1 That school was a GUN free zone, it was against the law to have a gun there.
It is illegal, so this couldn't have happened.

ie it must not have happened.

Now we need a NEW law to make the entire state gun free, then we would all be safe.

after all a "LAW" stops the criminals, they can't do it because its illegal.

We need some anti-bombing laws to stop the terrorists too.

And a law stopping terrorist from flying planes into buildings.

THEN WE WILL BE SAFE.

G

2 We need anti-knife laws too. You can just eat your steak with a spoon, plebe!

3 Forget the guns, find out about this guy's family.  They have to share in this responsibility if he spent any recent time with them.  Guns didn't do this damage, a man's brain did this:  He made the decision to kill.

4

Gerald: Good post.

 

 

Just think. If everyone was healed the bastard would have only gotten one or two victims before someone got him. Ah, for the good ole days in the west. Good guys had guns toj.

5 Not enough people with concealed weapons on that campus.  Had there
been at least one person in a hundred packing heat the
shooter wouldn't have killed so many people.  Let a shooter try that in
Texas and let's see how far he gets.

6 Come on guys, incidents like this are exactly what the communist/liberal loonies want. See how dangerous hand guns are, see how many died needlessly. If only there were stricter gun laws this wouldn’t have happened. And they are somewhat correct; VT was a gun free zone. If the laws were any stricter the body count would probably have been in the hundreds not the 30’s.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=16834

7 Israel solved Palestinian gun violence by arming teachers and expanding carry laws. That's the solution. If any one of the students in those classrooms had been armed, the assault would have ended sooner.

I also have to say that these students don't seem to have learned from other school shootings. The first thing to do when someone points a gun at you is to rush the bastard. It takes less than two seconds to cover 21 feet and if everyone does it, the gunman can be overwhelmed. I know, easy to say, hard to do. But sometimes doing the hard thing is the right thing.

Just IMHO.

8 Frank,
the instinct is to make sure you survive.  A student's instinct is not going to be to rush the shooter, but to do whatever it takes in the hopes that the shooter targets everyone else. If you are the guy who has the guts to rush, odds are you will be the only one, and it will be a failed effort.

Rushing the shooter requires a high level of discipline, training, and a willingness to sacrifice yourself for others.  None of those traits are common in college students (the ROTC guys might have been a different story)

9 I believe in allowing Americans to own and carry guns. What I do not believe in is banana clips and automatic weapons. No one knows yet what the gun(s) were. It hasn't been revealed.
I agree with a ban on semi automatic and automatic weapons. Also, high load clips.
That said, it seems rather far fetched that this shooter didn't have some kind of gun training.
We should all keep a close eye on this. How do you turn a boy into a psychopathic killer?

10

Guys, this may sound looney, but I've basically been dealing with the rush to grab guns by endorsing the following.

Publically, be an educator about the history, and purpose of the Second Amendment. Vote against anyone who is a threat to your rights. Use the system, and find legal ways to fight back against any governmental erosion of your freedom. Lawsuits sound good to me, though I've yet to sure anyone.

PrivatelyLearn to bury/hide at least one weapon for emergencies. Try to teach yourself how to weaponize common items they can't easily regulate, or take away. In short, where matters of the Second Amendment are concerned, consider the government as an occupying totalitarian enemy bent on crushing all resistance, and YOU are the resistance movement. Your mission is to preserve the means to strike back if the government goes that final step.

Theoretically, the government is our employee, and we are the employer. If government goes to hold us hostage in our own house, we need to evict it, and replace it. You don't let your employee make the rules, because that's your job. You don't give your employee the means to reverse the chain of command, and put you on the bottom. Jefferson would endorse this view, I'm quite certain.

So ...

USA, all the way!

11 babs any idea where people can get hold of a Musket, or a flint shot pistol so everyone can comply with your ideas of what guns people should own?

12 Wooga: Frank makes sense. Perhaps required   classes in protection instead of race relations would be a better use of time. This thing is going to get worse before it gets better. I still have one son in college who could defend himself if he had time to get to his car.

13

Babs, I really can't agree with you. When our Founding Fathers created our US Constitution, the people could own any weapon in military use at that time and often even better weapons than that.

