Author Topic: Signs of Intelligence?  (Read 8662 times)

Marshal Halloway

  • Forum Administrator
  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1293
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 28
Signs of Intelligence?
« on: April 30, 2007, 04:39:59 PM »

Signs of Intelligence?

By Fred Thompson

One of the things that's got to be going through a lot of peoples' minds now is how one man with two handguns, that he had to reload time and time again, could go from classroom to classroom on the Virginia Tech campus without being stopped. Much of the answer can be found in policies put in place by the university itself.

Virginia, like 39 other states, allows citizens with training and legal permits to carry concealed weapons. That means that Virginians regularly sit in movie theaters and eat in restaurants among armed citizens. They walk, joke, and rub shoulders everyday with people who responsibly carry firearms — and are far safer than they would be in San Francisco, Oakland, Detroit, Chicago, New York City, or Washington, D.C., where such permits are difficult or impossible to obtain.

The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so.

Still, there are a lot of people who are just offended by the notion that people can carry guns around. They view everybody, or at least many of us, as potential murderers prevented only by the lack of a convenient weapon. Virginia Tech administrators overrode Virginia state law and threatened to expel or fire anybody who brings a weapon onto campus.

In recent years, however, armed Americans — not on-duty police officers — have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge.

So Virginians asked their legislators to change the university's "concealed carry" policy to exempt people 21 years of age or older who have passed background checks and taken training classes. The university, however, lobbied against that bill, and a top administrator subsequently praised the legislature for blocking the measure.

The logic behind this attitude baffles me, but I suspect it has to do with a basic difference in worldviews. Some people think that power should exist only at the top, and everybody else should rely on "the authorities" for protection.

Despite such attitudes, average Americans have always made up the front line against crime. Through programs like Neighborhood Watch and Amber Alert, we are stopping and catching criminals daily. Normal people tackled "shoe bomber" Richard Reid as he was trying to blow up an airliner. It was a truck driver who found the D.C. snipers. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that civilians use firearms to prevent at least a half million crimes annually.

When people capable of performing acts of heroism are discouraged or denied the opportunity, our society is all the poorer. And from the selfless examples of the passengers on Flight 93 on 9/11 to Virginia Tech professor Liviu Librescu, a Holocaust survivor who sacrificed himself to save his students earlier this week, we know what extraordinary acts of heroism ordinary citizens are capable of.

Many other universities have been swayed by an anti-gun, anti-self defense ideology. I respect their right to hold those views, but I challenge their decision to deny Americans the right to protect themselves on their campuses — and then proudly advertise that fact to any and all.

Whenever I've seen one of those "Gun-free Zone" signs, especially outside of a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I've always wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don't mean much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.

— Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.


DBAIII

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 6
  • Live Free or Die
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2007, 08:17:56 PM »
We need more intelligent people like Senator Thompson, his words were eloquent and well organized.  The problem is words won't help these anti-gun nuts, what we need is shovels to dig their heads out of the sand, except for the one's whose are buried up up their... well you know.

Thompson for President.
Dave

Hazcat

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10457
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2007, 09:53:39 PM »
RUN FRED RUN!!
All tipoes and misspelings are copi-righted.  Pleeze do not reuse without ritten persimmons  :D

woodsman

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2007, 09:41:01 AM »
I'll second that! Run, Fred, run!

conagher

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #4 on: May 03, 2007, 12:04:29 PM »
Maybe this man should be President..

Sponsor

  • Guest
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #5 on: Today at 04:02:00 AM »

Lawrence Keeney

  • Active Forum Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 74
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2007, 07:49:21 PM »
Maybe this man should be President..


Ooooh..Fred has been my man for a couple of months now..hes the most reaganesque candidate since..well...since Reagan..

I think he can beat the dim candidate.

Hazcat

  • Top Forum Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10457
  • DRTV Ranger
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2007, 10:06:39 PM »
I think he is waiting for the field to thin a bit (10 person debate?) and to get his organization in place.  He does need to move soon though.  RUN FRED RUN!
All tipoes and misspelings are copi-righted.  Pleeze do not reuse without ritten persimmons  :D

drifter44

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2007, 10:16:05 PM »
It's a great thing to see a politician that has intelligence and common sense. I'm with everybody else, run Fred!

blackhawk

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 19
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #8 on: September 30, 2007, 05:23:12 PM »
Fred must run,and WIN, God Bless America.
Blackhawk 45Colt

Cogz

  • Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 37
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Signs of Intelligence?
« Reply #9 on: October 15, 2007, 03:33:19 AM »
More signs of intelligence:

Security and Liberty
by Ron Paul
The senseless and horrific killings last week on the campus of Virginia Tech University reinforced an uneasy feeling many Americans experienced after September 11th: namely, that government cannot protect us. No matter how many laws we pass, no matter how many police or federal agents we put on the streets, a determined individual or group still can cause great harm. Perhaps the only good that can come from these terrible killings is a reinforced understanding that we as individuals are responsible for our safety and the safety of our families.

Although Virginia does allow individuals to carry concealed weapons if they first obtain a permit, college campuses within the state are specifically exempted. Virginia Tech, like all Virginia colleges, is therefore a gun-free zone, at least for private individuals. And as we witnessed, it didn’t matter how many guns the police had. Only private individuals on the scene could have prevented or lessened this tragedy. Prohibiting guns on campus made the Virginia Tech students less safe, not more.

The Virginia Tech tragedy may not lead directly to more gun control, but I fear it will lead to more people control. Thanks to our media and many government officials, Americans have become conditioned to view the state as our protector and the solution to every problem. Whenever something terrible happens, especially when it becomes a national news story, people reflexively demand that government do something. This impulse almost always leads to bad laws and the loss of liberty. It is completely at odds with the best American traditions of self-reliance and rugged individualism.

Do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, and metal detectors? Do we really believe government can provide total security? Do we want to involuntarily commit every disaffected, disturbed, or alienated person who fantasizes about violence? Or can we accept that liberty is more important than the illusion of state-provided security?

I fear that Congress will use this terrible event to push for more government-mandated mental health programs. The therapeutic nanny state only encourages individuals to view themselves as victims, and reject personal responsibility for their actions. Certainly there are legitimate organic mental illnesses, but it is the role of doctors and families, not the government, to diagnose and treat such illnesses.

Freedom is not defined by safety. Freedom is defined by the ability of citizens to live without government interference. Government cannot create a world without risks, nor would we really wish to live in such a fictional place. Only a totalitarian society would even claim absolute safety as a worthy ideal, because it would require total state control over its citizens’ lives. Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons.
April 25th, 2007

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk