Sarah Brady & Paul Helmke Seek to Profit Off Virginia Tech Shooting
April16
Wow, talk about balls. Even if I were anti-gun, I wouldn’t jump on board designing new fundraising graphics before the bodies go cold. But that’s what Sarah Brady and Paul Helmke have decided to do. There’s just something about designing graphics just for the event on the day of asking for money and email addresses for a mailing list that doesn’t sit well with me.
UPDATE: For those of you who wondered what it looked like before they changed it to raise money on the backs of the victims, Sebastian had the super brilliant idea of capturing the cached page. As you can see, the graphics were completely new and designed specifically for the tragedy.
No obviously related posts.
They aren’t the only scumbags trying to score cheap political points out of this:
http://www.nyagv.org/documents/VirginiaTechShooting.pdf
Words fail me. Those who have reacted to todays killings with their fatwah against guns and gun owners are, indeed, scum.
It’s not a problem for the political points (even if I disagree), but to raise money is what I find disgusting. I don’t find the two to be in the same category.
The antis have been having a tough time in Congress, statehouses and the courts lately so it really doesn’t surprise me that they did this.
[...] I know there are Brady Campaign people that sometimes read this blog. I don’t honestly fault you guys all that much for covering the tragedy at Virginia Tech, or even for making policy implications around it. I certainly saw a lot of people on our side doing the same. But come on, changing your web site to prominently feature a “Donate Now!” button is pretty low. [...]
wow.
that’s fucked up.
It’s as if they have templates made up waiting for something to happen so they can start pushing it as soon as possible.
Ya think???
[...] Brady Presser: Shockingly, they blame guns. Well, and try to score some $$$. [...]
[...] our efforts are paying off. As distasteful as it seems, we can’t let down because the bigots will never let down. We see the NY Times calling for more gun control. Carolyn McCarthy calling for more gun control. [...]
[...] did move quickly; other than the Instapundit link that Sullivan gave, The Bitch Girls have a post showing the anti-gun Brady campaign getting into the debate early, the Violence Policy Center gave [...]
this sick opportunism–cashing in on great tragedy–is another tasteless symptom of the movement to destroy our second amendment right.
Those of us with carrying permits. if we were on that Va campus where the psyco was, would have taken him out long before he murdered all those kids.
Banning hand guns only removes the defense part of altercations not the bad guy ones. The stats for crimes involving a weapon kinda goes like this…….Less than 6% of all crimes involving hand guns were guns that were legal. That means that 94% of thos guns were obtained illegally, irregardless of the existing laws. Point is, the bad guy is going to get guns no matter how difficult the anti-gun peeps are with their laws. Their laws only remove your self defense mechanisims. But, then again, that’s what’s really behind the anti-gun lobbyists….Get the guns away from honest Americans, then our gov’t will become a full dictatorship, not the half one it is now. You people need to open your eyes and stop believing everything news channels are reporting. As a former newspaper worker, I saw where all the news came from and what it went thru before it got to you. It was censored by our gov’t before it hit the paper. Why do u think that all the channels have the same news stories on them? It all comes from the same place!
Didja ever wonder why these massacres never happen unless 1) the Democrats are on power and 2) they have a gun bill in the hopper that isn’t moving?
If GUNS cause crime, then matches cause arson and pencils cause misspelled words.
We have got to fight to keep the second amendment and the freedom of gun ownership. Convict the criminals, do not punish the law abiding citizens.
I agree , one law abiding citizen with a pistol and that wackjob whould have had something to think about.
What I don’t quite understand is, armed or not, the guy wasn’t rushed while reloading. If it looks like your going down anyway…
It seems like ever since 9-11. The only goal of the U.S. Government and those who run it are sacrificing the needs of many to please the few. Don’t expect the Government to come to your aid in time of need. Unless you’re an illegal alien or minority, the Government doesn’t care about you.
I agree 100% with DaFireman’s comment regarding keeping our weapons and defending ourselves. I also find it disgusting that the people who try to make money-for whatever cause-from a tragedy such as this, are despicable. I don’t, however, feel we should be so distrusting of our government. We should be informed and willing to pray for our leaders-Republican and Democrat-and vote for the candidate who is best capable of articulating and getting American policies enacted. We enjoy so many freedoms that too many of us take for granted.
Banning guns will not BAN shootings, why can’t you get this through your head. It is disgusting to start asking for money when the bodies are still warm, you sick, sick people.
Charlotte, Everyone talks about hurricane katrina and how the Government couldn’t take control of a horrible situation. Granted it was a disaster, they still messed it up. They went to people’s houses that owned LEGAL FIREARMS and demanded them to turn them over. It wasn’t those people who were doing the looting and rioting, but they were an easy target and it looked like they were doing something, even though they weren’t.
