Cosmic Irony

I found a reply to my last comments. I appreciated the fact that he changed the title of his post to “Virginia Tech Massacre is the Result of Cowardice.” He has a point. But the cowardice was Cho’s. Not anyone else’s. Here is his reply, followed by mine:

12. Sean Wilson | April 26th, 2007 at 8:40 am

Ah, well, now we’re getting somewhere. Yes, some of the things I wrote were my perception of your views as I could gather from what you wrote. Clarification and complete ideas are safer from interpretation than comments which are not clarified.

First off, I have quite an open mind, more than even most of those I call liberal. Right away, I want to acknowledge that you make a good point about young Republicans, because I have heard more than my share of them espousing views just as ridiculous as anything coming from the left. Upon further thought, it occurs to me that even those conservatives and Republicans and Green Party and Libertarians and Independents who do not stand up for others are all cowards.

Thus, because I do have an open mind, I changed the title of this post to reflect that it isn’t just liberals who can be cowards. However, I do maintain that those who are ‘liberal’ with regards to preserving rights and privileges of citizenship hold perhaps a greater portion of responsibility as they have made it hard to eradicate crime to the extent that it can be done by the lobbying for laws that fail to punish violent criminals while making criminals out of others over ridiculous things.

As to your suggestion to read up on post traumatic stress syndrome, I have spent more than a little time studying it and reading up on it, and understand it pretty well—just as I understand a variety of other mental health issues and symptoms. I understand trauma and fear, I understand lingering doubts and the damage that certain things can do to one’s mind.

However, your suggestion that simply because it is hard to prove stalking is a reason not to press charges is more of the same excuses people make for not doing their part in society. Oh, I can’t be troubled, I might be inconvenienced, he might get off unpunished or the problem won’t be solved.

All kinds of things might happen. Our lives might end tomorrow for all we know. Is that a suitable excuse for our behavior today? If someone is a menace to society, or you believe them to be, you have a responsibility to your community to do something about it, that’s the bottom line. If you don’t care about those in the community in which you live, perhaps you ought to move elsewhere, and live far away from civilization instead, where you have no responsibility to anyone and depend on no one else.

Community and society are not something every person deserves or even has a right to. They are things you earn by your participation and your mutual agreement to be a productive and responsible part of your community. Failing to press charges against Cho prevented the rest of the community and the government from being able to do their part to address the situation in that case. One more failing of they system because part of the system—a citizen—shirked their responsibility.

I am not suggesting people do not make mistakes. I am not even pointing the finger at her and saying it is her fault. What I am saying is that she—along with many other people—hold more blame in this matter than guns or the right to bear arms. And that is a fact that no argument can change. The guns are not at fault…they are inanimate objects.

If you want to end such incidents, you must address the causes of them. How about first of all, we reserve rights guaranteed to citizens of the US by our Constitution for those who are in fact citizens? How about we hold everyone in society more responsible for the welfare of society? How about we hold parents and children alike accountable for their actions and prosecute them for harming others and dealing out mental and physical abuse?

How about we hold institutions accountable for making sure that when there are killings going on, that they have a loudspeaker system capable of immediately warning and notifying everyone instead of sending out email—which is about as ridiculous as it gets. Do I want to be trying to read email when I should be running for cover?

Back to the point of how I think victims can be part of the problem. That’s easy. If you make yourself a ready and willing victim by the way you live, by your failing to be involved in your community, by your failing to take actions on the behalf of others, by living in fear and making yourself a target, you are culpable in creating your own victimization. If you walk down a deserted and darkened street, passing by even darker alleys while listening to your iPod and counting the number of pigeon droppings on the sidewalk that stand out in stark contrast to the sidewalk pavement—and a criminal jumps out of the darkened alleyway and mugs you…then you helped create your own condition as a victim.

I know many people don’t want to hear that. They want to hear that it is always everyone else’s fault, and that they have no responsibility for their own welfare and being. I’m not uncompassionate, nor heartless. I have spent time helping out at orphanages, and working with mentally and physically challenged children. I am kind to animals and I do not tolerate bullies and men who are abusive or rude to women or children.

However, if you wander around in a third world country where kidnappings take place, you are putting yourself at risk. No one else is responsible for you. It is the same here in America. It is the same on the street on which you live. You are responsible not only for yourself, but for looking out for your neighbors. If one does not believe they have any obligation to their community, they are basically a leech on the society in which they live, taking advantage of what others have built, made, and struggled for, contributing nothing in return—simply out for themselves. And yet, these same leeches expect society to protect them, shower them with sympathy, come to their aid, and be responsible to them should they feel like suing the society that did not protect their non-contributing selves.

Are you fine with that? I am not. Not in the least.

You say “Restraining orders cost a lot more than they are worth.” With that attitude, it is no wonder the system fails. Protecting one’s life is not worth the cost and effort of a restraining order? And you bother to ask how victims can be responsible for something that happens?

Now see, I find that almost funny. Because those who attempt to stand up for themselves often end up victims because society denies them the means to do so. Take those women I mentioned in a previous reply that die because they had to endure a waiting period to purchase a handgun and were killed by an estranged lover, husband or whatever. Laws enacted by those who are too cowardly to address the real issues in society and instead suggest it is guns or knives or anything other than people and society are responsible for crime are what get such innocent victims killed. In almost every case I have heard where that happened, someone had gone to the police and nothing was done.

The only recourse left was fending for ones-self, but society’s cowardice robbed them of that ability and left them at the mercy of someone violent by refusing them the ability to immediately purchase a gun and provide for their personal security. There is someone who is a victim and blameless…someone who tried to use the system, and followed through. When that failed, they attempted to ensure their own safety but society robbed them of that chance and sentenced them to death.

That is what makes me sick.

Carrying weapons does not make people fearful, and it does not show how fearful a society is. That is a twisted perception that is fraught with holes. Being prepared does not make one fearful. Do people carry spare tires and jacks because they are fearful? Or is it simply prudent and convenient? Having backups of data is not considered fearful? Nor is having candles for a power outage is it? You’re projecting your own belief onto guns and what they mean.

Do you go around in fear of policemen? Do you cringe and worry for your life every time you see one? Then why would anyone fear other law abiding citizens? I don’t fear criminals. Never have, never will. But I take precautions if I am going to be somewhere where criminals might especially be found. If I go to the mountains to camp, I will take a gun—that is prudence, not fear. It means I am not depending on the goodwill of others, nor on law enforcement, for my safety. It does not mean I fear anyone or anything. I may even have the opportunity to put food on the table. Or better yet, some ignorant criminal may actually attack me and I will get the chance to do society a favor of ridding it of a violent predator. I would call that opportunity, self-reliance, prudence, smart, and not fear.

