.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Virginia Tech, Guns And
The Second Amendment

I have a ton of things I could write and say about the horrific shootings in Blacksburg, Virginia yesterday at Virginia Tech. Most importantly, I'm going to reserve some of what I have to say until more facts are known, verified and re-verified. I am appalled at the speculation that has been engaged in by the Main Stream Media over the past two days.

What I do want to say today is this: I believe in no uncertain terms our Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment as it stands, giving us the right to own guns just as fiercely as the First Amendment gives us free speech. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with - never did - hunting game, sportsmen and sportswomen. Beware and be alert as soon as politicians and law-makers start talking about guns and hunting as being part of the Second Amendment. These are three distinct, unrelated and separate issues that may indeed sometimes overlap with each other, but they are not directly related or interconnected as the "Second Amendment=Hunting Crowd" would like for you believe.

As a believer in the Second Amendment and a responsible, legal gun owner I am appalled that, as of this writing, Cho Seung-Hui personally is responsible for the killings at VT and for giving the Second Amendment, and legal, law abiding gun owners a bad name.

We are in the process of learning that Hui had detailed plans written down about how he would go about his killing spree. His plans don't appear to be a spur of the moment act committed by someone who, in a fit of rage or act of passion, "snaps" in an instance and goes on a rampage. Yes, he "snapped" at some point, but he also crafted a sick plan to carry out his actions. He knew what he was going to do, planned it and carried it out. Thus far, it certainly appears his actions were premeditated.

It is being reported that a note written by Hui blamed U.S. decadence and a jealousy and envy of "rich kids" as what led him to do what he did. No - these things did not make him do what he did.

Given what we know at the time I publish this, Cho Seung-Hui alone is to blame. He alone is totally and fully responsible for - and guilty of - what happened at VT. He is the single source of the violence and carnage.

©2007

Others Writing On Virginia Tech:

    "...here is a list of NON US school shootings proving that it isn't just the US where deranged kids decide to kill fellow pupils."

Clint Heine
- - -

    "In the wake of the slaughter of the unarmed in Virginia the following question has been asked by some. "Do Americans have right to own a gun?'"

Gunner at No Quarters.
- - -

    "So the tragedy is not only were 33 unarmed students and faculty shot down in cold blood, but they could have protected themselves, thus ending the killing sooner, if they had been allowed allowed to carry a weapon for self protection."

Mr. Minority.
- - -

    "Believing in a 'right to feel safe' means that you are not responsible for your own safety. You can't be - you're not qualified."

Kevin at Smallest Minority.
- - -

    "The renewed cries for disarming you and me will push this debate into a level of hysteria and demands that will be unlike anything we have yet encountered."

David at The War On Guns.
- - -

    "I still am at a loss for words about THE KILLINGS AT VIRGINIA TECH. It is a tragedy. And even more tragic is the circus like atmosphere the MSM is making of it. CNN is playing it for all it is worth pushing its socialist view for gun control."

GuyK at Charming, Just Charming.
- - -

    "Virginia Tech already had a strict no gun policy in place, only recently penalizing a student with a permit to carry a concealed weapon on campus. Perhaps if that licensed individual had been allowed to carry a firearm Monday's tragedy would have been muted."

    [...]

    "As some have pointed out, it would make as much sense to ban foreign students as it would to ban guns. Millions of guns are in the hands of law abiding citizens and those persons don't go on killing sprees."

Curt at Flopping Aces.

Linking Here:
123Beta

Labels: , ,


Comments:
ah... you could have included my whiny liberal ass, as in fact, only morons cannot read the second amendment. i think i have found your boogie man so why don't you point to me and avoid looking insensitive by protecting gun rights now. me, me, pick the liberal you can wave in other's faces, pick me, pick me.

damn i sound like a seagull don't i?
 
(you can delete this one too if you want.)

when are you frikkin' neocons going to realize that gisher is your best friend. i might be a tad liberal leaning but i got most of your causes, just differently than you clowns, you guys put up crap that cranks up the battlewagons of the left. you should send my coloumn to the nra, and tell everybody else to take a vacation.

and i thought you beez smart.


love ya man.
 
Uhh...... no, I would certainly not delete your comments, Rev. I'm not exactly sure of what you're saying in your comments.

I read your April 16 piece on VT and you wrote is it a "lack of respect for human life" that is/was (your) cause and effect for what happened. If I understand your post, then you have no argument from me on what you wrote.

I also read your post dated today, 4/17. You wrote a causational effect of VT and "Too little reliance on individual involvement, and too much reliance on government." You also blamed lack of parenting, violent video games and other factors contributing to what happened. I don;'t disagree.

