Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Friday, September 19, 2008

School administrators eager to repeat the results, if not the spirit, of the Alamo

I don't know when, or even if, the Students for Concealed Carry on Campus (SCCC) movement will win any victories--they're fighting against a deeply entrenched prejudice in favor of disarmament (mandated defenselessness, in other words). Still, I can't help but be impressed by the progress made so far. Ten years ago (or even five), I suspect one would have been hard pressed to find any serious discussion about revoking colleges' victim disarmament zone status. Now, such discussions are commonplace.

One such discussion can be found here, in a newspaper serving San Antonio College and the Alamo Community College District. Predictably, administrators are less than keen on the idea.

"I don't think it's a good idea. I think that the risk of doing additional harm or mistaking a situation and harming someone is greater than the benefit," President Robert Zeigler said.
"The risk of doing additional harm or mistaking a situation and harming someone" must be great indeed, if it exceeds the benefit of stopping something like the Virginia Tech butchery a couple dozen victims short of the toll that was actually reached.
"Guns aren't the problem. They're the result. A better response would be to be sensitive to others and keep your eyes open. You can generally avoid these situations." Tim Rockey, dean of continuing education, said.
Oh--so that's the problem. The victims at Virginia Tech and Norther Illinois University weren't "sensitive to others" enough, and had their eyes closed. If not for that, they could have "generally avoid[ed]" being killed. One problem with that, Mr. Rockey, is that one only has to be killed once to be permanently dead. Generally avoiding being killed ain't good enough.

President Zeigler is also not impressed by the idea of deterring would-be shooters.
"I think that anybody who would seriously contemplate killing other students knows that they might die." Zeigler said. "In fact, that's their goal. They want to take as many people with them on their way out as they can,"
They might be willing, or even planning, to die, but they seem to have a tendency to want to do so on their own terms--killing a bunch of helpless victims, and then using their last round on themselves. Dying at the hands of one of their intended victims seems to have a lot less appeal.
Several of the faculty feel safe on campus, referencing the quick response time of the security, and say they prefer to leave guns in the hands of law enforcement.
True, they often set up a perimeter around the killing ground pretty quickly. It seems to work, too--so far, none of the killers has escaped after slaughtering his helpless victims and then killing himself.

Finally, Mr. Rockey seems to be under the impression that he is being asked to carry a gun, against his inclinations.
"After 22 years in the military, I had enough with guns. That's why we have law enforcement officers with uniforms, guns and the proper training," Rockey said.
And those law enforcement officers with uniforms do indeed seem trained well in the subtle nuances of sheltering behind trees and parked cars, while the killer goes about his business.


B Smith said...

"They might be willing, or even plannig to die..."
Allow me to assist the killer in his noble goal...

John Hardin said...

I had thought that military service taught self-reliance. I guess I was wrong.