Just because I use a rope when I go rappelling does not mean I fear death. That is just what you do to rappel. If I wear a helmet because I may fall, but rappel anyway, I am not fearful of death, I am just taking precautions.

You mention the rate of accidental shootings is alarming. Even more alarming are the number of accidental deaths related to automobiles, drug overdose, workplace accidents and even suicides—which is no accident. I don’t hear anti-gunners calling for outlawing auto. Drugs have been illegal and it has not stopped the problem…why does anyone think guns will be any different? There is no evidence to even suggest this. I don’t hear liberals or conservatives calling for better workplace practices.

And more importantly, the rate suicides in America is far more alarming than accidental death by guns. In fact, the suicide rate is such that it is like loosing an entire town every year. How horrific would it be if tomorrow some town of several thousand people all at once just committed suicide? You think 32 deaths would begin to compare to that in terms of shock and outrage and disbelief? Yet, why aren’t people outraged about that issue and willing to tackle it? The simple fact is that our society does not encourage us to tackle difficult problems. I lay the major portion of the blame for that squarely at the feet of liberals specifically.

The same mindset that says we must allow everyone to be, do, and have the same rather than work for it…or that illegal immigration is fine because it keeps our lawncare and produce costs down and the construction industry supplied with cheap workers (who also happen to be the leading statistic for deaths by falling). Rather than address the root causes that led Cho to do the terrible thing he did, rather than holding those who could have prevented this tragedy from happening responsible for their failure…people instead want to blame inanimate objects and the right of people to own them.

I can pop open the DSV-IV (and yes, I have spent my share of time reading it) and find any number of symptoms that suggest transference of blame and responsibility and irrational fears of an inanimate object are not only not normal, but manifestations of mental health issues.

And I do agree again with you that this is not the fault of gun laws or lack thereof. Yet, the liberal ideology that suggests no one has a responsibility to their community or nation or society is directly responsible for this. The laws that allow foreigners to come educate themselves in our universities simply so educational institutions can make money while they commit crimes or worse, go back home and help terrorist organizations be more efficient and equipped and trained as a result of their education is a shame. The fact that we allow people to burn flags which are symbols of pride and give people a reason to feel civic responsibility—such as the kind that would encourage them to do their duty to their fellow citizens and help put criminals away—is a disgrace, and liberals are directly responsible for that.

Yes, in the end, Cho did what he did, and the fault is his. But many people share responsibility, because they did not act when they could and should have. Just as society does not act and many children are killed every year by abuse sickens me, it sickens me that some people feel no responsibility to anyone else. This is the me-me-me society we live in.

Again, part of the reason kids get away with heaping abuse on others that lead them to grow frustrated and angry and commit suicide or begin cutting themselves is because parenting has been made insufferable by liberals. I know a man who ended up in jail and had his career damaged because he came home from work one day, saw his son throwing rocks at other kids and grabbed him, shook him and demanded he stop. Someone nearby called the police and he was incarcerated for child abuse. Parents can not even discipline kids in America anymore.

Real abuse, however, gets ignored and swept under the rug. No one will do anything about that because they might actually have to leave the comfort of their home or get involved in a trial and have their character and life pried into, etc. Laws that have made it nearly impossible for parents to control kids, and yet give abused children back to the abusive parents because DHS is simply pushing them through a system is shameful. We over-regulate and litigate as a society, and instead show disdain for the very things which have made our nation the place so many around the world seek out to have a better life.

We might as well be slitting our wrists and crawling in a bathtub to die as a society. Just as we fail to simply say no to illegal immigration for fear of offending people, we fail to address the underlying issues in nearly every aspect of life in America. It wasn’t even that shocking to hear of the 32 deaths at VT to me. Why would it be? American fighting men and women have been dying for years to provide rights for those who despise everything soldiers have fought for since our nations founding. You think I am going to shed tears over college students when they were killed because of ineptitude by college administrators, local police, a magistrate, and failures of people who believed Cho to be disturbed and did nothing?

I am not heartless nor cruel, nor un-empathyzing. I know first hand what child abuse does to a person. And you know what, I feel for rape victims, but it does not change how I feel—which is that if they refuse to help prosecute a rapist and could get him out of society and fail to do so, then they are partly responsible for every other victim of that rapist. I know I am not alone in this believe, I have heard others espouse it—including rape victims themselves who were angered that others could have helped prevent what happened to them.

It boils down to an attempt to take away the rights and privileges which would allow those of us who don’t fear inanimate objects to protect and defend ourselves, our loved ones, and our property against the criminal element which the rest of society is too lazy or inconsiderate to deal with in a firm, and appropriate manner that gives more consideration to the welfare of the law abiding citizen than it does to the concerns of criminals and offending those people who are not even citizens—or worse, are here illegally or with the intention of causing our nation harm.

That is the bottom line.

My response:

15. lunawolf | April 27th, 2007 at 1:24 am

Alright. You had some good points, and a lot not so good.
“However, if you wander around in a third world country where kidnappings take place, you are putting yourself at risk. No one else is responsible for you. It is the same here in America”. So are you saying that America is like a third world country? I hoped we had made more progress than that. No wonder you think people have to carry guns to feel safe!

“That’s easy. If you make yourself a ready and willing victim by the way you live, by your failing to be involved in your community, by your failing to take actions on the behalf of others, by living in fear and making yourself a target, you are culpable in creating your own victimization. If you walk down a deserted and darkened street, passing by even darker alleys while listening to your iPod and counting the number of pigeon droppings on the sidewalk that stand out in stark contrast to the sidewalk pavement—and a criminal jumps out of the darkened alleyway and mugs you…then you helped create your own condition as a victim.
I know many people don’t want to hear that. They want to hear that it is always everyone else’s fault, and that they have no responsibility for their own welfare and being”.
The woman that did not press charges against Cho did not walk down a dark alley looking to be mugged. Cho sought her out. I’m sorry. You just can’t convince me that victims of abuse are at fault. I can only put the responsibility on the person that committed the act. I disagree that people want to hear that criminal acts are someone else’s fault. I think they want to hear that it is the fault of the person that committed the crime.

“No on else is responsible for you.” You say in the same paragraph that people have an obligation to their community. Which is it? Are we responsible to watch out for each other or do we only rely on ourselves? Can we or can’t we hope to rely on community and human compassion? Or should we all just take up arms? Just looking for some clarification.

“Take those women I mentioned in a previous reply that die because they had to endure a waiting period to purchase a handgun and were killed by an estranged lover, husband or whatever”. Right, in a way, but on the other side of the coin, if there had been a waiting period in Virginia for Cho to buy his 9mm he would not have been able to purchase it. He was allowed to walk out of a store with a gun because his most recent mental assessment wasn’t in the database that alerts gun shops that the customer has been recently 5150′d. He did own another gun, but the glock was more damaging, that is why he chose to buy it and use it.

