Home > Political Insider > Archives > 2007 > April > 16 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USCertainty and uncertainty in the coming gun bill debate
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The certainty is that H.B. 89, the new vehicle for the guns-in-parking-lots bill, will be debated in the Senate in the aftermath of the worst campus massacre in U.S. history at Virginia Tech.
You’ll recall that on Day 30, Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle shelved the first parking-lots-in-gun bill in part because debate coincided with an employee-on-employee slaying in Atlanta.
The uncertainty is the impact of the bill. We’ve got reports that it’s been thoroughly gutted. NRA types say they’ve got what they want.
Here’s the new version of the bill. Somebody get a lawyer and tell us what it means.
Services »
Comments
Commenting is now closed for this entry.
By MrLiberty
April 16, 2007 8:01 PM | Link to this
In January a house committee in Virginia shot down a bill that would have allowed students and faculty with concealed weapons permits to carry their weapons on campus. Current law requires them to check them with campus police or store them properly in their dorm room with special permission. The head of Virginia Tech hailed the ruling as one that would no doubt increase the sense of security for all students and parents alike.
One person with a gun could have ended this tragedy as quickly as it began. Thanks to the legislature of the state of Virginia everyone was a helpless victim.
When Lubby’s cafeteria was shot up back in 1991, a member of the US Olympic shooting team watched both her parents die while her gun sat in their car (Texas law against handguns in restaurants). Nice going Texas.
What kind of tragedy is Georgia to face? Keep up the good work you gun haters!
By MrLiberty
April 16, 2007 8:33 PM | Link to this
Only one other comment -
Criminals don’t obey laws…victims do!
By SharonH
April 16, 2007 10:17 PM | Link to this
Mr.Liberty, could you wait until the bodies get cold before you use this tragedy to further your political agenda?
By Tony
April 16, 2007 11:04 PM | Link to this
MrLiberty,
I guess a campus full of untrained student gunowners is what you’d love to see. You’d rather see about 50 dead from a mass shootout rather than what actually happened. There is a reason we have law enforcement handling situations like this. They are trained when and how to react and respond in these situations. These 18-22 year olds are not. You’d rather resort to knee jerk emotional hypotheticals where in your world the perp is miraculously shot right at the get go. Making a law would not have prevented this. You’re nothing but a Hillary wannabe who uses death to further some “what if” dream world scenario. That law, if passed, would have done nothing to stop this. But somehow you think that a law ALLOWING guns to be carried would somehow transpire into college kids to not only have money to buy them, but to ALL carry them, and ALL use them without shooting the wrong people in the process.
So MrLiberty, or MrKneeJerk, keep on claiming your laws would have prevented this. More laws do nothing to stop criminals. More laws don’t force entire campuses to carry guns either. Keep up the good work. Your use of death to further your skewed sense of reality earns you a place with Sharpton and Hillary.
By Craig
April 17, 2007 8:55 AM | Link to this
A couple weeeks ago an FBI agent was killed during a capture of a bank thief in New Jersey. Turns out the agent was killed by one of his fellow agents. Even the most highly trained individuals sometimes make mistakes and shoot the wrong people. I’m with Tony, I sure don’t want a bunch of untrained college kids thinking they are going to save the day by taking out the perp. The carnage could very well have been much worse.
By MrLiberty
April 17, 2007 9:37 AM | Link to this
What a country we have become. I suggest that increasing personal freedom and restoring one’s right to self-defence is a good thing and I get blasted. A huge study by John Lott has already showed that there has been a decrease in these types of rampages and murders in general in states that have restored personal freedom to their citizens in the form of concealed carry laws.
The hypocracy is that you all will be suggesting some sort of law change that will take away personal freedom. Again, I come back to the fact that criminals don’t obey laws.
The issue on concealed carry rights is that restoring this freedom not only enables those who feel the need (and by the way, faculty, staff, and the like could easily have been armed yesterday as well as students - if you have issues with 18 year-olds, then maybe the 25-65 croud would suit you more appropriately) it also sends a message to everyone that an environment exists in which anyone might be in possession of the necessary means to protect themselves. It doesn’t mean that every need have a weapon. The benefits come just from the knowledge that anyone might have a gun.
Do you honestly think that the Columbine shooters would have tried what they did if they thought that dozens of faculty members might have been armed? Its easy to tell how many police you have to deal with on a college campus, but if you have no idea how many other folks might have guns wouldn’t that change your thoughts on the relative success or failure of your plans?
This is about logic and common sense, not about political grandstanding. As one who hsa worked all his adult life to promote an increase in freedom, I strongly resent any association with scumbags like Hillary and Rev. Al. Like it or not, this tragedy will be used as a tool to take away the personal freedoms of americans and it is important especially in this time to make sure that people are looking at this from a logical, not just an emotional perspective.
It is a tragedy that this happened. My heart goes out to everyone who was impacted by this. When I went to college the last thing on my mind was safety and security. Unfortunately our world has changed. Unfortunately our government has responded by creating numerous “safe” zones for these events to occur by disarming everyone at schools accross the nation. Now we are forced to rely on police forces that are too few and too visible. Its time for a different approach.
By Tony
April 17, 2007 10:04 AM | Link to this
MrLiberty,
Use some common sense here. These people were bent on shooting people regardless. People rob banks knowing security guards are armed. People have shootouts with police even with the fact police are armed. Insurgents in Iraq fight the most trained military in the world. To think some law would change that shows you are out of touch with reality. How does this law you want ‘increase freedom’? After all you are one of these that say we have a constitutional right. If that right is supreme, what more will a law ‘increase freedom’? No law has stopped murder and other forms of crime so what makes you think adding another law will make anything better? As the news has reported, this killer at VT had a receipt for his gun purchase. He obeyed the law and what happened?