Tuesday, April 17, 2007

The Virginia Tech Massacre: Where does society go from here?

I felt the need to vent about how gun control advocates are at least partially to blame for the mass murder that occurred yesterday in Virgina. But I was far too angry to put words to paper coherently. Thankfully Lawdog did so in a way I only wish I could. I post it in it's entirety here. I suspect Lawdog would not mind.

Oh, Christ, here we go again.

Some maladjusted little bugsnipe gets his mental panties into a bunch and goes flat boiling nutters with a gun in one of the few places where he knows someone isn't going to put him down like a rabid dog during his first magazine.

And -- as usual -- the Mainstream Media is bleating about needing more Gun Control.

Gun Control is a failure. You simply can not expect those who would do murder -- those who would violate the highest law -- you can not expect them to obey a lesser law.

And you can not turn a failure into a success by doubling the failure.

None-the-less, I will be greatly surprised if the Mainstream Media and the political lapdogs don't try to use this tragedy to further their gun control agenda.

You want to be really disgusted? I mean, the down deep nausea kind of disgusted?

The State Government of Virginia had a bill before it which would have allowed college students to exercise their Second Amendment rights on campus earlier this year.

The bill didn't even make it out of committee.

When the bill died, the spokesman for Virginia Tech -- where some college kids really needed to be able to shoot back this morning -- Virgina Tech spokescritter Larry Hincker stated:

"I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."


He was happy to hear of the defeat of the bill which would have allowed college kids to carry weapons for self-defence on his college campus.

Happy now, you sodding dacoit? Go tell the dead that they're really safe because the Virginia State Government refuses to allow them to carry for self-defence on campus, you ate-up catamite with delusions of adequacy.

And despite all of that -- despite the senseless death and the smug arrogance that allowed the death to happen -- there is news that sickens me to the very core.

There are reports -- granted unconfirmed at this time -- that several students were forced to line up, kneeling, and executed from behind.

I pray to the old gods -- the gods of war and blood and thunder -- that this is not the case.

I pray that some students went down fighting.

Because as bad as this is -- and this is a horror -- as bad as this is, if fifty some-odd people were injured and killed by one person whilst on their knees begging like so many Eloi, like a herd of sheep -- if no one stood up and fought back, then this is becomes an example of evil.

Not the evil that allows a man to kill other men -- although that is here in abundance. No, I am speaking of the putrescent evil which convinces good men not to fight back; the sordid filth of the soul which allows one bad man to prevail against fifty -- or 25,000 -- good men because good men have been systematically denied the mindset required to meet with, engage and defeat evil -- even if all you have is fingernails and rage.

One man. On a campus of 25,000 people. 25,000 people surrounded by fire extinguishers, book bags, pencils, pens, drafting compasses, chairs, broom handles, power strips, ceramics, chains and everything heavy and/or sharp.

One man managed to gun down fifty people -- or more -- without being stabbed and bludgeoned to death where he stood by the other 24,950 people.

I weep for the dead. I weep for the families who lost their treasured children today.

I weep even more for a land which not only denies the tools required for self-defence, but also denies the very mindset required for self-defence.

LawDog
I too weep. There is legislation that was passed in the Texas Senate 30-0 that would allow a CHL holder to keep his weapon in his vehicle in the parking lot of an employer even if the employer does not allow weapons on the premises. That bill, SB 534, has been introduced in the House but is hung up in the calenders committee. A similar bill HB992 is ALSO tied up in the calenders committee. It would appear clear that the calenders committee members are killing this bill. Please contact the committee members and let them know that there will be electoral consequences to killing this bill.

House Committee on Calendars (C050) Clerk: Amy Ehlert
Legislature: 80(R) - 2007 Phone: 463-0758
Appointment Date: 1/26/2007 Room: EXT E2.140

PositionMember
Chair:Rep. Beverly Woolley
Vice Chair:Rep. Norma Chavez
Members:Rep. Dan Branch

Rep. Myra Crownover

Rep. Dawnna Dukes

Rep. Gary Elkins

Rep. Ryan Guillen

Rep. Mike Hamilton

Rep. Larry Taylor

Rep. Sylvester Turner

Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale

2 Comments:

Anonymous TexasLiberal said...

Thank you for pointing out that my support for gun control makes me guilty to some degree for the murders at Virginia Tech.

Though I am somewhat surprised that you lay guilt on anyone but the shooter. I would have guessed that you would have seen that person as fully accountable for his actions.

If a poor person cited poverty as the reason he committed a crime would you accept that excuse as well?

In any case, since I and others who share my views are partly reponsible for these killings, what punishment do you propose? Or do you simply choose to look the other way at the killers in your midst?

April 17, 2007 1:26 PM  
Blogger Rorschach said...

If you want a breakdown of culpability, I'd say that 99% is the shooter, and 1% on gun control idiots such as yourself. Because the simple fact of the matter is that only the law abiding will follow the law, the lawless will NEVER follow the law (which is the definition of lawless!). Had one of the students or teachers been armed with a CCW weapon, it is possible his reign of terror would have been foreshortened. "gun free zones" are not and never will be "gun free". what they are instead are "free fire zones" because the lawless know that they will not be challenged by anyone equally armed.

The supreme court has ruled that because of sovereign immunity, the police have NO DUTY to protect you. And even if they did, there is no way they can be everywhere. therefore the only person that is ALWAYS responsible for your safety is yourself. But the VA Legislature has ruled that people on the VA Tech campus may not defend themselves. So if the police cannot defend you and have no DUTY to defend you even if they could, and you cannot defend yourself, who can defend you?

A quote I stole from Big45Iron:

The fact that laws against carrying weapons were ineffective against crime was no secret to Thomas Jefferson, who hand-copied this quotation from the 18th century Italian criminologist Cesare
Beccaria’s 1764 book On Crimes and Punishments into his own notebook on law and government, a quote which sums up well the arguments of those who defend the right to keep and bear arms:
“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of
arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty –so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator– and subject innocent
persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences
and advantages of a universal decree.”

As to what punishment would I proscribe? For those who voted to prevent the VA Tech faculty and students from protecting themselves, they are guilty of negligent manslaughter and I would sentence them to community service of cleaning the blood off the floors and walls of the buildings. that way they will have real blood instead of merely figurative blood on their hands.

For those that supported them, only the admonishment that I hope against hope that they never find themselves in a position of having to defend themselves and be unable to. But I will not shed many tears if they could not.

April 17, 2007 2:26 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home