“Do you go around in fear of policemen? Do you cringe and worry for your life every time you see one? Then why would anyone fear other law abiding citizens?” No, I do not. Police are trained and qualified. Not all people that legally own guns are law-abiding citizens. Cho proved this point. The kind of gun control I would like to see is the same that would require a person to drive a car. Training plus assessment of skills and a license with registration of all fire-arms. Is that taking away anyone’s rights? Or is it ensuring that the people that have rights to guns are the ones that actually deserve those rights.

“Carrying weapons does not make people fearful, and it does not show how fearful a society is. That is a twisted perception that is fraught with holes. Being prepared does not make one fearful. Do people carry spare tires and jacks because they are fearful? Or is it simply prudent and convenient? Having backups of data is not considered fearful? Nor is having candles for a power outage is it? You’re projecting your own belief onto guns and what they mean.”
You compare being prepared for a flat tire with being prepared for an attack by a criminal. I don’t see the connection. I interpret what you are saying as such: that at any moment someone could attack you to the point that you would need to use deadly force and that you are only being prepared. Seems like an awfully fearful way to live, in my opinion.

“You mention the rate of accidental shootings is alarming. Even more alarming are the number of accidental deaths related to automobiles…”
Yes. I did mention that. I believe that if there were no regulations for people to drive cars, it would be a thousand times worse.

“…drug overdose…”
The war on drugs is so complex. I won’t even get into it here.

“…workplace accidents and even suicides—which is no accident. I don’t hear anti-gunners calling for outlawing auto. Drugs have been illegal and it has not stopped the problem…why does anyone think guns will be any different? There is no evidence to even suggest this. I don’t hear liberals or conservatives calling for better workplace practices”.
As far as workplace accidents, remember a time in American history called the Gilded Age? The robber barons and the monopolies? The huge gap between the rich and the poor? Well,there were no work-place regulations at the time. In 1911, a sweatshop in New York locked it’s doors so women and children couldn’t sneak onto the fire escape for a break. The place burned down. When the women finally got the door opened after many had already persished, the fire-escape collapsed because there were no standards regarding it’s structural integrity. The women jumped or fell to their deaths.
Fortunately, the Progressive Era followed (a liberal era as far as political science is concerned). Although many changes were implemented, it still took until the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt (D) for companies to be held responsible for the well-being of their workers. The 1970’s saw even more work-safety related reform with OSHA.
What I’m trying to say with this history lesson is that yes, you do hear liberals calling for better workplace practices. We’ve been doing it for a hundred years.

“And more importantly, the rate suicides in America is far more alarming than accidental death by guns. In fact, the suicide rate is such that it is like loosing an entire town every year. How horrific would it be if tomorrow some town of several thousand people all at once just committed suicide? You think 32 deaths would begin to compare to that in terms of shock and outrage and disbelief? Yet, why aren’t people outraged about that issue and willing to tackle it? The simple fact is that our society does not encourage us to tackle difficult problems. I lay the major portion of the blame for that squarely at the feet of liberals specifically.”. So are you saying that because the suicide rate is higher than the accidental shooting death rate, we should disregard accidental shootings and not work toward a solution? There are a lot of people doing a lot of work regarding suicide prevention. I have seen it work first-hand. As far as accidental deaths, nothing seems to get done about lack of mandatory training for persons wishing to purchase a firearm to possibly prevent more accidental shootings. I don’t see that diverting attention from the firearms issue to point out the completely separate issue of suicide is effective argument.
Plus, you say that liberals are to blame for our society not attacking major problems. But again, I can point out the progressive era. Liberals did a hell of a job. I can also point out the war on poverty, AIDS, hunger, civil rights, conservation, and even the fight to Save Our Earth, to the causes of liberals. Talk about tough issues! Especially with all the conservative media out there brushing off these issues or even trying to convince the American people that tackling these issues is only wasting tax dollars and time.

“The same mindset that says we must allow everyone to be, do, and have the same rather than work for it…or that illegal immigration is fine because it keeps our lawncare and produce costs down and the construction industry supplied with cheap workers (who also happen to be the leading statistic for deaths by falling). Rather than address the root causes that led Cho to do the terrible thing he did, rather than holding those who could have prevented this tragedy from happening responsible for their failure…people instead want to blame inanimate objects and the right of people to own them.” I’m sorry, what do illegal immigrants have to do with the root causes of Cho’s massacre? I hold to the fact that the cause of Cho’s massacre was his own sick twisted mind and the finger he used to pull the trigger. No one but him could have prevented this. If the woman had pressed charges, he would have been out rapidly on bail, dropped charges, or a few months in county and still would have found a way to commit the crime. He probably would have had even more pent up anger and probably better ideas on the execution from the stories of other pod-mates.
A side note on illegal immigrants. They wouldn’t be here if money-hungry corpritocracies (corporate aristocracies) would stop paying them. Conservatives, again, spouting about immigrants on TV while letting them in the back door.

“Yet, the liberal ideology that suggests no one has a responsibility to their community or nation or society is directly responsible for this”. That is where you are wrong. Liberal ideology has always been geared toward helping fellow man. Liberals are even called communists at times because of their socialistic views regarding health care, civil rights, poverty, and other social issues. (I’m not talking Stalin here, so don’t get up in arms about communism. Some of the principles behind it have had a positive impact on the world).

“The laws that allow foreigners to come educate themselves in our universities simply so educational institutions can make money while they commit crimes or worse, go back home and help terrorist organizations be more efficient and equipped and trained as a result of their education is a shame”.
What universities exactly? Can you give me an example of a foreign terrorist going to college here and then going back to help terrorists? I hadn’t heard of this. I’m pretty sure we did educate John Walker Lynd, but he wasn’t a foreigner. We did, however allow terrorists to learn how to fly planes. It wasn’t liberals that ignored the flight instructor’s warnings. It was the FBI. And you can’t say they are liberals, they’ve been fighting communism for years! As far as flag burning,it is protected by bill of rights. It is usually common only among extremists. It is a civic duty for people to protest if they feel they are not being treated fairly or are not being heard. Just because some people don’t protest with tact doesn’t mean it discourages people to be proud of their country. If a person is truly proud, they will ignore this type of rare, extremist protesting.

“Yes, in the end, Cho did what he did, and the fault is his”. YAY! So glad you finally see the light!
“But many people share responsibility, because they did not act when they could and should have. Just as society does not act and many children are killed every year by abuse sickens me, it sickens me that some people feel no responsibility to anyone else. This is the me-me-me society we live in”. Of course it is sad that all these horrible things happen in our society. But it can’t be blamed on one group or the other. Sure, the blame can be leaned more towards the me-me-me society we live in, but conservatives are more me-me-me than liberals. From listening to conservatives points of views it seems they want to eliminate welfare, taxes and all kinds of other civil services (including CPS) that the big bad government provides. That sounds like me-me-me to me. “Get the bums off the street, send drug addicts to prison for life without any chance of rehab, feed corporations so they grow fatter and fatter while people get poorer and poorer.” That is my interpretation of the conservative viewpoints in America. This leads me to believe that conservatives are bigger contributers to the problem than liberals.

