Gotta love Ann Coulter

Joined
Mar 17, 2006
Messages
689
Likes
70
Location
New Bedford
Feedback: 14 / 0 / 0
Here's what she sent me on Myspace.com:

From the attacks of 9/11 to Monday's school shooting, after every mass murder there is an overwhelming urge to "do something" to prevent a similar attack.

But since Adam ate the apple and let evil into the world, deranged individuals have existed.

Most of the time they can't be locked up until it's too late. It's not against the law to be crazy — in some jurisdictions it actually makes you more viable as a candidate for public office.

It's certainly not against the law to be an unsociable loner. If it were, Ralph Nader would be behind bars right now, where he belongs. Mass murder is often the first serious crime unbalanced individuals are caught committing — as appears to be in the case of the Virginia Tech shooter.

The best we can do is enact policies that will reduce the death toll when these acts of carnage occur, as they will in a free and open society of 300 million people, most of whom have cable TV.

Only one policy has ever been shown to deter mass murder: concealed-carry laws. In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the inestimable economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect.

And the effect was not insignificant. States that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60 percent and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80 percent.

Apparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can't shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic "Gun-Free School Zone" laws.

From the people who brought you "zero tolerance," I present the Gun-Free Zone! Yippee! Problem solved! Bam! Bam! Everybody down! Hey, how did that deranged loner get a gun into this Gun-Free Zone?

It isn't the angst of adolescence. Plenty of school shootings have been committed by adults with absolutely no reason to be at the school, such as Laurie Dann, who shot up the Hubbard Woods Elementary School in Winnetka, Ill., in 1988; Patrick Purdy, who opened fire on children at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, Calif., in 1989; and Charles Carl Roberts, who murdered five schoolgirls at an Amish school in Lancaster County, Pa., last year.

Oh by the way, the other major "Gun-Free Zone" in America is the post office.

But instantly, on the day of the shooting at Virginia Tech, the media were already promoting gun control and pre-emptively denouncing right-wingers who point out that gun control enables murderers rather than stopping them.

Liberals get to lobby for gun control, but we're disallowed from arguing back. That's how good their arguments are. They're that good.

Needless to say, Virginia Tech is a Gun-Free School Zone — at least until last Monday. The gunman must not have known. Imagine his embarrassment! Perhaps there should be signs.

Virginia Tech even prohibits students with concealed-carry permits from carrying their guns on campus. Last year, the school disciplined a student for carrying a gun on campus, despite his lawful concealed-carry permit. If only someone like that had been in Norris Hall on Monday, this massacre could have been ended a lot sooner.

But last January, the Virginia General Assembly shot down a bill that would have prevented universities like Virginia Tech from giving sanctuary to mass murderers on college campuses in Virginia by disarming students with concealed-carry permits valid in the rest of the state.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker praised the legislature for allowing the school to disarm lawful gun owners on the faculty and student body, thereby surrendering every college campus in the state to deranged mass murderers, saying: "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."

Others disagreed. Writing last year about another dangerous killer who had been loose on the Virginia Tech campus, graduate student Jonathan McGlumphy wrote: "Is it not obvious that all students, faculty and staff would have been safer if (concealed handgun permit) holders were not banned from carrying their weapons on campus?"
If it wasn't obvious then, it is now
 
Coulter

You would think this is common sense to most people. Unfortunately the anti gun liberals have brainwashed many people to believe that guns are evil and even letting law abiding citizens carry concealed weapons some how violates their sense of right and wrong.
It`s the sheeple mentality.
 
You would think this is common sense to most people. Unfortunately the anti gun liberals have brainwashed many people to believe that guns are evil and even letting law abiding citizens carry concealed weapons some how violates their sense of right and wrong.
It`s the sheeple mentality.

Your problem is that you assume that common sense has anything to do with this issue.
 
Your problem is that you assume that common sense has anything to do with this issue.

That is exactly the problem. The mindless brainwashing of the left is always an issue. The complete lack of common sense is whole different story completely.... [thinking]
 
Is that pic photoshopped or is it real? Either way, that's fantastic!

I think what we haven't heard much about is how the liberal feel good school administrators missed three opportunities to keep Cho from legally obtaining guns. He stalked two women, the DA could have gone forward with charges, and it sounds like they could have kept him involuntarily for mental evaluation after a number of trigger incidents - his suicidal ramblings, his whacked out and apparently horrifying (to his teachers and classmates) writings on other subjects.

Sounds like there were a number of failures of the system along the way - as there always are - that allowed the incident to happen.
 
I think we're being a little overzealous in saying that it would have stopped
it.... as the CCW rates aren't nearly high enough to support it.

I think what we CAN say though, is that allowing legal CCW on the campus
there certainly would not have hurt anything. It's not as if the law stopped
this incident from happening. Every extra "good guy" in a given place
with a gun is overall a "good thing" . If it doesn't protect those 30 people, it
might stop someone from being a robbery or rape victim.

The problem is the left has this BS notional of kids bringing guns to keg
parties and the like, which I'm sure has happened before... but they seem
to insinuate that anyone that goes through the trouble of acquiring a
permit would be that irresponsible... and the numbers just don't support
that. I'd even bet that the "problem rate" among 21-24 year olds, lets
say, of those that hold CCW's is no better or worse than the rest of the
age range.

-Mike
 
I think we're being a little overzealous in saying that it would have stopped
it.... as the CCW rates aren't nearly high enough to support it.

I think what we CAN say though, is that allowing legal CCW on the campus
there certainly would not have hurt anything. It's not as if the law stopped
this incident from happening. Every extra "good guy" in a given place
with a gun is overall a "good thing" . If it doesn't protect those 30 people, it
might stop someone from being a robbery or rape victim. -Mike

Absolutely - many overlook that, while CCW has not been directly implicated in the interdiction of many relatively rare mass shootings, CCW holders defend their lives and loved ones on a nearly daily basis, as documented in blogs that track news articles on such events.

At the least, a CCW holder has a chance to save themselves. At best, they might stop a shooting that might have been the first of many. Had one of the unfortunate first two students at VT carried, this might have barely made the news at all (as the media wouldn't have gone to any extreme to highlight a story supporting CCW).
 
Back
Top Bottom