Posted on 01/12/2011 6:32:25 AM PST by Kaslin
When Jared Loughner opened fire in Tucson on January 8, six people were killed and fourteen injured. No matter where you were sitting, as the 24-hour news carried the details of the story, the world seemed almost to stop spinning. The raw evil of what Loughner had done was simply too great for decent, law abiding citizens to comprehend.
Sadly, it didn’t take long for various talking heads on the left to see the shooting as just another crisis that could be used to further their agenda: tightening gun control, besmearing the Tea Party, and destroying Sarah Palin. For instance, within 48 hours of the shooting, Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) promised to introduce stricter gun control legislation as soon as her staff could draw it up, the Washington Post’s Courtland Milloy affixed blame to the Tea Party, and uber-leftist Paul Krugman disgraced himself as one of the shrillest voices placing the blame on Palin.
Lost in these attempts to gain political points by placing blame on someone other than the shooter is the clearest lesson of the Tucson shooting: that we must take responsibility for our own lives — and be prepared to defend those lives with weapons we carry for protection.
Far from serving as fodder for the anti-gunners (save as they pervert the story to make it fit their template), the shooting in Tucson reminds us that when the criminal mind acts on its inclinations, its would-be victims must be prepared to take the necessary steps to stop the perpetrator in his tracks. Clearly, this is best achieved by lawfully carrying a handgun on our persons: a handgun with which we are familiar, and which we are willing to use to defend our own lives and the lives of other innocents.
If anyone thinks I go too far in positing a handgun as the best means of self-defense, consider Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito’s explanation for why that court famously overturned handgun bans in Washington, D.C., and Chicago: “We held that individual self defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment right [to keep and bear arms]. …[And] we found that this right applies to handguns because they are ‘the most preferred firearm in the nation to ‘keep’ and use for protection of one’s home and family.’”
Alito’s words rang in my head as I was eating lunch in a restaurant with my family on the afternoon of January 8, watching the television on the wall as news of the shooting poured in. My youngest daughter, who knows I legally carry a concealed pistol everyday, looked at me and asked: “Dad, would you have stopped him?” I explained to her that while I couldn’t say for sure I would have stopped him, I certainly would have been prepared to stop him and would have had absolutely no qualms about shooting a criminal who threatened the lives of my family and/or myself.
Such is life. As long as we are on this earth, criminals will be seeking the opportunity to carry out their evil schemes. And if we respond to their schemes as Representative McCarthy wants to, by passing more and more gun control laws, we’ll inevitably be disappointed to find that criminals will ignore the new laws just as easily as they ignored the old ones. In the end, such an approach will only hamper the ability of law abiding citizens to get their hands on the weapons “most preferred” for self defense, effectively transforming more and more innocents into sitting ducks for the next Loughner whenever and wherever he decides to kill in cold blood.
Our lives are our own responsibilities. We cannot entrust their protection to agents of the state, whether those agents are legislators, police officers, or federal agents.
If we want to be safe, we need to arm ourselves as a means of making preparation for safety. Perhaps this is the most valuable lesson the Tucson shooting can teach us.
FNC is reporting that gun sales rose 60% in Arizona on the Monday after the pothead went on his shooting rampage and Dipstik went on his moronic ranting rampage.
>I’ve had a CC permit since 2008. Taken some ribbing for bringing it with me on seemingly innocuous errands. My feeling is, the day I don’t have it with me is the day I’ll probably need it. Not getting much ridicule about it after Saturday.
Exactly. I see carrying a gun like wearing a seat belt. You don’t wear it because you either want, or intend to get in an accident. You wear it because if you do get in that accident, it really sucks not to have it on.
FYI
No longer bother.
As long as some wildcard $hitbird going off misses my a$$, I could care less about the remainder.
The delusion that one takes out some deranged shooter in a public setting is just that... A delusion.
Should such delusion manifest it is assured that those you “saved” will all sue your ass for the emotional trauma and distress to their persons you caused.
FYI
talk about delusions
I watched the report
It is NOT a license to be a policeman, a "defender of the people", a hero, or a martyr.
I think, unless the gunman was pointing at me or directly threatening me, my duty would be to get my loved ones and myself out of the KZ ASAP, and then contact the authorities. I am not trained nor want to be trained for those other duties.
My reason for the CCW would be for my protection and my loved ones; it would not be for any of the other reasons named above.
I have no doubt you are correct. There is no interest, on my part, to start slinging lead with criminals or insane people in public. The laws are different for each state. In my particular case, we were instructed on what was permissible in given situations.
My first instinct, in a situation like that, would be finding cover for me and whoever is with me. If we're directly threatened, at least I don't have to worry about being at a disadvantage. With my luck, I would be in a position to take out the bad guy, then find myself shot by LE personnel.
Agreed.
I doubt that Jeanne Assam would agree.
I am guessing she got lucky. My uncle trained a young lady who popped a early release schizoid who was hiding in her garage. Why she had a loaded .380 in her hand when he grabbed her is a question best not asked.
In my experience, you always have a gun when you do not need it, and never have one when you do.
I believe everyone of reasonable intellect should be afforded the lawful right to carry.
I just stopped carrying because it is a pain in the a$$.
It is counterproductive to desire the salvation of those who have made the legal hurdles so high.
I will save my own a$$, and I do not need a gun. I'll just take theirs.
I think Dr. Hupp probably disagrees too:
Dr Suzanna Hupp on Virginia Tech
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ggg0LwhrH0&NR=1
That's exactly what we need, IMHO. More law abiding people armed to protect against these maniacs when they go off. otherwise, everyone else becomes a target until enough people can physically restrain the individual at much greater risk to themselves (as this example indicates). The guy got off an amazing number of shots, and he was (tragically...horrifically) effective with the shots he made.
If someone right close had been armed and returned fire immediately, a lot of suffering may have been prevented, though I doubt seriously anyone was going to stop his first few shots.
See my post 16.
Exactly so. And the extension of this fundamental truth is it's converse, where, as Jeff Snyder pointed out in his seminal essay, Nation of Cowards, that anyone who will not act in their own self-defense, yet demand that the police run to their rescue is at best morally bankrupt.
Years back me and a friend got woke by two strange people rooting through our camp. They decided to leave when a 10mm colt got stuck in the face of the big guy.
My friend asked what we would do if we had to off them. No need for an answer..
I would have been digging three holes alone.
Bo has a conscience and a big mouth.
If the Bay County school board had been armed, they could have offed the shooter instead of pleading "Please Don't, Please don't". Luckily, the shooter missed them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.