Quote:
Within hours of the Virginia Tech massacre, the New York Times had identified the problem: ''What is needed, urgently, is stronger controls over the lethal weapons that cause such wasteful carnage and such unbearable loss.''
According to the Canadian blogger Kate MacMillan, a caller to her local radio station went further and said she was teaching her children to ''fear guns.''Overseas, meanwhile, the German network NTV was first to identify the perpetrator: To accompany their report on the shootings, they flashed up a picture of Charlton Heston touting his rifle at an NRA confab.
And at Yale, the dean of student affairs, Betty Trachtenberg, reacted to the Virginia Tech murders by taking decisive action: She banned all stage weapons from plays performed on campus. After protests from the drama department, she modified her decisive action to "permit the use of obviously fake weapons" such as plastic swords.
But it's not just the danger of overly realistic plastic swords in college plays that we face today. In yet another of his not-ready-for-prime-time speeches, Barack Obama started out deploring the violence of Virginia Tech as yet another example of the pervasive violence of our society: the violence of Iraq, the violence of Darfur, the violence of . . . er, hang on, give him a minute. Ah, yes, outsourcing: ''the violence of men and women who . . . suddenly have the rug pulled out from under them because their job has moved to another country." And let's not forget the violence of radio hosts: ''There's also another kind of violence, though, that we're going to have to think about. It's not necessarily physical violence, but violence that we perpetrate on each other in other ways. Last week the big news, obviously, had to do with Imus and the verbal violence that was directed at young women who were role models for all of us, role models for my daughters.''
I've had some mail in recent days from people who claimed I'd insulted the dead of Virginia Tech. Obviously, I regret I didn't show the exquisite taste and sensitivity of Sen. Obama and compare getting shot in the head to an Imus one-liner. Does he mean it? I doubt whether even he knows. When something savage and unexpected happens, it's easiest to retreat to our tropes and bugbears or, in the senator's case, a speech on the previous week's "big news." Perhaps I'm guilty of the same. But then Yale University, one of the most prestigious institutes of learning on the planet, announces that it's no longer safe to expose twentysomething men and women to ''Henry V'' unless you cry God for Harry, England and St. George while brandishing a bright pink and purple plastic sword from the local kindergarten. Except, of course, that the local kindergarten long since banned plastic swords under its own "zero tolerance" policy.
I think we have a problem in our culture not with "realistic weapons" but with being realistic about reality. After all, we already "fear guns," at least in the hands of NRA members. Otherwise, why would we ban them from so many areas of life? Virginia Tech, remember, was a "gun-free zone," formally and proudly designated as such by the college administration. Yet the killer kept his guns and ammo on the campus. It was a "gun-free zone" except for those belonging to the guy who wanted to kill everybody. Had the Second Amendment not been in effect repealed by VT, someone might have been able to do as two students did five years ago at the Appalachian Law School: When a would-be mass murderer showed up, they rushed for their vehicles, grabbed their guns and pinned him down until the cops arrived.
But you can't do that at Virginia Tech. Instead, the administration has created a "Gun-Free School Zone." Or, to be more accurate, they've created a sign that says "Gun-Free School Zone." And, like a loopy medieval sultan, they thought that simply declaring it to be so would make it so. The "gun-free zone" turned out to be a fraud -- not just because there were at least two guns on the campus last Monday, but in the more important sense that the college was promoting to its students a profoundly deluded view of the world.
I live in northern New England, which has a very low crime rate, in part because it has a high rate of gun ownership. We do have the occasional murder, however. A few years back, a couple of alienated loser teens from a small Vermont town decided they were going to kill somebody, steal his ATM cards, and go to Australia. So they went to a remote house in the woods a couple of towns away, knocked on the door, and said their car had broken down. The guy thought their story smelled funny so he picked up his Glock and told 'em to get lost. So they concocted a better story, and pretended to be students doing an environmental survey. Unfortunately, the next old coot in the woods was sick of environmentalists and chased 'em away. Eventually they figured they could spend months knocking on doors in rural Vermont and New Hampshire and seeing nothing for their pains but cranky guys in plaid leveling both barrels through the screen door. So even these idiots worked it out: Where's the nearest place around here where you're most likely to encounter gullible defenseless types who have foresworn all means of resistance? Answer: Dartmouth College. So they drove over the Connecticut River, rang the doorbell, and brutally murdered a couple of well-meaning liberal professors. Two depraved misfits of crushing stupidity (to judge from their diaries) had nevertheless identified precisely the easiest murder victims in the twin-state area. To promote vulnerability as a moral virtue is not merely foolish. Like the new Yale props department policy, it signals to everyone that you're not in the real world.
The "gun-free zone" fraud isn't just about banning firearms or even a symptom of academia's distaste for an entire sensibility of which the Second Amendment is part and parcel but part of a deeper reluctance of critical segments of our culture to engage with reality. Michelle Malkin wrote a column a few days ago connecting the prohibition against physical self-defense with "the erosion of intellectual self-defense," and the retreat of college campuses into a smothering security blanket of speech codes and "safe spaces" that's the very opposite of the principles of honest enquiry and vigorous debate on which university life was founded. And so we "fear guns," and "verbal violence," and excessively realistic swashbuckling in the varsity production of ''The Three Musketeers.'' What kind of functioning society can emerge from such a cocoon?
Have at it.
someone might have been able to do as two students did five years ago at the Appalachian Law School: When a would-be mass murderer showed up, they rushed for their vehicles, grabbed their guns and pinned him down until the cops arrived.
I don't actually have a point here, I just like how that rings.