The best rifles, the fastest repeaters, feild artillary, naval artillary, and private citizens raised and equiped entire military commands to serve thier country in time of war.  The American fontiersman was typically better armed than the average infantryman in any army. to own state of the art weapons, was common.  When the people lose that freedom, then they begin the path to slvaery.

You want to take the leathality out of banana clips, and fully automatic weapons? get rid of all gun laws for those not convicted of az felony. Presume a right to concealed carry of firearms, so ANYONE might be armed. Teach social responsability, and civic virtue in school, and at home, and raise your children to do the right thing according to the situation.

An armed society is a polite society, as even my most liberal college instructor had to agree.  Give it some thought.

Meanwhile, I do recommend training for firearms safety for all ages, incentivised through a tax credit you can claim the year you complete course. or the year you put your kid through the course.

Always armed even when I'm not

USA, all the way!

14 This is interesting... you guys post a story about the "gun grabbers" wasting no time, but not before linking to something by Malkin about how this may be the fault of universities making rules to prohibit people from carrying concealed weapons.

Looks like you gun nuts waste no time in trying to politicize this either.

15 RJ: Are you nuts? The guys family is responsible? Only if they are responsible. Are we holding the parents of the Colubine killers responsible? You are beginning to sound like someone who deep fries chitterling stuffed seagulls and doesn't blog here anymore.

16 John,  we who seek to preserve the Bill Of Rights can't afford to waste time. The anti-gunners have a fast 'draw', and we need to be faster. Also too bad about all that wasted time those students spent waiting for 'big brother' to come save them. If they had been able to defend themselves a lot fewer of thier LIVES would have been wasted. If someone besides the badguy had been armed there would have ben less wasted time. Consider that centuries of time were wasted in this incedent in terms of the loss of human life. All because the anti-gun twits don't want honest people to defend themselves. Plus, it's a waste of time trying to reason with you. Thought I'd add that ...                                
                                       USA, all the way!

17 I'm saying  give every drunken co-ed a gun . What I'm saying is that bulding security and maybe even a limited number of vetted students involved in safety and disaster functions (I believe i people working together for their own safety) have acess to tools needed to keep people safe.  In a situation like this I consider a gun just such a tool. Campus security, police and those in a position of responsibility in the student body  and faculty should have quick access to such a vital tool in an emergency as part of normal disaster preparedness.  To ban such tools because they are "evil dirty black guns" is silly.

18 John being a foreigner should mind his own country's business and get the fuck out of ours.

19 god help us if they take our guns away - we will be at the mercy of the govenment - the founding fathers saw this bakc in britan. when the millitary are the only on with guns then they have all the power and the man in charge can do anything he wants
 
We should never abandon the constitution!! Which admendment is Next? the first? the fifth???
 
I say over my dead body!!!

20 greyrooster,
I know Frank makes sense. However, I think he's putting an unrealistically high expectation on college students.  American college students are basically urban Canadians: generally pleasant, but they are self-centered pot smokers who have not yet learned about individual responsibility and sacrifice.  You can't expect college students to stop a murderer - that's what campus police are for (but yes, we all know campus police are lower than mall security).

21 You know, I really found the responses to my post to be interesting...
So, let's go with automatic weapons and fast loading clips...
Never mind that I approve of concealed carry weapons, let's make every college student a Rambo, yeah, that will solve it
I guess you can't ping off one guy at a time in a domestic situation as a civilian, you need an automatic weapon ....
Wow!
 

22 Blowmoulder1,
 
If we left them take away our guns then God is going to be the very last one to help us.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=16834

23 Babs,
I need a semi-automatic weapon because, in a armed confrontation, my aim probably won't be very good. I might need to fire off several shots in rapid succession.  It's also smaller and easier to keep by my bed.
I also want a fast loading clip for the same reason. I don't keep my gun loaded, so if the need arose, I want to be abel to get the thing loaded quickly.

Besides, is a "revolver" automatic in your definition?

What do you mean "high load clip"? Smaller caliber = more bullets in the same size clip.  I can probably fit 100 BBs in a clip, and it won't (pretending BBs worked in that fashion) do as much damage as one .40

"banana clip"? Don't you mean "big scary looking clip"?

