Renzolli: If I Only Had a Gun

I watched ABC’s 20/20 news report If I Only Had a Gun on Saturday and, as I suspected, it was nothing more than a tirade to try to debunk the idea that a regular person bearing arms can stop a wrong-doer from killing or doing harm to others in a shootout situation.

In the first segment, select college students are trained by police fire arm instructors on the usage of firearms and then put one of the students in a situation where an armed intruder comes in to shoot up the class. This segment had two holes in it that I will punch through as well as rebutt other points brought up in the report.

The classroom shooting scenario assumes that if guns were legal on university, college or school campuses that only one or very few students would possess a gun and would not be effective in stopping a shooter.

It also gave the false impression that a person needs some sort of formal training in order to properly use a firearm and that police training is the way to do it.

Ms. Sawyer and her colleagues did not care to investigate Front Sight in Nevada that specializes in training people in the usage of guns that exceeds police training standards.

Neither does she or her colleagues take into account the ease in which to use a gun. After buying my first pistol a friend of mine showed me how to handle it, fire it and clean it.

In a situation where students could legally carry guns on school property there would be more than one student armed in every classroom and, consequently, would increase the likelyhood a shooter would be stopped.

Also, with students being able to carry guns openly or concealed on campus, in a scenario with a shooter opening fire in a classroom, there is also the high likelyhood that armed students and faculty outside the classroom would respond and address the situation. The armed students and faculty would either hold him or her at gun point for the police to apprend or kill or maim the suspect if they tried to continue their shooting spree.

David Rittgers of The Cato Institute has also done an excellent response to the 20/20 report and details instances, many that took place at schools, where just one person halted a shooter from committing mass murder on campus.

There was also the profile of Omar Samaha who is working to close the so-called gun show loophole in Virginia. Mr. Samaha’s sister was one of the victims of the shooting spree at Virginia Tech in 2007.

What happened to this gentleman’s sister, like other victims of shooting incidents, is tragic beyond description. Samaha has a right to lobby for the policies he wants to see enacted. However, like Sawyer, he needs to be reminded that in a free society like ours, no one (including him) has the right to take away the rights of another by a majority vote.

In this case, it is wrong for him and anti-gun groups he maybe affiliated with to work to force his or their views on gun owners like myself.

Its a fact that the Virginia Tech shooter, Seung Hui Cho, was a disturbed individual since childhood and legally bought his firearms at a gun store. Not a gun show.

Cho, like many of the other people who shot up public establishments, was under the care of a psychiatrist and was prescribed anti-depressants.

Not surprisingly, reporters, like Dianne Sawyer, either will not or do not take the possibility that the psychiatrically-prescribed meds Cho and other shooters took prior to committing their heinous acts could have helped influence their decisions to go on shooting rampages.

What was entirely disgusting was Omar Samaha was made out to be a hero yet no mention of how gun restrictions, like the one he is lobbying for, contribute to, and does not deter, crime.

Laws regulating or banning the owning or usage of guns by people are an infringement on their ability to preserve their lives from others who would do innocent people harm. News reports, like Ms Sawyer’s, leaves many people with the impression that gun ownership is not effective to preserve a person’s life.

Shame on ABC, Dianne Sawyer and her colleagues for doing an extremely biased report slanted to demean gun owners and gun ownership.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: