The knee-jerking wingnut response was not just in defense of handguns as predicted.
(via) If it wasn't too early for Keystone Katie Couric to be jumping all over campus security yesterday for what they woulda/coulda/shoulda done in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, and if it isn't too early for The New York Times editorial board to be publishing its knee-jerk call for more gun control, it darned well isn't too early for me to raise questions about how the unrepentant anti-gun lobbying of college officials may have put students at risk.The back story: Virginia Tech had punished a student for bringing a handgun to class last spring -- despite the fact that the student had a valid concealed handgun permit. The bill would have barred public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit . . . from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun." After the proposal died in subcommittee, the school's governing board reiterated its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus buildings.
(via)If some students and faculty members had access to guns during the attack, there's a good chance they could have cut it short. According to witnesses, the killer -- identified by police as Cho Seung-Hui, a senior studying English -- took his time and paused repeatedly for a minute or so to reload.
By this logic, if everyone in NYC had shoulder-mounted rocket launchers, 9/11 wouldn't have happened.
Next semester, with laptops, books and iPods for all... everyone's issued a sidearm. Nothing's going to make post-game celebrations more entertaining than equally matched firearms.
update: there's more...
(via)Posted by kerry at April 18, 2007 05:43 AMApparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can't shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic "Gun-Free School Zone" laws.