The April 16 massacre wasn't the first shooting scare at Virginia Tech this college year. Nor are emerging questions over whether or not students should be allowed to bear arms for self-defense new.

In August of 2006, an escaped jail inmate shot and killed a deputy sheriff and an unarmed security guard at a nearby hospital before the police caught him in the woods near the university.

On August 31, VT graduate student Bradford B. Wiles wrote an eerily prophetic commentary about his experience that day:

On Aug. 21 at about 9:20 a.m., my graduate-level class was evacuated
from the Squires Student Center. We were interrupted in class and not
informed of anything other than the following words: "You need to get
out of the building."

...It was at this time that I realized that I had no viable means of
protecting myself.

Please realize that I am licensed to carry a concealed handgun in the
commonwealth of Virginia, and do so on a regular basis. However, because
I am a Virginia Tech student, I am prohibited from carrying at school
because of Virginia Tech's student policy, which makes possession of a
handgun an expellable offense, but not a prosecutable crime.

I had entrusted my safety, and the safety of others to the police. In
light of this, there are a few things I wish to point out.

First, I never want to have my safety fully in the hands of anyone else,
including the police.

Second, I considered bringing my gun with me to campus, but did not due
to the obvious risk of losing my graduate career, which is ridiculous
because had I been shot and killed, there would have been no graduate
career for me anyway.

Third, and most important, I am trained and able to carry a concealed
handgun almost anywhere in Virginia and other states that have
reciprocity with Virginia, but cannot carry where I spend more time than
anywhere else because, somehow, I become a threat to others when I cross
from the town of Blacksburg onto Virginia Tech's campus.

...I would also like to point out that when I mentioned to a professor that
I would feel safer with my gun, this is what she said to me, "I would
feel safer if you had your gun."

Wiles' commentary was responded to in an op-ed written by Larry Hincker, Assoc. Vice President of University Relations at Virgina Tech.

WARNING: In light of the April 16 massacre, Hincker's snide, ignorant and insensitive commentary will be extremely disturbing to some. Click 'Read More' at your own risk.

By Chris Chumita

There are more stories pertaining to our gun rights in Ohio then we can possibly draw attention to with individual daily commentary. But they are all worthy of mention.

What follows is our review of headlines from around the state though a pro-gun rights lens.

From Governor Strickland's wife discussing their differing views on gun control to a school shooting in the gun control utopia of Chicago, these articles should be a part of your required reading!

Click on the "Read More..." link below for several days of headlines accompanied by short, concise pro-gun analysis.

By Gerard Valentino

The establishment media’s immediate vilification of guns whenever a mass shooting happens means they forget that it only takes only one person with a concealed handgun license to stop a killer. They also refuse to accept that despite the leftist anti-gunners' cries to the contrary, when someone resists with a gun the death toll in these cases is much lower.

Every single one of the spree killings with the highest death toll have one thing in common, nobody was there with a gun during the early stages of the event to challenge the coward. Yet, in the case of the Pearl, Mississippi School shooting, the Alrosa Villa shooting in Columbus, Ohio and the Appalachian Law School tragedy someone was there to stop the murderer and the death toll was lessened.

Contrast those cases with Columbine, the Luby’s massacre in Killeen, TX, and the McDonald’s massacre in California, where nobody was able to defend themselves due to being legally disarmed, and it becomes apparent that people are safer from spree killers when they resist with a gun.

There are also hundreds of thousands of Americans each year that are alive because they chose to fight back with a firearm.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 17, 2007

Gun bans disarm victims, not criminals.

That is the simple lesson that anti-gun groups refuse to acknowledge as they race to dance in the blood of the Virginia Tech tragedy. Prior to April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech was an anti-gun “success story.” Tech fought, and won, a battle against a statewide measure that would have guaranteed the right of students to defend themselves while on campus. In Virginia, students with a concealed carry license are allowed to carry on college campuses unless the college prohibits it. Virginia Tech prohibits it, and fought to make sure they could continue to prohibit it.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. “I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.”

Within hours of news of the shootings first breaking, the “usual suspects” had geared up their P.R. machines to begin their attempts to exploit tragedy. Several organizations made sure to send their releases in time for West Coast mid-day news, practically before the campus was even secure. While they lament “the culture of violence,” they are silent about “feeling safe” resulting in a pile of bodies.

Representative of this exploitation is Toby Hoover and her organization and their release entitled “It’s about the guns.” In the usual fashion, the release is full of blatant appeal to emotion. Conspicuously absent from this release is any facts. That is because in their race to try and shape the initial news coverage, these groups cannot be bothered with any facts. It’s too important to get in front of the cameras before the bodies cool. In fact, groups like Freedom States Alliance criticize groups like the NRA for not rushing to join them in debate atop the pile of bodies.

While gun groups typically take the approach of respecting the families and the victims by allowing them to grieve privately, it is increasingly obvious that “abandoning the field” in the days following a tragedy serves only to clear the airwaves for the distortions and misinformation from the anti-gun groups. At present, all that appears to be known conclusively is: 1.) The victims were purposefully and aggressively disarmed by the school administration, 2.) The police served only to document the crime scene and count the bodies, and 3.) If just one victim had been armed they would have at least had an option before they were executed. Unlike our foes, we will await the reporting of further facts prior to calling for or opposing any further legislation.

Buckeye Firearms Association extends their thoughts and prayers to the victims and their families.

Click 'Read More' for commentary from renowned firearms instructor Gabe Suarez.