Gun advocates find in massacre a call to arms

Ohio State University senior Matt Green is angry and frustrated that the students at Virginia Tech died unarmed and defenseless.

Since hearing news of the massacre Monday, the 22-year-old Sylvania Township man has joined hundreds of other college students across the country in calling for students to have the right to be armed on their campuses.

Students from Ohio schools, like Allison Harnack of Miami University and Brent Kirgis of the University of Toledo, have also jumped in to support allowing guns on campus.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/117697179...

No votes yet

That's all we need is a bunch of drunk macho college students running around carrying guns. Heaven help us!!!

"All evil and unhappiness in this world comes from the I-concept."

"All evil and unhappiness in this world comes from the I-concept."

The state has the right to ban guns from it's public buildings. State colleges are public buildings hence the ban holds. Private colleges have the right to decide whether to ban or not to ban, but most, if not all of them have bans in place.

If students want to live off campus and own firearms that's a different story and it's up to the laws that govern any other citizen.

I do not lump all college students into the 'drunken frat rat' stereotype. They have rights and responsibilities just as any other adults do.

As far as the quote from the Irishman who changed his name to Wee Woo Wee, that's ridiculous. Our country became great because our declaration of independence recognizes that INDIVIDUALS have 'certain unalienable rights'...

Socialists hate the idea of the individual. Find me anyone anywhere who's lived under a Socialistic government and ask him if he'd ever go back. The ability to stand up for oneself, and take our destiny's into our own hands is what makes our country great - and the opposite, laying back with our hands out and looking to the government to coddle us from cradle to grave is what's driving us into the shitter.

Many of the older generations of Russians and so on, long for a time of the past. But they can accept excesses of the system, Stalin's purges and so on and hold him as a hero.

But back on topic, "Our country became great because our declaration of independence recognizes that INDIVIDUALS have 'certain unalienable rights'..."

The creator gave us rights....which are? Can we do as we please with out some outcome to our actions?

Can we pack heat as a creator given right? Is that what the creator had in mind?

"The ability to stand up for oneself, and take our destiny's into our own hands is what makes our country great - and the opposite, laying back with our hands out and looking to the government to coddle us from cradle to grave is what's driving us into the shitter."

And with those rights come responsibilities. Are we acting, on whole, in a responsible manner when we have people shooting up people, like the Nasa incident or a teenager walking into school and threatening others and killing others?

We speak of rights and yet we do not act in a responsible manner, laws, regulations are put in place as we cannot control ourselves.

We are the problem and yet at the same time we are the correctors and yet we do not like giving up rights and yet we must regulate the populace as the populace cannot regulate itself.

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

"If we have the INDIVIDUAL right, we also have the INDIVIDUAL responsibility. It's not my fault when some idiot acts irresponsibly."

Okay, valid point.

We are individuals and yet we are part of society. I prefer to not too refer to people as idiot's as the person at Virgina Tech had some mental health issues nor would I refer to politicians or ex-politicians as idiots for some of their actions.

Life is a fabric woven together for all of us. Do my actions cause an immediate reaction to you? Probably not but if I act in a way that causes harm to another and then that person reacts and causes harm to another and so on.

Some, much older than me, have said that life is a circle and then sat back and watched, saying no more. And they watched me spin in circles.

"The populace does regulate itself in the laws that are already existing." And yet parts of the populace do not want to be regulated as their rights are being infringed on. Ice cream or cake, I like ice cream better and eat it too?

"If a person isn't afraid of the consequences of murder, they're not going to be afraid of the consequences of illegally getting or carrying a weapon."

Quite. But if the process was possibly more uniform and consistent then....ah but wait....you would be infringing on the rights of another.

"You seem to be suggesting that because of a few bad apples, everyone must be regulated, rather than making an example of those who are 'bad.' Is this correct?"

Ms. Thurber, what are laws for? But to regulate the bad apples and set rules for the good apples to follow.

I also had the privilege to meet a 94 year old elder that said to silenced adults, kids really, as we were huddled to hear her diminutive voice, it is for you to decide what is right and wrong and for you to live with the consequences as she sat back and smiled.

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

Here's a thought-provoking commentary about guns on campus. www.counterpunch.org ...An excerpt is quoted below.

Bring Back the Posse

By ALEXANDER COCKBURN

Since there undoubtedly will be a next time, probably in the not so distant future, what useful counsel on preventive measures can we offer students and faculty and campus police forces across America?

There have been the usual howls from the anti-gun lobby, but it's all hot air. America is not about to dump the Second Amendment to the US Constitution giving people the right--albeit an increasingly circumscribed one -- to bear arms.

A better idea would be for appropriately screened teachers and maybe student monitors to carry weapons. A quarter of a century ago students doing military ROTC training regularly carried rifles around campus. US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia recently recalled regularly traveling on the New York subway system as a student with his rife. Perhaps there should be guns in wall cases, behind glass, at strategic points around campuses, like those fire axes, usually with menacing signs about improper use.

Five years ago Peter Odighizuwa a 43 years old Nigerian student killed three faculty members at Appalachian Law School Dean with a semi-automatic handgun, but before he could wreak further carnage two students fetched weapons from their cars, challenged the murderer with guns levelled ,and disarmed him.

[Rest of article can be found at the address cited above.]

So, we take our lumps once and a will and move on.

This is what happens when I rush to complete my turn at the computer so my kid can use it...

we take our lumps once in awhile and move on...

that someone in authority did not have a gun on the campus. The severity of the situation could have been cut short when the two armed forces met.

I'm just aghast when people postulate the argument that law abiding people will be safer when they aren't allowed to bear arms and defend themselves against armed criminals.

Who thinks like that? Who is childish enough in their mind to think that if you pass a law the criminals and law abiding people will all just turn in their guns?

Who is dull witted enough to suggest we'd be safer if our government and criminals were all armed and WE WERE NOT?

Scary. Very scary that there are people out there who are so Utopian in their minds that they cannot see what actually exists in the world. They'd take a Utopian solution and apply it legislatively in real world conditions.

Take the guns away from the criminals and the government. Then talk to me.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

"two students fetched weapons from their cars, challenged the murderer with guns levelled ,and disarmed him."

It is reactive to a situation and does not address how to stop gun violence before it occurs.

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

We would need to define law abiding.

He did have some problems arise from his interactions with some students on campus before his mental state collapsed but he was law abiding enough to go to a gun shop and buy the weapon and when his mind snapped he used the weapon.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070417/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting

http://toledoohioneighborhoodconcerns.com/blog

I'm all for an individual's gun rights but I also believe that there should be "gun free" areas.

Any business or institution should be allowed to decide if it wants to have a gun friendly zone or not.

Let the students leave the guns locked in their cars.

MikeyA

MikeyA

China. The only gun owners in China are the government. Anybody willing to go that far? I ain't.

If you're here to tell me it's my fault - you're right. I meant to do it. It was alot of fun. That's why I have this happy smile on my face.

...who is this "we" you keep referring to? If we have the INDIVIDUAL right, we also have the INDIVIDUAL responsibility. It's not my fault when some idiot acts irresponsibly.

The populace does regulate itself in the laws that are already existing. If a person isn't afraid of the consequences of murder, they're not going to be afraid of the consequences of illegally getting or carrying a weapon.

You seem to be suggesting that because of a few bad apples, everyone must be regulated, rather than making an example of those who are 'bad.' Is this correct?

Ohio State University senior Matt Green is angry and frustrated that the students at Virginia Tech died unarmed and defenseless

This is really a very hard question I think. Yes its great to think that in the first few moments of the killing spree an armed student could have whipped out his gun and taken out the killer saving coutless lives.

What I wondered about is one student hearing gun shots sprinting out of a class room gun drawn and running into another student doing the same thing, neither one knowing who is the actual shooter and hurting each other thinking they've come across the real killer. Or worse being mistaken for the killer by the police.
It would only add to the deathtoll.

I'm not saying that they should or shouldn't be allowed to carry guns, just pointing out that even if other students had been armed it wouldn't have necessarily stopped the killing.

Perhaps there should be guns in wall cases, behind glass, at strategic points around campuses, like those fire axes, usually with menacing signs about improper use.

This meant to be a joke, right?

Look, the truth is, we're probably lucky occurences like VT and Columbine don't happen with more regularity. It's the price we pay every so often for our "second amendment rights." So, we take our lumps once and a will and move on.

Perhaps there should be guns in wall cases, behind glass, at strategic points around campuses, like those fire axes, usually with menacing signs about improper use.

Brilliant!
Then the manical killers wouldn't have to bring their own guns they could use the ones provided by the school!
The only possible good thing about that I can see would be if a distinctive alarm sounded the instant the glass was broken alerting the building that someone in the building had a gun so that doors could be locked and cover found.

Am I nuts, or was Cho Seung Hui "law-abiding" when he got his guns?

http://nookularoption.libsyn.com/

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.