Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Who do you trust?

Who would you trust for your own safety? You, or someone else minutes away? If you trust the police, no wonder why there's so many muggings, assaults, rapes and murders every year. If you don't believe me, here's a case of someone who was forcibly disarmed by the inane policies at Virginia Tech:

Unarmed and vulnerable

Bradford B. Wiles - Thursday, August 31, 2006

Wiles, of New Castle, is a graduate student at Virginia Tech.

On Aug. 21 at about 9:20 a.m., my graduate-level class was evacuated
from the Squires Student Center. We were interrupted in class and not
informed of anything other than the following words: "You need to get
out of the building."

Upon exiting the classroom, we were met at the doors leading outside
by two armor-clad policemen with fully automatic weapons, plus their
side arms. Once outside, there were several more officers with either
fully automatic rifles and pump shotguns, and policemen running down
the street, pistols drawn.

It was at this time that I realized that I had no viable means of protecting

Please realize that I am licensed to carry a concealed handgun in the
commonwealth of Virginia, and do so on a regular basis. However,
because I am a Virginia Tech student, I am prohibited from carrying at
school because of Virginia Tech's student policy, which makes posses-
sion of a handgun an expellable offense, but not a prosecutable crime.

I had entrusted my safety, and the safety of others to the police. In light
of this, there are a few things I wish to point out.

First, I never want to have my safety fully in the hands of anyone else,
including the police.

Second, I considered bringing my gun with me to campus, but did not
due to the obvious risk of losing my graduate career, which is ridiculous
because had I been shot and killed, there would have been no graduate
career for me anyway.

Third, and most important, I am trained and able to carry a concealed
handgun almost anywhere in Virginia and other states that have recip-
rocity with Virginia, but cannot carry where I spend more time than
anywhere else because, somehow, I become a threat to others when I
cross from the town of Blacksburg onto Virginia Tech's campus.

Of all of the emotions and thoughts that were running through my head
that morning, the most overwhelming one was of helplessness. That
feeling of helplessness has been difficult to reconcile because I knew I
would have been safer with a proper means to defend myself.

I would also like to point out that when I mentioned to a professor that I
would feel safer with my gun, this is what she said to me, "I would feel
safer if you had your gun."

The policy that forbids students who are legally licensed to carry in
needs to be changed.

I am qualified and capable of carrying a concealed handgun and urge
you to work with me to allow my most basic right of self-defense, and
eliminate my entrusting my safety and the safety of my classmates to
the government.

This incident makes it clear that it is time that Virginia Tech and the
commonwealth of Virginia let me take responsibility for my safety.

This came out after the first on-campus incident at the beginning of this school year, when an escaped prisoner threatened the students at this and another nearby campus.

So, who do you trust? For more information on concealed weapons permits for your state, go to

Tuesday, April 17, 2007


Well, the bodies weren't even cold before the anti-self-defense minions began their spew against guns. Of course, there were a couple of people who get it right.

Suarez International USA, Inc. (

By now the news about the shootings at Virginia Tech have reached everyone. I hate hearing about things like this. I hate it not only because some probably good people were killed (I say probably because I didn't know any of them), but because those who hate us and our way of life will seek to use these events to further their political agendas. I can almost see Pelosi and Hillary snickering over their bubbling cauldrons at their "good fortune"

I wrote a piece a few months ago on how to prevent these things and it involves, simply and decidedly, that being armed is the best solution.

Point One: It is already illegal to do what the gunman did...murder people...but he did it anyway... sadly, the law failed.

Point Two: It is illegal to bring guns into the University, yet that didn't
stop the gunman. He did it anyway... again, the law failed.

Point Three: As courageous as the University police may be... as trained and equipped as they may be... they are totally irrelevant in such events. As we saw, they did not stop this man. He killed a boatload of people unbothered by the enforcers of the law, the prosecutors of the law, and of course, unbothered by those who obey the law.


There are only three conclusions we may reach here.

Conclusion One: These events are unavoidable and some people will simply die this way in the society we have. I personally refuse to accept that under any terms.

Conclusion Two: These event can be stopped by making it illegal for civilians to possess guns. The stupidity of this arguement cannot be overstated, yet that is undoubtedly what we will hear. I will reference all to the points above. In short, as they all invariably do, THE LAW FAILED.

Conclusion Three: Allow those who wish to, to carry guns for their own protection. (and I would add, make any organization that enacts policies to prevent the free exercise of civil rights, liable for any crimes of violence). I think of the three, this one makes the most sense, but probably the one least considered.

Some would say that an armed man or woman would only be able to protect themselves and would not have stopped the gunman. I disagree if in the act of this self-protection, they killed the gunman. What if the first or second intended victim had been one of these? How many lives would have been saved by one civilian carrying a pistol? After all...with all the cops in and around the college already, they could not prevent the shooter from killing again. The law failed here as well did it not?

On the shooter, few facts are coming out. This makes me wonder. First of all, I find it a very strange coincidence that every time some sort of anti-gun (anti-civil rights) legislation is being discussed, something like this happens. I'm not suggesting anything, but the contestants on Deal or No Deal should have as much "coincidental happenstance"

Regardless of where all of the fallout takes us, I expect a greater impetus in the left's attempts to deny our civil right to own and carry guns. I have just ordered a boatload of pistol and rifle magazines for sale at our store, and another two crates of ammo for our own armory.
There are people far more eloquent than I, but here's my version of the bottom line:

Gun Control Kills People

I wish that I could put it in a bigger font, but it's just that simple. If Cho Seung-Hui was not the only one carrying a gun in Norris Hall; if the Virginia State Legislature had pushed the bill through to allow CHL/CCW holders to carry on campuses of the state's university system, there would be a far lower death toll.

Ask Suzanna Gratia-Hupp about not being able to carry her legally owned firearm into a restaurant. She knows all about it, and she did something about it.

On the other hand, Carolyn McCarthy has it all wrong, just like anyone from that crime-infested liberal bastion on New York City.

It's time to wake up America, throw off the liberal shackles keeping us from protecting ourselves, and vote for personal responsibility by throwing out anyone who wants to take our constitutionally guaranteed rights away from us.