Here Come The Gun Banners

Status
Not open for further replies.

Guntalk

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
835
Location
Louisiana
I sent this out in my newsletter today, and posted it to the web site. I share it here.

Tom

--------------

April 16, 2007





"Gun Free" Zone Failure in Virginia

Here Come The Gun Banners

April 16, 2007, just might be a turning point in the battle to restore gun rights to Americans. The tragedy at Virginia Tech today, with more than 30 people being killed in a premeditated murder spree, will be the fulcrum upon which the anti-gun rights forces leverage their efforts to restrict (destroy, if possible) your right to not only own guns, but to protect yourself and your family.

Quite simply, this is the mass shooting the anti-self defense forces have been waiting for, as we will see over the coming days and weeks. The papers are already drawn up; the proposed restrictions were penned long ago; they have merely been waiting for this moment.

Lost in the coming cacophony will be the utter failure of the "perfect" gun law -- a total gun ban. You see, on that university campus, no one is allowed to have a gun for self protection in dorms or classrooms. It is the latest in a long string of murderous failures of "gun free" zones, or as they are better called, "victim-rich environments."

According to the school’s “Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention Policy”:
“The university’s employees, students, and volunteers, or any visitor or other third party attending a sporting, entertainment, or educational event, or visiting an academic or administrative office building or residence hall, are further prohibited from carrying, maintaining, or storing a firearm or weapon on any university facility, even if the owner has a valid permit, when it is not required by the individual’s job, or in accordance with the relevant University Student Life Policies.

Any such individual who is reported or discovered to possess a firearm or weapon on university property will be asked to remove it immediately. Failure to comply may result in a student judicial referral and/or arrest, or an employee disciplinary action and/or arrest.”
(Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Policy 5616, Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention Policy, http://www.policies.vt.edu/5616.pdf)

A similar situation to the one that happened at Virginia Tech occurred on January 16th, 2002 at Appalachian Law School in Grundy, Virginia. A disgruntled former student began a similar shooting spree. The difference in this case was that the attack was stopped by three individuals, two of whom were legally armed with handguns. Unfortunately, the attack was not stopped until three people had been killed and three more wounded. Why did it take so long to stop the attack? The good guys had to retrieve their guns from their parked cars before they could confront the gunman. ALS was a gun-free zone, you know.

Barely more than a year ago House Bill 1572 couldn't even make it out of committee in the Virginia General Assembly. The bill would have made it legal for students and staff at Virginia universities to have guns for their own protection. Today's shooter did not wait for such a law, and took advantage of the government-mandated victim-state.

When House Bill 1572 was defeated, state newspapers reported: "Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. '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.'"

Once again, the desire to "feel safe" prompts decisions which actually make people less safe.

What does it mean to America's gun owners? It certainly sounds the battle cry for those who enacted, then lost, the ability to ban full-capacity magazines for defensive firearms. Expect a quick call for limiting magazine capacity--and thus, the ability to fully protect yourself and your family. There may well be calls for the banning of all autoloading (semi-automatic) firearms, even though those have been in use for more than 100 years.

Fortunately, the political landscape is much different than it was when the Brady Bill and the Clinton Gun Ban were passed in the early 1990s. Those acts helped pull together a fragmented firearms industry which, until then, had kept out of politics, leaving that to the NRA. The firearms industry now understands the threat, as do individual gun owners who use guns for recreation, but especially for self-protection. Passage of the so-called "assault weapon" ban resulted in the Republican Party taking control of Congress, according to President Bill Clinton. The gun issue is largely credited with keeping a Republican in the White House since then. Elected officials of all stripes know that any proposal to infringe on gun rights is a third rail, capable of cutting short almost any political career.

Certainly, some closet gun banners will be emboldened by this tragedy and will come forward, counting on a groundswell of public outrage to carry the day for repressive gun control laws, much as it did in England and Australia after those countries experienced similar shootings. The disturbing fact that the violent crime rate skyrocketed in both countries following the confiscation of guns from honest people will not quell the zeal of those who dream of a country where the criminals are free to prey on the defenseless.

They long for the day when they can bring the failed experiment of "gun free" zones to every town, neighborhood, and home in America.

Until Monday, April 16, it was thought that gun control would be an issue politicians would try to duck over the next 18 months. That may have changed. What has not changed, though, is the awareness of the American public that they need firearms for personal protection. The vivid images of helpless people during Hurricane Katrina being victimized by thugs, with no police to help, crystallized the understanding that each of us is responsible for our own safety. Today, we all know we can certainly take advantage of help from official sources, but we also are clear that we should never give up our ability to help ourselves.

