Posted on 08/29/2007 9:52:46 AM PDT by george76
Few tragedies make their victims feel more helpless than multiple-victim shootings.
Imagine the terror: Unable to escape, simply waiting for the killer.
Virginia Tech’s just released report on how to stop future tragedies was pretty disappointing, and this coming week’s Virginia Governor’s task force report isn’t likely to be any better. The university proposes more counseling ...
But one glaring omission remains: The report failed to ask whether there were any common features or similarities among the different multiple-victim public shooting tragedies. And what happens if these policies fail? Should there be some ultimate protection upon which the university can rely?
Up until the early 1970s, Israel had to deal with the cold reality of terrorists who would take machine guns into shopping malls, schools, and Synagogues and open fire. That type of attack doesn’t occur any more. Why? Israelis realized that armed citizens could stop such an attacker before he did much damage.
About 15 percent of Israelis are now licensed to carry weapons, and determined terrorists have to resort to less effective, secretive routes of attack such as bombing.
While right-to-carry laws-- now operating in 40 states -- do reduce violent crime generally, the effect is much larger for multiple-victim shootings. Normally about 2 to 6 percent of adults in any state have permits, and for most crimes that means some deterrence.
Most people understand that guns deter criminals. Suppose you or your family are being stalked by a criminal who intends to harm you. Would you feel safer putting a sign in front of your home saying "This home is a gun-free zone"? Would it frighten criminals away?
Good intentions don't necessarily make good laws. What counts is whether the laws ultimately save lives. Unfortunately, too many gun laws primarily disarm law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Bang to the top.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Great post...and no one would have to explain the logic of this to The Founders.
Thanks.
The Founders knew the logic.
Owl_Eagle
If what I just wrote made you sad or angry,
it was probably just a joke.
Probably a very, very small percentage, and the ones that are licensed are more than likely stolen.
We have police for our public schools, they should be armed, they should be the first line of defense. BUT they have to store their weapons in the trunks of their vehicles during the day, when kids are in class and teachers roam the halls.
They can only retrieve their weapons in an emergency if, they contact the school administrator and they are given permission. Now, each of these officers goes through the same exact training as the police department, yet they are hamstrung into being unarmed and put in a dangerous position of being ambushed getting TO their weapon.
Every uniformed law enforcement officer I have talked to has said this is the epitome of stupidity.
We had an incident the FIRST day of school. A man was reported on the grounds of a high school with a gun. The officers responded and apprehended the man, who was not armed. The two officers were waiting for permission to arm themselves when they came upon the suspect. They subdued him, and fortunately he was unarmed. If he had been, these two officers might not have gone home that night.
I choose to be armed, wherever, whenever. I choose to be able to defend myself and others no matter where I happen to be.
bump
Thanks g76.
Slightly off topic, but does anyone have a link or info to what percentage of guns used in crimes are licensed?
It’s the elephant in the room that all the commissions analyzing the crime overlook. And in Virginia, the legislature specifically forbade concealed carry on campuses. If just one student had been armed.... But no, they will ignore that in their pontificating.
A gun is an important piece of safety equipment. Liberals think that someone might get hurt with it. Someone could get hurt by a fire extinguisher. Lets ban those too.
Its idiotic that a school will take all kinds of safety measures for various things but they will not develop a workable safety program to go into effect in the event of a loose shooter, because someone might get offended because some one would have to be armed. So much for higher learning.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1888293/posts
"less" modifies non-count nouns. "fewer" is needed before nouns which designate countables.
Joe Lib has to realize that some kind of repeal of the Second Amendment will not make him safe. He will be happy that the people on the other side of his political view will be "punished".
Actually even the plausible possibility of a gun is enough to deter many criminals. If they don't know whether you're carrying, that may be enough...but the certainty that you are unarmed is a standing invitation, as Britain and Australia appear to have discovered with escalating rates of violent crime following gun control.
What we’re fighting here cannot be fought with logic. We are fighting the pathetic pathological fear of ignorant, uneducated lemmings who have been brainwashed to believe “guns are bad, guns are bad.” I still don’t think that all the pro-gun arguments and talking points can take the place of some good old fashioned examples where “guns are good, guns are good.”
Guns in the hands of honest, law-abiding people save lives.
The liberals want to take guns away from law-abiding people and want (yes) to leave them in the hands of criminals.
I’m sick of politicians taking away MY rights because they are incapable of and unwilling to stop criminals.
If it were even the tiniest fraction of a percentage, the media would be screaming it from the tops of buildings, "proving" that CCW holders are actually a danger to society! Notice how they drop the "blood in the streets" and "old west" rants shortly after CCW laws are passed, and the only thing that happens is that crime rates actually drop. For example, to the best of my knowledge, there's only been one recorded use of a legally licensed machine gun by the owner in the commission of a crime in more than 70 years, and it was a cop that did it.
Mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.