Still crossing fingers 10 years after Columbine

On this 10th anniversary of the Columbine massacre, it is outrageous that there is nothing in place to stop a repeat or worse except our wish that there won't be. It is outrageous that when, not if, the next school shooting happens, the predominant voices from our elected representatives and the media, and those gullible enough to believe them, will be to demand more citizen disarmament.

Let me tell you about a research paper, written by the foremost expert on the Columbine shootings. From "Guns in Schools," my Nov. 2006 "Rights Watch" column for Guns Magazine:

"Students who bring guns to school are hardly ever detected," the researcher wrote. "This is shocking to most parents and even other students since it is just as easy to bring a loaded handgun to school as it is to bring a calculator."

The author was Columbine killer Eric Harris, who chose "Guns in Schools" for his report topic. It's not hard to see why he would favor "gun-free school zones."

Not hard at all. What's hard to understand is why the Brady Campaign and so many politicians agree with him.

Harris had a chance to test his theoretical preference for disarmed victims in the real world. As CNN reported on his encounter with Columbine's community resource officer, "[Sheriff's Deputy Neil] Gardner, seeing Harris working with his gun, leaned over the top of the car and fired four shots ... After the exchange of gunfire, Harris ran back into the building."

Unlike with his other targets, Harris did not pursue and try to finish off someone capable of returning lethal force. He fled to pursue helpless prey. The lesson here could not be more clear. Rather than being "no place for a gun," firearms in schools, deployed by moral people, can protect the innocent and repel the evil.

So predictably, there were calls for more "gun control," that is, more edicts that would infringe on your right and mine, but not make one bit of difference to those intent on circumventing them--you know, criminals.

And predictably, some of those calls came from people who behaved criminally and were caught. From "Look Who's Demanding Gun Control," my August 2005 Guns Magazine "Rights Watch" column:

Robyn Anderson thinks background checks to buy a gun should be expanded. Testifying before the Colorado House Judiciary hearing, Anderson claimed that background checks would serve to inhibit gun purchases--not by criminals, but by people who would pass such checks!

Anderson acted as a straw purchaser for Columbine killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. She knowingly bought guns for minors who would not have passed a check. Yet she was credited with "turning the tide" to pass a gun show background check expansion bill affecting those who would.

Mark Manes wants nothing to do with firearms. He thinks his mom, a long-time Handgun Control, Inc., activist, was "really right all along" when she warned him against having anything to do with them.

Manes was sentenced to a six-year term for his role in providing Harris and Klebold with a TEC-DC9 pistol and two 50-round boxes of ammunition.

The thing is, we've seen what doesn't work. But we can also see what has worked--time and time again:

"Teachers and kindergarten nurses now started to carry guns, schools were protected by parents (and often grandpas) guarding them in voluntary shifts."

So when we see the influential Slate.com website feature an article titled "The Four Most Important Lessons of Columbine," written by the author of a book on the subject, why is it the most important lesson isn't even mentioned?

Sorry. If I have a choice of heeding expert opinions, I've gotta go with Eric Harris. Knowing he wanted schools to be mandated "gun free zones" pretty much trumps anything Slate could add.

I searched Examiner.com's archive for licensed photos to illustrate this article, and the one I selected could not be more instructive:

Columbine High School Principal Frank DeAngelis crosses his fingers wishing that everything goes well with the School's Prom as he talks with reporters in the hallway at the school near Littleton, Colo., on Saturday, April 18, 2009. DeAngelis was on hand for interviews by reporters with family members. Monday is the 10th anniversary of the shootings at the school.

We can do so much better than crossing our fingers and wishing. But right now, that's really the only preemptive measure in place. Everything else is just a response.

The Columbine attacks were timed the day before a "Shall Issue" concealed carry bill was due to pass the Colorado legislature. I am outraged that when proponents of gun control stage a murderous attack on school children the day before a legislative attempt to allow people more personal protection, all the media could do was side with the killers perspective.