As for gun control, say what you want about the context of the law, but it does clearly prohibit Congress from infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."
Despite the gun-nut community's delighted guffawing, the point of the "gun-free zone" was not to prevent premeditated murder, but to avoid the problems that inevitably arise when you put thousands of adolescent men in a high-stress, co-ed environment and then arm them. It frankly blows my mind that there are people out there who think that would be a good idea.
It would have been better for Virginia to not be one of the few states that does not use a federal agency to do their background checks. That way two handguns would not have been sold over the counter to a man who was known to be 100% certified batshit insane, a danger to himself and others.
I have no beef with safe, sane, law-abiding citizens owning guns. But this incident should be enough proof for anyone that invasive medical, mental, and criminal screening needs to be performed on prospective gun buyers, every single time.
Was he diagnosed with anything?
And I'd like to point out htat Ultra is the one bashing the gun-free zone, not me.
ban cars, alcohol and cigarettes they kill more people than guns. game set match
I own an aks, 12 gauge pump action shotgun, ruger 10/22, and Im soon to own numerous ak47s, an ar15, and a couple handguns. I have yet to point any of my personal firearms at another person.
Gun control wont do @#%$. you ban guns people will refer to machettes, baseball bats, brass nuckles, whatever they get their hands on.
pardon my language.
europe and australia both banned guns only to see a rise in violent crimes. it wont work. remember when we tried to ban booze. yeah thats a good idea. organized crime went through the roof.
Preparing for the Iranian invasion, Spyder?
Sorry, I missed your post up there SX. I don't have time to pull up links, but basically the shooter was sent to an institution at some point on fears he would commit suicide, and was found by the doctors there to be unstable and a danger to himself and others. For some legal reason they weren't allowed to detain him on those grounds so they had to let him go. This little tidbit should have been more than enough to deny his access to guns, but because Virginia law has very poor wording when it comes to crazy people buying guns, and does not use Federal databases for their background checks, that info didn't come up when they were checking him out so they sold him the guns.
So get Virginia to use federal databases. o_o I didn't know he was OFFICIALLY insane.
iranian invasion. Nope I just like firearms like some people like collecting coca cola products.
...that and im military.
Okay, being one of the few Australians on this board, and seeing Spyder mention us and our gun control laws, well, that's just sparked me to make a post.
Our gun laws were put in place to prevent things like this from happening. And we haven't had that much of a violent crime increase. At least nobody's gotten shot, have they?
But, really, when it comes to America and gun laws, we offered the same laws, but the government turned the offer down. I think really when it all comes down to it, it's just a matter of money.
And thus more people are shot, rather than stabbed, hit, maimed, etc.
I read in Time that college campus violent crimes are decreasing.
Yeah, it surprised the hell out of me, too.
And no, I don't have a source, it's a magazine. If you want a source, google is your friend.
Violent crime can mean just punching a guy in the face, too.
CNN told me college campus violent crimes are out of control.
Time told me they're down 60%.
...:(
How old was the article? I've been noticed more than the usually assortment of rapes, murders, and kidnappings being reported on the web lately.
Almost think we need a Kira, eh?
~Tobe
The issue was the one with the VA Tech shooting story, so I figure it isn't that old.
US or worldwide?
US
Gun free zones don't work. Simply because criminals don't obey laws.
Israel allows teachers to be armed, the state of Utah allows college students with concealed carry permits to be armed on campus. Not a whole lot of college campus massacres in Utah.
Guns are simply a tool. A hammer in good hands builds a house, a hammer in bad hands crushes a skull. Guns are the same, you could walk down the street randomly shooting passersby, or walk down the street and shoot someone randomly shooting passersby.
Oh yeah, and I'm armed to the teeth, 3 AK's, 1911, blah blah blah yada yada.
Jimro
I'm going to direct your attention to my post near the top of the thread:
the point of the "gun-free zone" was not to prevent premeditated murder, but to avoid the problems that inevitably arise when you put thousands of adolescent men in a high-stress, co-ed environment and then arm them.
Not everyone is as responsible as you.
You seem to have constructed in your mind a model of society that is divided into two distinct groups: criminals, those evil men and women who commit crimes; and the innocent law-abiding herd of sheep who never commit crimes and need constant protection from said criminals. In fact, the average violent crime is committed in the heat of the moment by an otherwise decent, law-abiding citizen who is under intense stress of one form or another, and probably drunk. So surely you can see why arming everyone on a college campus is a terrible idea.
Cycle,
EDITED for content.
Here is the complete list of exceptions.
If the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtain such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license; which is--
not loaded; and in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack which is in a motor vehicle; by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone; by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual; by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.
It shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm at a place that the person knows is a school zone. However it shall not apply to the discharge of a firearm if on private property not part of school grounds; as part of a program approved by a school in the school zone, by an individual who is participating in the program; by an individual in accordance with a contractentered into between a school in a school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual; or by a law enforcement officer acting in his/her official capacity.
I can't find a judicial ruling if the wordage allows CCP's or if CCP's have to unload and lock their firearm, but the wordage is quite clear that unless you are a LEO or Security Officer, you can't legally discharge a firearm in a school zone, there is no exception for "self defense or the defense of others".
Checking Ohio's gun laws shows that the state of Ohio considers "school zones" to be in the same category as "Courthouses". The laws of the State of Washington are the same in that regard.
Multiple layers of law disarming people.
You can check which states allow CCW holders the right to carry a concealed firearm in school zones here www.stategunlaws.org/viewstate.php?st=CA
Kinda funny that California allows CCW holders access to schools. I think that's pretty cool, maybe the rest of the nation will follow suit?
Jimro
