Guns, guns, guns; everywhere, guns
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
John A. Suren
Published: August 2, 2008
Reading about carrying guns in restaurants, and possibly on college campuses, makes me wonder where our country is heading.
Are the advocates trying to recreate the “wild west” era? Are we destined to become a gun-crazy society where no one will actually feel safe? We obviously fear robbers and murderers. Are we also going
to fear our fellow citizens?
I already know that we are a money-crazy society. Do we also need to be a “gun-crazy” society? In a Democratic society I always thought there were certain people assigned to protect us — the police,
the FBI, etc. I, and many others, have always felt comfortable with that. It has been reported that there are more guns in the United States than there are people. That frightens me!
The gun “toters” use the “self protection” concept to justify their action. Reference is even made to the Second Amendment! The Second Amendment has served us well for many years — how is it now
being interpreted as not serving us well? The battle cry we often hear today is “it’s unconstitutional!” At the rate we are going, the first words spoken by a newborn baby will be “it’s unconstitutional.”
Can you imagine being in a restaurant and hearing a shot being fired, accidentally or otherwise? Can you imagine the panic and fear? Why should we be subjected to such a possibility?
The “self protection” concept needs to apply only to our home and adjoining property. For centuries man has felt obligated to protect his family and property. Beyond that framework, there are others who
are supposed to do it.
The gun advocates need to be reminded that our Constitution is supposed to protect ALL OF US. You cannot give something to someone without taking something away from someone else.
Bills introduced to allow students to carry concealed guns on campuses are usually defeated. Hopefully, that will continue.
The main responsibility of politicians is to protect the lives of their citizens. Much of the fear frenzy that has developed is due to the politicians not focusing on that.
JOHN A. SUREN
Manassas
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( jVA ) on August 08, 2008 at 9:12 am
Thanks for the comments, Chet. And believe me, I actually agree with the right to carry concealed weapons. I’m just not sold on the idea of students carrying on campus. That is putting a lot of trust in the judgement and maturity of people who are still very young.
I think it also opens up a new can of worms. For every spree killer stopped, how many distraught ex-boyfriends get drunk and shoot their former girlfriend? Both scenarios are just as likely.
You asked two questions:
“If your daughter and my son were in a classroom where students were being executed by a suicidal murder”
The answer is obvious. But I’d feel just as safe if faculty members were armed.
“Here is a more common scenario – maybe my son, armed once again, is leaving a late night study session on campus and witnesses your daughter being raped. What should he do?“
I don’t carry a gun. But if I saw a rape being committed, I don’t think my reaction would be to run for help. I’d help immediately.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Chet Szymecki ) on August 06, 2008 at 6:47 pm
jVA – We can agree that approximately 50% are young adults 18-25 years old. The questions I posted below are not intended to be cruel but realistic. Please take a moment and reply with your answers as I am interested in your response.
If your daughter and my son were in a classroom where students were being executed by a suicidal murder and my son was carrying a pistol would you want him to draw his weapon and protect your daughter or simply submit and await their untimely death?
Here is a more common scenario – maybe my son, armed once again, is leaving a late night study session on campus and witnesses your daughter being raped. What should he do? If he calls the campus police and they are still not there after five minutes and now the rapist is bludgeoning your daughter what should he do?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on August 06, 2008 at 1:04 pm
“1) Fully 40% of “students” are 25 and older - check the statistics on the Department of Education web site and learn something this evening. I am 40+ and I just finished my Masters - my wife in mid-30s and is finishing up her Bachelors. “
Thanks for the stats, Chet. I don’t doubt it. But this still means that something like 50% are basically still kids just out of high school. And the students living in the dorms are generally not 25+. Certainly not 40 years old and married.
I just think as a parent sending my daughters off to college one day, I’d be happy to know that some of the staff and professors were armed in the event of an emergency. I’d be less excited to know that 19 year old frat boys were allowed to carry guns on campus. Really, what could possibly go wrong at 3 am after a kegger at Delta Delta Delta?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( mmarin ) on August 06, 2008 at 8:53 am
Carrying a pistol on a college campus is not illegal (doing so at VCU is). An employee can be terminated, a student expelled, but a non-student citizen is not in violation of any law and won’t be charged with a crime (legally).
Utah provides for students to conceal carry pistols in class and has done so for a number of years.
