It Should Have Been a DGU: At Least The Campus is Still Gun-Free Edition

Lone Star College is a rough and tumble place for an ivory tower. Sharp-eyed members of the Armed Intelligentsia will remember that it was the site of a multiple shooting back in January. This, despite the fact that the school’s website clearly indicates that it’s a designated gun-free zone. It looks like someone was paying attention. Today Lone Star’s CyFair campus northwest of Houston was the site of a mass stabbing attack. “At least 14 students were injured — two critically — in a bizarre stabbing incident Tuesday at a Houston-area community college as a student ran from building to building cutting people with a sharp knife or box cutter, authorities said.” More as details on the shooter stabber become available.

comments

  1. avatar Cortney says:

    Disappointingly, all the gun grabbers are screaming “look, look, nobody died!”

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      He was only using an exacto-knife. They only cut about 3/4″ deep. If he were using an assault pocket knife there would have been casualties for sure.

      1. avatar Pat says:

        Or a Cold Steel Natchez Bowie with 12″ heavy blade. Basically a short sword where you could just jab it at a face and kill, rather than use the force of a punch.

    2. avatar dwb says:

      i am glad that there are socially acceptable forms of violence for the gun grabbers. As long as it causes only critical injuries and horrible life-long disfigurement I guess violence is ok then.

    3. avatar APBTFan says:

      In a defenseless zone a psycho with a proper 12″ Khukuri could literally leave a trail of lopped off limbs and the owners of said limbs bleeding out faster than EMT’s could get there and save them. I’ve owned a 12″ Nepalese-made Khukuri for many years and even though stabbings are no joke the sheer destructive power of the thing is frightening. Properly sharpened and with a good swing using the sweet spot of the blade arms and necks are nothing to it.

      1. avatar APBTFan says:

        To clarify, I’ve lopped off no human limbs. I’m going by accounts of the Gurkhas and the fact that a 3″ limb off a green tree is not hard at all.

        1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

          It’s a good think he didn’t have a Kukuri or similar knife. I have a SOG tomahawk and I know it would be pretty ugly is someone used it in a mass attack. Too bad nobody was there with a firearm to stop this idiot in his tracks.

        2. avatar APBTFan says:

          I’ve been wanting one of those SOG tomahawks. Are you happy with it?

          It’s definitely too bad someone wasn’t there to stop it posthaste.

  2. avatar Jon says:

    Wait for it…we need to ban knives and declare this a knife-free zone. It’s for the safety of the children.

    #facepalm

    1. avatar David says:

      Don’t worry! Knives over 2.5 or 2.25 inches are already banned at my college in Texas. We’re so much safer now… Because criminals never break the law or rules!

  3. avatar Roscoe says:

    Bloombergs next target – knives; x-acto or otherwise.

    I can see the money dump already!

    1. avatar DS says:

      Not all just the scary looking ones.

    2. avatar Shenandoah says:

      Well, I mean nobody NEEDS a blade capable of puncturing human skin. That is a weapon with no purpose but to maim and kill.

    3. avatar APBTFan says:

      I was gonna say they’d ban dirty looks next but that would criminalize 99% of those in NYC.

  4. avatar Gramps says:

    and later today Diane Feinstein will be introducing a bill banning assault exacto knives…

    1. avatar Wilsontx says:

      That would be a high capacity assault x-acto with an evil knurled tactical handle. Let’s do something that makes us feel good.

      I suspect sandpaper will be next…

      Unfortunately you can’t legislate away “nut-jobs”.

      1. avatar Sixpack70 says:

        Utility knives can be quickly reloaded when the end break off! Ban high capacity utility knives! It’s for the children of course.

      2. avatar JeremyR says:

        Ah, but the nutjobs can just legislate away. Until the 2014 election that is.

  5. avatar imrambi says:

    We need to ban this military assault knife! If the knife was shorter, he would have to stop so he could use it again. We also need to have universal background checks on all knifes so knifes don’t fall into the wrong hands. Just look at what this knife did!

    Remember its for the children!

  6. avatar Greg Williams says:

    A student who witnessed the attack told Fox:

    “God protected us in our classroom. We wish we could have protected ourselves with guns and stuff. We wish that the law would let us carry guns because we’re legal adults, and carry guns on campus to protect ourselves. But so far what we have to rely on is God. We’d love to have God and the law on our side,” he said.

    The Texas legislature has had a bill that would allow concealed carry on campuses, but it has stalled in the state Senate due to Democratic opposition.

    1. avatar Cortney says:

      I hope this incident inspires in them a desire to see the bill passed.

    2. avatar Billy Wardlaw says:

      God is a Bullet, comes to mind.

    3. avatar William Burke says:

      Yep, for the gun-disenfranchised, there’s ALWAYS PRAYER!

      1. avatar C says:

        Don’t be ridiculous. Prayer isn’t allowed in public institutions.

      2. avatar Jake says:

        Prayer is offensive and will not be tolerated under rules that were established to prevent religious intolerance. LOVE that typical statist line of reasoning the left likes to rub all over themselves.

  7. avatar DS says:

    Bet this will be ignored by the gun grabbers.

    1. avatar Cortney says:

      Nope, they’re chalking it up as a win. No guns were used, nobody died.

      1. avatar William Burke says:

        Look! Nobody killed! WE WON!!!

        1. avatar DS says:

          Two in critical condition. Not out of the woods yet as far as no one killed.

  8. avatar ST says:

    In B4 ” A Campus Gun Free-Zone saved 14 lives Today”

    1. avatar mountocean says:

      It may have saved one life, the dumbass running around with an xacto knife.

  9. avatar Billy Wardlaw says:

    I guess now they will make it a blade-free-zone too. That will fix it.

    1. avatar mountocean says:

      Start a petition to ban all wedges and inclined planes. Simple Machines indeed, more like simple machines of death.
      I guess Chris spun off The Truth About Knives just in time.