So, why ain't I following what you're saying in the comments?
 
i did not blame video games, frankly all that i blamed were parents, or the lack thereof. i was indeed kidding around otherwise, but i was serious about this not being the time for the second amendment crowd to flare up. i don't think you guys realize how high the heat is, and the typical arguements that you have used are more likely to backlash.

i am not a gun supporter, i am a constitution supporter, which means on guns i back you guys. i do not like backing the rambo crowd one damned bit, but if you are going to honestly defend the constitution then i must back you clowns.

more importantly both sides have started the atypical round and round that goes nowhere, and both sides are missing the point. it is not as black and white as both sides would like to believe, but banning guns will not solve the problem. as i have always said, what did banning drugs do besides jack up all of our costs/taxes?

did it stop drugs?

you cannot legislate this one, just like drugs,any attempt would fail, but more importantly, it will avoid fixing the real problem.

do we want more virginia techs? if both sides keep acting as they have for decades, we will have many more. if you want to solve this problem, it's gonna require effort from a lazy nation, that right now is taking sides and neither side is on the side of those kids who just got killed.

ignore me at your own peril, that clown kevin did a year ago, i bet he will now. (he cannot trust someone that is not one of the clan, how typically american)

sad but true.


don't tell me what you guys are going to do, read my post today. i am watching everybody's actions not their words and it's getting uglier by the moment.
 
From your post: "Next we have millions of parents who allow their children to watch violent programming unsupervised, programming that is most suitably viewed by adults. These same adults allow millions of children to play violent video games, again with little or no supervision. The majority of these children receive no counseling on what they are seeing and thus no counterpoint to the violence in front of them."

I stand corrected, Rev, you are indeed - if I may use the word - "blame" at the hands of parents or the lack of parents supervising their children.

So, what do we know then about the parents of Cho Seung-Hui? Are you saying we need to find out if they did their job? What if they did and the kid still turned out to be a sociopath/killer?

I'm not disagreeing with you. What my post is about is the Second Amendment and how it is often the Left that tries to tie it to "hunting and sporting". The 2nd Amendment is not about that, and that's all I was really saying about that part of the story.

I don't disagree "it's getting ugly". But, with what we know at this moment about VT, there is only one person to blame and who is responsible for what happened, and that is Cho Seung-Hui.

His parents may have been great, they may have been not so great - I don't know, I don't think any of us know this right now. It doesn't change the fact on who pulled the trigger.

I think we're on the same side of this issue, why does it seem as if we are disagreeing? Is it because I missed the Tango lessons?
 
no we are not disagreeing. but i am talking about Cho Seung-Hui only. take a real good look at the slaughters in the news on a weekly basis. Cho Seung-Hui gets your attention because of the numbers involved. 2 people getting their brains blown out do not get this level of attention. is the death of 2 people less significant?

i am talking about the total trend, and it points to escalation, as well as a desenitized public becoming more so.

the left is trying to say we are horrified and our solution is to try and destroy the second amendment.

the right tries to protect the second amendment.

meanwhile people keep dying.

i guess what i am saying is nothing gets done because both sides are focusing on something other than the cause.


i guess what i am asking is do you want to see more killing or not?

if the answer is no, then when are you going to start trying to stop it?

same deal about abortion.


all i hear is talk, boom, talk, boom, and on and on.


i pointed at something new and get zero attention. to me that tells me everything about the true intentions of both sides.
 
I agree the number of victims, dead and injured, receives more MSM attention, they exploit it-to one degree of the other.

RE: becoming desensitized, have we? Seldom will MSM and cable news run footage from 9/11. Is that part of the problem?

What do we do? Do we recognize that - in general - that there will be the aberrant random shooting spree as opposed to your correct call on if the victims are few, it doesn't get the media attention.

I'm editing my post on why what happened at Virginia Tech happened and by all means respond to it. We could write for days on the areas of where to concentrate to try to prevent killing sprees from happening in the first place. But the truth is, it will never be eliminated. We can only work to minimize the number of these types of occurances. It comes with the history of mankind.
 
i was not advocating anything reguarding the media, videogames, music, news, msm, yada yada. i still say parents rule the roost here (or more often) abdicate it.

i agree in principle that we will never get rid of it but i differ as to why. i think the why is we are too self-possessed and too damn dependant(read lazy) to do what we need to do.

the guy was sick, and that rolls into healthcare and that is another issue you and i need to find common ground on, but not today.

otherwise we beez on the same page.
 
"i think the why is we are too self-possessed and too damn dependant(read lazy) to do what we need to do.

the guy was sick, and that rolls into healthcare and that is another issue you and i need to find common ground on, but not today."


yes, yes, we be on the same page.

As I posted my piece today, which I see you commented on (will get to that after this) - I think there's many reasons we unfortunately experience from time to time. And working to minimize the occurrances is where we all need to find common ground and decide what price we will pay finanically and as a society.
 
amen my brother from across the aisle. amen. i will eventually email you on this healthcare thing and maybe do a tie in.

busy week here, hell everywhere.
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

eXTReMe Tracker



Web Site Traffic Counters
Alabama Internet

Listed on BlogShares

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

This site uses photographs and material from other sources in strict
accordance and compliance with Fair Use Section 107 U.S. Copyright Code.
All other images and content © 2005-2009 David Drake.
Not responsible for content contained at linked sites.

Policy on commenting:
- Anonymous comments have little chance of being published.
- Comments made on posts 60 days old or older have little chance of being published.
- Published comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this blog author.
- Discretion of publishing or rejecting submitted comments rests solely with the owner and creator of this blog.
- Comments that egregiously "plug" (i.e. advertise or promote) another site or blog will be rejected. This doesn't mean you cannot include a link to your story, blog or to another site, but don't go overboard.
- Profanity is not a disqualifying factor, but profane rants solely for purposes of profanity are unlikely to be published.
- The owner and creator of this blog is not liable or responsible for the opinions of those who comment.