Thoughts on Aurora , Gurudwara shootings and Gun Control
Posted: Wed Aug 29, 2012 3:44 pm
The shooting at Cinemark theatre in Aurora was sad and tragic. Clearly the Acts of a deranged and sadistic mind. I Wonder why people are so ruthless and give no thoughts to their actions before preying on innocent lives. The same is the case with the shootings In a Gurudwara at oak creek. My sympathies and condolences to the survivors and families of the victims.
Why these individuals did so no one knows. We will only find out later. If only one could understand the complexities of the human brain. Early investigations reveal very little. The Aurora shooter was an All American, Med school going, coming from a decent family and boy next door kinda kid. Unlike the Columbine kids who had a history of being trouble makers this kid had shown no signs of being a sociopath .
It's debatable whether the so called " relaxed" gun laws helped him acquire the Firearms and ammo or not. This is considering the revelations of early investigations that this boy was planning this for 4 months. His gun buying was not impulsive but was rather very meticulously planned. If so it would have been easier and cheaper for him to buy from an illegal source. The fact that he did use a legally bought gun was a coincidence and rather helped trace him. Making gun laws tougher would not help. We all know illegal gun trade and markets exist in every part of the world. They exist solely because it's easier and cheaper to buy from illegal gun runners than legally buying firearms and ammunition . Even the countries which have "relaxed "gun laws have some laws. They have some back ground checks, registrations and waiting periods. That means some form of control, checks and balances are in place. Criminals don't like regulations and control. The fact that this kid bought the guns legally has no impact on the fact that if he was legally restricted and had gun laws been tougher or if guns were banned his criminal act could have been prevented. It's just that on the surface it was impossible to foresee that this boy would mass murder innocent citizens and the tools he acquired to do so were bought legally.
On the other hand what the media and anti gun lobby hides from us is the fact that legally licensed permit holders of concealed carry guns were prohibited from carrying their weapons to the Cinemark theatre . These people had undergone thorough back ground checks and training prior to being permitted and issued this permit. If they were not restricted and denied their right, lives would have been saved and this mass murderer would had been countered and stopped sooner than he was. Just imagine if you were in there would you have preferred being a sitting duck or having a fair chance to defend yourself and fight for your loved ones life? As always the focus is on the law abiding gun owner and gun seeker. The governments around the world should Restrict crime and criminals not the law abiding honest citizens who want to take the responsibility of securing and protecting themselves and their community . It is a proven fact that criminals don't care for laws and regulations. Did the Aurora shooter or any other psychopath shooters care for the laws and displayed signs reading, " No Guns on Premises" or "Gun Free Zone" ? It was the law abiding citizens who did and followed these laws. They paid for it with their lives. These signs and laws do not bother or stop a determined criminal from carrying out a massacre! The outlaws have always stayed outside the purview of the laws.
So would it not make sense if people who have legally obtained gun permits were not restricted from carrying guns for self defence and if need be in the defence of their fellow citizens? The kids in Columbine also did not care or were bothered about the no guns on campus policy. They came and carnage followed them. These criminals knew that only they will be armed and the others will be easy prey. These laws made victims of law-abiding people who could haven otherwise countered deadly force with equal force If they were not denied their rights.
No published credible studies by any crime experts or economist indicate that the US original federal or state assault-weapons ban had reduced the total number of murders or overall violent crime. On the contrary the US murder rates dropped from 5.7 per 100,000 people to 4.7 per 100,000 people after the federal ban was lifted. The Gun Ban in UK has not brought down violent crime rate or number of crimes . Norway's strict gun laws did not prevent a psychopath from killing innocent holiday makers. The gun he used was illegally bought. So were the guns used in public shootings in Germany where even psychological screenings are employed prior to issuing a gun permit amongst other strict gun regulations . Switzerland and Cypress by law have an Assault Rifle in every home yet they boast of some of the lowest crimes rates in Europe. India' s National Crime Records Bureau has a published statistic that 99.9% of Guns used in Gun Related Crimes are illegally procured. That means only 0.1% of Legal Gun Owners use their guns for any criminal activity and a majority of these crimes are crimes of passion. Gun bans and Gun free zones though seemingly well intended have proved to be counterproductive . All this is factual data...
An armed society is a safe and polite society. When the law abiding are denied the right and tools to self defence the lawmakers and such laws unknowingly help the criminal victimise the common man and woman. When you outlaw guns only outlaws have guns. Only tyrants and dictators are afraid of an armed common citizen. All colonisers,dictators and tyrants have forcibly disarmed their subjects . An armed man is a Citizen and a Disarmed man a Subject. On the tragic night of 26/11 in Mumbai if some Hotel Guests or Hotel Security Staff had been armed the tragedy would have had been on a smaller scale. The carnage could have been stopped earlier. If nothing else then some of these people could have killed one or two terrorist and or at least gone down fighting and not been victimised and shot at point blank as being unarmed they were helpless ,forced to be on their knees by an armed terrorist . A gun is a force equaliser.