[...] more concrete and without getting into politics per se. A commenter over at the Bitch Girls asks why nobody bum-rushed the gunman while he was reloading. That’s a fair question, and one some of [...]
The people that go to the trouble to legally buy and license their guns are NOT the people that commit crimes with them. For the most part, they are extremely responsible and law abiding. It just amazes me that the anti-gun contingency feels these same law abiding citizens will suddenly go (pardon the pun) ballistic and start shooting innocent people. The majority of legal purchased guns are used for hunting, target shooting, collecting and self defense.
Now, if the school would have had armed instructors, trained in the use of a firearm, much of this would have been prevented.
Protect your students, not allow them to be targets.
It boggles as to why they think that having more anti-gun laws would be any more effective at stopping such psychopaths. The college was a “gun free” zone to begin with and so it was already illegal for the shooter to have a gun on campus. Would 10, 100 or 1000 more impotent laws have any effect in stopping a crazy SOB hell-bent on murder-suicide? Did any of these laws deter the shooter? No, but instead the laws were very effective at keeping the law-abiding from having any means to protect themselves. People need to wake up to the fact that there is actually no one responsible for your safety but you and you alone. Waiting for the police (who, by the way, have no responsibility to protect you as an individual per SCOTUS) to come rescue you has proven to be the best way to almost guarantee your own demise.
Several of you may also be interested in my update on VPC flat out lying about NRA’s response to this whole incident.
They outa be burned at the stake.
I’m from Indiana so understand people want to keeo their guns so they can hunt. The thing is, they hunt with shotguns, not semi-automatic weapons. The average person has no need for this kind of weapon and they need banned!
When will you get it. It isn’t about hunting, its about being able to defend oneself against people trying to take your freedom. I should be able to own whatever I want, not what you decide I should have. Austraila and Britian banned guns. All they got was a 300% increase in crime. I can’t believe they have the nerve to point a finger at the U.S.
Who decided hunting was the only legitimate sporting use of a firearm?
Being a free human being means I don’t have to justify a god damned thing to you, Julie. If we’re going to start banning things based on need, pretty soon, we’re not a free people anymore.
Last year Britain had 46 gun fatalities. New York City had over 300.
It doesn’t take a genious to figure out that gun control worked!!
God damned? God has nothing to do with this.
You seem to have missed the part where I wrote the “average” person does not need a semi-automatic weapon. I did NOT say no one has a reason to have one. I’m sure there are legitimate reasons, but I don’t think this student from Virginia Tech had a legitimate reason. When you can justify his need for a semi-automatic weapon, you’ll convince me.
I offer viewpoint from SAF
‘NOW IS TIME FOR DEEP REFLECTION, NOT DANCING IN BLOOD’ SAYS SAF
BELLEVUE, WA – Today, as the nation is mourning Monday’s horrible loss at Virginia Tech, this should be a time of deep reflection and offering our prayers for the victims and their heartbroken families.
Sadly, noted Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, some groups and individuals are using this terrible crime to further their own political cause: the continued erosion of firearm civil rights and the abolition of firearm ownership in the United States.
“Almost from the moment the first news broke about this monstrous crime,” Gottlieb said, “we at SAF have been forced to respond to staccato attacks from gun control organizations whose goal is to destroy the Second Amendment. Perhaps we should be astonished, but in fact, we are once again simply disappointed in the morbid exploitation of this event. We are grateful, however, that the media has given us an opportunity to respond to these attacks. There was a time in the past when that did not happen.
“These groups, that so quickly have tried to politicize Virginia Tech’s sorrow and loss, have a well-documented history of shamelessly dancing in the blood of crime victims to advance their agenda,” he continued. “Such deplorable behavior should not be forgotten by the American public. Eighty million law-abiding gun owners in this country did not go to Virginia Tech or some other college campus yesterday to unleash carnage. They have harmed no one, and their civil rights should not be erased in response.
“Today, we should all stand together as Americans with broken hearts,” Gottlieb added. “Today, we are all Virginia Tech students and alumni. Today, we are all diminished by this great loss.
“There will be plenty of time in the days and weeks ahead to analyze what happened, to try and make some sense of such a senseless act, and to examine what may have gone wrong and learn from it,” Gottlieb stated. “For now, let us direct our emotions toward where they will do the most good. Let us offer our prayers and support to the families of the victims, and to the thousands of students whose lives will be forever changed by this despicable, cowardly act.”
-END-
Copyright © 2007 Second Amendment Foundation, All Rights Reserved.
Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005 Voice: 425-454-7012
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
FAX: 425-451-3959
email: InformationRequest@saf.org
Julie…
The FBI says 80% of those 300 in NYC were criminals shooting other criminals.
That leaves 60, half of which were citizens defending themselved against criminals who don’t care about gun laws.
Julie- England and Scotland are passing laws against knife ownership
Julie: One of the problems that irritates all law abiding gun owners is how the “anti Gunners” use the ignorence of those not interested in owning or scared of guns.You use the term ’semi-automatic’ weapons. EVERY gun, with the exception of single shot guns, usually bolt action rifles for beginners/training purposes, are semi-automatics. Any gun, revolvers or ‘automatics’ fires every time the trigger is pulled. The term ‘automatic’ DOES NOT MEAN a gun keeps firing as long as one holds the trigger down and it runs out of ammo. It simply means it will load the next round into firing position to be fired when the trigger is pulled again. A revolver with 6 bullets has to have the trigger pulled 6 times to fire it 6 times. A semi-automatic pistol with 10 bullets has to have the trigger pulled 10 times to fire it 10 times. What the ‘anti gunners’ will have everyone believe it that a semi-automatic gun will empty as many rounds as the gun has in it by simply pulling the trigger once and holding it until the gun is empty. What they don’t tell you is that fully automatic weapons HAVE been against the law to own for many years unless one has applied for and granted a special collectors licence. You MAY NOT resell it to anyone who does not ALSO have the special licence.I have attended many gun shows over the years and have NEVER ONCE seen a fully automatic weapon even displayed, let alone for sale. If ALL SEMI-AUTOMATIC guns were to made illegal, it would vertually mean an end to firearms ownership. All pistols and revolvers. Most rifles, hunting and target. A large share of shotguns used almost exclusively for hunting. Also most articles that the anti-gunners write are so deceitfull and exaggerated in nature that they fall by the wayside if one will spend some time investigating their claims through research. If one corrects their posted claims by eliminating the higher crime areas in the US (that most of their numbers come from ), and populations, the US stacks up very favorably with other countries WITH much tighter gun control laws for crimes committed with guns, including murder. They leave out facts such as murders and other crimes now committed in these countries with other weapon like knives. Be objective, not emotional,and do some reasearch. It will open your eyes as to the true reason for the anti-gunners not wanting guns in the hands of the general population. Before Hitler and other dictators took power, the FIRST action they took was passing laws against gun ownership.
Yea guns! YOU did it again! I can’t wait until the next campus shooting. Why do paranoia and pro-fireams people mesh so well toghether? Guns are idiotic and dangerous weapons this type of event will occur until they are gone.
All you gun nuts please stand in a circle with your guns and see who is the toughest, that could solve a bunch of problems, quick.
Julie: Glad to see New York City’s defacto gun prohibition working so well for it. The US and Britain have always had roughly similar ratios of murder rates, even when both countries had no gun laws. These days our rate is dropping, and theirs is increasing.
In fact, if you look at the jurisdictions in the US where gun ownership is higher, crime is lower. I’m not saying that’s a causal relationship, but that it shows that guns aren’t really the problem.
Sandra Hammond-
“All you gun nuts please stand in a circle with your guns and see who is the toughest, that could solve a bunch of problems, quick.”
There’s two kinds of people Sandra-
The kind of people who think their lives are worth defending, and are willing to defend their own life, with deadly force when necessary-
And the kind of people who don’t think their life is worth defending, and when presented with violent aggression, they (useless) cringe in fear, waiting for the police to come save them. There’s 32 people still waiting.
The people in the second group- (your group) have some kind of loathing for the people in the first group (my group) I can’t seem to figure out why.
Simon: I’ve never waited for the police to save me from anything and chances are I never will, but if I’m ever in that situation its because some moron got access to a gun, and as you probably know any moron can operate a gun.
I don’t need a gun to defend my life either, just a brain.
Phil
Thank you for the education on how a semi-automatic actually works. (No sarcasm here.) But this leads me to the question of how the hell did this gunman have time to shoot so many people if this is true? I can’t help agreeing with another poster that he could have been bumrushed while reloading.
And I must admit that I do wonder how many people in Britain are now being killed by blunt force, strangalation, etc. While gunshot victims are down, is their murder rate really down? It does make sense that crime rates would go up. I’m sure the criminals thinking is, “Let’s break in and rob them. What are they gonna do? Shoot me?”
While I do want a limit on who has access to a gun, I think realistic questions need faced.
Sandra, if a man had his arm around you with a gun to your temple would you be able to use your brain to avoid getting shot? I don’t think so. How about if he had a gun to the head of your child?
