Flawed Laws Help Stalkers Victimize Women

[flange]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

Most restrictive gun control laws were the result of knee-jerk reactions. Repealing them after they have been proven faulty is not knee-jerk.

Pure spin. "It's only knee-jerk if I don't agree with it." It's the same BS that we see with complaints about "activist judges". It's only an "activist judge" if we don't agree with the decision.

If this guy had been trying to tighten gun control laws, you would be squarely on my side here. The fact is that this guy is exploiting a tragedy to get his way. It doesn't matter whether it's more gun laws or less, it's exploitation plain and simple. This whole situation needs to cool off a bit before we go making radical changes to our gun control laws.

Just relax. There's plenty of time to think this through after we've settled down a bit. And before you go screaming about needing to do something fast before this happens again, remember, the gun-ban nuts are saying the same damn thing.

[Bubba]

Anything that restricts gun rights by law abiding citizens is a step in the wrong direction. It's the people that aren't going to pay attention to laws that have and will cause the problems. After all Virginia Tech is/was a gun-free zone, too bad that fact didn't matter to Cho!

[Highwayman]

CC laws have been around in most states for several years and most states bring up amendments on a regular basis. The Tenn. case was originally primarily aimed at parks and playground areas, not schools. This isn’t unusual as CC laws have a good track record and it’s knee-jerk to think that somehow folks that behave themselves will suddenly go berserk when crossing some line from one side of the street to the other. It was knee-jerk to put these restrictions into the law in the first place. The proven track record of CC laws is reason enough to start removing those restrictions.

Keep in mind that Virginia discussed lifting the restrictions on college campuses last year but it was defeated. Defeated in part because of lobbying by VT administrators who claimed guns and CC had no place on campus. So when it comes up for a second time this year, and we can bet it will, is it a knee-jerk reaction or the revisiting of an old topic with a new perspective?

VT spokesman Larry Hinckman in 2005, "I think it's fair to say that we believe guns don't belong in the classroom. In an academic environment, we believe you should be free from fear."

Note to Larry; It didn’t work.

[flange]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

So when it comes up for a second time this year, and we can bet it will, is it a knee-jerk reaction or the revisiting of an old topic with a new perspective?

Here is a quote from the article you posted:

NASHVILLE - In a surprise move, a House panel voted Wednesday to repeal a state law that forbids the carrying of handguns on property and buildings owned by state, county and city governments - including parks and playgrounds.

"I think the recent Virginia disaster - or catastrophe or nightmare or whatever you want to call it - has woken up a lot of people to the need for having guns available to law-abiding citizens," said Rep. Frank Niceley, R-Strawberry Plains. "I hope that is what this vote reflects."

Come one, highway. They changed the law two days after the event. One rep specifically cited the VT massacre as the reason he felt it passed. You're telling me that this isn't a knee-jerk decision?

[Highwayman]

Knee-jerk at Yale: Fake wood swords to replace nasty assault swords.

In the wake of Monday’s massacre at Virginia Tech in which a student killed 32 people, Dean of Student Affairs Betty Trachtenberg has limited the use of stage weapons in theatrical productions.....

....“Red Noses” director Sarah Holdren ’08 said she first heard about the changes in a phone call from a friend as she arrived at the Off-Broadway Theater on Thursday morning. At the theater, technical director Jim Brewczynski told her about the new regulations. The pair then met with Trachtenberg, who initially wanted no stage weapons to be used in the show, Holdren said, though she later agreed to permit the use of obviously fake weapons.

In a speech made before last night’s opening show of “Red Noses,” Holdren said that Trachtenberg’s decision to force the production to use wooden swords instead of metal swords will do little to stem violence in the world....

Full story...

Yale Daily News - Weapons to go offstage

[Highwayman]

Originally Posted by flange

..Come one, highway. They changed the law two days after the event. One rep specifically cited the VT massacre as the reason he felt it passed. You're telling me that this isn't a knee-jerk decision?

Sorry I missed you while doing my other post. The law hasn’t been changed. This was just a sub panel of a committee. It has a long way to go and it doesn't affect schools.

[flange]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

Sorry I missed you while doing my other post. The law hasn’t been changed. This was just a sub panel of a committee. It has a long way to go and it doesn't affect schools.

Ok, you're right. I misunderstood when I read it previously. Still, it's a legislative body taking action towards changing a gun control law, and it still happened two days after the VT shootings. What if they'd been strengthening the gun control laws instead of removing them? Still think it's not knee-jerk then?

BTW, I'm not arguing to take away anyone's guns. I'm only stating that I think taking action one way or the other on gun control right now is not appropriate. I think it's fine for us here to discuss it, but we should wait until we all settle down before anyone tries to set things in stone. Taking legislative action now is nothing more than exploiting the deaths of these students and taking advantage of people's emotional response to this tragedy.