Today's shootings are terrible. Our hearts go out to the victims and their families. We don't want to inject politics into this, but to ignore this is to pretend the sun doesn't rise each day. The assault on our rights surely will come.

Whether we gun owners get swept away by a tsunami of gun restrictions, or swim to the top with logic and organized persuasion depends, I think, on the intensity and the quality of our reaction. One thing is for sure. This is the fight which will determine the future of gun rights, the firearms industry, our ability to protect our families, and the strength of our Constitutional protections.



* * *
 
Very well articulates the sensible position in light of today. Thanks for sharing Tom!

Regards,
ART
 
ART:

The assaults have already started. I do, however, see much more balanced news reporting relative to the gun issue. Not actually balanced, but it's a far cry from what we got 10 or 15 years ago.

There are many reasons for this, and we don't have the bandwidth for it here, but there have been some very sophisticated efforts on the part of a couple of organizations over the last 15 years which have moved the media a signficant amount on this issue. No, they are not our friends, but their coverage isn't as nasty. (Columnists and bloggers don't count.)
 
Go to thomas.loc.gov and search on Carolyn McCarthy. She just introduced HR 1859 yesterday (no coincidence, I'm sure). The title of the bill is Anti-Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act of 2007.

She also got 3 new co-sponsors on HR 1022 yesterday.

John
 
I've started a blog. I know the last thing this country needs is another would-be pundit, but I can no longer remain silent. I hope you all enjoy it and I encourage discourse and welcome your feedback.

www.tedcrute.typepad.com.

Kind regards,

Ted Crute
 
All I can say my friends is "GET YO SH%T NOW!" whatever kinds of firearms you are planning to get, better get them now.
 
Mr. Gresham, you might note that Virginia Tech had undergone a campus evacuation in August 2006 due to an escaped convict killing one man and then seeking to hide on the campus.

This prompted VT graduate student Bradford Wiles to write this editorial in the August 31, 2006 Roanoke Times (you can Google his name for responses as well)

Unarmed and vulnerable

Bradford B. Wiles

Wiles, of New Castle, is a graduate student at Virginia Tech.

On Aug. 21 at about 9:20 a.m., my graduate-level class was evacuated from the Squires Student Center. We were interrupted in class and not informed of anything other than the following words: "You need to get out of the building."

Upon exiting the classroom, we were met at the doors leading outside by two armor-clad policemen with fully automatic weapons, plus their side arms. Once outside, there were several more officers with either fully automatic rifles and pump shotguns, and policemen running down the street, pistols drawn.

It was at this time that I realized that I had no viable means of protecting myself.

Please realize that I am licensed to carry a concealed handgun in the commonwealth of Virginia, and do so on a regular basis. However, because I am a Virginia Tech student, I am prohibited from carrying at school because of Virginia Tech's student policy, which makes possession of a handgun an expellable offense, but not a prosecutable crime.

I had entrusted my safety, and the safety of others to the police. In light of this, there are a few things I wish to point out.

First, I never want to have my safety fully in the hands of anyone else, including the police.

Second, I considered bringing my gun with me to campus, but did not due to the obvious risk of losing my graduate career, which is ridiculous because had I been shot and killed, there would have been no graduate career for me anyway.

Third, and most important, I am trained and able to carry a concealed handgun almost anywhere in Virginia and other states that have reciprocity with Virginia, but cannot carry where I spend more time than anywhere else because, somehow, I become a threat to others when I cross from the town of Blacksburg onto Virginia Tech's campus.

Of all of the emotions and thoughts that were running through my head that morning, the most overwhelming one was of helplessness.

That feeling of helplessness has been difficult to reconcile because I knew I would have been safer with a proper means to defend myself.

I would also like to point out that when I mentioned to a professor that I would feel safer with my gun, this is what she said to me, "I would feel safer if you had your gun."

The policy that forbids students who are legally licensed to carry in Virginia needs to be changed.

I am qualified and capable of carrying a concealed handgun and urge you to work with me to allow my most basic right of self-defense, and eliminate my entrusting my safety and the safety of my classmates to the government.

This incident makes it clear that it is time that Virginia Tech and the commonwealth of Virginia let me take responsibility for my safety.
 
Good piece, thanks Tom!


I do, however, see much more balanced news reporting relative to the gun issue. Not actually balanced, but it's a far cry from what we got 10 or 15 years ago.
You are right, at least they give a forum to pro-gun voices which is better than nothing.


