POLJUNK

Derek,

Your commentary reminds me of an incident that I witnessed when I was in college. Some frat boys had rented a house down the street for the sole purpose of having keg parties. The neighborhood was "dodgy." One such party was under way one night when some local gang-bangers decided to crash the party. Of course, they were turned away at the door. So, one of the bangers picked up a stone a threw it through the front window of the house. Seconds later, a herd of hockey-stick-weilding frat boys assembled in the street in front of the house and threatened to kick the bangers' asses. One of the bangers replied, "Im gonna get gun and come back." Pointing to the frat boys individually, he said, "Then I'm gonna shoot you, and you, and you." Then the bangers took off.

Not twenty minutes later a car pulled up in front of the party and one of the bangers popped some caps at the house, hitting one frat boy (in the arm) who was on the porch at the time. (He dropped his hockey stick.)

The bangers in this incident acted as one might expect. That's bad enough. It would have been really interesting to see what would have happened if a bunch of priveliged and drunk frat boys had some heat too, not just hockey sticks.

Don't forget; these folks who think everyone should be armed to the teeth are also usually very pro-life. The irony kills.

Now, don't get me wrong. I like guns. I go skeet shooting from time to time and love to blow shit up when I can. But I also strongly believe in strict gun laws and restricting areas where guns are legally carried. Yes, I get that then "only criminals will have guns" but I also know that the shithead who I cut in front of at Starbucks this morning probably will not.

Reynolds is an ass.

Even the NRA is refusing to comment until all the facts are known.

And Derek - apparently this maniac loved to skeet shoot too. Only his clay pigeons were real life human beings. I just don't think you can have it both ways.

Do students still eat Mini-Thins? I thought they were all into snorting Ritalin these days...

Just like Columbine; it took maybe 2 minutes for gun nuts to hijack attention away from the death of innocents to say we need less gun enforcement.

I have no problem with legally obtained firearms. But I don't have the slightest idea what makes these gun nuts tick or why they have no sense of propriety.

Bryan, what am I trying to have both ways? There's no disconnect in thinking people can own firearms and also thinking we can regulate that ownership. We license and restrict dangerous behavior all the time. auto license, pilot's license, commercial trucker license...

Where's Charlton Heston when you need him? I'm waiting for the NRA to hold a rally on the quad at VT.

Derek: By "you", I didn't mean you in the singular. That seemed a little glib on reread, so I apologize.

My understanding of this situation so far is that this kid obtained a gun(s) legally. He had a green card, he was able to purchase the fire power that allegedly was used to kill these people.

Since he wasn't a felon and he had proof of identity, ta-da. Now, if he had been asked to take some sort of mini MPP (personality profile), we might not be having this discussion. But that would be a violation of rights. Or so says the NRA.

There's a line in the Woody Allen film "Hannah and her Sisters" in which a disenfranchised artist is talking about the holocost. To paraphrase, he says: "It's not surprising that it happened. What's surprising is that it doesn't happen more often."

I guess that pretty well sums up my feelings on gun violence. Until we make buying guns more difficult than getting some Claritin, we're fucked.

Whaddaya know: According to the Violence Policy Center, the gun industry creates its own reality.

http://www.vpc.org/studies/gunownership.pdf

Hmm. The vast majority of college students are decent, law abiding folks just trying to get an education. Imagine a small percentage of those decent folks discreetly carrying arms and using them only in the direst of emergencies. But you probably can't imagine that since you seem to identify more with the privileged, drunken frat boys. Do a little research and see how many cases you can find of a law abiding citizen carrying a gun legally shooting people other than in self defense. You won't find them, because it doesn't happen despite many thousand of people being armed all over the county. And by the way, being drunk and armed is generally not legal in case you didn't know.

Semper,
I did know that and yet I know lots of folks who start off their day sober and somehow end it drunk. What if those same people are packing heat instead of car keys?

But having spent far too much time at college parties with every stripe of college student, I am not at all comfortable with the idea of gun toting 21 year olds recreating the old west to settle a euchre dispute. Yes, there are plenty of decent, law abiding college students all over the country, and they sometimes do stupid things like we all do.

Semper,

It isn't the law-abiding folks I worry about. Given the relative immaturity of many college students, arming them is probably not a good idea.

