Boortz, this morning;
….let’s set up a hypothetical situation. You’re in a class full of people at a university. Let’s say that there are 30 people in that room. A predator with a gun walks through the door. He shoots the professor, kills him. He then takes the remainder of the people in the room and lines them up against a wall. He then walks up to the first person and shots them in the head. Now … let me allow you to change the scenario. We can freeze-frame this situation while you make a decision. Your decision is this: You can put a gun into the hands of one student or a professor in that room, or you can leave things exactly the way they are. What are you going to do? Come on now, let’s have it. Which way do you want it? Do you want the predator to be the only one in the room with a gun? Or would you like to have at least the fighting chance that would result if one, maybe two of your classmates had a firearm.
And there it is, freinds. That’s my whole, entire position from yesterday’s post, in one para.
Not bad, Neal.
Look, gang… we have no guarantees, here, except that the ‘gun free’ status on the campus of VT didn’t work to protect those people, yesterday, nor did all the gun control laws, supposedly designed to do the same thing. Indeed; logic suggests that such were counter-productive. That’s the only things we know, yet. The motivation of the gunman, we don’t know, nor does it matter.
The actions of officials we don’t know fully… nor in the end do they matter all that much, either; regardless of what they did, campus officials simply are not equipped to deal with such conditions, due as much to their own gun phobia as political correctness and gun control laws. The only chance anyone would have had to stop those killings was taken away from them, by people claiming to proect them, but who, in fact, made mewling sheep of them.
Tags: BitsBlog
