Submitted by Ed Shell, Feb 27, 2008 14:06

I very much appreciate the objective opinions advanced by Mr. Stossel in today's article, Thank you. It is quite refreshing to see a glimmer of truth in newsprint now and again. It IS true, and the repeated revisitation of "gun control" every time one of these tragic crimes (yes, it was already a crime, already against the law) occurs is merely an effort to pander and "feel better" about what happened.

There is always the misplaced desire to blame someone or something for the unthinkable, and as a parent of a recent college graduate myself, I can (barely) imagine the grief and loss that drives the need to get behind some sort of action to prevent this from ever happening again. "I must DO something . . ." and the activism helps to work through the grief.

At least Mothers Against Drunk Driving ("MADD") has it right - condemn the action: driving under the influence. They don't try to inflict further restrictions on innocent and law-abiding drivers or inanimate objects (vehicles).

Let us call this tragedy, and others like it, what they really are: Insane acts of violence by insane individuals where, by act of law, the victims had no recourse.

The real problem is that we have created so many "unarmed victim" zones that people bent upon destruction know where they can get away with such hideous crimes against their fellow man.

When I was a child, we had organized shooting events on school property and there were no mass murders. The high school had a rifle team, 4-H had a rifle team, Boy Scouts had a rifle team, and no one shot anyone, ever. At risk of sounding cavalier about this horrible trend by mentally disturbed people, there are NEVER such mass shootings at Gun Shows, and for good reason. This is not a gun problem, it is a people problem.

The founders of this country provided for us to have our basic human rights preserved against government, in the form of our US Constitution and our Bill Of Rights. One of these rights is the right of self defense, and the people who are being gunned down have been deprived of this right, via "Gun Free Zones" and other such illusions of safety where one my not defend themselves, but there is no obligation by authorities to defend them either. The result of such folly is clear.

The church shooting in Colorado in December was brought to a halt by an armed citizen. This citizen was said to be a "private security guard" with former police training, but was actually not acting in that capacity at all. This hero was acting in the capacity of an armed citizen who took the action necessary to stop yet one more mass shooting by yet one more mentally defective criminal. Perhaps there is something to be (re) learned here. . . .

Thank you Mr. Stossel, for attempting to provide logical overview to a subject so overwhelmed in illogical emotion, and thank you Editors, for bringing this to print.
ES

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.