I could go on and on and on and on, but I’m getting really tired. I will conclude with key points. I believe that stricter qualifications regarding people that can purchase guns is needed. You mentioned training and gun safety yourself. Well then implement it. Register guns and license owners.
Rape victims are not the cause of more rapes. Rapists are the cause of rapes. They are the ones committing the act of rape. Just as you can’t blame a gun for 32 people dying, you can’t blame anyone other than the rapist for rape.
Cho would have committed this horrible act whether he had picked up a stalking charge or not. He was sick.
Your view of the liberal ideology is scewed. Probably by pseudo-intellctuals like Ann Coulter who can only insult people and make up “facts” in order to sell books. Liberals have actually done a lot of good for people. There are extremists out there, yes, but there also are extremist conservatives (neocons) and they are dominating the air waves right now and creating this climate of fear that surrounds us. Hopefully you now see the true characteristics of liberals and conservatives. Join the good fight- Vote Democrat! Thank you for your input. It’s been interesting. I’m going to bed now.

While browsing around various blogs the other day I came across a title that struck me pretty well. It was titled “Virginia Tech Massacre is the Result of Liberal Cowardice”on the sight, “My Errant Mind.”

I’d been hearing variations of this around the news and around the sphere O’ blog and finally decided to see what all the fuss was about. I could not help but respond. Here is the discourse as it played out.

The blogger wrote:

“People who do not have access to guns, will not commit gun related crimes. It’s basic logic.”

I came across that on a message board. I posted this response…

Basic logic suggests that the only people who won’t have guns if all guns are outlawed are those who obey the law. Criminals do not go without drugs because they are outlawed, now do they? Someone better go take a philosophy 101 course somewhere.

How about instead, we hold people accountable? How about we instead make people responsible for their own actions?

Why do so many liberals think that the government has the responsibility to protect us? It is our responsibility and right to defend ourselves, our loved ones, and our property.

Just as it is not the fire department’s responsibility to make sure you don’t burn your house down from smoking in bed, it isn’t the police department’s job to make sure you don’t get shot, or mugged, or anything else. There is a reason it is called law enforcement and not crime prevention or mind reading.

Liberals would rather we give up all our rights rather than stand up for them. A gun is an inanimate object. I can lay a hundred of them on the ground and load them, and no one will die. I could mount a dozen pointed at me sitting here at my computer desk, and short of a freak accident like a meteor crashing through the house or an earthquake collapsing the walls, they won’t ever go off and kill me or anyone else.

People kill people. A gun is no different from a tire iron or a car. Heck, more people die in car accidents than from shootings. Why aren’t liberals calling for the outlawing of cars? Oh, because that would make life hard for them, that’s why. Silly me. Rather than admit the fact they are scared of the ease with which a life may be taken with a gun and forcing society to confront its many failures in raising people up to be good, responsible and law-abiding citizens, they would rather we give up hard won rights that men and women have fought and died for since our country’s founding.

How about we implement the death penalty for violent criminals and drug dealers? How about we make parents responsible for raising their children instead of an Xbox? How about we make our kids pay consequences when they bully others and mistreat other children? How about we make people care about their community and feel pride in citizenship? How about we not give non-citizens the right to own a gun?

There is no logic that works when suggesting the banning of guns, because the criminals DO NOT OBEY THE LAW TO BEGIN WITH! How many of those students would be alive if all of them were carrying guns in the classroom? Anyone of them could have shot Cho dead and stopped his rampage.

How about we put responsibility on the police and the magistrate who had him in custody and let him go. Or the counselors who did nothing. Or the girl who reported he was stalking her…but was not responsible enough or caring enough about her community to press charges. How about we address cowardice in our society and people who don’t care to do the right thing because they can’t be bothered?

What about professor Giovanni (?) who called him evil and removed him from her class? What about the college officials who knew long ago about Cho? What about all the mean bullies that dealt out mental abuse towards him as a teen? Why not hold them accountable? We have an industry of counselors and psychiatrists and attorneys that say mean-spirited words are grounds for ending relationships and for granting divorces…even getting people thrown in jail in some ludicrous so-called domestic violence cases. Women are encouraged to leave their husband if he complains about the house not being cleaned.

Yet I don’t hear any liberals stepping up to demand teenagers face prosecution for bullying and mental abuse and name-calling. What hypocrisy. And then they all want to whine about the horror of a shooting, and everyone wants to pretend they don’t know why it happens and let’s all just ban guns…that will make all the bad things in society go away.

Why don’t we put some of this responsibility where it belongs–which is on all those who did nothing.

As usual, liberals want to blame a gun, because they’re too lazy and selfish and hypocritical to deal with the real problems in society. Even if guns were banned, and killers had to resort to knives or screwdrivers or baseball bats, that’s OK. Cowards are fine with that, so long as only a couple people die…just as long as it isn’t 32 at a pop, right? They’re willing to take their chances outrunning someone with a bat or knife, but since they can’t outrun a bullet, they want to ban guns.

They never bother actually dealing with problems, just screaming for more laws and eroding more rights that leave those of us who aren’t cowards or idiots vulnerable to criminals. Maybe the best thing would be to make a half dozen states no-gun states, and the rest open carry states. Let the cowards fill up the no-gun states.

I already know right now where the criminals would move. That is basic logic.

Comments:

(I read the article, deeply amused by it, and decided this guy could use a little cosmic irony)

*

1. lunawolf | April 23rd, 2007 at 11:47 am

Yes. South central LA is one such great example of how effective it is for masses to carry guns every where they go…right.
*

(Another blogger, SA, had his own comments. I include them because -well- he had some good to say)

2. SA | April 23rd, 2007 at 2:17 pm

Wow, Sean! Interesting read, as always… i.e., a peek into the inner workings of a (Not So) Errant Mind, so the speak…

Funny, but I just sent you an e-mail offline somewhat related to this topic… I would like to know, if you can clarify this for me, as it would make what I read from you directly and on your blog here much more understandable with regard to your use of the word ‘liberal’ (particularly since it is almost always in a very negative light) for my non-English brain….

What is a ‘liberal’ for you? And a ‘liberal’ as opposed to what?