Sandra
I’ll take the scenerio further because I’m curious on how you think you’d get out this with your brain.
You’re at the gas station, bank, convienience store…pick any location. A man grabs you from behind, puts a gun to your temple, tells everyone else to get down and says he’s robbing the place. If he doesn’t get his money he’ll shoot you in the head. A man tries to go for a security button or maybe his cell phone and the robber shoots him without a second thought and puts the gun right back to your temple. You know this guy is capable of shooting someone in an instant.
So tell me, oh smart one, how’s your brain gonna save you?
Yesterday 32 American men and women lost their lives in a shooting done uninhibited, on a college campus. Get ready, here comes the stupid questions from retarded, and emotionally uncasterated morons. Why did this happen? How could this happen? Why didn’t somebody stop him? How can we keep this from happening again?
Ok, ok, don’t get your undies in a bunch. You didn’t see this kind of outrage when Chechnyan Islamic Terrorists killed hundreds in a Russian elementary school a few years ago. (Oh, right, you probably forgot about that already). Let me anwser these questions for those who can’t quite see through the smoke and mirrors provided by a coddling, manipulating social system.
Why did this happen? Simple, two things are facts in our country that provide for such tragedies, we have uncontrolled borders that allow our enemies flow right in like water through a hole in a sinking ship; that, and as in this case, some people are just jacked up in the brain. No one will ever know exactly why THIS creep killed all those folks. He was just mentally unstable, and a sociopath. Such people exist, and it is a problem with out a solution. I like to refer to such individuals as assholes. Unless your delicate personality prevents you from doing so, I suggest you do to.
How could this happen? Simple, a dude grabbed a gun, and went into the one area he knew masses would be gathered, unprotected, and completely incapable of defending themselves: a college campus. You see, campus police only carry flashlights, or maybe a baton. Whole lotta good that will do against a shotgun! Campusses are easy to access, and nearly impossible to close off. They also ban teachers and students who are licensed to carry weapons for defense every where else, from carrying their handguns on campus. So what have we created? In a society where 37 states issue concealed handgun permits, we have planted unarmed zones where assholes can gain access on a whim, uninhibited, and armed as they please.
Why didn’t somebody stop him? Umm… duh! Nobody could. In our country, over 1 million illegal weapons are imported via the black market every year. That is one illegal weapon imported for every 25 citizens each year. It is more impossible to stop this flow than to stop illigal aliens, or even the drug flow. It is NOT going to stop! What’s my point? Anybody can get a gun if they want to bad enough. Especially criminals. It would be easier for me to get a fully automatic, and totally illegal MAC 10 from Downtown Fayetteville, than to buy a legal Glock from a licensed gun dealer. Guns are a part of the world, and American society. An unremoveable part. However, the places like movie theaters, college campuses, and fair grounds are banned from legal concealed carry. Why? To prevent such instances as this, which is about as stupid a screen door on a submarine. All it does is prevent people who choose to obey our laws, from defending themselves in this location.
How can we stop this from happening again? Simple, lift the ban on people who are licensed to carry firearms concealed, from our campuses. I promise you, if I was anywhere near that asshole, he would have had only seconds from the first shot till I put a round through his head. Oh, wait, even though I am licensed and capable of defending myself and others in most places, a college campus is not one of them. If proffessors, who chose to get licensed armed themselves, one could have shot this asshole before he killed so many.
Simple anwser folks, criminals have guns, and you can’t change that. Cops can’t stop such atrosities, as is continueasly proven. You are an adult, and responsible for your own life. Are you gonna take that responsibility or just hope for the best? Your choice, you life. As for me, I am writing my congressman telling him to lift the ban on licensed carry on college campus, and if you see me strollin’ down the street, you can believe I am packing.
Folks! Don’t you want to know who in the hell sold a gun and 33 bullets to a lunatic with a history of violence?! Is it really that easy to buy a weapon of mass destruction in our country?! Wasn’t there a background check? Isn’t there an interview or a psychological exam you have to pass when you want to buy a gun? Do you even have to take a class to get a license?? How in the hell could this happen? This is what us non-gunlovers are so pissed about, not that you’re free to buy a shotgun and go shoot bottles at the dump, give me a break!
