“People should have the ability to defend themselves. Mass shootings take many lives in part because no one is firing back at the shooters. The shooters in recent massacres have had many minutes to complete their evil work, while their victims cower under desks or in closets. One response to the tragic reality that we are a gun-saturated country is to understand that law-abiding, well-trained, non-criminal, wholly sane citizens who are screened by the government have a role to play in their own self-defense, and in the defense of others (read The Atlantic article to see how one armed school administrator stopped a mass shooting in Pearl Mississippi). I don’t know anything more than anyone else about the shooting in Connecticut at the moment, but it seems fairly obvious that there was no one at or near the school who could have tried to fight back.” – Jeffrey Goldberg (via theatlantic.com)

Recommended For You

22 Responses to Quote of the Day: Fairly Obvious Edition

  1. A teacher with an LCP .380 doesn’t stand much of a chance against an adrenalin infused dead-ender with an AR and the element of shock and surprise.

    But she has a fighting chance. And that’s better than no chance at all.

    • What I notice in many of these mass shootings is that once someone steps up to confront the loon, the issue is over quickly.

      While no one can know with certainty what is going on inside these loons’ heads, it does seem that as soon as there is armed resistance put into the loons’ faces, their either take their own lives or stop what they’re doing.

      The #1 thing that supporters of RKBA should campaign for in all of this tragedy is the prohibition on the press from giving these loons their nine days of wall-to-wall coverage. After every event, there’s an absurd amount of press obsession with the shooter, and I’m convinced that’s half of what these twerps want.

    • not even that much some times. the mall shooter killed himself once he was confronted with a glock 22. but a shot was never fired at him.

    • correct …as in the the recent TTAG article the Oregon mall asshole just had to “see” that there was a law abiding ccw citizen with a gun focused on him he then proceeded to blow his head off ending the threat….arm the damn teachers already….

  2. This is the only tone of the intelligent conversation. Israel understands that teachers can be armed. It is time that our nation understands this as well. However, based upon stupidity that I’ve seen in the past, I could see the creation of TSA for school or the “super extra double plus gun free zone.”

    • “…I could see the creation of TSA for school…”

      I actually saw someone say (not here) that “I wouldn’t mind paying an extra $5 per gun I purchase to fund a TSA-like organization to guard our schools.” What a fvcked up world this is when the horribly inefficient and ineffective TSA is being held up as an example.

      • Agreed; however I would give a $5 tax on every gun to fund a mandatory active shooter class for teachers and school officials.

        I’d say that if we want to keep this law of no-carrying at school. There needs to be someone with access to a metal- detector wand for every visitor during school hours.

        It seems that a school should have some sort of mindset for this. Hear a loud noise even if it’s a desk falling over and slamming on the tile (very loud). The teachers should have the mindset to lock the door and hide the children until the office announce an “All clear” with a code word that changes daily.

        I cannot say arming every teacher with a gun is a good thing, but having a system in place where someone at the school with the proper clearance (security/psych), an active shooter training class geared toward schools that must be refreshed every year or 2, and access to a locked up firearm would probably not hurt. I just cannot see arming every teacher as even teachers can snap.

  3. Maybe they should just pass a law that makes it illegal for fruitcakes to go into schools and kill children… yeah, that will fix the problem.

  4. Laws are a fence that keep the sheep from getting out but are marginally effective keeping predators out. Sometimes the predator digs under. Other times they jump over. Or they barrel through as though the fence were not there. Often times when the predators get in, the sheep cannot escape, trapped by the very thing meant to protect them.

  5. Unfortunately, the rest of the article recommends things like “closing the gun show loophole” and commending Canada’s strict gun laws and conflating that with low crime rates.

    • As an expat Canadian living in CT, the rules for / difficulty of actually obtaining a handgun in Canada and in CT are actually pretty similar. Canadian are limited to 10 round mags in pistols, and 5 in long-guns and there’s no civvie carry of any kind (locked up on trips to the range is pretty much the only way to transport). And there is a national registry of all “restricted” weapons – i.e. pistols and scary black rifles.

  6. I know it sounds “crude” but as the late Archie Bunker said:
    “You want to stop Airline hijacking, issue all passengers a GUN”

  7. Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic seems to really be making common-sense more open-minded progress lately. Kudos to Jeffrey.

  8. Spree killings attract viewers, viewers attract advertising money. Spree killers stopped before they can kill don’t make the evening news.

    The media has a financial interest in disasters.

  9. Read the whole article, and it was well worth it. I may not agree with all of his points on gun control, but for the most part he got it right. Ill be keeping a printed copy to show to anti 2a aquaintances.

  10. The tragic reality that we a gun saturated country? Is this guy going on Leno? How many guns were in the school that weren’t the shooters? 0 is saturated? The tragic reality is that while making some sense hes got aways to go, Randy

  11. “law-abiding, well-trained, non-criminal, wholly sane citizens who are screened by the government”

    So this means the citizen had to submit to government’s background investigation, mental health evaluation, paid for approved training, and so on just to express a right?

    Why don’t we add mental health tests for all people posting on any social media site? Perhaps their posts are inciting someone to do something bad! We need more government oversight.

    This is ridiculous, but it’s coming.

    It’s our fault for not yanking the government’s leash.

  12. The comments on that article are infuriating. How many people are so delusional they will adamantly state that it would be better for a mass shooter to continuously rampage than for someone to dare even TRY to stop him/her, because that would be traumatizing for witnesses. What, having someone save your life is more traumatizing than getting shot by a lunatic? The best part is people call them out on this assuming that couldn’t possibly be what they’re saying, and they confirm it quite clearly. It is more civilized to die than to defend yourself to these animals, the next logical step for them in life by their own philosophy is suicide.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *