Anti-gun groups once again seek to exploit tragedy
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.
By Gabe Suarez
By now the news about the shootings at Virginia Tech have reached
everyone. I hate hearing about things like this. I hate it not only
because some probably good people were killed (I say probably because I
didn't know any of them), but because those who hate us and our way of
life will seek to use these events to further their political agendas.
I can almost see Pelosi and Hillary snickering over their bubbling
cauldrons at their "good fortune".
I wrote a piece a few months ago on how to prevent these things and it
involves, simply and decidedly, that being armed is the best solution.
Point One: It is already illegal to do what the gunman did...murder
people...but he did it anyway...sadly, the law failed.
Point Two: It is illegal to bring guns into the University, yet that
didn't stop the gunman. He did it anyway...again, the law failed.
Point Three: As courageous as the University police may be...as trained
and equipped as they may be...they are totally irrelevant in such
events. As we saw, they did not stop this man. He killed a boatload of
people unbothered by the enforcers of the law, the prosecutors of the
law, and of course, unbothered by those who obey the law.
Again...THE LAW FAILED.
There are only three conclusions we may reach here.
Conclusion One: These events are unavoidable and some people will simply
die this way in the society we have. I personally refuse to accept that
under any terms.
Conclusion Two: These event can be stopped by making it illegal for
civilians to possess guns. The stupidity of this argument cannot be
overstated, yet that is undoubtedly what we will hear. I will reference
all to the points above. In short, as they all invariably do, THE LAW
Conclusion Three: Allow those who wish to, to carry guns for their own
protection. (and I would add, make any organization that enacts policies
to prevent the free exercise of civil rights, liable for any crimes of
violence). I think of the three, this one makes the most sense, but
probably wil be the one least considered.
Some would say that an armed man or woman would only be able to protect
themselves and would not have stopped the gunman. I disagree if in the
act of this self-protection, they killed the gunman. What if the first
or second intended victim had been one of these? How many lives would
have been saved by one civilian carrying a pistol? After all...with
all the cops in and around the college already, they could not prevent
the shooter from killing again. The law failed here as well did it not?
Regardless of where all of the fallout takes us, I expect a greater
impetus in the left's attempts to deny our civil right to own and carry
Gabe Suarez is President of Suarez International.