Posted on 04/10/2009 12:43:14 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
America is facing an epidemic of gun violence.
Thirteen people were killed last week in Binghamton, N.Y., when a gunman, identified by authorities as 41-year-old Jiverly Wong, executed a mass shooting at the American Civic Association. The aftermath of that bloodshed has raised many questions, including whether armed, everyday citizens could take down such a gunman and save lives. Could you protect yourself if you only had a gun?
There are 250 million guns in the United States, enough for almost every man, woman and child to arm themselves. The FBI performed 12 million gun-related background checks in 2008, according to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. And with more than 50 deaths resulting from mass shootings in the past month alone, the argument for ordinary citizens arming themselves in schools, workplaces and anywhere else continues to grow.
But if teachers at Colorado's Columbine High School or the students and faculty of Virginia Tech University had concealed or open-carry permits, range training and loaded handguns mixed with their school supplies, could they have taken down men armed to the teeth, ready to die and acting under the element of surprise?
Watch "If I Only Had a Gun" tonight on a special edition of "20/20" at 10 p.m. ET
Some, like the group Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, which claims to have more than 38,000 members, think it would at least give people a better chance to survive.
Matt Guzman, leader of the advocacy group's Texas chapter, said that an armed student or citizen might even be more effective in taking down a gunman than law enforcement.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Eaker,
I didn’t understand your first sentence. I thought anything bad like this would put me in the wrong place at the wrong time but you now know you are right. I have every right to be where I care to be without interferance from the thugs and psychos.
Thanks for the correction. The next time I hear the authorities claiming the victim shouldn’t have been there, I’ll have a rebuttal.
Hope to see you in October at the Trinity River lease.
This is phrased to make it sound unlikely, but since at Columbine law enforcement stayed outside and at VT, they didn't get there while there was anything to do, the statement is true, no matter how ridiculous they try to make it sound.
I am looking forward to it!
No, that was NBC. For those who aren’t familiar with the indicent, IIRC it went something like this: General motors wanted to give their trucks a lot of range between refueling, so they used large tanks that extended outside of the frame rails. Some people argued that this made them more susceptible to rupture in an accident, and I believe there might have even been a couple of accidents where the tanks did rupture. So NBC decided to do an “expose” and crashed a truck with a full gas tank. No rupture, so they tried overfilling the tank, and leaving the cap off. Still no rupture. They kept trying more and more farfetched scenarios, and I think they finally had to place explosives in the tank to get the explosion. It leaked or someone figured it out from seeing the video and it was a big scandal.
The guy grabs the Glock through his shirt and flails around like a fish on pavement, trying to get it unholstered.
I think part of the "simulation" was having him sit next to a girl, so he'd be distracted. He fidgets with the pistol so much she actually asks him if he's carrying a gun.
Wow — that’s unreal. I wonder if ABC is likely to put it up on their website?
Only Liberal media would consider two pistols “armed to the teeth.”
This Yank won't be giving up any of his rights. I learned several years ago (on FR) that 'unalienable' not only means "can't be taken from" it also means "can't be given away." That crystallized for me just how superbly the Founding Fathers had crafted the DoI and the Constitution.
They weren't just great documents they were magnificent works of profound character and meaning. "But of course!," I thought, "what God bestows can no more be relinquished than it can be stolen. Not even the possessor of the rights has the power to affect them. My rights exist by no man's thought nor word nor action. Not even mine. As I exist my rights exist."
It was not a new thought that the DoI and Constitution were unique and that they put government last in the hierarchical line of power and authority. (as it should be) But it gave me a new sense of just how intensely scrutinized every word and every concept in them was.
There wasn't the least bit of careless zeal or unconscious hubris allowed to remain in their efforts. They weren't claiming anything by their own power and weren't going to leave any back doors in the program to allow it to be changed from within by someone who did claim that power later. (if they could help it) They were talking about an operating system they didn't even write and had no means to scrub. The natural order. What is what was and what would always be.
Brilliant! says I. So,! you're going to take my rights!?! You want me to surrender them over to you!?! You're going to have to bring God Almighty Himself in Person to ratify that!!! Otherwise all you've got is a temporal wrassling match with me and neither you nor I gets to make the final call.
So, that's how I feel about my rights. :-)
BTW, aren't you going to become a Yank soon? I mean, apart from in spirit, a technically and officially gooberment documented Yank?
That man is a hero to all self-reliant Americans.
I’ve enjoyed our discussion on this thread, too. It’s been refreshing.
I hadn’t thought of “unalienable” in quite those terms before, until you just pointed out that they are rights that can’t be relinquished any more than they can be taken. That actually makes alot of sense.
Your Founding Fathers were indeed very wise men with magnificent vision.
You write:
> BTW, aren’t you going to become a Yank soon? I mean, apart from in spirit, a technically and officially gooberment documented Yank?
I would do it in a heart-beat, except that three other Nations hold prior claim on my Loyalty. I am a Citizen of Canada and the UK by birth, and of New Zealand by Naturalization.
The United States (I believe) would require me to relinquish these loyalties were I to become a Citizen of the US, as I have been told that the US does not permit the concept of Dual Citizenship. I don’t feel I could jettison my loyalties like that with any good conscience: as a Patriot that’s just not something I am able to do.
So instead I do the next best thing, and resolve to be the very best and most loyal friend that America could possibly ask for. I have a feeling that America will need a few of us in the coming years.
God Bless America
*DieHard*
Nothing. But it is good that you did watch it and report back to us that ABC has not changed. They are still an enemy of the Republic.
I love that video.
Not all of us northerners are tools.
It does! That's how it hit me. It's one of those things that was right there in front of your eyes all along. So natural that you just don't notice it until someone points it out. Then you slap your forehead and say "Of course! How else could it be?"
It's beautiful! In a few words they set the whole basis for the being of our nation unto a Realm that can't be touched by the weaselly minds of men.
The Declaration of Independence is a document of temporal liberation. It clarifies, without mistake, the limits of temporal authority over any and every man. It establishes, in the spirit of its meaning, a constituency of men who recognize no final authority over a man's life existent from this world but existent nonetheless. In that great constituency, with and begun by our Founding Fathers, should any man find his right to exist as a free and sovereign individual of good conscience challenged by man or state, he will be in good company should he stand his ground to the bitter end.
I dont feel I could jettison my loyalties like that with any good conscience: as a Patriot thats just not something I am able to do.
Understood. Such ties should not be severed for light and transient reasons. I thought I had read that you were considering it. You are a Yank patriot at heart which is more than can be said for many native born Americans. Your friendship will be needed and hopefully appreciated.
The DoI. It's not just about America. It is about every man.
You can’t make this stuff up.
It’s up now at http://abcnews.go.com/2020 . To top it off, they’ve got he guy trying on safety gear, so h’s wearing a helmet and gloves that are less than conducise to fine motor skills.
Thanks for that — I’m going to watch it now!
Do you think the same people would argue that because a vaccine is not 100% effective, no one ought to be immunized against tetanus, whooping cough, or smallpox? Of course not. Preventive measures are a safeguard, not a guarantee. In the case of firearms, ownership is a first step, followed by training, practice and the maintenance of discipline, all of which improve the chances of successful self-defense.
Wow! I just watched the video, and it was excellent. It was entirely consistent with the sorts of results our Crisis Management training simulations would get from the executives we trained.
For once, ABC seems to have done a superb job.
In my opinion, the simulations were very realistic and the results they got were probably typical. Their explanation of adrenaline dump was spot-on.
This doesn’t mean that Citizens shouldn’t carry: of course they should. It does mean that if you carry then you ought to invest the time and effort into Range Time and Crisis Training.
No surprises there. I doubt anybody would argue with that.
You can never get too much Range Time.
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.