PDA

View Full Version : The Nuge on VT shooting, others...



SteelCore
04-20-2007, 01:46 PM
The Nuge doth rock!:rockon:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/19/commentary.nugent/index.html

Text:
WACO, Texas (CNN) -- Zero tolerance, huh? Gun-free zones, huh? Try this on for size: Columbine gun-free zone, New York City pizza shop gun-free zone, Luby's Cafeteria gun-free zone, Amish school in Pennsylvania gun-free zone and now Virginia Tech gun-free zone.

Anybody see what the evil Brady Campaign and other anti-gun cults have created? I personally have zero tolerance for evil and denial. And America had best wake up real fast that the brain-dead celebration of unarmed helplessness will get you killed every time, and I've about had enough of it.

Nearly a decade ago, a Springfield, Oregon, high schooler, a hunter familiar with firearms, was able to bring an unfolding rampage to an abrupt end when he identified a gunman attempting to reload his .22-caliber rifle, made the tactical decision to make a move and tackled the shooter.

A few years back, an assistant principal at Pearl High School in Mississippi, which was a gun-free zone, retrieved his legally owned Colt .45 from his car and stopped a Columbine wannabe from continuing his massacre at another school after he had killed two and wounded more at Pearl.

At an eighth-grade school dance in Pennsylvania, a boy fatally shot a teacher and wounded two students before the owner of the dance hall brought the killing to a halt with his own gun.

More recently, just a few miles up the road from Virginia Tech, two law school students ran to fetch their legally owned firearm to stop a madman from slaughtering anybody and everybody he pleased. These brave, average, armed citizens neutralized him pronto.

My hero, Dr. Suzanne Gratia Hupp, was not allowed by Texas law to carry her handgun into Luby's Cafeteria that fateful day in 1991, when due to bureaucrat-forced unarmed helplessness she could do nothing to stop satanic George Hennard from killing 23 people and wounding more than 20 others before he shot himself. Hupp was unarmed for no other reason than denial-ridden "feel good" politics.

She has since led the charge for concealed weapon upgrade in Texas, where we can now stop evil. Yet, there are still the mindless puppets of the Brady Campaign and other anti-gun organizations insisting on continuing the gun-free zone insanity by which innocents are forced into unarmed helplessness. Shame on them. Shame on America. Shame on the anti-gunners all.

No one was foolish enough to debate Ryder truck regulations or ammonia nitrate restrictions or a "cult of agriculture fertilizer" following the unabashed evil of Timothy McVeigh's heinous crime against America on that fateful day in Oklahoma City. No one faulted kitchen utensils or other hardware of choice after Jeffrey Dahmer was caught drugging, mutilating, raping, murdering and cannibalizing his victims. Nobody wanted "steak knife control" as they autopsied the dead nurses in Chicago, Illinois, as Richard Speck went on trial for mass murder.

Evil is as evil does, and laws disarming guaranteed victims make evil people very, very happy. Shame on us.

Already spineless gun control advocates are squawking like chickens with their tiny-brained heads chopped off, making political hay over this most recent, devastating Virginia Tech massacre, when in fact it is their own forced gun-free zone policy that enabled the unchallenged methodical murder of 32 people.

Thirty-two people dead on a U.S. college campus pursuing their American Dream, mowed-down over an extended period of time by a lone, non-American gunman in illegal possession of a firearm on campus in defiance of a zero-tolerance gun law. Feel better yet? Didn't think so.

Who doesn't get this? Who has the audacity to demand unarmed helplessness? Who likes dead good guys?

I'll tell you who. People who tramp on the Second Amendment, that's who. People who refuse to accept the self-evident truth that free people have the God-given right to keep and bear arms, to defend themselves and their loved ones. People who are so desperate in their drive to control others, so mindless in their denial that they pretend access to gas causes arson, Ryder trucks and fertilizer cause terrorism, water causes drowning, forks and spoons cause obesity, dialing 911 will somehow save your life, and that their greedy clamoring to "feel good" is more important than admitting that armed citizens are much better equipped to stop evil than unarmed, helpless ones.

