Monday, April 16, 2007

Virginia Tech Shooting; Worst School Shooting Ever?

Found the link to the article linked here on Keep and Bear Arms. According to the article;
BLACKSBURG - At least 22 people, (possibly as high as 32(?) according to later updates from various news sources), were killed today in two shootings at Virginia Tech, the school said. Dozens more were being treated at area hospitals....
A very sad event to say the least. And, those who are concerned with our unalienable right, all know what is going to happen next. The 'guns' of course will be blamed. And the call for a 'ban' or further restrictions will be cried for loudly. And this, rather then blaming the person that perpetrated the atrocity.

What I am going to propose will probably ruffle a few feathers, but the TRUTH always does.

First, the fault lies in the errant "Gun Free School Zone" policy. The right and duty of Self-Preservation is the First Law of Nature. And, according to Thomas Jefferson in his 1824 leter to John Cartwright. It is not only our "Right", but our "Duty to be at all times armed". To Wit;
"Its principles and forms had entered little into our former education. We established, however, some although not all its important principles. The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved), or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press."

- Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Cartwright. [Washington ed. vii, 356. <>. 1728. CONSTITUTIONS (American), Characteristics of. -- JCE1728. The Modern English Collection at the University of Virginia Electronic Text Center.]
My contention, is that had there been a number of individuals on the campus whom were armed. As was the clear intent of the men that founded this nation. That the death toll would have been much less. And perhaps, the only one whom would have perished would have been the perpetrator himself....

The blame lies squarely upon our governmental servants that have allowed the perversion of our inalienable right. And, the perverse learning institution(s) that carry into effect the "Gun Free School Zone" policy. The really sad part about this, is that the Virginia legislature had just refused to pass a bill that might have prevented this from happening. Our servants have totally laid aside "the Trancendent laws of nature and of natures God". (See Federalist #43 By James Madison). Which are the very laws that ALL American government are based upon. Our government(s), and the people that have pushed for the infringement of our "unalienable right" are the ones directly responible for this carnage.

What we really need here in America, is a return to following Original Intent. Rather than following the edicts of those whom have subverted it. I contend, that until We The People insist upon the return of our government following the established guidelines found in our Constitution. We shall continue seeing events such as the horrible one at Virginia Tech.

The guidelines really are quite simple;

"I here close my examination into those natural rights, which, in my humble opinion, it is the business of civil government to protect, and not to subvert, and the exercise of which it is the duty of civil government to enlarge, and not to restrain. I go farther; and now proceed to show, that in peculiar instances, in which those rights can receive neither protection nor reparation from civil government, they are, notwithstanding its institution, entitled still to that defence, and to those methods of recovery, which are justified and demanded in a state of nature.

"The defence of one’s self, justly called the primary law of nature, is not, nor can it be abrogated by any regulation of municipal law. This principle of defence is not confined merely to the person; it extends to the liberty and the property of a man: it is not confined merely to his own person; it extends to the persons of all those, to whom he bears a peculiar relation -- of his wife, of his parent, of his child, of his master, of his servant: nay, it extends to the person of every one, who is in danger; perhaps, to the liberty of every one, whose liberty is unjustly and forcibly attacked. It becomes humanity as well as justice."

- James Wilson, from a series of lectures given between 1790 and 1792, 'Wilson, Of the Natural Rights of Individuals', in 2 The Works of James Wilson 335 (J.D. Andrews ed. 1896).

The law of nature is immutable; not by the effect of an arbitrary disposition, but because it has its foundation in the nature, constitution, and mutual relations of men and things. While these continue to be the same, it must continue to be the same also. This immutability of nature's laws has nothing in it repugnant to the supreme power of an all-perfect Being. Since he himself is the author of our constitution; he cannot but command or forbid such things as are necessarily agreeable or disagreeable to this very constitution. He is under the glorious necessity of not contradicting himself. This necessity, far from limiting or diminishing his perfections, adds to their external character, and points out their excellency.

The law of nature is universal. For it is true, not only that all men are equally subject to the command of their Maker; but it is true also, that the law of nature, having its foundation in the constitution and state of man, has an essential fitness for all mankind, and binds them without distinction.

“This law, or right reason, as Cicero calls it, is thus beautifully described by that eloquent philosopher. "It is, indeed," says he, "a true law, conformable to nature, diffused among all men, unchangeable, eternal. By its commands, it calls men to their duty: by its prohibitions, it deters them from vice. To diminish, to alter, much more to abolish this law, is a vain attempt. Neither by the senate, nor by the people, can its powerful obligation be dissolved. It requires no interpreter or commentator. It is not one law at Rome, another at Athens; one law now, another hereafter: it is the same eternal and immutable law, given at all times and to all nations: for God, who is its author and promulgator, is always the sole master and sovereign of mankind."

