do you think gun control is the answer ?

Question

Last Monday, tragedy struck the campus of Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Virginia. A lone gunman went on two separate shooting rampages at the university. After killing two students in a dormitory, he later entered an academic building and chained shut the front doors.

Then he proceeded to walk through the second floor, and with two pistols shot and killed another 3O students and instructors. Before he could be stopped by the police, he shot himself.
When the day ended, 33 were dead and more than a dozen injured. This is now the deadliest shooting spree in American history.

With each eruption of unbelievable, unforgivable violence like this, Americans invariably ask, “How did this happen?” And before the dust has settled, the finger-pointing begins. But the more important question – and the one we don’t want to ask because we don’t want to answer it – is “Why did this happen?”

America has suffered a monumental tragedy. My heart and prayers go out to all Virginia Tech students, parents, and families who lost loved ones and friends in this senseless act of a twisted mind.




But in the aftermath of America’s worst school massacre, I know there are those who will use it to promote causes that don’t really address the problem. For instance, the anti-gun crowd is already springing out of the woodwork.

But to say that this tragedy was caused by the availability of guns, simplistically fails to recognize the real source of the problem. There has never been a gun made that killed anyone. It’s the person wielding the weapon who kills. If that’s not true, we had better forbid the use of the automobile.

Far more people are killed in auto accidents than are killed with guns. And yet, therein the problem is illustrated. Automobiles don’t kill people. It’s the person who drives the automobile that kills people.

One issue that is almost always overlooked in the discussion of gun violence is the complete removal of Biblical morals and ethics from America’s public life, especially our schools.

This has left young minds vulnerable to such things as the endless flood of computer games that facilitate, inspire, and train them to kill great numbers of people with efficiency, but without remorse. It’s done with computer simulation.

Some say there’s no correlation between these games and the act of murder. However, there have been connections established with some of those who have killed in the most calloused and ruthless manner.

If a mind is continually imprinted with the acting out of bloody, ruthless killings, the lines between make-believe and reality become blurred. And though moral judgment is blurred, physical skill is sharpened. Just think for a moment.

Mohammad Atta and the other terrorists on 9/11 had never actually flown a Boeing 767. They were taught the basics of flying in smaller aircraft, but they learned how to operate the instruments and controls of a 767 through computer simulators.

In the same way, many of the computer games played for hours on end by some young people teach the tactics and reflexive skills needed for killing large numbers of people.

These games are much worse than the violent movies and TV series that feature violence. At least they have a script that attaches some semblance of rationale for why the killings are taking place. But the violent computer games bring no ethics or morals into the equation. You win by blowing apart in bloody gun battles as many people as possible. Normal human sensitivities and compassion are dulled over time by this simulation.

This is especially true in the case of disturbed and alienated young minds that have not been taught any concept of parental discipline, love and Biblical morality.

It’s the amoral mind of people that causes death via guns, knives, clubs – or whatever else can be used in a lethal way. It’s not the inanimate weapon.

So removing guns from law-abiding citizens is not the answer. It only leaves them defenseless before the criminals that in any case will manage to obtain guns. History repeatedly proves this point.

Listen to this statement and ask yourself who made it: “This year will go down in history. For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration. The street will be safer, the police more efficient and the world will follow our lead into the future.” That was Adolf Hitler, on April 15th, 1935.

History offers other examples of what can happen when citizens are stripped of the means to defend themselves.

The Turkish Ottoman Empire established gun control in 1911. It then proceeded to exterminate one and a half million Armenians from 1914—1917.

The Soviet Union established gun control in 1929. Subsequently, from 1928—1953, 60-million dissidents were imprisoned and then exterminated.

China enacted gun control laws in 1935. After the communist takeover, from 1948—1952, 20 million Chinese, unable to defend themselves, were murdered.

Nazi Germany fully established gun control in 1938. That helped the government to round up 13 million defenseless Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, mentally ill and impaired human beings. Many were imprisoned in concentration camps, then destroyed.

Guatemala passed gun control laws in 1964. Then, from 1964 to 1981, 100-thousand defenseless Mayan Indians were exterminated.

Uganda established gun control measures in 1970. Predictably, from 1971 to 1979, 300-thousand defenseless Christians met a similar fate.

Cambodia established gun control measures in 1956. Subsequently, from 1957 to 1977 one-million Cambodians met their deaths.

Our Founding Fathers had good reason to include in the Constitution “the right for each citizen to bear arms.” They came to this country with vivid memories of what an all-powerful government could do to its defenseless citizens.

In our country, the following evidence clearly demonstrates the impact upon criminals that armed citizens have. Vermont has a genuine right-to-carry law. That means no permit is required. Yet Vermont boasts the lowest crime rate in the nation. Nationwide in the USA, concealed-carry laws have resulted in a drop in crime rates.