  10. avatar Randy Drescher says:

    Buck found out TTAKnives, they were sued because their product had a serious design flaw that left their product dangerously sharp on one edge. It would have been nice to read about a student who accidentally forgot to leave his gun home & shot the punk, Randy

  11. avatar josh says:

    Quick fact, Lone Star College is a system of community colleges in the Houston area with multiple campuses (9 i think). This incident occurred at the CyFair campus, about 3 miles from my house. The earlier incident (altercation between two students resulting in a gsw) happened at the north Houston location about 20 ish miles away. Still, reminds me why both wife and I carry daily.

  12. avatar Mike says:

    He was using an assault knife with a wooden grip and a serrated edge known to be devastatingly effective at cutting meat!!! As a civilized society, NOW IS THE TIME to get these instruments of death off our streets!!! We MUST enact a ban on Farberware Steak Knives and similar weapons that serve no lawful purpose and put our children’s lives at steak!!! I mean, stake!!!

    1. avatar Randy Drescher says:

      That may not pass, I think they will take stab at it though. Hopefully they will cut it out & not butcher our rights, Randy

      1. avatar Robert Farago says:

        Edgy.

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Now that’s outstanding! I am still laughing out loud over a minute later.

    2. avatar Gary W says:

      I think you all are missing the point….

    3. avatar Mike in NC says:

      OK… who’s volunteering to manage RF’s next spin-off: The Truth About Puns?

      1. avatar ChrisMcLain says:

        I would if I thought I could cut it…

  13. avatar Steve in MA says:

    This is why I’m always sure I DON’T carry a knife at school. Mine all sunk in a tragic boat accident.

  14. avatar RockThisTown says:

    Clearly, this knife learned assault skills from some irresponsible assault rifle.

  15. avatar jwm says:

    this knife had a blade .9mm wide and the shoulder thingy that goes up. Clearly this is a dangerous weapon of war and Urkel will put slow joe and difi right to work on a bill to ban them.

    However they will settle for UBC’s and a registration system on these dangerous assualt knives.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      More laughing … this is almost as good as Randy’s comment above. Well done!

  16. avatar Alex says:

    So you all believe the violence should have been escalated by someone with a gun? Then more people might have been killed, but less wounded? Sounds like we need an entry titled “Inside the twisted mind of a 2A Lover”

    1. avatar Robert Farago says:

      Not escalated. Terminated.

      1. avatar Alex says:

        Is that person not someone’s son? Surviving, he has a chance to be rehabilitated. Do we not value all life? We kill to show that killing people is wrong?

        1. avatar John Doesky says:

          Ok I understand now…. you still thinks it’s April 1st right?

        2. avatar John Doesky says:

          The assailant was trying to MURDER, a rescuer with a gun would attempt to KILL the assailant. Two different words…. two different meanings.

        3. avatar Alex says:

          I’m actually being serious! I don’t perceive that you are at all willing to consider that you might be wrong, or that someone who disagrees with you about some things might, in fact, care about the same values that you do (they just express them in different ways).

        4. avatar Jorge says:

          Alex, are not the people he injured “and tried to KILL” someone’s son or daughter? What if it was your daughter or son he killed.
          Get over it, a knife is just as deadly close range as a handgun if not more so. You pull a knife on a cop within 20 feet and they are trained to. TERMINATE the threat!

        5. avatar Alex says:

          John,

          I agree. In this scenario, I think shooting this person would have been justified. The paradox is that having more people packing heat might actually alleviate (at least in the short term) the SYMPTOMS of the problem (which are expressed in the form of individuals going berzerk and killing people) but it at the same time exacerbates the ROOT of the problem (a society where people are alienated from one another by violence and hyper-individualism… which is too liberal-artsy to be a compelling argument, I know… )

        6. avatar Robert Farago says:

          Concealed carry does not alienate individuals. Have you ever tried it?

        7. avatar Alex says:

          I have never tried it. If you carry, every day you are prepared to kill for the things you love and believe in. I believe it is much more courageous to be prepared to die for things you love and believe in.

          So yes, I am alienated by people who are prepared to kill everywhere they go.

          I’m NOT saying they THINK about killing or WANT to kill. I know lots of folks who carry, and they are wonderful, loving people who HATE violence and would only use their gun as a last resort. But still, it bothers me that they have made that decision. That, if push comes to shove, they would rather kill for what they believe in and live having killed than die for it, having taken a principled stand for peace.

          We must resist evil and violence wherever it exists — including within ourselves. When we put faith in tools capable of lethal force, we are conceding that sometimes violence is good, which – at its core – is the same mindset of a mass killer. The difference is that their concept of “good” has been completely twisted.

        8. avatar John Doesky says:

          re…”the SYMPTOMS of the problem (which are expressed in the form of individuals going berzerk and killing people)”

          How about I propose that the root problem is……the leftist indoctrination of the past three decades has generated a generation of people that are horribly narcissistic (Leftist self esteem policies run amok) in concert with the Leftist mocking of idea that there may be an ultimate justice awaiting for someone who commits evil. The confluence of those two leftist dogmas (i.e. the religion of the left) has resulted in blatant disregard for fellow life and mass killings.

        9. avatar Bort says:

          Good point, poorly presented. Still, sad to see an outburst of attacks in response. Surely individuals have the right to self defense, but recognizing that it is sometimes necessary to take a life to protect your own, or that of another, does not de-problematize the issue.

          The willingness of several individuals to state that an individual assaulting another with a knife deserves to be “terminated” is troubling… not because their termination is not perhaps necessary or warranted, but because if possible such acts should be avoided for any number of reasons. (Due process, compassion, possibility of retribution/civil compensation, rehabilitation, etc.)

          The underlying concerns presented by Alex’ comments would, further explored, make for an excellent article. Something along the lines of preparation v. anticipation in holding the proper mindset regarding potential DGUs.

        10. avatar Alex says:

          Thank-you Bort. I agree completely. You do a much better job of articulating it than I do. Must be my pesky liberal arts degree getting in the way.

        11. avatar Mister Fleas says:

          “Surviving, he has a chance to be rehabilitated.”
          Or try to kill again.

          “Do we not value all life?”
          The would be murderer is a sick menace to society. So, no, actually.

          “We kill to show that killing people is wrong?”
          In this case we would kill the perp to protect the innocent.

