Chron works in anti-DeLay screed into Virginia Tech editorial
by Owen Courrèges · 04/17/2007 7:43 amI knew the Houston Chronicle was shameless, but … wow. This really takes the cake:
The massacre at Virginia Tech relieves Texas of the sad distinction of being the state with the most people shot to death in a single incident. In 1991, George Hennard, armed with two pistols, drove his pickup into a Luby’s cafeteria in Killeen, shot 23 people to death and then himself.
Despite this history and Monday’s heavy toll of human life, the Texas Legislature is contemplating making it easier for people to carry weapons to and from work. The Texas Senate passed a bill that would allow those with a license to carry a concealed handgun to lock their guns in their cars in company lots, even if the business bans guns from its property.
And this is connected with the Virigina Tech shooting … how?
If students had been allowed to carry guns into class with a concealed-carry permit (as recent legislation in Virginia had proposed) then chances are this massacre wouldn’t have lasted nearly as long as it did. Now, liberals may disagree and believe that having more people armed would have simply made the situation worse, but that notion is at least less obvious than the idea that anti-gun laws made the students sitting ducks.
The shooter in this case wasn’t deterred by Virginia’s gun laws prohibiting guns on college campuses under any circumstances, and it was illegal to carry in that Luby’s in Killeen, just as it was illegal to carry at Virginia Tech. Accordingly, it seems bizarre to connect allowing concealed carry to two massacres where concealed carry was not permitted.
In any event, the Chron doesn’t make the argument.
A one-time Texas legislator, then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, led the fight to make the United States again safe for the importation of an endless supply of assault rifles — weapons whose only purpose is to kill human targets quickly and reliably.
Open message to the Houston Chronicle:
This is an intervention. You need to realize that Tom DeLay is gone. I know for obsessive liberal media outlets like yourself, he was an endless source of commentary.
However, it’s been a year now since he left Congress and public life. Stop writing about him.
In any event: the shooter at Virginia Tech didn’t use an assault rifle. This was likely because he needed weapons that he could conceal, and it’s difficult to conceal an AK clone. Moreover, it’s difficult to see how massacres like this would be “easier” with a semi-automatic assault rifle. Except for long range fire and penetration, assault rifles offer little advantage over semi-automatic handguns, which were apparently used by the killer at Virginia Tech.
Proponents of unfettered access to firearms rely on the rallying cry, “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people.” That’s true. The horrifying reality is that too many Americans — afflicted with mental illness, alienation or hatred — are ready and willing to take life. And they can arm themselves to the hilt without ever undergoing a background check.
What is the Chron talking about? I suppose they’re talking about the so-called “gun show loophole,” whereby some private individuals without federal firearms licenses can sell guns without performing a background check. Otherwise, a background check is always required.
Of course, the vast majority of dealers at gun shows have federal firearms licenses, and only about 2% of guns used in crimes come from gun shows. Gun rights advocates have proposed creating an instant background check system for all purchases, but this has been symied by folks like those at the Brady campaign, who evidently want to inhibit gun purchases.
In short, then, there may be good arguments linking the Virginia Tech massacre to lax gun control, but the Chron certainly didn’t make them.
Filed Under Uncategorized · · · · 
Print This Post
··
Comments
20 Responses to “Chron works in anti-DeLay screed into Virginia Tech editorial”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...
Well the Chron never runs out of ways to run off subscribers. What nitwits.
The kid was here on a student visa. you may not legally buy a weapon if you are in the country on a non-immigrant visa. You MUST be a resident alien to purchase or obtain a weapon legally:
http://hotair.com/archives/2007/04/16/where-did-the-shooter-get-his-guns/
Therefore, the gun laws did exactly BUMPKIS to stop this. In fact they had the worst possible effect of preventing those people who WERE eligible to carry a weapon from doing so, thereby preventing them from trying to stop the gunman before he finished his killing spree. Additional gun control laws will only result in yet more unintended consequences.
The Senate approved SB534 30-0, which would allow a CHL holder to keep their weapon in their vehicle even if their employer would not allow weapons on the premises. A similar bill in the House, HB992 was approved by committee but is hung up on the calenders committee, the Senate bill has also been introduced in the house and is awaiting placement on the calender. It would appear that there is a faction of people on the calender committee that are actively trying to kill this bill. But it is situations like this one at VT that show that such restrictions come at the cost of lives.
PS I urge everyone to contact these committee members and make them understand that killing this bill will have electoral consequences.
House Committee on Calendars (C050)
Clerk: Amy Ehlert
Legislature: 80(R) - 2007 Phone: 463-0758
Appointment Date: 1/26/2007 Room: EXT E2.140
Position Member
Chair: Rep. Beverly Woolley
Vice Chair: Rep. Norma Chavez
Members: Rep. Dan Branch
Rep. Myra Crownover
Rep. Dawnna Dukes
Rep. Gary Elkins
Rep. Ryan Guillen
Rep. Mike Hamilton
Rep. Larry Taylor
Rep. Sylvester Turner
Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale
Delay should have never resigned what a huge mistake and how many years later still not charged?
Obviously the Chronicle is pandering to the anti-gun and anti-Delay crowd.
I am re-subscribing after a 11 year boycott of the Chronicle as soon as I finish typing my absolute lie.
If he had used a suicide bomb vest instead of shooting them, whose fault would it then be? Unfortunately, I shall have to put up with the same quality of journalistic babble from the Honolulu Advertiser when I get to Hawaii.
