say no.

And with the vastness of campuses today (hundreds if not thousads of acres), how can you prevent people from coming onto those sites without making these institutions of learning anything less than a fortress, complete with crenilated bastions and watch towers, let alone keep those that attend these colleges from carrying firearms onto campus for the sole purpose of inflicting harm to others? The logistics are simply not practical as things stand today. We can (and should) do everything in our power to keep guns away from elementary, secondary and even high schools, as their areas CAN be patrolled and monitored a lot easier than colleges.

I will grant Mr. Helmke one thing, and one thing only...with the technology in place today, a nationwide database can (and should) be in place that has within it the people who should NOT be able to legally purchase a firearm. That's it. As to those who will ILLEGALLY get a firearm, that's another story. They will ALWAYS find some way as I said above. As to the whole "lethality" issue, well...that's a non sequitor to me. ANY firearm is LETHAL. It can be as small as a .22 pistol, or even a black powder revolver. In the right hands, with the right training, even a pellet or BB pistol or rifle can be brought to bear with the expected results, although the lethality of those is significantly less likely. Hell, Alexander Hamilton was killed by a DUELING pistol (single shot), so the whole smaller clip thing is nonsensical at best. Ever hear of the phrase: "One shot-One kill"? Whether I have 10 rounds or 15 rounds in my clip, or 6 rounds in the chamber of a revolver doesn't matter, UNLESS I hit whatever I'm AIMING at. Ask any hunter about that.

As Helmke continues (regarding more anti-gun legislation): "This might have not have STOPPED this guy (so even YOU admit it won't work?), but what we end up with is making it easy...why don't we prevent these people from getting guns in the first place? Why don't we make it harder for them to get it?" (We have made it harder...they just found other "cracks" to slip through, and that explains the gun violence on our streets...these perps ain't getting them LEGALLY, Paul)

One interesting thing about this...*IF* students WERE allowed to bring their guns onto campus (and many of the VT students DO have firearms as well as concealed-carry permits), the death toll might have been considerably LOWER. Imagine Mr. Hui being confronted with a group that was WELL ARMED, instead of a group that was just trying to get out of his line of fire...
That makes the case for the whole "Better to HAVE it and not NEED it, than to NEED it and not HAVE it" axiom.

We will never know how THAT scenario might have played out, but I would wager that most (if not all) of the 32 that were killed might be alive to relate the tale...should it have been told in that manner.