>>
..it is outrageous that there is nothing in place to stop a repeat or worse except our wish that there won’t be..
<<

Of the four firearms carried by the attackers, two were sawed off shotguns, the making and possession of which has long been a felony that is vigorously enforced.

So, on this single point, indeed something is “in place to stop a repeat”, for surely anyone contemplating another Columbine would be stopped by such a law.

Along with the four firearms, the attackers also carried over 90 bombs, the making and possession of which has long been a felony that is vigorously enforced.

So, on this single point, indeed something is “in place to stop a repeat”, for surely anyone contemplating another Columbine would be stopped by such a law.

That is of course, after the law prohibiting assault and murder fails to stop a repeat of the Columbine massacre.

I heard Lou Dobbs last night report this ruling by 9th circuit court. The ruling says that states cannot make laws that go against the second amendment. Basically saying we have all the rights to own firearms.

http://themoderatevoice.com/29505/9th-circuit-incorporates-2nd-amendment/

“I wonder if Columbine High still cultivates an acidic culture of jock-worship and unchecked bullying.”

Who cares? Elementary to high school bullying is one of nature’s ways of deciding who gets to have sex first. It’ll never go away. And it wasn’t to blame. The killers were one of, oh, about 300 million people who were belittled at some point in their lives. Most of the rest of them didn’t go on a murder spree.

Plus, with a cool knickname like the “Trenchcoat Mafia,” how hard would it be to turn that around to your benefit? I don’t think they tried hard enough.

I am outraged because ten years after the fact the libtards are still milking Columbine to try and pass anti-gun laws in this country, but only 8 years after 9/11 they have totally blacked out the news and are not pushing for anything to be done to prevent another one, quite the contrary, they are doing all they can to make sure one happens.

Every time the libs want to pass a new anti-gun measure, and this time it is once again the "assault" weapon(notice the change from assault rifle)ban, so we have a rash of shootings and, more importantly, we have the MSM reporting every local occurrence they can find as if it is national news.

It doesn't take a tin foil hat to realize some of these shootings were engineered by the left. Don't think so? Ever heard of suicide bombers, what is so hard to believe about a suicide shooter? Once they get a sensational shooting then they plaster it all over the news for days and of course the copy cats come out of the woodwork then. My theory and I'm sticking to it.

Of the four firearms carried by the attackers, two were sawed off shotguns, the making and possession of which has long been a felony that is vigorously enforced. So, on this single point, indeed something is “in place to stop a repeat”, for surely anyone contemplating another Columbine would be stopped by such a law. Along with the four firearms, the attackers also carried over 90 bombs, the making and possession of which has long been a felony that is vigorously enforced. So, on this single point, indeed something is “in place to stop a repeat”, for surely anyone contemplating another Columbine would be stopped by such a law. That is of course, after the law prohibiting assault and murder fails to stop a repeat of the Columbine massacre.

You make some very valid points, but like most of us you are forgetting the most important law that should have stopped these kids from killing their classmates. It is against the law to commit murder, no matter what weapon you happen to use. This law, a basic law that has been in existence almost since time was first recorded, failed to stop them, if it didn't stop them no other law would.

Laws only work on the law abiding and on people who are afraid of the consequence. Obviously these kids intended to commit suicide anyway so nothing would deter them.

Anyone who thinks they can legislate themselves out of crime is deluding themselves.

Here is the source to show that Eric Harris, one of the Columbine shooters, was actively opposed to guns in schools:

“Let me tell you about a research paper, written by the foremost expert on the Columbine shootings. From “Guns in Schools,” my Nov. 2006 “Rights Watch” column for Guns Magazine:

“Students who bring guns to school are hardly ever detected,” the researcher wrote. “This is shocking to most parents and even other students since it is just as easy to bring a loaded handgun to school as it is to bring a calculator.”

...Ultimately, “a school is no place for a gun,” he concluded.

The author was Columbine killer Eric Harris, who chose “Guns in Schools” for his report topic. It's not hard to see why he would favor “gun-free school zones.”

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.