24 Wooga: College students are the same age as our military. Uh, oh. Campus police cannot be the answer. 

25 I agree with a ban on semi automatic and automatic weapons.

Babs you probably got that response because you evidently don't know what a 'semi-automatic' weapon is, if you banned them we'd be left with single shot weapons that needed constant reloading ala a musket.
By the way you sound like a kneejerk liberal, you need a class III license to even own an automatic weapon, something that isn't given out like a dogs license, you're also assuming if you ban something that criminals will comply. move to Britain, that mentality is rampant there.

26 Michael Weaver ,  we who seek to preserve the Bill Of Rights can't afford to waste time. 
 
 
 
To that I add a hearty AMEN.................
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=16834

27

Not just for Babs,

  Banning something you have no personal use for (like a weapon that won't fit in your concealed carry holster) doesn't make much sense to those who see the Second Amendement in its proper context. By no means do I suggest that naval artllary has much use to you. I do suggest that it isn't the right of the government to infringe on the right of the people to keep, such arms, or to bear them. It is a kind of authority that is prohibited to government SPECIFICALLY. 

Any time a 'gun control' law is enforced then it has "infringed" upon the right of the people, in part, or in whole, to keep and bear arms. This is clearly NOT LEGAL, under the US Constitution. Anyone who seeks legislation that restricts the right of the people to keep and bear arms is motivated by something other than the rule of law, and the rights of the people.

A politician is suppossed to understand these laws. Frankly, that suggests that a politician pushing for gun control laws is knowingly working against the rights of the people, and doing so against core Constitutional LAW which nearly any 8th grader should be able to read for themself. This further suggests that the politician is the sort that we are armed to guard ourselves against! A corrupt, and powerhungry opportunist, who sees a chance to create something for himself, and his allies! Someone who could abuse the standing military to impose a new order that pleases himself.

In which case we must consider what use the people might have for any handy feild artillary, automatic rifles, or concealed semi-automatic pistols! If our politicians do not fear us, they may elect themselves as 'gods', as they once could do in Rome! We the people are the custodians of justice, and the government is our servant. Only if we can fight back when our servants are disobedient.

There is an old story (where from I can't recall, and I'm going to get details wrong, but it is a real story) A 'prince' was travelling with his servant, on a trip to recieve a reward that he had earned. The servant was both corrupt, and stronger, and he forced the prince to switch clothes with him, and to act as if the former servant was now the prince. If the real prince refused, his servant would denouce him, and kill him. Because the traitor was dressed as the prince, this was a real threat.

So the way became clear for the deceitful servant to seek a reward which he had neither earned, nor which he deserved.

Now days we have a growing segment of our population that buy into the illusion that everything should be the governments responsablity. "The government should do something" about this or that. "They oughta make a law" against this or that. What has the government "done for me" lately?  That is all kinds of wrong headed thinking.

We should keep the power, and the authority, and we should make our servants in government remember who is the real boss. They shouldn't be stealing our clothes, and threatening us, when we are the ones who are suppossed to have final say.

The issues involved when our Second Amendment rights are "infringed" goes far beyond the tragedy of the day, and extends into the future of freedom in America. If more of those students, or faculty had been able to fight back effectively, the tragedy would have been less. The tragedy of the future will be if a tyrannical authority takes hold, throws out the Bill of Rights, and we can do nothing but submit, or die because we let ourselves be passively disarmed.

I must always and forever put myself in opposition to any law that makes the American people weak against a possible dictator, or other threat subversive to our Constitutional values. Gun, and magazine bans are only an example. Laws punishing speech are out there as well. We should all be standing watch ....

USA, all the way!

28 Doriangrey!   Thanks!                    USA, all the way! 

29 Michael Weaver,
 
Blogs such as this may well be the last chance for those of us who still believe in the constitution to fight the Marxist/liberal left without having to resort to armed conflict to preserve the constitution.  If we cannot marshal enough of our fellow patriotic Americans here to take such political action as is required to protect and preserve our constitution against all enemies foreign and DOMESTIC then we surely will be forced to take up arms against our fellow citizens who have fallen sway to the brainwashing and propaganda of the Marxist/liberal left.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

http://www.mp3.com.au/artist.asp?id=16834 

30 xrgc wjzbfunva okydpziq xhradi uzpg yvjpnsizm jtmrqoci