My own idea from what I have read so far on this blog (not just this blogentry) is that it (obvious or not) has far less to do with Republicans and Democrats (or, Conservatives and Liberals, their more or less counterparts, here in Canada) since we seem to have wrestled with this mix-up in the past and has more to do with an ideology, even more so than a definition, i.e., http://www.onelook.com/?w=liberal&ls=a … but, even so, I still cannot grasp it as so many of your own views, strong and bold and almost primitive, to be frank, as they are (which is more than fine by me, if true, and/or if my understanding about said views are right), are usually what liberals, as how *I* understand them/the noun to be, stand for (…i.e., responsible for one’s own self, protective of civil rights, desirous of less government, etc etc.)!

So, please help me out here, would you?

It’s basically stuff like this, i.e., you write: ‘Yet I don’t hear any liberals stepping up to demand teenagers face prosecution for bullying and mental abuse and name-calling. What hypocrisy.’ that I have difficulty understanding… as though only liberals were so… I would think that people with a less humane priority, generally speaking, might fill the bill (and NOT a ‘liberal’ per se), no? What am I missing here?

Thanks in advance.

And by way, you wrote:

“How about instead, we hold people accountable? How about we instead make people responsible for their own actions?”

I mean, AMEN to that! I don’t think anyone can say that often enough! But beyond words, if only we could all ACT that way too! As a liberal hippie might say, ‘Right on, brother!’ =)

I find that the idealist in you is threaded throughout all of your topics including this one and, as such, I think I can understand why you might say something like, ‘but was not responsible enough or caring enough about her community to press charges. ‘ about a girl who is stalked… well, not all of us have had bootcamp and commando courses or whatever training… Some of us are not as strong or are too frightened or too beaten down as opposed to cowardly IMHO and I would think that the measure of any successful and compassionate society is how they take care of their weak, be they the elderly, the young, the sick or the oppressed in some way or another… (and, yes, we are failing but, again, how is that ONLY the ‘liberals’ at fault here?)

Our technologies and creativity in these regards, including firearms, have far exceeded our personal (and collective) evolution to handle them all well, it would seem (at least in the manner you state (or I understand as you state and happen to agree with for a large part) but it is definitely an ideal to reach for, all this that you say about being responsible for one’s self… The question is, as I see it, what do we do in the meantime? and what plans are in place to get us there all the while?

“Cowards are fine with that, so long as only a couple people die…just as long as it isn’t 32 at a pop, right? ” Ouch, Sean… The answer to that is NO… a resounding NO, NOT RIGHT but hey, in the meantime, better a couple of people than 32 WHILE we backpeddle and try to find our collective humanity once again… or are you saying it is less ‘cowardly’, to use your word, to let them all loose and kill one another just so we can all have the right to arms? I’m not really sure I get you in this regard and I don’t think that this is what you mean; if you would care to elaborate?

Just as another by-the-by, if we were that self-responsible, do ya think we’d even NEED to bare arms (at least against one another)? or that the right to bare arms would even be an issue? and a bit more off topic, if you like, I can restate the statistics, i.e., something like 30,000 Americans, good law abiding non-criminal citizens get killed, never mind how many get maimed, every year by guns that were shot by accident (and NOT by the criminal element), but, yes, I probably DO digress!)… Actually, I am reminded from a line from the 1951 version of A Christmas Carol, where Scrooge refuses to donate to charity as he sayssomething like they had better all die (these poor and destitute to relieve the world of excess population!!!) Ha!

P.S. You wrote: ‘Why don’t we put some of this responsibility where it belongs–which is on all those who did nothing. ‘ Another AMEN!

Take good care, Sean! Keep on truckin’!
*

(Here is the author’s response)

3. Sean Wilson | April 23rd, 2007 at 3:48 pm

Well, if all the good law-abiding folks were carrying them, it would soon be cleared of all the criminal and gang elements, don’t you think? You’re trying to point out a situation and describe it as bad because of law-abiding citizens, but the fact it is that the criminals in south central LA that have all the guns, and that go around shooting and raping and robbing that made it bad.

Please enlighten me as to how law abiding citizens made it a bad place? You will amaze me if you can, because no one else has ever been able to explain how that could possibly be so.

And, quite frankly, if the good law-abiding citizens are all armed, perhaps the next thing that needs to be done is teach them how to shoot straight to ensure that when they are justified in pulling a gun on some gang-banger or other hardened criminal, that they don’t waste the opportunity to rid society of one yet one more leech.

I can point to just as many cities and towns where people are allowed to carry and there is very little violent crime–far below national averages. Ask yourself how south central LA became so bad? How did 5th Ward in Houston, and parts of NYC and other notorious areas of criminal activity become so bad?

They became that way the same way our border with Mexico has–people have for far too long failed to address the problem and continue making concessions to the very people that are destroying our society. The only gun control I advocate is the kind that allows one to hit his/her target.
*

(Another response from the other reader)

4. SA | April 23rd, 2007 at 4:21 pm

Hi again, Sean! Interesting response but I am still not quite sure what a ‘liberal’ has to do with this as opposed to selfish, self-absorbed people, in general….

The questions you ask do not seem to be addressed to me so I shall leave them be.

In the meantime, I’ve got to laugh at myself… Amongst my grammatical errors, I see this doozie that made me laugh right out loud, i.e.,

“do ya think we’d even NEED to bare arms (at least against one another)? or that the right to bare arms would even be an issue?”

I mean how serious can I be if I don’t believe we should have the right to bare our arms, especially now that summer is around corner!!?!! I read somewhere that the something like 10 of the 14 or so years have been the hottest on record! Bare arms is definitely a right not a privilege in this case!!

I meant, ‘to bear arms’… sorry about all the errors!

In the meantime, as you know, it isn’t just one element or even just two or a few, that can make “a place bad”, but, as you suggest, neglect or convenience for others who would make a profit from making and/or maintaining it as bad, in many cases IMHO. Do you really think that if everyone had a gun and were taught “how to shoot straight to ensure that when they are justified in pulling a gun on some gang-banger or other hardened criminal, that they don’t waste the opportunity to rid society of one yet one more leech”, as you say, that all these good citizens would all have the good sense and collectively the same values and aim ONLY for the gang-banger and/or other hardened criminal? Who would judge? Who would judge the judge? By what standards would these judgements be made in this asphalt jungle? Guns can indeed be a great equalizer so that survival of the fittest, i.e., the rule of the real jungle, cannot – can NO LONGER – apply here… We are mostly a sedentary peoples, as we have our milk and our meat delivered right to our tables in our mostly weatherproof homes… so the fittest can be merely the one with the biggest or most expensive and gadgety gun or, better, one who can afford a marksman (an ex-soldier or what not) who can pull the trigger for him at his will… This idea of cleaning up the streets might all start off well, but, without a collective conscience to take care of ourselves and eachother, i.e., where we attack only to protect what is ours or hunt only to eat and share the surplus, and without any way to weed out those who have any sense of entitlement, then how is every ‘good’ and well-intentioned citizen armed with a gun, even if all manage to learn how to aim properly, going to resolve anything?