America is not supposed to be easy. Rights are always in friction with powers and any individual has the right to give up their right if they so choose. However, because you do not want that right or do not intend to ever use it; doesn’t give you the right to take my right away.
Always keep in the back of your mind that the first anti-gun laws in the United States were made to keep former slaves from having access to firearms. It was state sponsored racism.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Chet Szymecki ) on August 05, 2008 at 7:06 pm
In response to college carry consider the following:
1) Fully 40% of “students” are 25 and older - check the statistics on the Department of Education web site and learn something this evening. I am 40+ and I just finished my Masters - my wife in mid-30s and is finishing up her Bachelors.
2) These same “students” are permitted to carry everywhere else in our society with no problems but the moment they step on campus property they magically transform into killers? For what its worth most states allow 18+ ADULTS to openly carry a firearm with no permit. Most will grant a concealed weapons permit to those 21 and older. According to your flawed logic my sub-100# wife should not be permitted to protect herself while leaving campus after a late night of study/research.
3) If you have 15 seconds I will gladly provide you with all the firearm training you will ever require. Gather ‘round…here it goes:
- treat all guns as if they are loaded, always
- never point a gun at something that you do not want to destroy or kill
- keep your finger off the trigger until you are on target
- be sure of your target
Self-protection is a God-given right that we are born with.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Hokie ) on August 05, 2008 at 6:55 pm
“I also see no need for some of the automatic weapons that are now available to the general public”
Since when were we the land of the need? Should we outlaw everything except the necessity of life, food, water, shelter?
as far as permit holders vs police officers in shooting. About 11% of police shootings kill an innocent person - about 2% of shootings by citizens kill an innocent person -Gary Kleck, “Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control”, 1997
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Sammy B ) on August 05, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Decoligny, you are absolutely right that people have been hurt on account of speech or religious practice. That is why our constitutional rights do not protect snake handlers or the proverbial person who shouts “Fire!“ in a crowded theater. It is not stupid to regulate rights to a reasonable degree to defend the right of others to be safe. Contrary to your implication, I do not advocate any licensing program for speech, religion or voting because irresponsible exercise of those rights, except in extreme cases like the above, do not harm anyone. The exercise of one’s Second Amendment right without training, however, can very easily kill. To make my argument more specific, if someone wishes to keep a gun for home defense, hunting or target practice, there is little need for regulation beyond keeping felons from obtaining them. But if a citizen is appointing himself an armed defender of public safety, failure to obtain extensive training is comparable to shouting “Fire!“ during an opening weekend showing of the next Harry Potter movie.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on August 05, 2008 at 1:54 pm
“I absolutely don’t want college kids packing guns on campus. “
I’m with Cobra on this one, even in spite of VA Tech. I think a better idea for colleges and high schools would be to have a certain number of teachers or school officials licensed and trained to carry weapons.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( cobra ) on August 05, 2008 at 1:32 pm
As a life long responsible gun owner, I will agree with Mr. Suren in part. I absolutely don’t want college kids packing guns on campus. As stated, being a gun owner comes with some serious responsibility and training. Spending a day or two at the local range is not considered training. I also see no need for some of the automatic weapons that are now available to the general public. I was just at Clarke Brothers in Fauquier County recently and there were many new gun owners there taking lessons. One should have the right to protect his property and family. Beyond on that, I don’t need a John Wayne on every corner.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Decoligny ) on August 05, 2008 at 11:55 am
Sammy B asked: “Decoligny, I am assuming that you have seen friends and relatives killed by poor public speaking because there is no other way a reasonable person would have made the analogy you did in response to my comment. Why should we not expect people who own guns for the purpose of defending their fellow citizens to be as well trained as possible?“
I used the analogy to show how stupid it is to try to regulate the exercise of your fundamental RIGHTS.
There have indeed been many instances of people being hurt or killed because of something they said while speaking in public.
There have been many instances of people being hurt or killed because of the religion they choose to practice.
There have been many instances of people being hurt or killed because they chose to try to vote in an election.
Excercising rights does comes with responsibilities. But when you demand that exercising that right be limited to only those “qualified” enough to do so, it is no longer a right.
My point was, a right, which self-defense is, cannot be regulated or it becomes a privilege. We have the Right to Free Speech. We have the Right to Freedom of Religion. We have the Right to Vote. And we also have the Right to keep and BEAR arms.
Are you “fully qualified” to exercise your rights? And who exactly determined that you are qualified?
Report Inappropriate Comment