        12. avatar Alex says:

          Señor de las Pulgas,

          I am thankful that the majority of those in power do not share your same sense of political and social ethics. If they did, I feel confident that our society would be so “menacing” as to produce far more murderers and “sick” people than it already does.

        13. avatar Scout says:

          No, we do not try to kill the perp. We try to STOP him. He might die in the process, but we are willing to take that risk.

        14. avatar ChrisMcLain says:

          Scout said it all, the goal is not to kill the bad guy. Anyone that believes they need to kill the bad guy in all situations seriously needs to reconsider carrying a gun. The point of carrying a gun is to STOP bad things from happening because of bad people. If the presence of a gun doesn’t stop a bad guy then the next step is a bullet. The idea is to eliminate the threat whether a shot is fired or not.

        15. avatar Jake says:

          In civilization, when a perp decides to attempt murder, they have by association made the decision to commit suicide. The decision that some person who is not attacking you has no right to life and thus you are going to take their life is a decision that your own life has no worth to you, as your life can only hold the same value you hold others’ to have.

          If you make that decision, on your own head be it. Why do you think these people kill themselves most of the time? They know they’ve done something irrevocably unforgivable and that bad things are headed their way. I don’t think it’s the haughty “shooter controlled narrative” explanation folks often give, I think these cowards just genuinely panic when they take a minute and think about what civilization has in store for them, even just in the five minutes from capture to having your worthless sack of broken bones stuffed in the back of a police cruiser. If you want to stab someone, stab yourself. If you want to shoot someone, shoot yourself. For all those that can’t help themselves, people who value their own lives should be able to choose to protect themselves from those that do not. To say anything else is also by association to say that the life of a criminal, the life of a person who tries or succeeds in taking the lives of others, is more valuable than the lives of his/her victims. This mentality is severely uncivilized and wantonly destructive.

      2. avatar John Doesky says:

        @Alex…. “we are conceding that sometimes violence is good, which – at its core – is the same mindset of a mass killer”

        yes Timmy, committing violence upon EVIL is in fact GOOD.

        That’s a piece of wisdom that I gave you for FREE that you didn’t get in your $200K$+ liberal 4 year degree.

        1. avatar Alex says:

          OK, first off I took 5 years because I failed a class, and second, I paid much less than $200K thanks to scholarships and grants.

          And third, what if committing violence IS evil? Are people evil, or are acts evil?

          As a Christian, I believe in the bible. People were made on the 6th day, in the image of god, and were made GOOD.

          (Now you could say that because of the fall, the image of god was broken and we are all evil outside of Christ, but I would remind you the words of the Apostle Paul that “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god” so it’s not that simple)

        2. avatar John Doesky says:

          “I paid much less than $200K thanks to scholarships and grants”

          Sounds like to me that the university still may have got their 200K$ for their mis-education of you.

          “As a Christian, I believe in the bible. People were made on the 6th day, in the image of god, and were made GOOD. ”

          Prager has a 5 minute video on that…..”People are NOT basically good”.
          http://www.prageruniversity.com/Life-Studies/Human-Nature.html

        3. avatar john Doesky says:

          “As a Christian, I believe in the bible.”

          If that statement is really a statement of the heart than I have to admit that the primary un-stated objective of your professors was not achieved. Good for you on that point.

          Now you just need to be de-programmed of the other rot that they WERE able to foist on you. I suggest a 1 year subscription to Prager.

        4. avatar Alex says:

          I agree that people principally DO BAD THINGS. They tend towards evil. But human lives are still good. They are capable of redemption. If everyone is 100% evil and beyond redemption, then the gospel is a lie, and god’s grace is less powerful than satan’s corruption.

        5. avatar john Doesky says:

          You and I may both believe in God’s grace but I do not believe that Hitler’s soul experiences an enviable position at this time. If that’s not true than nothing we do matter’s on this Earth and I don’t accept that Leftist dogma.

        6. avatar JeremyR says:

          Alex, so We got stuck paying for your failed education? You claim to be a Christian, yet fully fail to follow GODs law. Jesus even told the disciples to arm themselves. The Bible says that whosoever sheds mans blood, by man shall his blood be shed. He also says vengence is mine (his). We are not to take vengence, we are just to arrange the meeting as promptly as possible.
          The Bible provides a laundry list of crimes for which hte death penalty is merited, and in some cases required by GOD. It is to keep our culture clean that he made those instructions. If we do not stop violence, it takes over. Fools in their ignorance convinced the courts that rape isn;t that big a deal. Prior to Kinksey, the penalty for rape was death, a penalty also prescribed by GOD. Now that we no longer adequately punish rapists, rape is a bigger problem.
          We should never tollerate the intollerable. Too bad you wasted my tax dollars. I want a refund.

        7. avatar john Doesky says:

          Something like this in the primary text for the first 200 years of our country (aka the Bible)…..

          When you show mercy to the evil how do you reward the good?

        8. avatar Alex says:

          @ both John and Jeremy

          We could prooftext back and forth with the bible all day. That solves nothing. “Whoever lives by the sword dies by the sword.” “Love your enemies.” Blah blah blah. The bible can certainly be used to justify violence and it regrettably has been used that way throughout the centuries. The bible (the word of God, lowercase w) is only authoritative as it points to Jesus (the Word of God, capital W) who preached nonviolence and compassion, who was not afraid to aggressively confront systems of power and injustice with creative nonviolence, and who ultimately died as a result of a twisted sense of justice and a misinterpretation of Israelite law.

          How do we reward the good if we show mercy to the evil? Well, I certainly hope God shows mercy to those who have sinned, because otherwise I’m in deep doo-doo (but if you’ve never really screwed up, you’ll be fine). I would suggest reading the parables of the workers in the vineyard and the prodigal son.

          Finally, God’s mercy is different from human mercy. Final judgment is different from humans living in covenant community. I keep saying it over and over again: you can hold someone accountable and even PUNISH them (with the hope of it being transformative rather than vindictive) without killing them or torturing them!

      3. avatar BLAMMO says:

        The idiot brought a knife to a gunfight. Unfortunately, nobody brought a gun. That’s where the plan broke down.

        1. avatar Nobody says:

          “Unfortunately, nobody brought a gun.”
          No! I didn’t! I wasn’t even there! Sorry!

    2. avatar John Doesky says:

      Indeed… the prescribed leftist solution to this “misguided individual” is to de-escalate the incident by offering the knife man a hug. You first Alex.

      So Alex, please show us all the stats of DGU’s gone awry with innocent civilians being accidentally killed. Don’t forget to compare that number to the total successful uses.

      1. avatar Alex says:

        You don’t give him a hug, but you don’t kill him either.

        You can’t legislate away violence or evil, but by creating a culture that doesn’t glorify guns, you can socialize people not to be so reactively violent and driven by testosterone in their decision making.

        1. avatar Jorge says:

          Yea, that has worked for lets see “ALL OF HUMAN EXISTENCE”. NOT!

          What sheltered planet do you come from?

        2. avatar Alex says:

          Maybe it hasn’t ever really been tried? Because let’s face it, what we’re doing now ISN’T WORKING EITHER! (And maybe it HAS been tried in Amish or Mennonite communities that haven’t gotten press or have been willfully ignored.)

          You know what else hasn’t ever been tried? Arming all teachers and students with guns! But many put blind faith in that solution, too.

        3. avatar John Doesky says:

          Alex, I’d ALMOST pity you if you weren’t such a tool.

          Go to this link and learn more in a 5 minute coarse than you’d learn in a semester long indoctrination at whatever mental gulag you attended.

          http://www.prageruniversity.com/

          I know you won’t go because you fear you spent 200K$+ on a worthless (even damaging) degree.

        4. avatar Alex says:

          John, do you have a liberal arts degree? Did Dennis Prager convince you that everything you learned was BS and was actually hurting you? I’m going to need more of a testimonial or more actual evidence/convincing than simply you saying HE’S RIGHT YOU’RE WRONG.

          I’m using actual arguments and engaging your points (except for that oxymoron comment ZING!!.. sorry about that). You, on the other hand, are attacking my background and character? Who is the “tool?”

        5. avatar John Doesky says:

          ” I’m going to need more of a testimonial or more actual evidence/convincing than simply you saying HE’S RIGHT YOU’RE WRONG.”

          Ok…..since I KNOW at your leftist indoctrination camp you were taught that “all people are basically good”.

          Here is a 5 minute Prager coarse that blows up that argument that was drilled into you from your idiot profs.

          Then YOU decide if Prager has merit rather than your HuffPo overlords.

          http://www.prageruniversity.com/Life-Studies/Human-Nature.html

        6. avatar Alex says:

          I will watch it. Thank-you.

        7. avatar Leo338 says:

          John, do you have a liberal arts degree?

          I doubt John has a liberal arts degree. It appears you’re the only one around here stupid enough to get such a worthless degree. Dance or VCR repair would have been a better choice. Perhaps this also explains your level of thinking, or lack there of.

        8. avatar Alex says:

          Some of TTAG’s contributors have liberal arts degrees.

          I wish you were here so you could say that to my face!

        9. avatar john Doesky says:

          ….”John, do you have a liberal arts degree?”

          Engineer.

          Was able to avoid the leftist indoctrination because the left hadn’t yet figured out a way to assert that the reason that 2+2 does not equal 5 is due to white racism and a male patriarchy.

          But that was also the mid-80’s and leftism wasn’t TOTALLY entrenched. I figure by now though that the leftists say that 2+2 can in fact equal 5 if you FEEL it does. Of coarse if a different minority class feels 2+2=6 ……well they’re correct also. Don’t want to hurt anybody’s self esteem.

        10. avatar Leo338 says:

          I wish you were here so you could say that to my face!

          So you could sit me down for 2 hours and tell me how it makes you feel and use my shoulder to cry on? F that.

        11. avatar Alex says:

          @ Leo: touche. Kudos on not “taking the bait.”

        12. avatar Jake says:

          So basically let the violent people keep hurting non-violent people, unless a socially acceptable violent person with a badge is available to stop them. Good to know.

    3. avatar jwm says:

      How about instead of 14 innocents wounded,Alex, there was 1 perp dead. Would that have been more or less to your liking?

      1. avatar Alex says:

        Having a gun does allow you, the one man army, to be judge, jury, and executioner. Now THAT sounds like a free country!

        1. avatar John Doesky says:

          Alex, you must have a liberal arts degree to have this level of “thinking”

        2. avatar jwm says:

          So you don’t believe in self defense, Alex. How many people does he have to slash or stab before i quit being an executioner and become a self defenser?

        3. avatar Alex says:

          Yes, John, I do. It also allows me to use fancy elitist terms to describe people’s debate tactics. Like “ad hominem.”

        4. avatar Jeff says:

          It is a free country to do whatever you want unless that means screwing with someone else. Then your rights go out the window.

        5. avatar John Doesky says:

          Wisdom from Dennis Prager.

          If you graduate with a 4 year degree in liberal arts or social sciences than most likely you are dumber than when you started college.

          If you got a masters in liberal arts, you’re now dumb and DANGEROUS.

          Yep, and “ad hominem” is the first refuge of leftists who are losing an argument. Then the next are sexist, racist, xenophobic, islamophobic, homophobic,bigoted, blah,blah,blah

        6. avatar Alex says:

          And if non-liberal-arts educated conservatives are losing an argument, do they resort to oxymorons? Like “wisdom from Dennis Prager?”

        7. avatar John Doesky says:

          Re…Prager…..Dollars to donuts that you’ve never listened to more than a 5 second out of context clip of him on HuffPo.

          Also, everybody notices that you always keep avoiding my responses to your idiotic statements. You keep shifting away and refuse to defend your statements. Such as the KILLING versus MURDER and your unwillingness to differentiate the two.

        8. avatar Alex says:

          yes, there is a difference between killing and murder. One can be offensive and aggressive and the other is defensive/protective. but in the end, life is lost, and the myth of redemptive violence is reinforced. Most people who commit murders are victims too, of something, in their own way… HOWEVER that DOES NOT make their acts justified, and they should be punished, BUT people ARE a product of their environment, and that is the fundamental point about which we will disagree and never find consensus on.

