Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Fine
So, I haven't said much about Virginia Tech because there isn't really anything to say.
The rush to determine whether it was because of too much gun control or too little is stupid. Bad things happen. That's not necessarily evidence of a policy flaw. Is there a "right" policy that would prevent bad things from ever happening? No.
The fact is, this incident didn't change, in any way, the facts surrounding those arguments. If they were right before, they're still right, and if they were wrong before, they're still wrong.
The reason I support access to guns has nothing to do with reducing or limiting these kinds of incidents. (I imagine more gun access would make these incidents less deadly but more common) It's a moral argument that the government has no right to tell us to leave responsibility for our self-defense to a police force that isn't able to do the job.
This dude, while apparently calling for the suicide of VT Prez Charles Steger for his support of the policy making campus "gun-free," explains:
It is simple logic. Once you deprive an individual of his right to defend himself, you assume the responsibility for their safety. If you fail at that responsibility, there must be a consequence. Now, if the law will not do the right thing, then the responsible party must do the right thing and accept the consequence of his colossal failure in the execution of his duties. Whatever. The point is, folks cannot morally limit the ability of people to defend themselves when they are unable to defend those people. It essentially forces folks to enter the "will you be protected?" lottery.
. . .
|
. . .
|
