Duc, sequere, aut de via decede!

Discussion about guns before the massacre at Virginia Tech

April 17th, 2007 . by Matt

Michele Malkin has discovered that the administration of Virginia Tech had dismissed any suggestions that concealed handguns might be needed for self defense and punished a student that had a concealed weapons permit for bringing his gun to school. From VDARE

There’s no polite way or time to say it: American colleges and universities have become coddle industries. Big Nanny administrators oversee speech codes, segregated dorms, politically correct academic departments and designated “safe spaces” to protect students selectively from hurtful (conservative) opinions—while allowing mob rule for approved leftist positions (textbook case: Columbia University’s anti-Minuteman Project protesters). Instead of teaching students to defend their beliefs, American educators shield them from vigorous intellectual debate. Instead of encouraging autonomy, our higher institutions of learning stoke passivity and conflict-avoidance.

And as the erosion of intellectual self-defense goes, so goes the erosion of physical self-defense.

Yesterday morning, as news was breaking about the carnage at Virginia Tech, a reader e-mailed me a news story from last January. State legislators in Virginia had attempted to pass a bill that would have eased handgun restrictions on college campuses. Opposed by outspoken, anti-gun activists and Virginia Tech administrators, that bill failed.[Gun bill gets shot down by panel |HB 1572, which would have allowed handguns on college campuses, died in subcommittee, By Greg Esposito, Roanoke Times, Roanoke Times, January 31, 2006]

Is it too early to ask: “What if?” What if that bill had passed? What if just one student in one of those classrooms had been in lawful possession of a concealed weapon for the purpose of self-defense?

If it wasn’t too early for Keystone Katie Couric to be jumping all over campus security yesterday for what they woulda/coulda/shoulda done in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, and if it isn’t too early for the New York Times editorial board to be publishing its knee-jerk call for more gun control, it darned well isn’t too early for me to raise questions about how the unrepentant anti-gun lobbying of college officials may have put students at risk.

The back story: Virginia Tech had punished a student for bringing a handgun to class last spring—despite the fact that the student had a valid concealed handgun permit. The bill would have barred public universities from making “rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit . . . from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun.” After the proposal died in subcommittee, the school’s governing board reiterated its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus buildings.

Late last summer, a shooting near campus prompted students to clamor again for loosening campus rules against armed self-defense. Virginia Tech officials turned up their noses. In response to student Bradford Wiles’s campus newspaper op-ed piece in support of concealed carry on campus, [Unarmed and vulnerable, August 31, 2006] Virginia Tech Associate Vice President Larry Hincker [Send him mail] scoffed:

“[I]t is absolutely mind-boggling to see the opinions of Bradford Wiles. . . . The editors of this page must have printed this commentary if for no other reason than malicious compliance. Surely, they scratched their heads saying, ‘I can’t believe he really wants to say that.’ Wiles tells us that he didn’t feel safe with the hundreds of highly trained officers armed with high powered rifles encircling the building and protecting him. He even implies that he needed his sidearm to protect himself . . .”

The nerve!

Hincker continued:

“The writer would have us believe that a university campus, with tens of thousands of young people, is safer with everyone packing heat. Imagine the continual fear of students in that scenario. We’ve seen that fear here, and we don’t want to see it again. . . . Guns don’t belong in classrooms. They never will. Virginia Tech has a very sound policy preventing same.” [Imagine if students were armed, Roanoke Times, September 05, 2006]

Who’s scratching his head now, Mr. Hincker?

4 Responses to “Discussion about guns before the massacre at Virginia Tech”

  1. comment number 1 by: kjeff

    Now, that’s a solution, preventing gun crimes by allowing everyone to ‘carry and conceal’ a gun. And I still can believe, especially when I’m in an interstate, that all-in-all, it took me, and most of everyone, less than 30 minutes(including waiting time) to pass my driving license test.(my cousin told me that it took him several days in Germany) I could be a psychopath, a drunk, a drug addict, or all of the above, and would be able to buy a handgun as long as I don’t have a felony record.

  2. comment number 2 by: T_K

    It’s just pure obfuscation for Malkin and other clowns to portray concealed carry as the only (or most sensible) way to prevent school shootings. If it were that way, there’d be a negative correlation between carry permits and school deaths in the industrialised world.
    Looking at other Western countries, it seems that limiting gun ownership reduces violent crime. I haven’t heard the pro-gun movement offer anything but sophistry and Peter Pan logic against this observation.

  3. comment number 3 by: Matt

    Looking at other Western countries, it seems that limiting gun ownership reduces violent crime. I haven’t heard the pro-gun movement offer anything but sophistry and Peter Pan logic against this observation.

    It has not in mine. In fact, now there is a certain group of people within that are so well armed that none dare oppose them. All the law abiding people turned in their guns, while the criminals kept theirs.

  4. comment number 4 by: kjeff


    All the law abiding people turned in their guns, while the criminals kept theirs.

    Most illegal guns(criminals’) were legal ones once upon a time.