Posted on 07/05/2007 2:06:23 PM PDT by neverdem
|
||
|
By Kati Whitaker
BBC Radio 4's Crossing Continents
|
|
|
In the aftermath of the Virginia Tech massacre, many Americans have been campaigning for permission to carry guns in more places, even churches and schools.
"Imagine you are in a restaurant and a mad man is walking around from table to table, pointing a gun, taking aim and pulling the trigger, going to the next person, taking aim, pulling the trigger and so on," says Suzanna Hupp.
"Even if you have chosen not to have a gun with you - don't you hope the guy behind you has one? Just imagine that."
But Suzanna Hupp does not have to imagine.
It was October 1991 when a gunman entered the diner where Suzanna, a Texan chiropractor, was having lunch with her parents.
The man methodically executed 23 people including Suzanna's parents.
Suzanna had a gun. But since Texan state law at the time banned people from carrying guns in public places, she had left it in her car.
|
||||
|
|
|
Nobody could have stopped the first couple of murders but it sure wouldn't have been a body bag of 32
Suzanna Hupp
|
|
|
"My gun was 100 feet away in my car, completely useless to me," she says.
"I was angry at my legislators because they had legislated me out of the right to protect myself and my family."
The massacre was, until Virginia Tech, the largest mass shooting by a single gunman in the US.
Now, in the wake of that tragedy, Suzanna is one of a growing body of Americans campaigning for the availability of more, rather than fewer, guns.
"Nobody could have stopped that guy from the first couple of murders but it sure wouldn't have been a body bag total of 32," she says.
Gun sales
Statistics are hard to come by, but at Saxet Gun Show in Austin Texas, there was plenty of anecdotal evidence to back the claim that since Virginia Tech, more Texans, at least, are now applying for licences to carry guns.
At a huge convention centre in the southern suburbs of Austin, Judith Baker of A Texas Girl's Guns firearm sales company was talking a young woman through the safety features on her new handgun.
"Gun sales have gone up since Virginia Tech. Not just my own sales but many dealers and distributors have also increased their gun sales," she says.
"And we are not just talking men here but I am seeing a lot more women wanting to get their concealed handgun licence.
|
||||
|
|
|
HAVE YOUR SAY
Nothing will stop the killing until America changes its attitude to the gun
John, Manchester
|
|
|
"I am glad to see that women are learning to protect themselves."
Some 48 states in the US issue licences to allow the carrying of concealed weapons to those who pass a background check.
But states vary in their restrictions. Thirty eight states, including Virginia, ban weapons at schools.
In Texas, certain places like churches, courthouses and schools, are designated "gun-free zones".
It is an exception that Texas governor Rick Perry recently challenged with the wholehearted endorsement of campaigners like Suzanna Hupp.
"It is my fervent belief that when legislators create a list of places where people can't carry guns, what they have actually done is create a shopping list for a mad man," he said.
Guns in classes
Andrew Sugg is a student of aviation science at Baylor University at Waco and a member of the newly formed national body Students for Concealed Carry on Campus.
He is spearheading a campaign for students to be allowed to carry concealed firearms into the classroom.
|
||||
|
|
|
PROGRAMME INFORMATION
BBC Radio 4's Crossing Continents was broadcast on Thursday, 5 July at 1102 BST
Listen to the programme
|
|
|
"I actually got angry that Virginia Tech had said 'no you can't have a gun', and here's this incident, the second-largest school shooting in the world and no-one could do anything about it," he says.
"Now, when I walk into my own class, I have to think: 'Where do I want to sit so I can make a quick getaway?'
"I look at my book bag and think: 'What can I throw at someone who comes through the door? What could I do to stall him and let everybody get away or what can I do to stop him from doing this?'."
It is a mindset that is of considerable worry to the campus police force.
Lethal combination?
Baylor University has a dedicated force of 24 police officers who are trained and drilled to respond to a firearms attack such as that at Virginia Tech.
Its chief, James Doak, said that the potential for strife is considerable among its 14,000 18-to-22 years-olds - whether it is stress of exams, girlfriend problems or simply hot tempers.
Add guns to the equation and the combination could be lethal.
"We cannot rely on students who have not been drilled in these situations to respond properly. Would they freeze up? Would they have a sense of terror in their hearts so they respond inappropriately?" he says.
"Our officers have a level of life experience which students can't possibly have at the age of 21 or 22."
But like many other Americans, Mr Sugg points to the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms, as a fundamental justification for his position.
"Guns are to me a freedom, that is what won us our freedom during the revolutionary war and we've had them ever since," he says.
BBC Radio 4's Crossing Continents was broadcast on Thursday, 5 July 2007 at 1102 BST.
It will be repeated on Monday, 9 July 2007 at 2030 BST.
If you’re ever in Palm Beach County, FReepmail me.
Carry openly, carry often, ignore these laws, Civil Disobediance IS an American Tradition
Screw these politicians.
“Our officers have a level of life experience which students can’t possibly have at the age of 21 or 22.”
