The Tennessee state legislature is looking at a proposal that would allow college students and faculty members to legally carry weapons on campus. Not that most folks in Tennessee have a problem with packin', but University folk are a decidedly different breed.
Of course, we're nearing the two-year anniversary of the mass shootings at Virginia Tech, a subject near and dear to my heart.
State Rep. Stacey Campfield's bill would allow any full-time faculty and staff with a valid permit to bring a handgun onto their public college campus. The Knoxville Republican says banning guns on campuses isn't banning criminals, only preventing "people from being able to defend themselves."
No one wants to talk about it, but I will. What if someone other than Cho in the second floor of Norris Hall had a gun on April 16, 2007? Opponents argue "he still would have killed a lot of people." Well, is a body count of 20 better than 33?
It's no coincidence that in a similar incident earlier this decade at the Appalachian School of Law in southwest Virginia, two students who had shotguns in their trucks went to retrieve their weapons after a gunman began shooting people. They used the guns to hold the shooter at bay until police arrived. He killed two people. How many would have died had not these "good ol' boys" brought their guns with them---in a blatant violation of the school's "zero-tolerance gun policy," I might add.
Think about it, folks. If we are to believe the liberal's view of guns, it is simply their availability that is a precursor to violence. If so, why are we not hearing stories every day about mass shootings at gun shows, where weapons are readily available? Wanna know why? Because even the most deranged gunman knows that if he gets trigger happy at a gun show, there are more than a few law-abiding citizens that will fill him full of holes.
If you're looking to kill as many people as possible, where would you rather be---at a gun show, or at a place that prohibits guns? Think, folks, think! To put it another way, if you're looking for the best steak in town do you go to a restaurant that has "GO VEGAN" in neon lights, or one that has steer horns mounted above it's entrance?
I realize that's a crass way to look at this. So, sue me.
As we get closer to the two-year anniversary of the Tech shootings, alums like me will deal with a lot of thoughts and feelings. If the tragedy underscores the right we have as private citizens to take reasonable measures to protect ourselves, then maybe all was not in vain. That's a helluva price to pay, though.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You know that I disagree with you out of love. But, as someone who remains close to the situation, I have to, if only because 1) the scene was absolutely chaotic and 2) no one knew (even up until a few hours later) how many shooters there were and what he/they looked like. I firmly believe that if those students had guns, more people would have gotten shot.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Because I think that in the moment, with friends and classmates and teachers dying in front of them, in the uncertainty and shock, the students likely would be assuming that anyone not from their classroom who was also armed was the/a shooter; they weren't operating based on fact, they were wallowing in chaos. And it's not as though they were handed a flier beforehand that gave Cho's description and noted that he was the only gunman.
So imagine that armed-yet-innocent students came to check on them. What would the likewise armed students have done? Not to mention, what would have happened when the police arrived? (Keep in mind that Cho deliberately dressed like someone from the military; survivors reported that even after the shooting started, they were confused as to why someone from the military would be shooting at them.) In either scenario, I think that it would be inevitable that, given the chaos and panic, students would have been shooting at similarly armed-yet-innocent students.
And that's what puts me into the "students with guns? hell, no" camp. Maybe Cho would have gone down a lot sooner. Maybe a lot more innocent students would have died. I don't think that you can invest in such an important decision based on a lot of "maybes."
(I won't even get into other arguments, such as, we can't trust these kids to walk across the street without getting hit by a car, but we want to give them guns? :))
No, please disagree. Hell, I'm just glad someone is actually READING this thing! :)
ReplyDeleteOf course, it's impossible to say what exactly would have happened on 4-16-07 had a student or faculty member returned fire. Maybe they would have stopped Cho relatively early in the spree; maybe the confusion would have made an already deadly day even worse. No one can say. "The Fog of War," and all that...
My main point is I'm worried that as a society, we are taking away a reasonable measure of self-protection in the name of safety. If the bad guys were willing to abide by "gun-free zones," then I'm willing to as well. You know me, I'm not "packin'." I just see these measures as emblematic of a society that is far too willing to turn over 100-percent of our personal safety to The State. No, we don't have a "responsibility" to protect ourselves, per se, but I think we do enjoy the right to take such measures as we deem appropriate---provided they fell within the letter of the law.
Don't misunderstand, I'm not advocating that we "give them guns." (Or a anything else for that matter---too expensive!:)) I just think that those who are willing to go through the hoops and hurdles to obtain a permit be allowed to take what I think is a reasonable measure to protect themselves, should worse come to worst.
Perhaps my thinking is a bit shaded by those who have used this tragedy to advocate much broader anti-gun policies.
Oh well, that's enough thinking for one day. Lemme go grab a beer and clean my shotgun, in case Hannah decides to bring her boyfriend by!
BTW, she insists she has a boyfriend. His name is Mitchell (First Grader). He's clueless, and he's scared shitless of me. Good boy!
" I just think that those who are willing to go through the hoops and hurdles to obtain a permit be allowed to take what I think is a reasonable measure to protect themselves, should worse come to worst." On this, we can both agree. :)
ReplyDeleteAnd oh, dear... I figured you had at least another five or so years. Keep him scared shitless. You'll be in excellent scaring condition when she hits the teens.