In the wake of the VA Tech shootings there have been many people predictably laying blame on the school administration for not locking down the university (excuse me, how many cops do you think they have to seal off every possible entrance to a university campus?). I've heard some say we need to have metal detectors at every building, which is absurd as well. If I wanted to I'd wait for a dead period between classes, walk up, and shoot the security guy before continuing on in the building. This might sound harsh, but in reality it's simply the truth. America is not nor will it ever be completely safe. We can do our best to try and limit damange not just from man-made harm, but also from natural disasters. We have doppler radar and sophisticated equipment yet Hurricane Katrina still wreaked havoc and earthquakes still cause destruction. We have new safeguards in place to try and prevent another 9/11 attack yet someone will decide to crash and aircraft somewhere else with a maximum effect. We have barricades and checkpoints at government buildings to prevent another Oklahoma City, but someone will find a way to make the bomb smaller and safe from detection. We build safer cars yet people still die--some the product of road rage like what happened here in the DC area where a man ran a car off the road and killed two people. If someone decides they're going to kill they're going to do it. Nobody is going to stop them from deciding it's going to happen. But it doesn't mean we leave completely in fear and stay indoors trying to ride out the storm. You might think I'm being a little morbid and have a doomsday mentality, but I'm just being realistic--seems lawmakers don't necessarily live in that world.
So this brings me to two editorials I found on www.cnn.com. The first is from Tom Plate, a professor at UCLA, who believes no one should be allowed possess a gun. You can find the article here. I found his article interesting in the way someone smoking weed might think the world is perfect. He talks about how the tragedy somehow makes it harder for him to be proud of being American--huh? He talks about how people have focused on him being a Korean. I agree there that race has nothing to do with it--this guy was off his rocker and it didn't matter what race or ethnic background he had. Sure, gun violence has seemed to be on the rise. Used to be you'd get into a fight with fists and that was that. Nowadays you have to worry about someone pulling a weapon on you or coming back later to exact some measure of revenge. But I don't think guns caused people to do that--not sure what, but I don't think that was it. I do agree with Mr. Plate the mantra that "guns don't kill people. people kill people" is a tad on the absurd side because someone has to aim the gun and pull the trigger. Mr. Plate tells the story about how he was robbed at gun point by some guy as he was taking groceries inside his house. Let me tell you something, Mr. Plate, that guy probably wasn't someone who went and legally purchased a firearm. And why he brings in the whole Korean thing again at the end makes no sense to me. One person responded to the article by saying guns should be made more difficult to get. Why would you make guns more difficult to get for law-abiding citizens? This lady is out of her mind! How long have we been fighting the war on drugs? We have seizures all the time of drug caches and dole out stiff penalties. And yet people still score drugs. Get real, lady.
Ted Nugent's article with an opposing viewpoint (found here) discusses some of the fallacies with the idea guns should be outlawed. I've got to say I agree. I don't own a handgun, but why not protect yourself if necessary so I don't have a problem with people LEGALLY obtaining a firearm if they so choose. In a response, Doug from Houston TX believes it's absurd to let everyone own a gun because criminals will find a way to gain the upper hand on their firepower. I believe Doug was dropped on his head. Doug, WHY DO YOU THINK CRIMINALS USE GUNS NOW? Because they know you probably don't have one! I can't foresee a criminal trying to be conspicuous with an M-60 under his trench coat waiting to mug someone or taking a chance on robbing someone who might have a weapon themselves. Do you think if cops were unarmed they wouldn't be held at gun point? Please. One guy from New York says we should be able to posses rifles for hunting, but handguns go too far. Ummmm, buddy, what happened was used during the DC sniper scare a few years back? It wasn't a 9 mm.
The next time someone runs over people with their car we're going to start considering bans on vehicles. Knives will be banned the next time some idiot goes around randomly stabbing people. Read Ted Nugent's article and you'll see a couple of other examples he gives. Bottom line, like I said before, people that set their mind to kill people or do harm will find ways to do it. Hopefully law enforcement agencies will intercede, but there's always going to come a time when it is up to a regular citizen--like the assistant principal in Pearl, Mississippi (more examples in Nugent's article)--to put a stop to the carnage.
No comments:
Post a Comment