A comprehensive national study in 1996 determined that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. The results of the study showed that states, which passed concealed-carry laws, reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, and aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%. By extrapolation, if the other States, which do not have concealed-carry laws, had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly.

So let’s deal with the real problem – by seeking to reform the minds of our citizens with Biblical morality and ethics. Paul, writing in 2 Timothy 3:1-5, said, “But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!”

All of the above characteristics are those of a society that has rejected God and His morality and ethics. It is an accurate description of America’s predominant morality today. And as a result, “perilous times” have come.

Answer 1

gun control is wrong,it will not stop people from snapping and killing.rejecting "gods" does not make people kill on a mass level.the problem has nothing to do with guns,or any "god".

Answer 2

If 10% of the students and teachers were trained and armed, the death toll would have been much less. We keep expecting someone to do something about violent crime, but we forget that we are someone.

Here is the deal. Most people (over 99%) will not hurt you, it is the less than 1% that terrorize the rest. Why because they have weapons and the rest do not. We can't take the weapons away from the bad guys. Sure you pass gun laws which has done a lot of good in NYC, LA, DC, etc, NOT!

There is already plenty of gun control laws.

So let anyone with a clean record carry a firearm anywhere. This includes planes. I can hear the gasping now. Planes, what happens if one goes off and blows a hole in the plane. Then they fix it when it lands. It isn't a big deal. No one is going to get sucked out like in the movies. That is pure Hollywood. Pilots routinely open the hatch during flights to let there smoke out when they are smoking.

73
WA1GON

Answer 3

There are two issues here.

The first is dealing with criminals and criminality.
The second is preventing bad government.

I believe that a certain amount of gun control is needed within the confinds of the 2A. Ie, the people can have guns, but that there are certain controls to weed out people like the guy who killed people the other day.

The best answer i have been able to find is along the lines of a type of conscription for the militia. Make people join up (allowed, happened in 1792 as a result of the 1792 militia act) make them learn about guns, make them be a part of their community.
Any person who cannot cope with this sort of thing, should not be allowed to have a gun. It will instill a moral duty on people, and make it easier to prevent criminals from getting guns.

Of course there are other things that can be done besides this, better education funding (fairer for a start) and programs to help single parents deal with kids, like community centres, after school programs, more sport in the community and so on.

Answer 4

Laws preventing police that have to wait until fired upon to draw their weapons are the problems. Ambushes will always be the most dangerous for police and most will be killed that way, police are expected to have their weapons but not look threatening when dealing with the public. I personally carry a gun, know how to use it (very well). It is not the gun that sets up the ambush it the complacency of some. Look at the Dallas Police officer that pulled over Maots(sp) he drew his weapon and was pressured to quit, had it been the latest shooting( Pittsburgh) he would have killed the bad guy and been a hero.

Answer 5

No. Gun control is not the answer.

It's not the absence of gun control that keeps Vermont with the lowest crime rate in the nation.

Did you know that Vermont is #2 in the nation for the use of marijuana in the last year (#5 in drug use overall) and #6 in the number of heavy drinkers? Maybe that's why their crime rate is so low! They're all wasted!!

Maybe we should just get rid of all the drug laws...

In reality, you need to look at three very important statistics. Vermont is #2 in the highest median age of residents - so most of the residents have grown out of their violent tendencies. It is 96% white (and I don't think it's the specific ethnicity, it's just that they are the same - I think you'd have less crime in any area that is 96% the same ethnicity). But most of all, it is a very rural area - it has more square miles per capita than any other state except Alaska.

I hate it when people pick one fact and try to prove a theory around it...

Answer 6

There is no one answer to the senseless tragedy of violence that occurred last week and other weeks in recent years. Society must work to find the cause of the malaise that affects young people to the point that they lash out in such a violent and brutal way-- we must mourn all 33 deaths at Virginia Tech because surely the perpetrator deserves our sympathy as well. How did we as a society fail him to the point that he could become so disconnected and angry? When we have found the answers to that question, we can begin to find "the" answer.
Parenting, education, community involvement with youth, good citizenship, and gun control are all elements that must work together to ensure public safety. Gun control is not the answer, but it is certainly part of the answer.

Answer 7

NO it's not an answer it's an opeit it to stop to stop the ppl from making their own choice, it will end our right to make judgment calls and protect ourselves and our families the gov. want the right to say who gets protection and who do sent

Answer 8

Hear....Hear.....Well said.....very well stated indeed!
Nothing to add......it just isn't necessary. Hats off to you for your crystal clear thinking on the matter. Pistol Pete

Answer 9

Gun control will be a part of the solution.

Answer 10

Hey how did you get that many characters on your question?