Scott
Did you catch The National tonight? There was an extended story on the debate to allow students to carry weapons on campus, the logic being that someone could have stopped the latest massacre, or limited the carnage. It was insane, but a great example of how Americans just dig a deeper hole, in the name of protection.
Just imagine, alcohol fuelled freshmen packin.
Guns on campus, with a little alcohol, some SSRI’s and a splash of sexual angst mixed in, make for good times, indeed.
Scott,
This may surprise and even shock you but I can see both sides of this and I think they both make good points.
Firstly, yes it is entirely possible that the massacre would have been cut very short had there been someone with a gun there to take out Cho. The same thing happened a few years ago at the Appalachian Law School - two armed students took down a shooter after only 2 had died.
That being said, the ‘armed students’ in that case were a well trained enthusiast and an ex-cop.
Do you see what I am getting at? If there are going to be “gun free zones” then those who insist on them had better make damn sure that there are ways to prevent criminals and deranged individuals from also bring guns in, as they are notorious at ignoring those rules. There would have to be armed security in nearly every building and every quad. Metal detectors at the doors? Random searches? Universities and colleges could easily resemble prisons out of fear of guns, leaving most law-abiding kids on campus unarmed sitting ducks for the nut that decides not to follow the rules. They have no way to defend themselves and were made to rely on the campus police who did not and probably could not defend them properly.
But everyone having a gun or other weapon is equally stupid. As Bbiill says, its a volitile combination. And merely having a gun or weapon is no garrantee that it will be used properly. I could see easily see VT being a much worse masacre, with untrained and unpracticed students hopped up on adrenaline shooting other untrained and unpracticed students hopped up on adrenaline, each thinking the other was the shooter. Or innocent gunt-toting students being shot by the first repsonding cops, thinking they were the shooter. Everybody having a gun could be as bad as everyone being disarmed.
The answer is somewhere in the middle, but where I don’t know just yet.
If you are going to make a place a “gun free zone” you had better provide alternative means for individuals to defend themselves, unless you want to make it a locked down prison.
If you are going to “carry a gun” or be otherwise armed, you had better be well trained and better be prepared to accept the consequences, or don’t bother. Not everyone should, or will want to, be armed for self-defence.
No one should be forced to be armed or disarmed.
Of course this entire line of arguement is moot if Cho and those like him get help much sooner and the problem of a murderous shooting is stopped before the gun is even bought.
Nobody says much about this was actually a healt care issue. gaping Holes in the access to proper health Care is the main problem.. But CNN and the Media is MUM about it
I was even wondering all the injuried got hospital care ….now the BILLS will follow The devastation….shame.
That answer is not only south of the border sadly. Wingnut, Christian (and I only raise that because it’s important to him and he says as much), Michael Coren supports the same thing. More guns, not just in the US, but here too. All students should have guns, in his opinion.
Something is happening to us, all of us, and imo it’s something we need to keep an eye on. During periods of war, the desire for guns goes up historically. What I don’t want to see is that number go up hysterically and that is what I see happening.
This needs to shift. We are going in the wrong direction.