        9. avatar john Doesky says:

          “BUT people ARE a product of their environment, and that is the fundamental point about which we will disagree and never find consensus on.”

          Yep, because if that point of the Leftist dogma is wrong, all the other scales might fall from your eyes and you can’t let that happen.

          The Prager show regularly has callers that were ex-leftists that had similar revelations when they had experiences that revealed that Conservatives in fact aren’t native racists, bigots, homophobes, etc that the left constantly portrays them as. Once that lie is revealed, the other lies also quickly fall.

        10. avatar JeremyR says:

          Yes, Alex, they too are victims. Victims of stupid liberal logic that says they don’t need to be accountable for their actions. Liberal logic that says its OK to slash or shoot 14 or 26 people for no other reason then that they Feeeeeel they were hurt. How hard do you work to remain so stupid? Is complete ignorance your lifes endeavor? It pains me to know that I spent 21 years in the military defending people like you.

        11. avatar Alex says:

          @ Jeremy:
          Thank you for your service defending our country.
          I certainly think people should be held accountable for their actions. I would love for you to show me where I said otherwise. I did state that violence is never redemptive, and is part of the problem, not part of the solution. To say that someone cannot be held accountable without using violence, in my opinion, lacks imagination. A legitimate function of jails is to teach that if you disrespect others rights and freedoms, you have forfeited some of your own rights and freedoms. HOWEVER the right to life is sacred and is God’s alone to grant and take away.

          The scenario of an active shooter is a tough one! I will concede that in those situations, those who are entrusted with the means of force to protect life are authorized to act. Especially in our country where there are already so many powerful weapons out and easily accessible, we need police/law enforcement officers that have the power/tools they need to neutralize a threat. BUT the act of doing so is a concession to human brokenness and is in itself a regrettable necessity, done with the purpose of limiting death and suffering, NOT in order to “hold someone accountable.” That comes later.

          Believe it or not, I am trying to stress the COMMONALITIES so called left and right wingers have. A commitment to life and peace. I think, while you carrying a gun might save YOUR ASS and those who happen to be close to you in the unlikely event that you are in the vicinity of a tragedy, if everyday citizens are carrying weapons capable of deadly force and are prepared to kill every day, everywhere they go, that contributes to an atmosphere of distrust and perpetuates the myth that violence is good and can be redemptive. It leads people from “if you try to kill me, I have the right to kill you” down the road of “if you hurt me, I have the right to kill you,” to “if you take my property, I have the right to kill you,” to “if you TRY to take my property, I have the right to kill you,” and on and on.

          That’s why it is less bad to have only a certain class of people — universally recognized and invested with special authority and privilege by virtue of special knowledge and training — who are the ones prepared to kill in order to preserve life.

          It’s really not that different of a philosophy. We’re on the same side. Please tone down the rhetoric and personal attacks.

        12. avatar Jake says:

          You left out Witness. The key thing judges, juries, and executioners are all not, is a Witness. Witnessing the actual crime in the course of your normal daily actions (ie, not stalking and staking out a known mobster or such) is the difference between vigilantism and simply being in the right place to stop a bad person before they hurt any more people. If you witness someone actually murdering another person while you were eating chimichangas at the local fryer you would likely either run or panic and faint, or even call the police, thus leaving the victim to die. The response an actual human being would have is to help the innocent victim. But that’s baaaaaaad. So sorry for valuing innocents more than the people that kill innocents.

    4. avatar neo297 says:

      Are you kidding me YOU would rather the perpetrator just run amok stabbing however many people he could, without knowledge of who may die or not from those injuries, just so not to escalate the violence!!!!! Are you daft. He should have been shot after he stabbed the first victim and maybe the sum total of violence would have been less. Obviously you have no stake in the victims or you wouldn’t utter such nonesense. I would never offer up my family , friends or even strangers to a lunatic with a knife to perish on the alter of GUN SAFETY. I have family that went to that campus and my son almost went there until we convinced him to stay up in East Texas with us. My nephews went to cyfair high school and could easily have been there were they not able to be sent to a more expensive private college. I would have them carry even if against the law and be able to protect themselves when obviously the school , local and state PD, congress and any alphabet soup bloated incompetent federal agency you choose to name cannot. We will see if obama or the dems use this as a positive tward civillian disarmament when it is clearly screaming for why CC with appropriate training is warranted.

      1. avatar Alex says:

        Be pacifist does not mean your passive! Do everything you can to try to stop him! But, be committed to the principle of not killing. But by all means, physically restrain him, disable him, etc — he’s not in his right mind. I would never ask anyone to die for the sake of gun safety. It has to be a personal choice/decision — and I’m just trying to convince people that it is a noble, courageous decision to make. If more people were committed to it, there would be less violence. I’m not trying to legislate anything, just inspire people to believing that it doesn’t have to be this way.

        1. avatar Jorge says:

          Alex, were you born with a vagaina or did it develop over time?

          ad hominem enough for you.

        2. avatar Alex says:

          What if I’m a woman? Do you believe that people with vaginas are somehow inferior? Maybe I would rather have a vagina — yes it’s ad-hominem, but it’s also a really sh*tty ad-hominem attack, unless you assume that I am anti-woman (and if you know I have a liberal arts degree, you should know that I just LOOOOOOVE feminism!)

        3. avatar JeremyR says:

          Jorge, its a mangina. Maybe he never had a father. That might explain why he is such a suckass craven cowardly keyboard commando. Don’t insult women like that. Most ladies have more cujones then smart Alek.

        4. avatar Alex says:

          JeremyR,
          I actually do have a father who loves me very much and who I love to. And a mother. That’s part of why I had all the advantages necessary to pay not-too-much for a fancy elitist liberal arts degree.

          BUT by looking at potential family problems as the source for my alleged “disfunctioning” and deviance, at least you’re thinking systemically! That’s the first step to not blaming individuals but instead focusing on your own functioning within the system.

        5. avatar ChrisMcLain says:

          My question Alex is at what number of stabbing victims does it take for you to view using a gun on the madman acceptable. Is 1,000 stabbing victims acceptable as long as no one died? 2,000? over 9000?

