If anyone ever needed to see a definition of closed minded and annoying, here it is. This self-righteous blowhard isn't really interested in any answers. He is interested in browbeating his audience. Click PLAY if you must, but consider yourself forewarned. 

Now, to answer his questions:

1. Are you guys insane? No. We are a freedom loving people. We recognize the importance of the ability to use force against bad guys. We also recognize that bad guys will get guns no matter what laws are written to prevent such.
2. Is this an NRA rule or something? The NRA doesn't make rules (we call them laws). That is the job of the government.
3. Exactly how does that work? (re: Cho legally buying a handgun after being declared a danger to himself or others) David Hardy argues in VA Tech shooter's psych ruling that Cho's situation was muddy, at best. Under normal situations, Cho would probably have been given a padded cell and then been clearly a prohibited person.
4. "With no waiting period?" (Repeat question expanded). Yes no waiting period. I guess the fact that Cho waited four weeks between buying the gun and executing his plan is irrelevant to your rant. In the more general case, do you want a waiting period for women buying guns to protect themselves against abusers? Do you want a waiting period for guns when society is melting down, like happened in New Orleans? Does a waiting period make society safer when the vast majority of guns used criminally are bought on the street illegally?

Now, let's examine the flip side of the situation. What laws did Cho violate?

1. If he was a prohibited persion, he lied filling out 2 4473s. Each is a felony.
2. Possession of the firearms and ammunition are each felonies.
3. He did not have a concealed carry permit and violated Virginia law by carrying concealed.
4. Shooting people is definitely considered a no-no in every state in the nation.
5. Shooting yourself is actually a violation of law in some, if not all, places in the country.

Any law written that would have slowed Cho down could have been simply circumvented by going to the street like they do in D.C., Chicago, London and Toronto. So, Mr. Wild Eyed Canadian, what law do you think could have been written to prevent this event?

How about we let law abiding citizens defend themselves in the cases where the worst situation occurs?

Canada's response to such an event, the École Polytechnique massacre, was to pass C-68. C-68 has been so spectacularly expensive and unsuccessful, that an entire government did not get reelected, the current government has relaxed the law and there is a push to repeal it.

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!