And, truly, I’m curious now… what does a ‘liberal’, in particular, have to do with the slow erosion / death / downfall of our modern society? And why ONLY a ‘liberal’?

(Now this is a good point. Blaming one specific group in a society for the ills of all mankind is reminiscent of Germany in 1939, in my opinion).

Take care, Sean! =)
*

(More extremist hate language and saber-rattling)

5. Sean Wilson | April 23rd, 2007 at 4:55 pm

SA, in America, a liberal equates to Democrats usually, but not always. My own definition of conservative and liberal go something like this:

Conservatives attempt to preserve/conserve traditional values and are more likely to not stray far from a core set of principles.

Liberals on the other hand are just that—liberal with the rules and bounds and law-making in a society.

Also, let me just say here in America, both parties have strayed far off course. I could have said Democrats, but many southern Democrats who are proud gun owners and very pro-gun. It suited the post better to use liberal, and to have it directed at those social experimenters who prefer to attempt to regulate human behavior with laws that rob all citizens of freedoms, rights and privileges—rather than actually address the problems society faces and attempting to preserve those freedoms and liberties generations have struggled to secure for posterity.

That, in America, is one of the best ways to identify a liberal. They think everything should be politically correct, that we should force inclusion of every kind on every institution and person, and that it is better to take away freedoms and liberties that belong to everyone rather than just those elements in society that should be punished…simply because they feel it is too mean or cruel to make anyone responsible for their actions or to impose any kind of penalty on a few people. They feel that we must impose punishment on everyone for the crimes of the few or we’re being unfair.

As to a woman being stalked or raped or anything else and not pressing charges out of fear, it has nothing to do with boot camp or commando training or military service or taking tae kwon do lessons. It has everything to do with courage.

The fact of the matter is that if she hadn’t been a coward, 32 people might still be alive today. Instead you want to make excuses for her and blame every gun and gun owner for that loss of life instead of her. Or the police. Or the magistrate who released him for counseling. Or the counselors who did a terrible job of diagnosing him and ought to lose their licensure.

(It was about this point, I admit, I stopped reading. I couldn’t believe the man had the audacity to call a woman who is stalked or raped a coward. I left my second comment).

Sure, you may be beaten down or oppressed or whatever…and that’s exactly how I feel about it…whatever…you let yourself become that way, if you don’t stand up for yourself. That mindset of fear is the enemy we should be targeting, not guns that we can use for self-defense, for survival, for hunting…and yes, handguns are used for all of those things. They are even used for sheer pleasure on a weekend, plinking and shooting in competitions. Not everyone is afraid of their own shadow, and they shouldn’t be punished because others are.

No, instead of saying to that woman that she contributed to the deaths of 32 people, liberals think that is cruel and instead would rather rob millions of people of freedoms and liberties and rights that men and women have fought and died to earn, preserve, and protect. I’m sorry, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one in this case.

(Ha, he thinks he’s Spock!)

Why should everyone else pay for her cowardice? Or the ineptitude of the law enforcement officers or the magistrate or counselors or college professors or immigration officials or the dean of the college or his parents or the kids who tormented him? No…it is obviously the fault of an inanimate object.

Obviously, we should outlaw screwdrivers too, right? Come one, when was the last time any gun ever got up, loaded itself, and went out and killed someone? It has NEVER HAPPENED! PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE. Inanimate objects do not.

The problem that girl has and so many others do, is that they have had weakness and submission drilled into them. That is not the natural state of human existence, I’m sorry. There’s too much to suggest otherwise. Intellectualism is fine to a point, but as some point, you have to face reality. We are animals and animals fight. Animals disagree. They kill.

Yes, some of my views are indeed ‘primitive’ if you like. Just because you adorn yourselves with gadgets and inventions and can think more than our ancestors, do not make the mistake of thinking you are something more than an animal whose evolutionary path led you where you are because your ancestors struggled and fought and overcame. And because instead of claws or large tusks or teeth, nature gave us minds and opposable thumbs which allowed us to become the fiercest animals on the planet and is the only reason civilization exists.

Why should we take guns away from people because some girl was cowardly or some judge incompetent? Why not instead hold people accountable, teach kids to stand up for themselves, to not be afraid and to not bully others? I already know the answer every liberal will give. Because it isn’t practical or it is too hard, or it won’t work, blah blah blah to infinity. It is always what can not be done, and why it can not be done rather than finding the guts and courage to say “we’re fed up with this, and from now on this is the way it is going to be and we don’t care if you think it offends your children to be punished for bullying or name calling.”

See, that would require responsibility and effort. It’s so much easier to take the easy way out and say “let’s just ban guns.”

That whole line of thinking is how rights and freedoms are eroded until people are enslaved. It has happened in democratic societies of the past–the various city-states of ancient Greece and Rome as well. In modern times, it has happened in several countries. And you have only to look at the oppression in Islamic republics and how they treat women to see that freedom is too valuable to throw away out of laziness or cowardice or fear or for fear of hurting someone’s feelings.

And you make my point beautifully for me. You said it is better a couple of people rather than 32 getting killed. That is exactly the mentality that needs to be done away with. We shouldn’t tolerate any innocent deaths. We should be so outraged that we banish criminals from our society. We should execute murderers and rapists and drug dealers. We should have tighter border security, we should allow everyone to be able to protect themselves by being armed.

Eventually, all the stupid people and all the criminals and all those that natural selection says can’t make the muster are gone, the gene pool would be stronger. However, liberals and intellectuals who would rather let themselves be murdered or raped rather than stand up for themselves know they would be among the early exiters from the gene pool, and so they would rather take away rights and freedoms and attempt to subjugate and enslave and weaken everyone else.

It has been said that society hates nothing more than a strong person, and this is true in any society where citizenship and individual rights are not valued. The degeneracy of capitalist societies and the greater importance placed on people’s ability to live conveniently—rather than with courage and honor and ethics and concern for their neighbors and communities—breeds ideological cowards who make excuses for what they can not do or will not attempt rather than the kinds of people who are willing to hazard all and struggle for success and a better life.

There are plenty of towns and cities in America where if gang-bangers cruised through and tried to act like hoodlums they are in LA, they would end up dead in short order. Some places, law abiding citizens don’t tolerate or put up with that kind of behavior. No one should have to. But liberals have made it so that criminals have more rights than citizens.

As to what you are missing about the hypocrisy of people not demanding teenagers face harsh consequences for their actions, it goes like this. Cho, the shooter, was angry at the world, and he obviously had mental health issues. Part of his anger, according to his own words and as can be garnered from his writings, was because of the bullying and mental anguish and abuse he suffered from other teens.