          The idea that carrying a gun means I am willing to kill to protect myself and others is complete nonsense. I am willing to kill to protect myself and others no matter what I am carrying, it could be a knife, rock, or my fists. Now that it is clear I am willing to kill I can’t say killing is the last thing I would want to do because there is no scenario I can think of that I would want to kill. My one and only goal is to eliminate the threat of a madman. If the madman dies in the process of eliminating the threat then it is because that madman left me with no other options.

  17. avatar alanhmn says:

    We have to stop this knife violence.

  18. avatar Accur81 says:

    I doubt any of those victims will get a ride in Air Force One, mention in the Super Bowl, Demand a Plan, etc.

    This should definitely have been a DGU. Good thing only the bad guy had a weapon, said absolutely no one with half a brain.

    1. avatar John Doesky says:

      “Good thing only the bad guy had a weapon, said absolutely no one with half a brain.”

      Uhhhh….Alex just did 2 posts up. Oh I guess you qualified “with half a brain”. Ok , you’re statement is still valid.

      1. avatar Alex says:

        Do you have a crush on me?

        1. avatar john Doesky says:

          Do all leftists have homosexuality on the brain 24/7?

        2. avatar Alex says:

          Yes, actually.
          I was hoping for a date. Bring your gun, if you catch my drift.

        3. avatar john Doesky says:

          Cmon…call me a teabagger…you know you want to.

        4. avatar john Doesky says:

          At home happily listening to Prager….

          Dennis talks to Peter Wood, author of the report on how Bowdoin College has become a left wing seminary.

          Another apt name for most liberal arts colleges today….. a left wing seminary.

        5. avatar Alex says:

          John, I really, honestly don’t. I don’t come on internet message boards that often. I don’t like the name-calling that it results in. The battle of wits is fun, but calling you a teabagger wouldn’t mean anything, because it’s used by left wing people who seem to have lost the creativity to actually engage the other argument. Between our back-and-forth squabbling, I really am trying to engage the pro 2A argument.

        6. avatar john Doesky says:

          A good Prager nugget already after only 20 minutes…..

          “Naivete…charming for a 3rd grader but not for an adult. Naivete in an adult is a sin because you can’t do good if you’re naive”

          Kinda applicable in some of the messages I’ve read today.

  19. avatar Trogdor says:

    Crazies gonna Crazy. If he didn’t have a knife he would have used a rock.

  20. avatar Jorge says:

    Thank god no gun was used to perpetrate the crime. Now we can all collectively call for the banning of this heinous weapons of war the dreaded “Assault knife”.
    Call your congressman sporks for everyone :/

  21. avatar Ed S says:

    OMG, it was one of those re-loadable exacto knives. We must ban them!

  22. avatar ready,fire,aim says:

    alex, I hope to god that your time on earth here is safe from harm …because if you are ever in harms way you will be a slaughtered defenseless sheep then as you lay dieing you will see the light…or maybe not

    1. avatar Alex says:

      If I train myself to be prepared every day to die for what I believe in, in the same way that responsible CCers train themselves to be prepared every day to kill for what they believe in, then I live unafraid, with the courage to face violence with devilish, irreverent, playfulness. This view towards life helps us communicate respectfully and treat each other not as objects or as potential threats, but as fellow human beings.

      1. avatar Stinkeye says:

        Alex, have you ever actually faced actual violence? Because I suspect it’s all theoretical with you. If a sociopathic thug decided to curb-stomp you just for the hell of it, I’m guessing that devilishly irreverent playfulness would end up trickling down your leg.

        1. avatar Alex says:

          You’re right, it is mostly theoretical, I’m ashamed to admit. But have YOU ever tried, it either?

          I lived in a poverty stricken “young town” on the outskirts of Lima, Peru for a year. I was robbed twice, once I was jumped by 3 guys. I didn’t react violently, and so I wasn’t hurt, I just lost my cell phone and 20 bucks. After that, every time I went out I prepared myself to react nonviolently if I were ever robbed again. And once the robbers ran away, I was ready to chase after them and say “hey, wait, you forgot my shirt!” (/other money/ipod/etc)

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Alex,

        First of all, few if any armed citizens train to kill. Rather, they train to draw and shoot proficiently so that they can STOP an attacker as quickly as possible. They do NOT train to kill an attacker. If the attacker dies as a result of their injuries, that is a natural consequence of the attacker’s actions. Is it tragic? Sure. Is it somehow wrong? No.

        Second, your notion of being passive is just plain wrong. Look at nature. Every animal in nature will do everything in its power to defend itself if attacked. Even your own body does everything in its power to defend itself from bacterial and viral “attackers”. And if you body is injured in an attack, you body will do everything in its power to keep you alive. And yet you willfully choose to NOT defend yourself as a whole. Do you see how you are a living self-contradiction?

        Finally, your notion that all people are “good” is wrong. Rather, all people are valuable. But no one is inherently more valuable than anyone else. And the fact that all people are valuable does not excuse them from the consequences of their actions.

        1. avatar Alex says:

          uncommon sense, I agree with most of what you just said.

          Again, like I told JeremyR above, show me where I say people should not be held accountable and suffer the consequences of their actions. Lock them up, put them in solitary, but don’t kill them to teach them the lesson that killing is wrong.

          I think you are right and I stand corrected about people not being trained to kill. But I do think that if you choose to carry then you are PREPARED to kill — that is, to discharge deadly force that you know very well may end in the death of the person on the receiving end whether your INTENT is to kill or not.

          And you are also right about passivity and nature. It is natural to react violently. That’s how it works in the animal kingdom. However, I prefer to think that humans are more evolved than most members of the animal kingdom.
          Chauvinists can make the argument that promiscuity is “natural” to males, but that doesn’t mean its right and that doesn’t mean that men aren’t CAPABLE of fidelity. Marriage is a HUMAN-MADE, SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED institution, but that doesn’t mean that it’s BAD. On the contrary, it’s GOOD. It orders civilized life.