Looking forward to your show this Sunday. I am sure this will be discussed in length.
 
but there have been some very sophisticated efforts on the part of a couple of organizations over the last 15 years which have moved the media a signficant amount on this issue.
Okay, I give up.

Which organizations ?
 
I would also like to point out that when I mentioned to a professor that I would feel safer with my gun, this is what she said to me, "I would feel safer if you had your gun."

Yeah, this is the sort of thing that should inform the legislators in richmond.
 
My point, had I had a gun while in class, there would have been about 2 shots. The first from him toward the classroom, and the second from my .45 in his face.... Case closed... There are two ways around this, end guns for all (not going to happen), or allow people to carry in public places like a university. Its a lot different from a high school, a lot easier to go into class with a gun. Had another student had a weapon, there would not have been near the amound dead from this. I just do not get it?? I will tell you this, yes, I could kill about 50 or so people in certain situations with my handguns before being killed. Anyone could.. It looks bad when someone acually does it. However.... If I really want to die in the effort of killing others, I could kill about 500 or more without the use of a gun. Lock them in, and use a very large fire or a bomb. When you look at it like that, a gun does not seem so bad, nor would it help in these kinds of cases. I just really feel that if someone would have had their own weapon, this would have ended much quicker. Not unlike many cases like this in the past. If anything comes out of all this, it will be a push to ban handguns, not allow us to protect ourself using them. "thats not safe":rolleyes:
 
Silver Bullet . . .

I was thinking primarily of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

The NSSF recognized long ago that just saying NO doesn't get the job done in politics. You need to position yourself to be a player, and that's what they have done.

In creating Project Homesafe (which became Project Childsafe), they spent more than $50 million on firearms "safety kits" which included educational info and gun locks. Yes, some on the gun fraternity had a problem with that, but what it did (and was designed to do) was establish in the minds of the Washington politicians and the press that WE were the "gun safety" people. WE did something about it. WE were doing more than just jumping up and down and shouting NO NO NO.

As a result, WE got a seat at the table when policy was being discussed. WE were and are consulted when somone is considering gun measures.

No longer do we sit outside the door and wait to be told what THEY have decided.

This is huge. It's also sophisticated.

NSSF also created ongoing media seminars to take journalists to the range, and to have them shoot and talk with championship-level shooters.

NSSF held events such as bringing the editors of Women's Wear Daily to the range. They were told it was a fashion show (country chic, don't you know), but they were offered a chance to shoot. It started raining, and even in the rain, the organizers couldn't get those tiny women in their expensive shoes to leave the range and get back on the buses.

There has been a lot of quiet work like this since 1994. What it has done is change the landscape with the media and opinion leaders. They may not write glowing articles about us, but within most of the media world, the current thinking is "what gun issues?" As one put it, "You have already won. This is no longer an issue."

Sure, we need people who "just say no" and stand the wall against assaults on gun rights, but we also need our own "intelligent services" who change the playing field below the radar.

Without that, the reactions to the VT shootings would be much, much different.
 
Tom, I hope you talk about this a good deal on your show Sunday. Wouldn't hurt to reference this article from last year about the Virginia legislature striking down a bill that would have potentially allowed someone to end this tragedy when it started. I quote:

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "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."
 
Tom,

We can't deny the national significance of this, but groups like NSSF, NRA-ILA, GOA, SAF need to follow VCDL's lead on coordinating efforts to make sure this doesn't happen again. You should contact Philip Van Cleave - [email protected] to discuss how these organizations can help.

We knew something like this was going to happen and we need people like you with a public forum to help get support behind VCDL with the goal of making sure these gun free victim zones are eliminated.
 
Tom,

Great way to put it.... Thanks!

I totally agree that if those that had a CCW in VA Tech were allowed to carry on campus. There would of not been 32 deaths and plus injuries. We would of still had some loss of life, till a CCWer responded.

The other way to think about it would of been, if CCW was allowed on campus and the shooter knew this, he might not of choose to start and create this mayhem. The shooter got his guns legally.... and appears to of planned this action. So he knew what he was doing.

Good luck on your show...
 
Great article, Tom. It's so important that we get our message out alongside the "Guns are bad, ban the guns" reaction.
 
Tom, good article. I find myself having a hard time disagreeing with your premise.
When House Bill 1572 was defeated, state newspapers reported: "Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. '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.'"
Since you are one of "them", might I suggest a follow-up interview with Mr. Hincker? Seems his comments encapsulate the current argument over gun control that is destined to expand. Since the chances of him agreeing to an interview rate slim to none, it would be interesting to see a chronicle of your attempts to get an interview. Don't know about you but I thing people ought to be held accountable for their public utterances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top