Some of those students he’s talking about are probably Iraq or Afghanistan vets. There could also be older students there who are Gulf War vets etc.. so is this police chief including those people in his list of people without life experiences?
I’ve mentioned this before, but I was talking with a police officer one time and mentioned about my 1911 A1. I had to explain to him what that was. People should not assume that police officers are experts in weapons. To be sure, there are some. But there are plenty of officers who don’t know a whole heck of a lot about firearms.
I’m pretty sure that I have a lot more weapons training and experience than the vast majority of police officers. I don’t need to hear their preaching on the subject.
In fact, in England going back 100 years, police men did not have weapons, but a lot of civilians did. There were a number of recorded cases where officers were chasing armed suspects and borrowed a handgun from a passer by. I think that was a better way for law enforcement to operate.
If they’re doing that, Tom, why not eliminate the Senate?
That looks like a reasonable sized friend.
My dad’s old-school. He’s believed since his first shot that “automatics jam,” so he’s all-revolver. Except the P-38 my great-uncle brought back from Europe. He’s kind of retired, but he still qualifies with a service .38 every year.
Dad was a counselor and administrator in corrections — the rough equivalent of a deputy warden when he retired. Carrying wasn’t a requirement of his job, but he did, and takes the same annual range test as the cops. As a retired LEO, he is eligible for a permit to carry most places in all 50 states.
Just recently, he’s gotten vaguely interested in Western shooting competition. So when a single-action Ruger Vaquero popped yo at a reasonable price, he was all over it. I got my first chance to shoot it a few weekends ago. It may be based on century-old technology, but it’s solid and heavy and boy howdy, it shoots straight.
So, do you practice what you're preaching? Do you carry in the open all the time? Or are you encouraging others to fly the flag, so you can offer armchair support?
I prefer concealed carry, because it doesn't bother people who fear guns. It doesn't matter whether that fear is rational or not. I believe I have a first-amendment right to use profanity, but I choose not to do so in public places or in mixed company. Courtesy is not surender. Standing up for your rights does not require that you be in-your-face obnoxious about it.
Don't like a law? Step one is to speak against it. Step two is to campaign against it in the legislature. Step three is to challenge it in court. Only when those have failed is step 4, civil disobedience, justified. And when you make that leap, know that, if you're lucky, you'll likely be harassed and hassled behind it. If you're not lucky, you'll be arrested, tried and imprisoned.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
As a counterpoint, one of my sister's girlfriends is a cop in a small Arizona town where they not only know what the 1911 A1 is, they carry them cocked-and-locked as their duty pistols.
She weighs about 105 lbs, but I once was with her in a bar off-duty and saw her knock down a man twice her size with one blow. He was a big belligerent drunk, but when he pinched her ass, she turned around quicker than a cobra strikes (or so it seemed) and had him whimpering on the ground in no time.
The best part is while he was being arrested for assault, he started blubbering to the uniformed cops about how this crazy bitch attacked him for no reason. Boy, did those cops ever have a horse laugh at his expense, as they explained that the "crazy bitch" was a cop too, and would be riding down to the station in the cruiser to help book him.
I'm not sure I've ever seen a man so humiliated in front of so many people. I still laugh like a fool when I think about the way the crowd jeered and insulted him.
Yes, and how very strange that is....considering it's the Citizens who have approved LEO's for carrying privilege. It isn't their right, as it is we who determine what their working tools are or are not.
And for them to turn around and pretend it is they who have approved us, the Citizens, for carry is pompous arrogance of the highest order.
I say dis-arm and fire any LEO who has succumbed to the disease of the elite.
That’s pretty much my point.
The police can NEVER protect you. Even if you suspect someone wants to kill you and you ask for protection, all you will get is that “No crime has been committed yet. We can do nothing.” All the law enforcement community can actually do is DOCUMENT THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME AND COLLECT EVIDENCE AFTER THE FACT. It is to late for the victim. It is the responsibility of the individual to protect himself and his loved ones. Laws that restrict the ability to keep and bear arms do nothing but imperil you and all you love.
Liberals place more importance on feelng safe than actually being safe.
I was expecting a dateline of 1789 for this article followed by a body that read something along the lines of “If you don’t like it, don’t come here.”
Just like at VT. What a load of manure.
This is as basic as it gets.
Every man, woman, and responsible child has an unalienable individual, civil, Constitutional, and human right to obtain, own, and carry, openly or concealed, any weapon -- rifle, shotgun, handgun, machinegun, anything -- any time, any place, without asking anyone's permission. - L. Neil Smith. The Atlanta Declaration
Another nanny-state gasbag protecting his little empire.
Power is intoxicating. The paramilitary mentality which is increasingly monopolizing law-enforcement agencies in the U.S. does not want to share power with the average citizen.
I have more confidence in an average law-abiding citizen having a gun for his/her defence than in some testosterone charged elitist modern cop with his PBA or FOP benefits, outrageous pay and arrogance.
Hey, that's tagline material, right there. Bears repeating. OFTEN.
An armed citizen is a safe citizen!
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.