Thursday, April 19, 2007

 

What passes for intelligent debate from the left

Don't go to this YouTube "tribute" to Cho Seung-Hui if you don't want to be pissed off.

The left has been making the argument that Cho's murder spree is the result of the ease in which he bought the two pistols. I can't deny that it was easier to walk into a gun shop and buy a handgun in VA. than in Chicago, for example. Of course this is the reason that the murder rate in Chicago is so much lower than Virginia's. My answer to this argument is do you think a gun ban would have deterred Cho from killing? If Cho could not have found a handgun on the planet earth could he have killed a lot of people? Timothy McVeigh did not use a handgun to kill far more people.

Given the world we live in, reality based if you will, what is the best way to stop killers like Cho? I think the best way is to allow trained citizens with clean records to carry guns. Isn't that a lot more likely to stop a killer than a ban on guns? If such a ban took effect today there would still be guns on the street. There would still be cars. There is evidence that guns in the hands of students and teachers have prevented attacks. Looking at this from a logical point of view, allowing some of the students and faculty, some of the victims had military training, to carry guns was a far more realistic way to have stopped a school shooter than a general ban on owning guns.

It was the ban on guns of V-Tech's campus which put these students in jeopardy. Gun free area really means no guns for the law abiding.

Related:

The Gun ban and the gunman

Virginia Tech's gun-free zone left Cho Seung-Hui's victims defenseless.

War Over Firearms


People don't stop killers. People with guns do

Labels: ,


|

<< Home

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