Do you seriously think students are gonna walk around with guns drawn at the ready to deal with any potential threat? Unless somebody has a gun already trained on that classroom door, the psycho is gonna bust off a few rounds before even the most experienced marksman-student has time to draw his weapon.

If you support free and easy access to firearms, then you inadvertently also support putting guns into the hands of people who should not have them. That's the trade-off that you make. Most of these gunmen were law-abiding persons until they pulled their triggers.

I'm not naive enough to think that simply declaring a campus or a community "gun-free" will mean that a person can't bring a gun in if they really want to. This will work about as well as declaring "drug-free school zones." (Don't get me started on what a farce the War on Drugs is.)

What we can do, reasonably, is create an environment that makes it difficult for the wrong people to get their hands on guns:

1) People with criminal or mental histories should not be allowed to own guns.

2) We need reasonable gun registration / background checks. The NRA has almost always opposed such measures. Why? If you are, in fact, a law-abiding citizen, then why would you oppose registration and background checks? Also, if my next door neighbor has 25 guns, I absolutely want local authorities to be aware of that fact.

3) Nobody needs a goddamned assault rifle. They are designed to kill a maximum of people with a minimum of effort. If they are allowed to proliferate, what do you think will eventually happen?

If our society is going to allow people their guns, then the occasional massacre by a lunatic is one of the prices we will have to pay.

So basically what you're saying is that states like Utah have it wrong, where college carry, both open and concealed is a protected right? I haven't heard of anyone shooting up a Utah school. In fact, I think they are probably the safest schools in the nation.

Are you saying that places like Kennesaw, GA have it all backwards with mandatory gun ownership (with certain exceptions) and a crime rate that is almost negligible?

Are you saying that states with a Shall-Issue permit system (38/50) are wrong in trusting citizens to do the right thing are wrong in their approach?

The logical pitfalls that the anti-gun argument must overcome are near insurmountable on a number of fronts, even more so for those that want to restrict the bearing of arms in a concealed or open manner. Those that are bearing openly or are paying the tax on the privilege of conceal carrying are not the lawbreakers or trouble makers.

Also, you do realize that the police have no legal obligation to protect your life, right? That decision has been upheld in the Supreme Court multiple times. Basically, cops are there to enforce the law and tag your body if you are the victim of a violent crime. They are not your legal guardians or protectors of life, they are agents of the state that are out to do the state's bidding.

I realize this is an old post but I figured what the hell.

CARRY ON!

-N8
Open Carry California!

Nathan,

Utah has everything wrong, particularly underwear, but that's another matter. I have, however heard of shootings at plenty of other schools, even in gun-loving states such as Colorado and Texas (!). Perhaps you're right that Utah's schools are ultra safe. Please come to Chicago and explain to the gangs who rule the high schools on the south side what they're doing wrong and how they can be more like Utah.

Why would you support government-mandated anything? I agree, Georgia is backwards. Lots of little towns (at roughly 30,000 residents, Kennesaw is tiny) have relatively low crime. That's because they have relatively low people.

Have you seen some citizens? I wouldn't trust half the citizens in this country to walk a goddamned dog. Guns are not toys, and, no, I don't think it's a good idea to hand them out like candy on Halloween. Be careful what you wish for.

"The logical pitfalls that the anti-gun argument must overcome are near insurmountable on a number of fronts, even more so for those that want to restrict the bearing of arms in a concealed or open manner. Those that are bearing openly or are paying the tax on the privilege of conceal carrying are not the lawbreakers or trouble makers."

- If you introduce guns into a population, sooner or later they will be used. That is all.

"Also, you do realize that the police have no legal obligation to protect your life, right? That decision has been upheld in the Supreme Court multiple times. Basically, cops are there to enforce the law and tag your body if you are the victim of a violent crime. They are not your legal guardians or protectors of life, they are agents of the state that are out to do the state's bidding."

- I understand this perfectly. I also don't live in fear of my world. You, apparently, do. I'm sorry.

You appear to be the typical gun fanatic, complete with a hatred of government and taxes. Funny thing, though - there is a place where there is no government, no taxes to speak of, and everybody is armed to the teeth and they often use their guns to settle their differences. Much like the Old American West, no? The weather's usually warm and there are some nice beaches. Perhaps you'd like it. The place is called Somalia. - Kinda shoots a hole in your argument, doesn't it?

Wheee...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/11/alabama.shooting.spree/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/03/11/germany.school.shooting/index.html