Pray for the families of victims everywhere, America. Study the methodology of evil. It has a profile, a system, a preferred environment where victims cannot fight back. Embrace the facts, demand upgrade and be certain that your children's school has a better plan than Virginia Tech or Columbine. Eliminate the insanity of gun-free zones, which will never, ever be gun-free zones. They will only be good guy gun-free zones, and that is a recipe for disaster written in blood on the altar of denial. I, for one, refuse to genuflect there.

turbothis
04-20-2007, 02:04 PM
i am thinking he needs to run for president!
he talks in plane english that certain people dont want to hear.

Rampager
04-20-2007, 02:32 PM
I couldn't agree more...my thoughts exactly plus more. I'm printing this one out to post at work.:rockon:

okie shooter
04-20-2007, 02:41 PM
I like the idea "Evil is as evil does" how true that is.

MicroPilot
04-20-2007, 02:55 PM
i am thinking he needs to run for president!
he talks in plane english that certain people dont want to hear.

+1 to that!

Did anyone bother to read the opposing article? There is a quote from a reader that goes something like "drugs are illegal, but does that stop anyone who wants them from getting them?" If guns were illegal it would be the same.

cimmaronkid
04-20-2007, 06:44 PM
Extremely well thought out and written. He is without a doubt a voice that needs to be heard from more often in the upcoming months.

bullseye
04-20-2007, 07:07 PM
What a gift if he would be Fred Thompson's speach writer. :)

Teyvareb
04-20-2007, 07:17 PM
--Evil is as evil does, and laws disarming guaranteed victims make evil people very, very happy. Shame on us.--

He doth rock verily.

Rampager
04-20-2007, 08:16 PM
What a gift if he would be Fred Thompson's speach writer. :)
Or better yet running mate!

wandering_ronin
04-21-2007, 12:56 AM
Saw Ted on Glenn Beck tonight. He was saying basically the same thing. There was also some FBI guy on there, who was saying that we should let law enforcement handle it. I wanted to throttle the guy, yelling at him the whole time that law enforcement shows up after the fact! Yeah, they might prevent some future occurence, but sux to be you if you are the victim of the crime that caused the initial call. It sickens me. Dammit, if you are gonna disarm me, by God you better make those who are supposed to "protect" me liable if they don't! It's like the deal where retired LEO's are allowed to carry, etc...what makes them better than me? If they are given this "power" over us mere mortals, they had better be given the responsibility as well. They should be charged if they are in a situation and do nothing. If they step out of line, they should pay the harshest of penalties. Look at the off-duty cop in Chicago, who beat that bartender. Look at the cops in New York that shot the unarmed groom outside a strip club. Look at ATF's handling of Waco. Think these folks are gonna pay the same penalty that you and I would for the same actions? It is getting to the point where those tasked with "enforcing" the laws are not bound by them, yet we are supposed to kneel before them. What a crock!

Sorry for the rant, but I got a little fired up. I apologize if I offended anyone.

Reloader_26D
04-21-2007, 01:07 AM
There is already precedent with THE SUPREME COURT, stating that law enforcement has NO obligation to protect us. We are responsible for our own protection. Even if we have to do this outside of the law...

wandering_ronin
04-21-2007, 01:25 AM
Exactly! But how often do you hear this brought up? Not once during the discussions over this latest tragedy have I heard that point mentioned. If an institution (school, govt, whoever) removes your ability to defend yourself, then they should assume the "responsibility" for your protection. If any thing happens to you that could have been prevented by your being armed, that institution should be liable. Period. They should assume the consequences for shouldering the mantel of "power" over us.

jlpskydive
04-21-2007, 08:34 AM
That's a very good point and I agree. If you disarm me a take away my right to defend myself... YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MY WELL BEING!!!! If you can't handle that don't even think about telling me how and where I can protect myself. A mayor (umm I mean major) reason I quit my last job is I couldn't take living in DC where every time you go out at night you take you life in your own hands and only the criminals are armed and they know it. You can buy anythinng you want two blocks from the White House... LEO's are so outmatched in sheer numbers there is no way they can protect us... They can solve crimes but, rarely prevent them.

rustypirate
04-21-2007, 09:04 AM
This whole thing makes me wonder how many college students will be packing heat in their rucksacks as well as books from now on.