- James Wilson, [The Works of the Honourable James Wilson, L.L.D.; Chap. III Of the Law of Nature]. Mr. Wilson signed the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. In addition he was a delegate to the Constitutional Convention and a U.S. Supreme Court Justice.

"It is not only vain, but wicked, in a legislator to frame laws in opposition to the laws of nature, and to arm them with the terrors of death. This is truly creating crimes in order to punish them."

- Thomas Jefferson, The Jeffersonian Cyclopedia, 1900 - 4538. LAWS OF NATURE, Opposition to. -- JCE4538. Note on Crimes Bill. Washington ed. i, 159. Ford ed., ii, 218. (1779).


Anonymous said...

We need to take time to love on those that are not at the top of the social chain. We may never truly know the motive behind such horrific actions that the killer uses to justify his or her means. However when the downtrodden and socially uncool are are excepted I believe a major motive is removed.

John said...

The very gun control laws that these idiots advocate are the ones that were in place on this campus (gun-free zones are gun-banners' wet dream), which enabled this demon to roam unmolested for over 2 hours. We should be screaming it from the rooftops. Gun control is responsible for every one of these deaths.No

Jay said...

Good post, David.

Ash said...

You do understand how inherentaly flawed this argument is don't you? I mean, I really don't know where I stand on gun control other than to say, I don't think any gun should be legal in America for a private citizen, but, because others may have them, I have one. But, I believe in the government, but, also fear the down fall of society. But, the idea that if a student in one of those classes had a gun, the shooter would have been shot before killing anyone is a bit silly. It just means that the student in class would have been able to just stand up in class and started shooting from that stand point. Crazy is crazy, zero guns, or a hundred guns is not going to stop that. But, you would think that the same kind of student that would fight back with the gun in his pocket, would be the same type that would have at least thrown objects, chairs, desks, anything to fight back. It's just, the argument that because a criminal might have a gun, means everybody should have a gun is a little like saying that you should carry a gas mask around with you twenty four hours a day, just in case. This act was the exception to any rule that can be made, it should not dictate the rules to live by. The concept that fear that any American walking the streets might have a gun and will shoot and kill you if you commit a criminal act, well, it's a little like thinking that a criminal will be detered by the threat of the penalty of death. Whether it's dealt by your hand or a man with a badge and a syringe, threat of death does not deter violent crime.

E. David Quammen said...

ash said - "You do understand how inherentaly flawed this argument is don't you?"


What I do understand, is how flawed that YOUR position is. For you promote the weakness and vulnerability of your fellow citizen. And, reliance upon a potentially corrupt government. For power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That, in case you didn't know, is what is known as a MAXIM. It seems that you have more faith in a non-entity that was created by the People. Rather than those whom created it.

You are a drone, a mindless follower that abides by the dictates of its 'master'. Rather than being a Sovereign U.S. citizen that is responsible for their OWN defense.

Government is clearly charged with the duty of the COMMON DEFENSE. It is still not only the RIGHT, but the DUTY of the citizen to provide for their OWN defense.

The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed. Means PRECISELY that which was written. It is the INALIENABLE RIGHT of ALL Free American citizens.

You evidently have ZERO understanding of "the TRANSCENDENT Laws of Nature and of Natures God". Which are the very same laws that ALL American government is based upon. That which you express is far more in line with communist/socialist views.

Would highly suggest that you study the FACTS. Unless that is, you are comfortable being a 'subject' of the 'state'. Are you even an American?

Janet said...

I like the way you said this:

'And this, rather then blaming the person that perpetrated the atrocity.'

I also appreciate your reference to Jefferson's words: "that all power is inherent in the people". Which is where the power belongs. A shooting like this could NEVER happen in Texas...and for a damn good reason, too.

E. David Quammen said...

Thank you Janet. Just wish it would have been a better topic that I had written the words about.

Anonymous said...

Ok first of all Janet, there actually was a fatal shooting in Texas that killed 15 and wounded 31, that being one of the many shootings that have actually occurred in Texas but thats besides the point. I dont care if the Founding Fathers intended for people to carry around guns, that doesnt mean it was a good decision. I mean they didnt really mind slavery or counting african americans as 3/5 of a person. Its not a coincidence that the high percentage of Americans that own guns is connected with the high amount of gun related deaths in the United States. Yes guns are not the only problem but limiting the amount of firepower that people have at their disposal will surely reduce the amount of shootings. If you want people to have power, why not give everyone a tank or an atomic bomb and let them defend themselves. Who cares if we allow psychos a chance to blow up the world its our right to do it. Give me a break.

Will said...

um... yeah whatever if people wanna own a gun let them own a gun, but what about selling guns to people who are not citizens of this country, like the shooter at VT? The guy was a korean national. isnt this a threat to national security if terrrorist can walk into a gun store and buy guns to go kill people. just a thought