          In the same vein, compassion and nonviolence don’t come naturally when a person is threatened. To act nonviolently, one must override the base level, reptilian brain with the frontal cortex – the part of the brain that sets humans apart. This allows us to live peacefully in a violent natural world. If anytime a person or his/her loved one was hurt or killed or threatened, they reacted in kind, the violence would never end. But, EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE TEND TOWARDS THE “BAD” THEY ARE CAPABLE OF THE GOOD. And every day people decide to stop the violent cycle and react nonviolently for the purpose of the greater good — rather than out of fear, or “teaching a lesson” or holding someone accountable, or out of a twisted sense of retributive justice.

          Acting violently ONLY in self defense or ONLY to protect the innocent/preserve life acknowledges at some level that violence is bad. Pacifism just goes from saying it’s “almost always” bad to “always.” It’s not that radical of a jump. Life must be preserved. It’s mainly the difference between thinking on an individualist level to thinking systemically.

        2. avatar CarlosT says:

          “Acting violently ONLY in self defense or ONLY to protect the innocent/preserve life acknowledges at some level that violence is bad. Pacifism just goes from saying it’s “almost always” bad to “always.” It’s not that radical of a jump. Life must be preserved. It’s mainly the difference between thinking on an individualist level to thinking systemically.”

          It’s an unjustifiable jump, however, and I’d go further to say that a pacifism that is willing to put innocent lives at risk because it can’t handle distinctions between righteous and immoral violence is itself immoral.

          If someone had shot Adam Lanza at the start of his attack, that would have been an unambiguously good and righteous act. Dying for your pacifistic beliefs in that situation might make you feel superior and more evolved, but in the real world just makes you useless.

      3. avatar Nobody says:

        No. You are misguided on so many levels. You seems to think being unprepared is somehow more brave and godly than being prepared.
        We do treat other people as fellow human beings. We don’t wish anyone harm – that’s their choice, not mine. Most of us do believe that a person intent upon spreading destruction can be redeemed. But he lost that chance when he attempts to harm my family, and especially my granddaughter.

        I’m not going to be “brave” and die for what I believe in (life is precious) as I watch one of mine be raped or killed. I’m going to stop the threat – and harsh words usually don’t work.

        1. avatar Alex says:

          So don’t use harsh words then — do whatever you can without killing and without being vindictive! I agree with your philosophy for the most part! Have you ever tried harsh words? If you think violence is bad, then use your imagination and try every single avenue before you resort to it, and if you have to resort for it, pray for forgiveness, thank god that at least some form of innocent life was preserved, and pray that the perpetrator may be redeemed rather than praying that s/he suffer vindictive pain.

      4. avatar Scout says:

        Alex, why don’t you just off yourself if you value your life and health so low? You are fine with letting some mugger decide if he will just take your money, phone or your a$$ or maybe your life? OK, your decision. Be a sheep. But do not call it brave or noble.

  23. avatar Jeh says:

    Our minds: Someone got stabbed.

    Their minds: Oh my god! Someone was stabbed with a Bushmaster assault weapon bayonet attachment! Now they can shoot nuclear missiles and knives?!

    (Sounds crazy, but think of who we’re dealing with)

  24. avatar ready,fire,aim says:

    fine then don’t piss on our parade and we won’t piss on yours good day sir

  25. avatar Russ Bixby says:

    Shashed, not stabbed. Come on!

    “A thousand throats may be cut in one night, by a running man.”

    — Unnamed Klingon to Kang, in “Day of the Dove”

  26. avatar James MacKenzie says:

    Alex, although you may not have intended to be, your claims are disrespectful toward many of the other people on this board. In the first place, you’re claiming that your ethos (“A principled choice to die for my beliefs” and “the courage to face violence with devilish, irreverent, playfulness”) is superior to the ethics of armed defense. While you are entitled to your own ethical preferences, we are equally entitled to make our own ethical choices. I choose to protect the weak and helpless, using whatever force is needed to control the situation, including lethal force. This is not done out of malice toward those who would work evil: It is my duty as a man and an oath-sworn servant of the republic.

    If you want to consider a Christian perspective on the use of deadly force, I would suggest that you read The City of God by Augustine of Hippo. While his writings specifically address the need for “just war” to defend Christian communities, his arguments also apply to self-defense on a more personal scale. While Jesus urged us to “turn the other cheek”, and warned that “he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword”, he also advised his followers that there would be times when some of them would need to have a sword (Luke 22:36).

    You are also mistaken in your belief that a gun would neccesarily lead to the knife-wielding assailant being killed. Many criminals surrender as soon as a gun is drawn on them. Many others are shot, but with modern medical technology, such wounds are hardly all fatal. Since many spree killers attempt suicide immediately after achieving their gruesome goals, interruption by a gun-brandishing civilian might actually increase the odds that the perpetrator would survive.

    1. avatar JeremyR says:

      Turning the other cheek is not a passive act. It is allowing the consideration that the first offense was an inadvertent and not a thought out act. When you turn the other cheek, and are again struck, then all the rules of vengence apply. S often it gets confused. I did not understand it until a few years ago.
      If some one wrongs you, you have the right to seek restitution, an eye for an eye so to speak. But if it was unintentional, it is better to forgive an move on in brotherly love toward our fellow man. That is why the offering of the other cheek so to speak. its like asking some one “What did you just say about my wife?” Instead of providing him with the more painful aspects of acquiring dentures free of charge on the off hand chance you misunderstood his comment.
      When Jesus comissioned his disciples, he told them to take a sword, and if they did not have one, to buy one. it was not a command to spread the Gospel by the sword as islame is spread, but to be prepared to defend the faith by force if needed.

    2. avatar Alex says:

      James,

      Thank-you for your thoughtful response. The thing about pacifists (and to be honest, I’m not sure I’m even an absolute pacifist personally even though I strive to make an argument for it) is that most know that not everyone is called to be one or will choose to live like one. I apologize for any disrespect. I have certainly gotten on my self-righteous high horse a lot. I think that temptation is easy to slip into on internet message boards.

      I hope you’ll read some of my posts above that I posted earlier (but still after you made the above post). I really want to stress the commonality between a “just war” position and a “pacifist” position. Both are faithful responses to the Bible and to Christianity. Both value life. One just sees the kingdom as closer, and one sees it as more distant. I think it’s good to have people to subscribe to both.

