Posted on 04/17/2007 2:55:09 PM PDT by gc4nra
_____________________________________________________________ This visitation of death against Virginia Tech University this week is a direct result of gun laws banning weapons within 1,000 feet of a school -- the victim disarmament zone is as advertised once more. Sure the shooter is to blame, but Congress shares the blame not only for shootings, but for any instance of disarming citizens who could have resisted with all legal authority and use of force. Why obfuscate or discourage this legal authority?
We’ll never keep weapons – knifes, bare hands, brute force and guns – out of the hands of the criminal, but we sure can disarm the honest. This is the concept, and to announce same.
Anti-independence officials think that somehow trying something that doesn’t work simply needs more work, or at least that's the claim. Victim disarmament zones is one of the better examples of this stubbornness.
But when does it become outright interference with the family where the obvious solution is ignored and the go-nowhere solution is repeated. The purpose is a widespread and ever-increasing move from personal independence to dependency on agencies. And people die in this kind of stubbornness.
Personal weapons are a right secured by law, (and for such good reason) but are viewed as anti-social in spite of such guarantees, and are banned more and more from the hands of loving parents and able citizens who are not criminals, and who could have been on scene to protect their family members or another’s child.
Now let me address Congress with this edition of Good For The Country, please.
In banning weapons from parents carrying on campus or workplace, you have sent two messages – in spite of the fact that a majority of states affirms right to carry as a reasonable and lawful use of force, Congress has done a very ugly and unpatriotic thing for communities nationwide.
In banning personal weapons in victim disarmament zones, Congress has said:
1. To citizens: "Don’t do anything until we get there."
2. To shooters; "You have four minutes."
This is not for peace or safety, but outrightly against the people of the United States. Being a former Los Angeles Paramedic, I can tell you that EMS teaches Citizen CPR and First-aid for one important reason: we cannot meet a life-saving response time of under three minutes.
Neither can law enforcement. Where does that leave kids?
But the legal authority of the people can be on scene as it is in other venues where shooters dare not go because they are uncertain as to who is armed. Legally armed. As in nearly all state sof the union, but not on school campus. Recognizing citizen authority must be part of any serious-minded approach to shootings in schools, workplace, churhces - everywhere.
It’s time to repeal all gun laws as illegal in their inception because police cannot arrive with a life-saving response time, (and because they have had no such duty to begin with since 1845); because the armed citizen is the first line of defense, and because individuals have all legal authority to act in defense of another. Why make schools different? Airports? Civil aircraft? Shopping malls. Why advertise them as victim disarmament zones?
An armed citizen could have dropped this shooter before the number began to rise.
An armed citizen could have stopped him. Instead, you stopped the armed citizen.
32 more dead, Congress.
Repeal all gun laws and respect the sovereignty of the citizen over the illusion that a criminal will obey laws you write.
_________________
John Longenecker is Chairman of the Good For The Country Foundation, a patriotic non-profit.
See www.GoodForTheCountry.org
My experience with law enforcement is that they are glorified accountants. After you are dead or robbed, they rope off the area, dust for prints, collect samples and put them in the database. Once they are in the database unless they have a hot trail, they wait for matches. I am not sure how that relates to reviving you and putting your family back together....as far as I know that effort does not restore you to life. The chances of law enforcement preventing any of this at VT is slim and none. Developing a free fire zone for murderers seldom works properly.
If you want political power, you only have to ask, what are you willing to give up for it? If you are willing to put your life on the line, you can have your own private election for any office by replacing the incumbent office holder. The world is dangerous because alot of people are willing to do just that.
Not in Texas...sounds like VA needs to look at our conceal and carry requirements.
I can’t say that I’m following your train of thought there.
Virginia is a “shall issue” state. If you obtain a CCW why shouldn’t you be allowed to carry to carry on campus as well as off?
Barricading a door is not actively trying to take the shooter out.
The passengers on flight 93 actively prevented the hijackers from taking over the plane, with full knowledge that they would die.
“He’s not off base. He’s refering to the U.S. Congress. His organzation is based in California.”
The US Congress had nothing to do with VT not allowing students to carry concealed weapons.
It was a Va. thing.
I hope that’s the way I’d deal with it. But nobody really knows how they’ll react until they’re faced with the situation.
Repeal all gun laws and respect the sovereignty of the citizen over the illusion that a criminal will obey laws you write.
Sorry, my second paragraph refers to chaos you can cause if you are willing to lose your life in doing it. Lee Harvey Oswald had his own private election for president, his one vote for Lyndon Johnson made it happen.
As if being Republican meant anything. I think it used to, way back when, but not anymore.
Is it any wonder why so many of us Republican voters are frustrated?
BTW: Ron Paul for POTUS
I understand that the Va. legislature voted down a bill to allow permitted students and teachers to carry on campus, and that Virginia Tech lent its weight to keep it a "gun free zone".
I believe that the posters point was that the U.S. Congress had effectively underwritten such laws by outlawing handguns within 1000' of a school. Admittedly, "school" in the Congressional bill is defined as elementary, secondary and high schools....not Universities. However, the point is valid....Congressional action encouraged the mistaken belief that "a gun free zone will be a crime free zone", when just the opposite is true.
Well with that being the case, Congress should repeal that law and allow conceal to carry inside of all schools.
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.