Yes, you're right. I consider that Florida and Ohio election BS the pinnacle of whining. The DNC approved the ballots, and then complained later that they were no good. What could be more obvious than that? I agree that the ballots were confusing, but I wasn't asked for my approval before they were used. The DNC was. Moreover, they were not particulary confusing that the average idiot could screw up that badly. Have you ever accidentally pressed the button for the wrong candidate when you were voting? Did you go ahead and pull that giant lever anyway?
Had the process worked correctly in the Cho situation, the school officials should have reported his crazy behavior to the police, his stalking incidents should have been reported, etc. If the people responsible had done their jobs, Cho never would have been able to buy the guns. I don't think we was as resourceful as the common everyday criminal in NYC who can get a gun more easily than any law-abiding American citizen. Instead, he probably would have filled up a 5 gallon container of gasoline, chained the exits and burned hundreds of students to death. Should we ban combustible materials because so many arsonists have killed so many people? Remember the Happyland incident in which 87 people died when a jealous lover torched a club with a gallon of gas.
I'm not arguing that everyone should carry a gun. I don't generally carry one. I am arguing that the POSSIBILITY of law-abiding citizens carrying guns serves as a deterrent to otherwise powerless maniacs like Cho. The only power he weilded over his victims was that he was the only person with a gun. Furthermore, the sole purpose of law enforcement carrying guns is not "to kill people". It is to act as a deterrent to crime, and it is VERY EFFECTIVE. Or do you think we should take away the guns from the police too?
More women, particularly young women, should get trained in firearms usage, and they should carry guns. Statistics show that 1 in 4 women are rape victims. That number is completely outrageous. The possibility of getting killed trying to rape a woman would greatly reduce the number of rapes, even if the perpetrator were also carrying a gun.
Ed, you'll probably consider it whining, but I feel the need to point out that Bush was never actually elected in the first place. He was installed by an activist court in 2000, and in 2004 squeaked into office after some very suspicious circumstances in Ohio and Florida. If anyone is trampling "on all the people who exercised their votes and won," it's the current administration.
And as far as the 2nd amendment goes, answer me this: Do you honestly think Cho should have been allowed to own a gun? Was he part of a "well-regulated militia?" Our first amendment rights have never allowed us to say anything we want--why should the 2nd amendment be construed to mean that any one of us can bear any arm we want? Should I be able to own a stinger missile or an rpg launcher? Should high school students across America be subjected to the burden of carrying firearms to school on the off chance a couple of their peers might go off the deep end?
I'm an American, a gun owner and not even all that liberal. But this argument that everyone should carry a gun around to either a) protect themselves against other gun owners or b) protect themselves against the government, is ludicrous. I don't think you guys are crying crocodile tears over VT, but I do think you're deluding yourselves when you claim that more guns are the answer to gun violence. And the idea of fighting off the government with store-bought handguns is a brave but impotent fantasy.
Bill 440: The driver is to blame. But comparing guns and cars on the basis that they can both kill people is fallacious. Cars are not made for killing or injuring people. Guns are. In fact, their sole purpose is to kill or injure people. The government regulates all sorts of things that can hurt us and we don't complain about that. Some old lady dies because there's e coli in her spinach salad and the next day, you can't find one leaf of spinach in any supermarket in the country. Yet when some nut kills thirty people with a handgun, the response is to rush to the defense of the gun industry?
Doesn't make sense to me...