Big Steve
04-21-2007, 09:32 AM
I don't know if they have changed the responses but the two negative comments were really lame. Doug Houston wrote that if people arm themselves that the criminals would just get superior fire power. I guess he thinks that everyone should just go ahead and let them kill you with a small gun. And Joe Russo says he is a hunter and the 2nd protects his right to own a hunting rifle but handguns and assault rifles should be banned. I guess if someone was breaking in to his home to kill his family he would not use his rifle to defend them because it is only to be used for hunting!
And then John Thatasomething says; Jesus said those that live by the sword, die by the sword. Well I say if the criminal has a sword and you don't, your screwed!
Steve

jlpskydive
04-21-2007, 10:31 AM
I don't live by the sword, I only have one just incase someone who does live by it happens along. :slap:

vpost
04-21-2007, 10:58 AM
I really don't want this to turn into a biblical discussion but, Jesus did say "those who live by the sword will die by the sword", He wasn't talking about us regular folks, he was talking about the criminals themselves. Look at Luke 22:36 " Then he said unto them, But now, he that hath a purse let him take it, and likewise his scrip, and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one".

I do get a little fired up about this subject!

Vince

RIGID04
04-21-2007, 01:02 PM
just to add my two cents worth...in my profession...i've never taken a LEGAL gun off the street...nor have i ever been shot at by a LEGAL firearm!!!!! There must be some measure of gun control...but not to the extent where you hurt the law abiding citizens. It took me 9 months and two court appearences to exercise my right. All this without a parking summons on my rap sheet. (This is all before my current employment)

iocane
04-22-2007, 01:09 AM
Something to remeber about this is individual responsibility. Those that disarmed people resulting in their deaths are responsible. Not everyone else who happens to be in a similar occupation, or works for the goverment, etc. etc.
One of the tricks power mad backstabbers use is they divert the blame. Individuals had the power and made the bad decisions. Those same individuals should have the responsibility for what they have done.

halfmoa
04-22-2007, 05:51 AM
I would like to add my .02. Since the biblical was brought up, here is a wonderful story from the bible about a good guy and a bad guy.
Our hero took down a bad guy that was terroizing a whole nation, the guy had body armor, several assault weapons, and was a big dude as well, and was taken out by our hero with 1 well placed round to the head with the proper application of shot placement by his Saturday Night Special rock.
(David and Goliath)
I am responsible for my safety, and the safety of my family. All of the weapons in my home are just that Home(Homeland) Defense Weapons, the sooner folks grasp that the better off we will all be.
1. This country is at war with folks that do not play by any sort of rules.
2. Personal safety is a personal responsability.
3. Terrorists and criminals do not as a rule attack armed folks, from the front anyway.
4. Anyone that advocates that any form of governmant is responsible for their personal safety has not been paying attention to the way the UN handles itself in the world.
5. If we are unarmed and the Government is responsible for our safety, bring alot of body bags and toe tags.
++++ on all of the psts before this one, i just wanted to add my thoughts.
Best regards,
Jim

SteelCore
04-23-2007, 10:38 AM
Oh, well who decides? I must disagree on this point. If I wan FA and silencers, I should get them, and so should my neighbor, and everyone...and access to body armor. And whatever the gov't has that it could use to suppress the rebellion that the Framers predictecd would some day come to pass. YMMV.


"don't want this to turn into a biblical discussion"
-->Fine by me. Here's some relevant topics from the Havamal:

1
The man who stands at a strange threshold,
Should be cautious before he cross it,
Glance this way and that:
Who knows beforehand what foes may sit
Awaiting him in the hall?

16
The coward believes he will live forever
If he holds back in the battle,
But in old age he shall have no peace
Though spears have spared his limbs

38
A wayfarer should not walk unarmed,
But have his weapons to hand:
He knows not when he may need a spear,
Or what menace meet on the road.