And Simon there are far more than two kinds of people. The “useless” person you’re describing who in your eyes doesn’t think their life is worth defending with deadly force sounds like Ghandi or Jesus, neither one a coward by any stretch. There are other reasons for not wanting to carry a deadly weapon and for not wanting the average person to carry one either. Have you seen how easily people get pissed off when they’re drunk or cut off in traffic (or both)?? And who the hell are you to describe victims of a violent psychopath as useless anway?! Think quick: you’re walking by a crowded schoolyard downtown and a guy who has just commited a robbery runs through and grabs a little girl and holds her up to his chest as defense. So now get to use your gun and be a hero finally. Are you gonna pull out your gun and point it in his (and the girl’s) direction? What if he sees you with your gun and he fires at you? Are you going to be “willing to defend your own life” and shoot back at him and the girl, into the crowded schoolyard? Or are you “useless”? Are you willing to accidentally kill children and other bystanders to “defend your life”? When the real cops show up how are you going to explain that, sure, you’ve got a loaded gun in a schoolyard but really you’re the good guy? Real life, it’s not clean cut.
PS Phil, the word “ignorance” is not spelled “ignorence”.
I find it curious that some people are so afraid of the vast majority of gun owners who are law-abiding that they would deprive the law-abiding of a liberty in an attempt to contol the relatively small number of those who misuse firearms. I don’t know how many crimes are committed with guns each year in the U.S.; but if a different gun was used in each of 250,000 crimes and there are over 200 million guns extant, the percentage of gun misused would amount to .00125.
I noticed that the Chinese government had the nerve to condemn our firearms freedoms. Unless they have changed their methods they have guns deaths, too. The big diffence is that in China it’s a state-run operation in which a bullet is administered to the back of the head of criminals convicted by kangaroo courts. Of course the starvation of various ethnic minorites does avoid gun violence, not to mention the savings in ammunition costs.
In this country, it is unlikely that any gun ban scheme would be successful in preventing deaths on any scale.
By the way, I carried a gun every working day (and many days off, too) of my 30 year LE career. Law-abiding gun owners didn’t worry me; but the lawless, with or without guns, could be scary.
Mike — Let us not try to exaggerate the simplicity of what happened. Gandhi nor Jesus were waiting in the wings to stomp-out oppression, nor were they religious leaders… It was a school. Deranged man enters school with guns and, methodically and anti-socially, systematically began killing people for some unknown reason only to himself.
I am a 9-1-1 dispatcher. I handle police, medical and fire calls daily from victims in the heat-of-the-moment from just these kinds of disasters. I am also a gun owner. I am furthermore a concealed weapons permit holder. Yes I took a class regarding the same laws policemen take regarding use-of-force, yes I am skilled with firearms. Yes, I have taken multiple psychological tests and interviews for my job. I am very confident that I also have a cleaner background down to kindergarten than even you do.
My first rebuttal is simply how _dare_ you think that you can even contemplate what it means to be a victim in such a situation. How dare you even trivialize someone’s willingness to protect a life which I believe everyone here wishes to on some level.
You have effectively created a no-win situation which even a trained and very experienced police sniper would have a problem resolving, and used that scenario to push through your own viewpoints that are both meaningless and distasteful.
Do you know what it is like to talk to a murderer? Do you know what it is like to talk to victim who really does have a gun pointed to their head? What advice would you give them, with or without a gun present in the victim’s or even someone else’s hands? Do you know how useless the victim actually feels not being able to have any control on their life continuing? Do you know how useless you feel, as someone who is trusted to preserve life feels, not being able to do anything when you hear that shot and the sound of their body hit the floor? Do not pretend to know how it feels. Do not pretend to think that you know what “hero” means, or even what the “real cops” do. Take your baseless reason and shove it until you have something to bring to the table.
There will always be no-win situations, such as the one you posed. There will always be mistakes, many of which are taken by “real cops” every day far more outweighing the regular citizen with a firearm. No one can ever predict a situation with a deranged individual with a firearm. No amount of background checks can single-out someone who hasn’t had an episode of violence yet. There is indeed no way to predict the future and I find it humorous that you would even try.
One thing that is obvious in your no-win situation is your lack of training and experience in hostage situations. A person such as the one in Virginia is not going to take a hostage, he planned on taking his life before he ever loaded his gun off campus. He did not need a “bargaining chip” to leave unscathed. He was a sociopath. The only people that take hostages believe that it will either delay the inevitable a little longer or provide a means of escape. Many people involved in school shootings do not count on this, they count on suicide as their means of escape — there is no bargaining with people who intend to do harm without remorse.
So now you’re left with nothing. That’s right, nothing. No law on a piece of paper is going to stop someone from committing a crime. I haven’t seen a cellphone yet that can both call 9-1-1 and stop a bullet at the same time. A law is not going to save you and neither is a phone because we can’t magically materialize a SWAT team to your location. It takes time. Usually it takes quite a few minutes. So let’s say 10 minutes as a VERY conservative number. Do you know how slow just a minute passes in crisis? Can you imagine 10 of them? What will you do for 10 minutes while someone is randomly shooting people in front of you?
