Posted on 08/29/2002 12:57:32 PM PDT by Badray
Last night I watched the TV program Minute by Minute. The show features an event and the actions of the people involved, literally minute by minute. This episode detailed the Long Island Rail Road shooting on December 7, 1993 by Colin Ferguson. Thirty shots were fired in the course of three minutes. Twentyfive people were shot and six of those people died. Ferguson is now serving six consecutive life sentences for the crime.
The show included interviews with surviving gunshot victims, family members, and witnesses. There were a few clips of Ferguson acting as his own attorney and pictures of the blood stained rail car. It succeeded in graphically depicting the horror of that day.
Only after the train came to it's next regular stop and Ferguson was trying to reload for the second time, did anyone attempt to stop Ferguson. Several of the passengers jumped on him and subdued him until the police arrived.
The car had 100 people in it and not one, let alone two or three men, did anything other than try to run or hide. One hundred people! Flight 93 had 37. Yet there was no Todd Beamer or Tom Burnett to be found that day. As I watched, I found myself getting increasingly angered by their tales of inaction. I have never been under fire. I don't know how I would react, especially if I was unarmed. I pray that I wouldn't just sit and wait my turn.
Two of the victims were Denis McCarthy who died and his 26 year old son who was badly wounded. The wife and mother is Carolyn McCarthy. She rode the coattails of shock and outrage and the cry for gun control all the way to the U.S. Congress. She was successful in getting some gun control legislation passed early in her first term and she continues to serves and work for even more gun control.
One of the remarks from Mrs. McCarthy made in the interviews shown last night was to the effect that to stop the gun violence, we have to get rid of these guns. There are too many guns.
Actually, Mrs. McCarthy, you couldn't be more wrong. The problem that night was that there was only one gun on that train. The lawabiding (and cowered) citizens left their guns (if they even own one) at home and made that train car a killing zone. There was no danger to the shooter that night. No Charles Bronson a la Death Wish I, II, or III. No Dirty Harry. No, not even a Bernard Goetz to challenge this evil man on a rampage. If there were armed citizens on the train that day, maybe this rampage would have ended sooner with less loss of life. Maybe your husband would still be at your side.
But because the denizens of Gotham City were debarred the use of guns, 6 people died and countless lives were shattered. Because of more anti-self defense legislation like that which succeeding in passing after this tragedy, the likelihood that more lives will be snuffed out or effected adversely increasing even more. And the man that deserved to die that night lives on as a symbol of the need for more gun controls laws.
So I ask you Congresswoman McCarthy:
Do you really think that there were too many guns on that train that day? Or not enough?
I won't speak for anyone else, but if I had been there on that day, I'll wager I'd have dropped the goblin ricky-tick, saved a lot of lives, and then had to boogie in an attempt to not be jailed myself for defending my own life and the lives of others.
Individual mileage will vary.
Next to our faith in God as a people, it is the only thing standing between us and total tyranny ... despite misguided, useful idiots like some of those you saw on the show.
BLOAT and best regards!
There's no such thing as too many guns or too much ammunition.
80+ million gun onwers.
250,000,000+ guns in their hands.
2,000,000,000 rounds of ammos un-expended.
(All unofficial claims I have heard bandied about, but if anything they are probably low).
Still not enough.
Concerned about the easy availability of guns in our society?
Alarmed about the "gun nuts" and other freedom wackos the government allows to run loose?
Wish the government would just repeal the Second Amendment and confiscate all the guns because you believe sensible people shouldn't suffer because of some idiotic notion about some antiquated “right?”
While we can't take the guns away from the people, we CAN take the people (or at least SOME of them) away from their guns.
At CAMP GUNFREE, we have created an atmosphere of near-total tranquility where you and your family will experience the benefits of a GUN FREE environment.
Each of our camps is a gated community designed to keep guns away from camp guests. Firmly enforced security measures ensure that these dangerous and destructive devices are kept outside. Each camp boasts 24 hour, 7 day a week sentries and state-of-the-art enclosure systems, guard dogs, trenches and surveillance equipment to absolutely GUARANTEE that no firearms enter the facility. Rigidly controlled access ensures that no guns can ever be smuggled in.
No cost has been spared to ensure that Camp GunFree remains gun free.
All camp members are given distinctive uniforms to distinguish them from any gun-toting barbarians who might attempt to evade our security measures. Each camp member is also assigned a distinctive ID number to ensure that only the right people are allowed within the camp.
The current headlines prompt us to remind you that there has NEVER been a shooting by a student in any of the camp schools and we can GUARANTEE that there never will be!!
For more information, call 1-800-GUNFREE
OR visit our new website at
http://www.privategunsareabadthingandwe'llseethatyouare”safe”.batf.gov
(This idea from a pamphlet originally created by The Minnesota Center for Individual Liberty, PO Box 32170, Minneapolis, MN 55432-0170)
Legal permit, eh. Do you mean this one?
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
infringe: 2. to encroach or trespass, to break, weaken.
encroach: 2.to trespass upon the property, domain, or rights of another esp. stealthily or by gradual advances.
Do you feel permits are permitted by the Constitution? Do you feel you surrender or weaken your rights in the process of getting a permit to exercise a Constitutional right?
Just curious, as the "with permits" is now accepted jargon of almost everyone supporting the second ammendment, but a plain reading seems to make it quite clear such permits are exactly what the Founders were opposed to, and the Constitution prohibits.
A permit means they give you PERMIssion.
By so doing they attempt to establish their (the governments) supremacy on this issue where they are not supreme. The Constitution Bill of Rights merely enumerates something which the Creator is the surpeme over.
BLOAT!
Congrats on getting a firearm. If you don't mind me asking, what did you get? I have my PA carry permit and I do carry it whenever I go out, but it just galls me to get permission from a bureaucrat to exercise my rights.
I have heard Hupp at the AIMM in DC in 2000 and McCarthy in various spots on TV. Hupp would clean her clock.
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.