Rorschach, I say the heck with all of the caveats. Let a CHL holder carry it everywhere except the court room,places where prisoners are,
and on an airplane.
The fact that laws against carrying weapons were ineffective against crime was no secret to Thomas Jefferson, who hand-copied this quotation from the 18th century Italian criminologist Cesare
Beccaria’s 1764 book On Crimes and Punishments into his own notebook on law and government, a quote which sums up well the arguments of those who defend the right to keep and bear arms:
“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of
arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty –so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator– and subject innocent
persons to all the vexations that the guilty alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences
and advantages of a universal decree.”
Rorschach,
Your points are all well taken, but they’re reporting now that the shooter was indeed a resident alien.
Re the original posting on the DeLay bashing: Sometimes, when you are used to beating a dead horse, it’s just too hard to stop! Especially when there’s nothing else to say. When you have nothing productive to do, walk back the horse carcass and begin beating it again. At least it makes you look busy.
For some libbies, it’s a bad habit. For others, it’s an addiction.
I believe that part of the resident alien problem is the United States inability or reluctance, which ever is true, to conduct a proper back ground check.
I do not recall where I read this but the gubment approves student visas in about 3 days.
Once again the comical proves that my decision to cancell years ago was the right choice. I wish they would quit throwing their surplus copies in my yard. It just takes up my time to pick them up and toss them unread into the trash.
The comical IMHO is a terrible waste of good trees.
Dude, I stand corrected. The information I had at the time was that this was a Chinese national here on a student visa. That would appear to be incorrect on both points. But the fact that it was illegal for him to have weapons in his dorm room, or on the campus is still valid.
Bigs, I agree, in fact I further think that aircraft should not be out of bounds either. The problem is that the deadline for the introduction of new legislation in the current session of the state lege has come and gone.
Rorschach, on an aircraft at 40,000 feet with 200 people on board, I don’t want just anybody shooting. I want somebody well trained on the shoot/don’t shoot aspects in an aircraft that has alot of critical moving parts. I’d rather depend on untrained passengers to rush the bad guys armed with brief cases, ball point pens, dinner and drink carts, blankets and pillows (if your airline still provides these) to take the bad guys down.
12 - Doesn’t that same logic hold true off an airplane as well? A crowded restaurant, or a classroom? I don’t have an agenda, I’m just asking. Does the training a person receives to get a concealed carry permit prepare someone for such a situation? And what happens when the police roll up and can’t tell the good guys from the bad guys?
I just don’t know.
A lot of people have been concerned that a shot out window would suck people out of aircraft or cause explosive decompression. This has been shown to be incorrect. Yes there are vulnerable places in every aircraft, ones that can lead to fire or loss of hydraulic pressure or even loss of an engine. But given the choice of being a passenger on a cruise missile a la United 93 or killing everyone trying to stop the madness, I’d certainly take my chances and I believe most people would agree with that. In fact that is exactly what the passengers of Flt 93 did and in doing so they lost their lives but saved untold numbers at the intended target.
One other point Bigs. Suppose you had a choice between a somewhat trained but armed person that can try to adapt to the situation or a untrained and unarmed mob using makeshift weapons, which would you chose?
JohnRH and Rorschach - No, it doesn’t apply on an aircraft. Rorschach, you are right that explosive decompression is not a factor. And redundancy of control systems normally make a stray unlikely. However, a bullet in a fuel tank or fuel line centerline of aircraft could be fatal. A fire could be fatal. And that’s fatal to everybody. Again, I’ll take my chances on the unarmed passengers taking out the bad guys armed with scissors or box cutters. If I shoot at a bad guy in a restaurant and I miss him or hit another diner, the restaurant doesn’t fall out of the sky. On Flight 93 and the other 9/11 flights, the passengers weren’t prepared for what happened. Today, knowing the agenda of the Islamic crazies, the passengers would react before the takeover was completed.
Wimpy chronicle writers are afraid of strong men. I also get tired of picking up the free chronicle to toss in the garbage. I have often thought I should call the Chronicle and tell them to stop throwing their rag in my yard. It embarrasses me to think people driving by might think I read their rag. Liberals are notoriously wimpy.
Big, would it be anymore fatal than a suicide hijacker?
duhmoose, unless he has a bomb, the suicide hijacker can be handled by passengers OR a trained air marshal. If he has a bomb, nothing is going to help.
Thinking about it, Richard Reid had a bomb in the heels of his shoes, and passengers subdued the hell out of him.
During the flight, the Reid, who was sitting behind the wing in the coach section of the Boeing 767, lit a match but put it in his mouth when confronted by flight attendant Hermis Moutardier, according to an FBI affidavit.
She told the captain and returned to see Reid with a match held to the tongue of his sneaker, then noticed a wire protruding from the shoe. She tried to grab the sneaker, but Reid pushed her to the floor, and she screamed for help. Another flight attendant, Cristina Jones, intervened, and the 6-foot-4 Reid bit her on the thumb, and Ms. Moutardier threw water in his face.
Passengers violently subdued the man, some taking off their belts to strap him into his seat, officials said. Two doctors used drugs from the airplane’s medical kit to sedate him.
He was sentenced to life imprisonment on each of the 3 charges, 20 years imprisonment on 4 other charges, and 30 years on 4 other counts, to be served CONSECUTIVELY, followed by five years of supervised release (somebody will have to sit in the graveyard 24/7). Eight fines of $250,000, restitution of $298.17 and $5,784,800 special assessment were imposed.