Death Toll Limited Before Campus Gun Ban
[Here's a very short article I found at WorldNetDaily. And since I know few of you consider WND a valid news source, I'm offering corroboration from 2 other sources, one of which is a much loved by the left (and of questionable validity), Wikipedia...]
From Wikipedia: The Appalachian School of Law Shooting
And then there's this piece from Law.Com: A Tragedy Compounded:
I can't help but wonder if any in the Virginia Legislature feel the slightest bit of remorse for crafting a law that turned Virginia campuses into Gun-Free Zones just one year before the massacre at VT? My guess is, 'No'. Todd Gilbert, Delegate to the Virginia House, did say however that bill that died in committee last year to lift the ban on guns, would be revisited in light of this tragedy.
No place is truly safe, but anywhere people are prohibited from protecting themselves with other than fists and rocks, a lone gunman can, and likely will again, shoot up another campus. And more students and faculty will die.
These days, I'm not even sure banning guns at Day Care Centers is a good idea, let alone elementary schools. If it could happen at Beslan, it could happen here. If it could happen at Virginia Tech, it could happen ANYWHERE in the U.S.
A deeply troubled and disgruntled foreign student runs afoul of college authorities.
He comes to the Virginia campus armed and starts shooting in one building.
But, unlike the massacre at Virginia Tech last week, the damage was contained in this incident that occurred five years ago, before the state legislature banned guns on college campuses.
On Jan. 16, 2002, Peter Odighizuwa, a 43-year-old student from Nigeria, walked into the Appalachian School of Law offices of Dean Anthony Sutin, 42, a former acting assistant U.S. attorney, and professor Thomas Blackwell, 41, and opened fire with a .380 ACP semi-automatic handgun – shooting them at close range.
Also killed in the same building was student Angela Denise Dales, 33. Three others were wounded.
As soon as the gunfire erupted, two students acting independently of one another, Tracy Bridges and Mikael Gross, ran to their vehicles to retrieve firearms. Gross, an off-duty police officer in his home state of North Carolina, got his 9mm pistol and body armor. Bridges got out his .357 Magnum.
Bridges and Gross went back to the building where the shots were heard and as Odighizuwa exited, they approached from different angles. Bridges yelled for him to drop his weapon and the shooter was subdued by several unarmed students.
Gross went back to his car and got handcuffs to detain the shooter until police arrived.
Most news reports of the incident failed to mention the presence of two armed students and their role in subduing the shooter, saying only that he was tackled by bystanders.
Odighizuwa was tried for the murders and sentenced to multiple life terms in prison.
Virginia Tech, like many of the nation's schools and college campuses, is a so-called "gun-free zone," which Second Amendment supporters say invites gun violence – especially from disturbed individuals seeking to kill as many victims as possible.
Foreign-born student Cho Seung-Hui murdered 32 and wounded another 15 before turning his gun on himself.
A year earlier, the Virginia legislature banned all guns on campus in the interest of safety.
From Wikipedia: The Appalachian School of Law Shooting
And then there's this piece from Law.Com: A Tragedy Compounded:
Soon after the shootings, allegations circulated among gun-rights supporters nationwide that the media had suppressed a key element of the story: That Odighizuwa had been apprehended by two law students with handguns.
The students, Tracy Bridges and Mikael Gross, had worked as police officers in North Carolina before moving to Grundy. Both said they ran to their cars and grabbed weapons when the shooting started on the second floor of the law school.
They, along with two other students, approached Odighizuwa in front of the law school. Bridges and Gross both told reporters that they raised their guns at Odighizuwa and he dropped his weapon, after which the group tackled and handcuffed him.
But Odighizuwa's gun, authorities say, was already empty, and other witnesses have said the alleged shooter never even saw the other students' guns before surrendering. (Bridges and Gross could not be reached for comment.)
"This is a good example of what happens often," says Patricia Gregory, a spokesperson for the National Rifle Association. "What gets the national coverage is that this nut went into a law school and killed people. But this guy was not a law-abiding gun owner, and he was apprehended by lawful gun owners. It's the NRA story."
I can't help but wonder if any in the Virginia Legislature feel the slightest bit of remorse for crafting a law that turned Virginia campuses into Gun-Free Zones just one year before the massacre at VT? My guess is, 'No'. Todd Gilbert, Delegate to the Virginia House, did say however that bill that died in committee last year to lift the ban on guns, would be revisited in light of this tragedy.
No place is truly safe, but anywhere people are prohibited from protecting themselves with other than fists and rocks, a lone gunman can, and likely will again, shoot up another campus. And more students and faculty will die.
These days, I'm not even sure banning guns at Day Care Centers is a good idea, let alone elementary schools. If it could happen at Beslan, it could happen here. If it could happen at Virginia Tech, it could happen ANYWHERE in the U.S.
from the mind of... Eric | 9:12 AM
3 Comments:
As with any knee-jerk policy, and Im sure more will occur as a result of VT, things are missed.
I think that banning guns on campus is a good idea, however such a law needs to be supported by the relevant protections. As it is apparant that shootings tend to happen in this way on American campuses, then any gun free zone must have a high level of security, both technological and physical, to ensure guns do not get onto the campus.
Serial Extremist? I like that!
I understand where you're coming from Jamal, but there's only one way to ensure guns do not get on campus and that is to wall off the campus, establish foot patrols along the perimeter in conjunction with a video surveillance system comparable to London's, with gated entrances that perform mandatory vehicle and personal searches, to include x-ray and metal detection, and physical pat-downs and the occasional strip search. This would have the added benefit of eliminating drugs and alcohol on campus as well as other contraband like tobacco, as well as any other items the University sees fit to ban. But who would apply for application to such a college? It'd be like enrolling in San Quentin (Prison). The University would lose money... which means, 'We can't stop kids from being kids, or killers from being killers' would become the University's official motto... in other words... 'We're not sacrificing money for security'.
The reason I say this is because America, unlike Britain, allows near-unrestricted personal gun possession for any of her citizens who has not been disqualified by law to own a firearm. Most campuses are open, as in unfenced, and students can pretty much carry anything they want onto campus and into their dorms. There is nothing in place to prevent it, and to say there should be by enacting severe restrictions that damage or make null and void the Second Amendment, is to fundamentally change America... As if she hasn't already been changed fundamentally by the continual warping of a document, via strained interpretation, that is quite plain and straight forward. Our Constitution, on its face, is extremely straight forward. It doesn't require interpretation-- it is easily read and understood by anyone reading at an 8th or 9th grade level and higher.
Also, one could easily say it was 'knee-jerk' policy that banned guns from the VT campus in the first place-- it's a matter of perspective. Besides which, what IS missed in all this is the honest recognition that emotions are still high... and RAW... and no decision additionally curtailing or relaxing VT's (or any university's) gun-free policy should presently be considered. Let the dust settle first, THEN take counsel and decide what's best.
But despite all the long-winded positions taken here by those who disagree with the idea of relaxing the gun ban, none have honestly recognized-- and stated as much -- the very real possibility that lives would have been saved had one or more students and/or faculty were in possession of a legally obtained firearm licensed for concealment....
10 lives lost because a student or faculty member subdued or killed Cho is better than 32 lives lost. 15 lives lost is better than 32. 31 lives lost is better than 32! It's a matter of perspective, which is the most endangered of species this close out from the events of last week at Virginia Tech.
banning guns never works. when guns are banned the only people who have them are the bad guys.
Post a Comment
<< Home