Regarding Yale: it's not a legislative action. They're trying to be sensitive and playing it on the safe side. It's probably overkill, but I really don't see the big deal.

[Made in the USA]

All this "knee jerk" action is making me a little "beef jerky"!!

[Highwayman]

Flange, I agree that you haven’t called for changing gun laws in either direction, only for a cooling off period before taking a “knee-jerk” action.

I also agree with your statement that the folks calling for more restrictive gun laws aren’t going to wait before getting started. The first salvo from that side that I personally heard was the White House press conference on Monday at 1:00 PM. The call was for age limits for gun possession before the identity and age of the shooter was known. I’d call that knee-jerk because the age was unknown.

The next round was straight out of the gun banners playbook about high capacity magazines and I still haven’t heard anything about capacity of the shooters magazines. So maybe that’s not knee-jerk because it comes up whenever those folks get a microphone. It has little to do with the VT event because witnesses reported the shooter reloading and several magazines littering the hallway. Forcing the shooter to reload a few extra times has little to do with anything because no one was able to stop him anyway. I suspect if the shooter used a pair of six-guns or a pump shotgun it would have had little effect on the outcome.

I submit that the issue of allowing CC on campus isn’t new or knee-jerk because it has been being discussed since last August after a previous occurrence of a gunman on the VT campus. Here’s the commentary by Bradford Wiles in The Roanoke Times dated August 31, 2006.

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.

Unarmed and vulnerable - Roanoke.com

[Highwayman]

Here’s a follow up by Mr. Wiles in the same paper from yesterday, April 20.

Student pleaded with Tech: Allow guns

Bradford Wiles

Wiles, of New Castle, is a graduate research assistant in the department of human development at Virginia Tech.

My fears have been realized. As a graduate student at Virginia Tech, I have been adamant about changing the university's policy forbidding students from defending themselves. Before I proceed, let me please express my deepest condolences to those who have lost family, friends and loved ones in this awful tragedy. I do not want anyone to misconstrue my pleas for reform of university policy with a disregard for the human impact of this calamity.

It is clear that we need to rethink the idea of gun prohibition. If just one person in Norris Hall had a gun to defend himself or his classmates from an armed attacker, lives could have been saved. It is difficult not to think about how I would have felt had I watched in horror as my classmates were gunned down, and me standing there without my gun, helpless. What would it be like to stare down the barrel of the gun when it was aimed at me?

Then I think about how abhorrent that scenario is. Shouldn't I be able to think about how I would draw my own gun and stop this madman from killing my classmates and me? Gun laws and policies affect law- and policy-abiding citizens. Are we really expected to think that the shooter thought, "I shouldn't go on a murderous rampage; it's against school policy?" Can't we all see how ridiculous that is?

The policies in place on Virginia Tech's campus ask that we, as students, faculty and staff, do exactly that. In August I wrote a letter to the president of Virginia Tech, Charles Steger. An excerpt reads: "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 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."

If they had made the change at that time, then perhaps things would have been different.

The fact is that we have seen where gun control gets us. Prohibiting guns on campus only creates a place where those bent on murder can inflict the most amount of harm with the least fear of armed resistance. Virginia Tech has asked that its students choose between expulsion and death. Is that a choice we need to be forced to make?

Would my wife and family, knowing how much I have written and spoken about allowing me my most basic right of self-defense on campus, feel any comfort in the policy that supposedly protects me?

Larry Hincker, associate vice president for university relations, in response to a column I wrote in August asking that the university change its policy forbidding law-abiding concealed handgun permit (CHP) holders from carrying on campus, wrote the following in The Roanoke Times: "Guns don't belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same."

Do you still feel the same way about your policy now, Mr. Hincker? Will your faith in that policy provide comfort to any of the victims' families?

In the coming weeks and months there will be calls for gun bans and tougher restrictions on gun rights. This is only "feel-good" legislation and does nothing to prevent those who follow the law from protecting themselves. The answer is not restricting freedoms, the answer is to make would-be killers think twice because of the probability of armed resistance.

Let us try the other end of the spectrum, responsibility for our own safety. If the university community members were not subject to penalties for arming themselves, perhaps someone would have neutralized the attacker before he could kill more than 30 people. The Virginia Tech police did the best they could in responding. Responsible individuals who want to protect themselves need to have that option, without being subject to disciplinary action or termination of employment.

The devastating events on Virginia Tech's campus remind us of just how sacred and precious life is. The Virginia Tech community and the entire nation wish that the families and friends of the afflicted students find peace somehow.

We all need to come together and do what is prudent to minimize the possibility of this ever happening again.

Student pleaded with Tech: Allow guns - Roanoke.com