Dying Unnecessarily

by Robert Ringer Wednesday, July 27, 2011


Try to imagine if just one person had been carrying a concealed weapon at Gabrielle Giffords’ gathering with her constituents in Tucson … or in all those classrooms that Seung-Hui Cho shot up at Virginia Tech … or at the Labour Party’s summer camp for youth activists in Norway … or, for that matter, on each of the jetliners that went down on 9/11.

Better yet, imagine if there had been many individuals carrying concealed weapons in each of those situations. Had that been the case, it’s a virtual certainty that scores of people’s lives would have been saved — possibly thousands if armed passengers had been able to take down the 9/11 terrorists.

It angers me whenever I think of innocent human beings dying unnecessarily. And when unarmed people are faced with an armed madman (or madmen), that’s exactly what happens.

When I was in my twenties, it was a different world. Hard as it is to imagine now, I always carried a concealed weapon when I traveled. I would usually stick my head in the cockpit and, as a courtesy to the pilot, let him know I was armed. Without exception, I’d get a smile and a “thank you” in return. This is before the fascist left gained control of our culture and our legal system.

P.S. I never killed anyone. Nor did I ever injure anyone. Thankfully, I never had occasion to use my gun on an airplane. But had some nut pulled out a weapon and begun attacking people, it was comforting to know that I might have been able to take him out.

Today, I’d feel a heck of a lot more secure if I knew that many passengers on every flight were armed. I’ve never known anyone who has killed another human being, so why would I have any concern about passengers being armed on a commercial flight?

But the liberal doesn’t see it that way. The mental disorder known as liberalism has many tentacles, and no one can ever hope to completely understand it. Why? Because the liberal bases his actions entirely on subjectivism and emotion. To a liberal, good is whatever he subjectively decides it is, and, on the other side of the moral coin, he believes it is his duty to stop that which he subjectively perceives to be evil.

Unfortunately, one of the things the liberal sees as evil is a firearm. Therefore, guns must be stopped — meaning, banned. I know it’s a tired cliché, but it can’t be repeated too often: Guns don’t kill people. People do.

Jared Lee Loughner, Seung-Hui Cho, and, most recently, Anders Behring Breivik killed a lot of people using guns. But those same guns in the hands of sane, moral people would not have killed anyone.

Better still, those same guns in the hands of sane, moral people almost certainly would have saved scores of lives. Strange that the left can’t seem to grasp that. It seems so logical … but, then, that’s precisely the problem. Logic doesn’t jibe well with subjectivism and emotion. Which is good for criminals, but not good for law-abiding citizens