      I have been a “lurker” on this board for awhile. What makes me speak out is that I perceive so much hostility and violence toward “anti’s” that I believe is wrong and troubling. No doubt that “left wingers” can be just as mean and spiteful and aggressive and dehumanizing. But I am trying hard to show that not ALL of them are that way. The divisive rhetoric, I believe, is one factor that contributes to alienation and violence.

      And finally a faithful interpretation of the Luke 22 passage submits the literalist reading to Jesus’ more general message of nonviolence, and thus reads that verse figuratively/symbolically. Whether or not you want it, Jesus is telling his disciples, violence and persecution are coming to you because my message is threatening and subversive to the social order. Really, “two swords” will not be enough to protect them or Jesus from his or their upcoming trials and executions. The beast of babylon is mighty indeed, but we always hope for the day coming when God will break the bow and shatter the spear; when they will beat their swords into plowshares.

      Of course, maybe in the meantime the sword is necessary. I think the just war tradition is faithful and loving and important. I just think it is MOST effective when it is put in conversation with the pacifist tradition, which was popular before Augustine. Many Christians refused to serve in the military early on based on pacifist principles.

      There are left wing “nutjobs” just as there are right wing “nutjobs” but reasonable people on both sides value life and love and peace. Unfortunately, to use “hippie” words such as those — even if you believe in them — is seen as a sign of weakness and naiveté.

      1. avatar Accur81 says:

        Alex,

        I appreciate your perspective and comments. We pro-freedom types sometimes lash out with our words – as do those on the pro gun control side. I hope you find what you’re looking for. I’ve learned a lot on TTAG, and I hope that you enjoy your time here as well.

      2. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Alex,

        If you truly subscribe to the Bible, self-defense is pretty straight forward. To begin, let’s change the wording slightly to self-preservation. The Bible has hundreds of examples that endorse self-preservation. Remember when Rahab lowered the Israelite spies out of her window so they could escape the city? Neither Rahab nor the spies were passivists. They were pragmatists. The spies knew they could not defend themselves from overwhelming numbers with weapons so they fled. Then we have the various battles. Sometimes God intervened (such as the battle of Gideon) and sometimes God expected the Israelites to get their hands bloody. We have the example of David and Goliath. And when Saul sought to kill David, David evaded Saul’s attacks. Note that David was justified to defend himself. The only reason David did not use force is because Saul was king and David respected the kingship beyond measure.

        We also have Exodus 22:2 “If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed …”

        Now let’s consider the last supper. Jesus and his disciples were observing the Passover — perhaps the most important Jewish religious holiday. Even at this solemn, religious occasion, some disciples were armed with swords. Jesus did not direct them to get rid of their swords. Further, when the crowd approached Jesus outside after the meal and Peter swung his sword at one of the crowd, Jesus’ simple instruction was, “Put your sword away.” He did not scold Peter for having a sword. And as another poster stated, Jesus even told the disciples to buy a sword if they did not already have one.

        And how about providing for your family? Look at 1 Timothy 5:8 “Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.” Providing for your family is more than just food and shelter. It includes love, teaching, and security as well. You cannot protect your family if you lack the determination and means to protect them. And you cannot provide anything for your family if an attacker kills you. Along the same vein, it is wrong to stand by and do nothing when calamity strikes a neighbor. (The parable of the Good Samaritan.) Saving a neighbor’s life is a noble act.

        Finally, we have the admonition from Romans 12:8, “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.” This statement does not forbid using force to defend yourself. It simply directs us to never look for a fight. Perhaps even more important, the admonition from 1 Peter 2:16 states, “Live as free people …” When we are passivists and submit ourselves to criminals, we are not free people.

        Taken as a whole, the message is loud and clear: live! Live in peace as much as it depends on you. Live as free people.

        The only example of “passivism” that I can think of from the entire Bible is Jesus’ trial and crucifixion. Jesus actions were not “passive” because he was teaching us to be passive. His actions were “passive” because his explicit mission was to be tried and crucified (and later resurrected) for our sins. If he used self-defense and warfare to protect his life, he would have failed his much larger, much more important mission to justify all mankind before God. No one on Earth has such a mission today. Thus no one has a reason to be passive today.

        1. avatar Alex says:

          Uncommon sense, thanks for writing such a thoughtful and detailed response.

          However, taking the canon as a whole, I believe it’s difficult to make a case that either “self preservation” or “just war” OR pacifism are “straightforward.” The biblical writings were composed over hundreds of years, in a multitude of different contexts. Tolstoy put so much stock into the Sermon of the Mount — commands to “turn the other cheek” and “love your enemies” — because he viewed them as the ONLY straightforward, plain, simple, morally unambiguous lesson in the bible. And they were simple imperatives given by Jesus — the center of Holy Scripture — to those who would follow him.

          Unfortunately, pacifism is frequently equated with passivity. I urge you to look at the interpretations and strategies of Christian Peacemaker Teams, Walter Wink, Shane Claiborne, John Howard Yoder, etc. They saw imaginative, confrontational, nonviolent tactics — like those used by Civil Rights protestors — NOT as “passive” modes of submission/”nonresistance” to evil but rather ACTIVE, OFFENSIVE, WEAPONS to combat the evils of violence and injustice wherever they occurred. Pacifists are called to “seek peace” by confronting the places where there is tranquility on the surface in order to stir up and expose the conflict that was pushed underground. And then to vanquish the evil and violence causing that conflict with the “weapon” of enemy love.

          Yes, it sounds crazy, but in the Civil Rights Movement, it worked. Gandhi made it work. I know conservatives love to bash liberals’ appeals to Gandhi and the Civil Rights Movement, so I have avoided naming them until now.

          But by all means, at this point, have at it! If that’s how you “get off.”

        2. avatar Robert Farago says:

          Gandhi: “Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.”

  27. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    Boy, I’m happy this wasn’t foreseeable. Oh wait, the same day as the Newtown shooting there was a mass stabbing in China….

    Well you know hindsight… er foresight, is not for…see..able?

    Hmm I’m confused. Oh wait. Gun Free Zone. Thank goodness nothing bad happens there. Those three words are all I need to sleep tight at night.

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email