The answer is you _try_. That’s the best that any of us can do, even the “real cops” and “real heroes”. The theory that Phil was proposing was not that guns are the end-all-be-all of violence in society. The theory is that what if, given a situation where there is an opportunity of happenstance where a gun may just prove to be the right answer. The theory continues that if that opportunity presents itself to stop that violence, would you take it? If that opportunity is subsided by the inability to have a gun, what would have been the outcome if someone did have one?
Would it have made a difference? Maybe, maybe not. Nobody knows. But the question posed to you is that if there was a situation like there was in Virginia — mind you no hostage situation occurred that we know of — would the presence of someone with a gun who could take that opportunity to stop that violence and potentially end it short of its outcome instantly be worth having the chance to have that gun present?
And everybody _was_ hoping to have a gun present whether it will be admitted or not. If a person did not want to have a gun present in the hands of a regular citizen, they wanted one of those “real cops” to have one, didn’t they? They were hoping that the “real cops” who are “real heroes” to come save the day… WITH THEIR GUNS.
So I ask you: The outcome that _everyone_ was hoping for was that the deranged person would have been shot on-sight when he pulled his gun out, before he could take the first shot. Realistically, this would never happen. Idealistically, we were all still hoping for that — that he would be stopped before his rampage. But we’re not mind readers, so he would open fire on one of the innocent victims. So if there was a chance that someone, anyone would have been able to stop that person — by the only realistic means to combat a gun, which is with a gun — would you have hoped and prayed for one of those “real cops” to come in 10 minutes or would you have accepted Joe Schmo who would have an equally comparable gun and skill who would have already been there in the first place?
You have already made it clear that you do not trust a gun in the hands of a regular citizen. But you also make it clear that you do, in fact, trust a “real cop”. Might I remind you that the only thing different between a cop and a regular citizen is a certification. A certification that shows that the cop has been taught the laws and understands them. A person with a concealed weapons permit has the same certification only in the laws that govern self-defense and the defense of others with not only lethal, but non-lethal force as well. Because, whether you’d like to believe it or not, killing someone is still killing someone. The only thing that makes it right is whether that person was standing on the side of law to protect life. There is NO law that protects solely cops when they shoot someone in defense of themselves or others. If you don’t believe me, look it up, call your local police station or legislature. The various state laws protect a citizen, any citizen — cop or not — who stand on the side of law and the protection of life. Why are you so focused on ensuring that only a person with a shiny piece of tin on their chest is the only one that can save your life?
You have the right as well as anyone — including “real cops” — to save a life. You choose not to and that’s fine. But you should keep in mind that there are some people that believe that life is too precious to take the chance of not being able to defend it. Guns are not the end-all-be-all of defending yourself or others. It is the means by which you can defend it when lesser options are not appropriate nor comparable to what is threatening your life and action of some kind needs to be taken _now_ to save it.
PS Mike, the name “Gandhi” Jayanti is not spelled “Ghandi”.
Some really wacko folks in this comment thread…
A favorite quote “The 2nd amendment is not about rabbit hunting” flies in the face of those that say this or that weapon is too big, fast, automatic, etc. Either the citizenry can be armed or they can’t. This case, of a legallly acquired weapon brought illegally onto a campus to commit illegal deeds, is a cost of our freedoms to choose. Chinese newspapers today revel in the violence caused by our “loose guns laws”, not a problem in their fair country.
if only one person had a gun with them this would not be so ugly .period -enough said
Calm down, all of you. Would any of you care to listen from someone living in a strictly regulated society? Japan has one of the lowest crime rates in the world, including gun crime, but it is not a safe society by any means. Obtaining a firearm illegally is no more difficult than finding a McDonald’s. I’ve been living here going on 5 years now, and so far I have seen on the news (what’s been reported, that is) school killings, shootings, (the mayor of Nagasaki was shot the same day as the Va. tech tragedy-he died), slayings, suicides (32,000 each year, on average), and countless other things. The point is, over here, telling the people what they can or cannot possess lead to telling them what they can or can’t say, now telling them what to do is at their doorstep.
Well, the American government has already made a mistake long time ago to allow Americans to have guns. So now, it would be impossible to ban guns. Even if you carry a spot check, there will always be some remnant of a gun or ammo. If the whatever organisation ( the Brady? ) really wants to bring out the bans, well they would be lyk Ghandi. Not asking for donation. Why do you need donations for anyway? To bribe the officials? Which I trust it wont be for that use. Sometimes people dont get it that sometimes to do the right thing, you do not always have the correct rewards. Well, the Chinese cant really revel, cos they had a case a month or two back that two uni students were daring each other to kill some random guy, and then they both got killed cos they started fighting. You dont need a gun to do the works. You just need a desire for blood. Why does every one speculate whether a certain method could have prevented the disaster from happening? Its already past. Now we have to see the people in front of us, like the VT killer, and help them. Not to dwell on the past. That would certainly be a good waste of time. This sort of reminds me of the Rawandans.
You don’t get it, do you? Gun control is not about making society safer, or saving “the kids”. It is about disarmament. The Second Amendment is there to put the “teeth” in the Bill of Rights. Without it, our Constitution is simply words on paper. Having the right to bear arms is a jewel envied by countless nations, and condemned by just as many, especially communist countries. By the way, Sarah Brady’s organization is openly supported by communist China and Russia, to name a few. They want to see America go the wayside just like Australia, England, and South Africa. Democracy and freedom are enemies of the wicked, and should be defended accordingly. So ask yourself this: since when is the world interested in what’s good for America? Answer: when it suits their political agenda, which is NEVER good. Right now, your government and the U.N. are seeking to disarm you like never before. Why do you suppose that is? If the real reason behind gun control were made known to the public, the outcry for it would cease. Remember…a bird in a cage is safe, but still in a cage. If you’re tired of living in America, constantly bashing the freedoms that your founding fathers DIED for, then please feel free to move to one of the aforementioned countries. And by the way, your freedoms were bought and paid for at the business end of a rifle. This message brought to you by an American.
Julie. Just some ideas for you. I am an avid gun owner and was also a Police Officer in Atlanta, GA for several years. Unfortunately we live in a violent society. If guns could truly be outlawed and destroyed, then society would then turn to other outlets for violence, knives, baseball bats, anything that could be used to harm others would become fair game. What then, do we outlaw all those items? A gun is a tool. We need the laws on the books and the enforcement at the judicial level to get these problems under control. Banning certain types of guns or all guns won’t do a thing to eliminate these types of crimes. Not sure what the ultimate answer is to our violent society, but I stand ready on a daily basis to protect myself and my family.
An armed society is a polite society. Soes Brady really think that they can control violence by banning weapons? How many people who leagally carry concealed weapons on their persons are involved in illegal actions? I would bet that the number is very small compared to those illegally carrying weapons. I proudly carry my weapon and would run screaming like a girl from most any violent situation. But if I can’t extricate myself from a situation where someone had a weapon and was trying to kill me, well…..
It’s times like these which I am thankful we have worthy organizations such as the NRA which will help defend our freedoms against the inevitable onslaught. In fact, I just sent them a $100 check.
Why is it you do not hear of
any shootings at Police Dept.is it because the bad guys know every one there is carrying a gun
[...] would be nice if the money raised by the Brady Campaign with the snazzy new logos posted within a few short hours of the tragedy was donated to a good [...]
FYI, I posted this at digg.com – this deserves to be wider publicized:
click the “digg” button:
http://www.digg.com/politics/Brady_Campaign_makes_new_FUNDRAISING_graphics_within_hours_of_VA_shooting
It was not the gun that killed, it was the person that showed all the signs of mental unstability. If you want to put blame, put it on the people that knew of the problems the person was experiencing and didn’t want to get involved by turning him in to who ever could have given him the help he needed. The gun was only a killing tool for him to use. I also get frustrated with hearing about criminals being caught and they have 10, 15, even 20 past violations. The court systems are so overloaded with cases that they stream line the cases or for some reason these criminals don’t get put away like they should and eventually the crimes they commit get worse and end up killing with a TOOL, most of the time it is a gun used.
When are these Anti’s going to get it, that the gun is not what kills it is only a TOOL. They really need to work on the social and legal systems
This was written about 9/11, but applies perfectly to this thread:
“Many people will use this terrible tragedy as an excuse to put through a political agenda other than my own. This tawdry abuse of human suffering for political gain sickens me to the core of my being. Those people who have different political views from me ought to be ashamed of themselves for thinking of cheap partisan point-scoring at a time like this. In any case, what this tragedy really shows us is that, so far from putting into practice political views other than my own, it is precisely my political agenda which ought to be advanced.
Not only are my political views vindicated by this terrible tragedy, but also the status of my profession. Furthermore, it is only in the context of a national and international tragedy like this that we are reminded of the very special status of my hobby, and its particular claim to legislative protection. My religious and spiritual views also have much to teach us about the appropriate reaction to these truly terrible events.”
http://www.adequacy.org/stories/2001.9.12.102423.271.html
Good Point Mike. How could this happen? The back ground check didn’t look at this persons mental health record. Oh, that’s against the law. Since we don’t respect anyone individual rights, lets make everyone’s medical history available to anyone who wants it. Hell, lets post it on the web. In fact lets look into people’s health information before we give them a drivers license. Not a yes or no question, but a sit down exam with a Psychiatric. You never can tell, Sandra, may be in therapy for anger management. We wouldn’t want her behind the wheel. Come to think of it, subway platforms are a dangerous place to stand. Crazies might push us in front of an oncoming train. We should probably do back ground checks to ride the train. So the common thread with all of us “gun nuts” is this: If it isn’t your cup of tea, i.e guns, then don’t partake. Please don’t tell a law abiding person they have to have the same views as you. Many warning signs were missed with this mentally ill young man. I heard a radio person ask a therapist, “could we have done more for this person”. The therapist mentioned they had done all they could but the individual still has rights to refuse treatment. This is only a half truth. The shooter was evaluated before and was deemed “a danger to himself and others.” So if you want to be mad, be mad at the school, the administration, the cops who interviewed him and the mental health system for failing. They failed to recognize someone in need of treatment and provide that treatment. This happens everyday and is more dangerous then worrying if a person has a conceal carry permit.
Well said. Let’s not forget that after the Columbine massacre, the Brady bunch and the Million Misguided Mom March were advocating their new policy to parents, which was: “If your child wants to go to a friend’s house or a sleepover, inquire first whether or not the parents of your child’s friend are gun owners. Do not send your child to a home that has guns.” That is telling them to be selective about their friends based on an object that their parents may or may not own. Where does it end? Let’s go further, using the liberal mindset..Before I send my child to your home, you have to show me proof that you are not a gun owner, so let me come in and inspect your house. By the way, how well are your dogs trained? Where do you keep your prescription medications at night? Do you lock up the booze? Yes? Oh, so you’re an alcoholic. I want to see a psychological profile on you first. What about kitchen knives? Can’t have any of those, can we? Tools? Power drills? Saws? Lock ‘em up please. Better give me the key, too. Well, believe it or not, there are a great many liberals that would nod their head in agreement with the above statement, as ridiculous as it sounds. And even more nuts is that where I currently live, Japan, this is definitely the mindset. Gun control advocates like to cite this country as a model society where strict gun laws have made for a safe society. WRONG. Japan leads America by tens of thousands in suicides every year. Crime is rising rapidy, and arrests are way down. There are massacres here, but you never hear about them. A student a couple years back killed several students and then beheaded them, placing the heads outside on the school fence poles. Didn’t hear about that one, did you? Or the guy who was shooting a Mac-10 from a highrise in neighboring Fukuoka city, then killing himself. And don’t forget that the mayor of Nagasaki, where I live, was shot to death a couple of days ago. With a handgun. A BANNED handgun. A supposedly UNAVAILABLE handgun. And who do you think the Japanese are blaming? Their failed gun laws? No. The shooter? No. They blame America. Don’t be shocked. That’s the liberal mindset. So why blame us? Because the pistol supposedly was made in America. But that’s okay..I’ll be back in the States in a couple of years…although I wonder, what exactly, will I be coming home to? God help us all if another liberal coward Democrat gets into the White House.
Food for thought: All the people who were killed during the September 11th tragedy were effectively killed with a razor blade. No guns were used at all.
My point is that if someone is hell bent on killing and willing to die themselves in the process, then no laws can be made to stop them. A sling shot, a knife, bow and arrow, piece of pipe, large rock, whatever, will do the job.
Enter the gun. Probably the weapon of choice for most psychotic killers, but also the great equalizer. You’ve probably heard this before, but whether or not you are religious or pro or anti-gun, if you are in a situation like Virgina Tech, you will pray for someone with a gun to show up and save you.
Keep in mind that the police officer that does come to “rescue” you has no desire to die either. It may not be in their best interest to lay their life on the line to come to your aid. I am in no way trying to be disrespectful, just practical. Wouldn’t it be reasonable then, for you to have the right to defend yourself? Of course I am speaking of guns (don’t bring a knife to a gun fight). As mentioned by others above, this right need not be exercised, but is a very good one to have.
Finally, beware of anyone quoting statistics. They can be manipulated to prove just about any point.
[...] I was watching Nightline last night, and they ran a story of people who were cashing in on the Virginia Tech tragedy in various ways, such as registering domains like http://www.vatechlawsuit.com, and the like. Of course, they seem to have overlooked a pretty big example of this. [...]
[...] What pro-gun group went the way of Sarah Brady in a fundraising email plea sent 11 days after the Virginia Tech shooting? <sarcasm> To [...]