They hypocrisy is liberals clamoring to outlaw guns, which are inanimate objects and have absolutely nothing to do with Cho’s anger, frustration, or mental health issues.

For the sake of argument here, if he had walked into those classrooms with a tire iron and started clubbing people to death, would we be hearing people calling for a ban on tire irons? Of course not. He might have only killed one or two, and as you and others have said—that’s acceptable. Why is that?

Why is no one calling for jail time for bullying that teenagers engage in? If liberals want to protect innocents and are so concerned with protecting life and preventing everyone in society from having to endure the least bit of mental anguish, then why aren’t they clamoring about harsh penalties against the things teenagers do—which is the age/period of life where most negative traits begin to come out…such as cutting, drug use, gang membership, etc.?

Why are we not calling for jail time for the Virginia Tech professors and the Dean who failed miserably in their responsibilities–and knew of Cho’s condition and past! No one wants to address the root causes.

Ask yourself this one question. If you could magically wave a wand and all guns disappeared, would that in any way, shape, form, or fashion solve the hurt and anger and frustration and mental illness and offenses and wrongs and hurts and drugs and depression and despair and hopelessness and rage and evil that drives people to kill?

No one with more common sense than nature bequeathed a dead leaf of cabbage could possibly think that would be so, nor would anyone else believe them. Yet, that is precisely what liberals seem to believe. Else, why would they not address real problems instead of attempting to regulate objects? There is absolutely no logic to that at all.

I’ve been around guns my whole life, been in a war, been shot at, been shot, and I wouldn’t trade the freedom to have one if 1000 college students were shot over the course of the next week. I would rather take proactive action, address the root cause of that situation, clean up our nation, and hold people accountable, even if it means hurting their feelings or executing them for their crimes.

Many liberals say a civilized society has no need for guns, that there is no real use for them. I beg to differ.

You could line up all the violent criminals in our prisons that rape, murder and deal drugs and shoot them. Think of the benefits—less tax burden, lower crime, might actually scare young kids into growing up to be law abiding citizens, and most of all, it would force us to confront the issues behind the causes of crime rather than run away from them and ignore them.
*

(I think the author is talking to the other reader here. It is unclear. He starts with telling someone to wait for a response, but he was the last person to comment).

6. Sean Wilson | April 23rd, 2007 at 5:05 pm

Maybe if you wait until your post gets answered, you might not have to ask redundant questions.

Of course there are those that profit from bad situations. Are you suggesting not tackling a problem because you wouldn’t want to address those persons too? Gun manufacturers don’t make a situation or city bad. Society does by tolerating criminal behavior.

If you want to know what a liberal is, read your own posts. Your asking ridiculous questions that have absolutely no bearing on reality. If law abiding citizens can shoot straight, what the heck does that have to do with them shooting people. Are they suddenly going to start just shooting people at random because they now know how to aim?

That’s ludicrous. You shoot who are legally entitled to shoot—those attacking you with deadly weapons, those attacking others with deadly force, those in the commission of violent felony crimes that may cause the loss of life or limb.

THE SAME LEGAL STANDARDS THAT APPLY NOW TO EVERYONE, EVEN NON-GUN OWNING LIBERALS.

You make a good example of how liberals try to argue around a point rather than address the issue. Instead, you choose to make outlandish assumptions that somehow society will change and people will act in strange ways just because they receive marksmanship training.

It is no wonder that anti-gunners make no sense with arguments like that.
*
(Here’s the second comment I made. I was a little pissed).

7. lunawolf | April 25th, 2007 at 2:21 am

I thought that maybe their was a point to the argument that carrying weapons would have prevented this, but then I thought about a room full surprised, adrenal-pumped people with guns all shooting at one guy at the same time and the chaos that would have ensued. Their is a reason why police are trained as a team to take down perps. They don’t teach it to college students.
To top it off, I saw your comment about a rape victim being a coward and I had to stop reading because I nearly threw up. You’re a creep. Go talk to the women’s center in your local community and then talk about cowardice. You’re just sick.
*

(And now for the fun part: his response to my last comment. This is good. He reads words that are not there. I call him on it. Maybe next time he’s in an argument he’ll omit putting words in people’s mouths).

8. Sean Wilson | April 25th, 2007 at 12:56 pm

Lunawolf…OK, I will in the effort to make a point here—and in the hopes of shedding some light–bother to reply to your post.

There are a few things which need to be pointed out about your post. First of all, thanks for showing me just why I dislike most liberals. You know what is best for everyone and believe cowardice and fear are a necessary and even desired and acceptable response to outrages committed against innocents.

I was speaking of a woman who was stalked and reported Cho to the police, but failed to press charges against him. The mention of the a rape victim was in reply to another poster’s mention of rape victims. I never said anything about a rape victim being involved in this situation, except hypothetically. You can call me sick or whatever the hell you feel like. I don’t really care.

I have seen more than my share of women waste their lives, cowering in fear from abusive men and you can whine about victimization all you want, but it does not change the fact that if a woman is too afraid or cowardly or so damn selfish that she won’t press charges and allows that rapist to go rape another women, I have not one bit of damn sympathy for her.

She is causing harm to the society in which she lives just the same as if she helped hold down the next rape victim for the rapist. You may be fine with having rapists running lose in society, others are not. I thank my lucky stars there are women who have the spirit to be courageous and help prosecute rapists. They are amazing examples of courage and bravery that astound me because I know it is a horrible thing.

Further, I don’t need to go talk to counseling center. I can talk to a family member who was raped. Or I can talk to a friend of mine who was raped. What I can’t do, is talk to a woman I fell in love with who was murdered, burned alive in her bed.

Take your bleeding heart pity party for the weak elsewhere. The whole reason women are afraid to stand up and press charges is because of the damn fear they have our society will not support them and stand by them and that they will carry some sort of ridiculous stigma.

If anyone is sick, it you and those like you who think it is better to hide things and just live in misery, fear and horror your whole life if something terrible happens. Not standing up and doing the right thing is why things like child abuse and incest keep happening to our nations children. Another part of the problem are people who ignore things they know are going on—people don’t press charges on behalf of others.

And, because this woman who was stalked didn’t think it was worth the bother to do anything (which if it was of no concern, really, then why the hell report she was being stalked in the first place?) serious about it and get him off the street, 32 people are dead.

Even if she had been a rape victim, do you think I would feel sorry for her—for helping contribute to the deaths of 32 innocent people?

Your other point about a roomful of people all trying to shoot the same guy is equally ridiculous as the other poster suggesting that just because people take marksmanship training and carry weapons and make every effort to kill violent criminals—when they are in the legal right to defend themselves or others—that they would go on shooting sprees and act as judge, jury and executioner. Why is it that people who are against gun ownership don’t have a clue that things called gun safety and training both exist for a reason?

And that most gun owners have more than just a little common sense. Could it be that millions of gun owners who don’t shoot themselves in the foot, ass or face and who don’t break laws actually have intelligence? I think most liberals hate gun owners simply because they aren’t worrisome and fearful mewling cowards afraid to stand up for themselves or others.

Where I come from, kids are often in the woods with a gun on their own at 12 and 13 years of age. I was. I was a safe gun handler before I even made it to high school and have never had an accidental discharge nor accidentally shot someone else. Pretty much the first thing you learn when shooting is sighting and target acquisition. If you don’t have something in your sights, you don’t fire.

So if everyone in the room jumps up and an innocent classmate is between them and the killer, you think that they’ll just start shooting holes in their classmates so they can try to kill someone trying to kill them? I think someone has been watching way too much TV. And if you have such low regard for people who are receiving a college education that you don’t believe they can engage in even the most basic thinking processes, then our nation would be in real trouble if that were the case.

So, let me recap. Victimization is an excuse to not be responsible to one’s community. College students are morons and can’t think. And I know nothing about rape and death or guns or anything else because while I have compassion and empathy for those who suffer rape, I nonetheless believe they have a responsibility to make sure that others do not become victims of the same rapist? Those are pretty much your thoughts on the matter, is that right?

I just love how liberals all say they are so concerned about their fellow humans, yet they would rather cower in fear and whine about being victims and allow violent criminals to prey on and take the lives of others when they could do something to prevent it. That’s real compassionate.
*

(Well, I couldn’t just leave it at that).

10. lunawolf | April 26th, 2007 at 12:54 am

“You know what is best for everyone and believe cowardice and fear are a necessary and even desired and acceptable response to outrages committed against innocents”. Those are your words, not mine. I have certain values in which I believe, but I never claimed to know what’s best for everyone. I’m simply poking holes in your sanctimonious rhetoric. Having a society that has to carry guns with them every where they go just shows how fearful that society is. I would rather have a society that doesn’t need to live that way. I’m not asking anyone to take guns away or deny anyone of their rights.

You say, “The whole reason women are afraid to stand up and press charges is because of the damn fear they have our society will not support them and stand by them and that they will carry some sort of ridiculous stigma.” Well, you are right about this. Our justice system does not do as well as it could. Sometimes a victims efforts are futile, even if they do go to the police. I don’t know how you could ever go so far as to say the victim is part of the problem. Also, rape is so traumatic that some people are paralyzed with fear. That is their fault? They are the ones that were raped. Read up on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Especially the part about avoidance of stimuli associated with the traumatic event, in this case: recounting the event many times to cops and lawyers and doctors and god knows who else.

You stated, “you and those like you who think it is better to hide things and just live in misery, fear and horror your whole life if something terrible happens.” I do not believe this. I never claimed to believe this. These are your words, not mine. I do believe in women speaking out against abuse, but I know that the psychological damage of abuse is so severe that it doesn’t always happen. Not everyone is going to react the same. Also, our society has kept things like this under the rug so long, it is taking a lot of work to get the word out that there are safe places to go. I sat in a class last year full of young conservatives that told me women should quit their whining about rape. It is not liberals that are encouraging women to keep quiet.

You replied to me “And, because this woman who was stalked didn’t think it was worth the bother to do anything (which if it was of no concern, really, then why the hell report she was being stalked in the first place?) serious about it and get him off the street, 32 people are dead.” It is even harder to prove stalking than it is to prove date rape. Unless threats or actual physical harm occurs, there is nothing police can do. Restraining orders cost a lot more than they are worth. Yes, why would anyone bother if there will be no results? This is not the victim’s fault. It is the justice system that should be changed, not the victim.

“Even if she had been a rape victim, do you think I would feel sorry for her—for helping contribute to the deaths of 32 innocent people?” How can you be so certain that this woman could have prevented this tragedy? Is it logical to think that the police would take a statement from her and then turn around and judge by this behavior that he would end up going on a shooting spree? You don’t want to blame inanimate object (guns) for the tragedy, but you want to blame one his victims? She didn’t shoot anyone.

You also said, “Why is it that people who are against gun ownership don’t have a clue that things called gun safety and training both exist for a reason?” I know these things exist. Yet the rate of accidental shootings in this country is alarming. Obviously there is not enough training and education. Would conservatives be open-minded to a regulation that required classes before a person can own a gun? A friend of mine that has owned many, many guns (see, I’m not totally against guns, have even shot a few) told me the most dangerous gun is the one you are certain is not loaded. Human error is too great a margin. I would like to see this training do more.

You asked, “So if everyone in the room jumps up and an innocent classmate is between them and the killer, you think that they’ll just start shooting holes in their classmates so they can try to kill someone trying to kill them?” I’m saying the unpredictability of human beings is such that anything can happen. Anyone can make a mistake, especially in crowds.

“So, let me recap. Victimization is an excuse to not be responsible to one’s community. College students are morons and can’t think. And I know nothing about rape and death or guns or anything else because while I have compassion and empathy for those who suffer rape, I nonetheless believe they have a responsibility to make sure that others do not become victims of the same rapist? Those are pretty much your thoughts on the matter, is that right?” No, that is not what I said. Again, these are your words you are putting into my mouth.Victimization is not an excuse to not be responsible, but a victim is not responsible for the failure of a community. And they didn’t ask to be victims. I do not believe you have empathy for people who have suffered rape. Empathy requires understanding how another person feels. You assume you know how a rape victim feels. You said you know people who have been victims. I assume they spoke out. Good for them. That is a wonderful and beautiful thing. They are the few that feel strong enough to do so. Not everyone is effected the same by rape. Some women are harmed too badly. Are you saying it is their responsibility to stop a man from raping? I think it is a man’s responsibility to not rape. Mystrength.org is an organization created specifically to teach men about what they can do to prevent rape. That being said, I’d like to apologize for calling you names. Maybe you aren’t a creep and maybe you aren’t sick. You probably just need a more open mind.
#

11. lunawolf | April 26th, 2007 at 1:02 am

I’m sorry, one more point: How can we blame this on gun laws or lack there of? How are liberals responsible for this? Why is the media blowing this up into a “us v them” debate? It was CHO that did this. A man walked into a room and opened fire on his classmates. You can’t blame the gun, and you can’t blame anyone other than the person that pulled the trigger. Ok, sorry, two points: why weren’t these students adequately warned that there was a shooting on the campus? That is another point to ponder. Much more relevant than the argument between liberals and conservatives.

————————————————————-

And that is the end of that. I’m done talking to a brick wall. I just thought it would be fun poke holes in it for awhile. Then I found out it was so easy to do.