Citizens who own or are seeking legal guns are not looking for trouble, they carry guns because they want to be left alone. The gun is like an insurance policy against crime, because crime like accidents and calamities does not come with a prior warning. They refuse to be victims. They value their life and personal property and that of their fellow citizens. They carry and want to carry a personal firearm not because they are afraid but because it boosts their confidence, that if faced with a life threatening situation they are adequately equipped to counter it. A gun is the only proven force equaliser when one is threatened by an adversary superior in physical strength or numbers. In the right hands guns safeguard people against crimes like rape ,murder and extortion. No country can deny its citizens the right to self defence and like it or not a gun is the most effective tool for self defence. Then why should the honest law abiding citizens be denied means to defend themselves? The state and police can not protect you at all times and neither do they claim to do so. Zameen Pe Apni Hifazat Khud Karo, Khuda to Yaaron Aasmano Main Hai... Take the responsibility to defend your self on Earth, For the Gods reside in the Heavens above you. Support freedom and liberty.. Support the citizens rights to self defence and the privilege to bear arms. Fight for your rights....Join and Support NAGRI.....
Rakshit Sharma.
Why these individuals did so no one knows. We will only find out later. If only one could understand the complexities of the human brain. Early investigations reveal very little. The Aurora shooter was an All American, Med school going, coming from a decent family and boy next door kinda kid. Unlike the Columbine kids who had a history of being trouble makers this kid had shown no signs of being a sociopath .
It's debatable whether the so called " relaxed" gun laws helped him acquire the Firearms and ammo or not. This is considering the revelations of early investigations that this boy was planning this for 4 months. His gun buying was not impulsive but was rather very meticulously planned. If so it would have been easier and cheaper for him to buy from an illegal source. The fact that he did use a legally bought gun was a coincidence and rather helped trace him. Making gun laws tougher would not help. We all know illegal gun trade and markets exist in every part of the world. They exist solely because it's easier and cheaper to buy from illegal gun runners than legally buying firearms and ammunition . Even the countries which have "relaxed "gun laws have some laws. They have some back ground checks, registrations and waiting periods. That means some form of control, checks and balances are in place. Criminals don't like regulations and control. The fact that this kid bought the guns legally has no impact on the fact that if he was legally restricted and had gun laws been tougher or if guns were banned his criminal act could have been prevented. It's just that on the surface it was impossible to foresee that this boy would mass murder innocent citizens and the tools he acquired to do so were bought legally.
On the other hand what the media and anti gun lobby hides from us is the fact that legally licensed permit holders of concealed carry guns were prohibited from carrying their weapons to the Cinemark theatre . These people had undergone thorough back ground checks and training prior to being permitted and issued this permit. If they were not restricted and denied their right, lives would have been saved and this mass murderer would had been countered and stopped sooner than he was. Just imagine if you were in there would you have preferred being a sitting duck or having a fair chance to defend yourself and fight for your loved ones life? As always the focus is on the law abiding gun owner and gun seeker. The governments around the world should Restrict crime and criminals not the law abiding honest citizens who want to take the responsibility of securing and protecting themselves and their community . It is a proven fact that criminals don't care for laws and regulations. Did the Aurora shooter or any other psychopath shooters care for the laws and displayed signs reading, " No Guns on Premises" or "Gun Free Zone" ? It was the law abiding citizens who did and followed these laws. They paid for it with their lives. These signs and laws do not bother or stop a determined criminal from carrying out a massacre! The outlaws have always stayed outside the purview of the laws.
So would it not make sense if people who have legally obtained gun permits were not restricted from carrying guns for self defence and if need be in the defence of their fellow citizens? The kids in Columbine also did not care or were bothered about the no guns on campus policy. They came and carnage followed them. These criminals knew that only they will be armed and the others will be easy prey. These laws made victims of law-abiding people who could haven otherwise countered deadly force with equal force If they were not denied their rights.
No published credible studies by any crime experts or economist indicate that the US original federal or state assault-weapons ban had reduced the total number of murders or overall violent crime. On the contrary the US murder rates dropped from 5.7 per 100,000 people to 4.7 per 100,000 people after the federal ban was lifted. The Gun Ban in UK has not brought down violent crime rate or number of crimes . Norway's strict gun laws did not prevent a psychopath from killing innocent holiday makers. The gun he used was illegally bought. So were the guns used in public shootings in Germany where even psychological screenings are employed prior to issuing a gun permit amongst other strict gun regulations . Switzerland and Cypress by law have an Assault Rifle in every home yet they boast of some of the lowest crimes rates in Europe. India' s National Crime Records Bureau has a published statistic that 99.9% of Guns used in Gun Related Crimes are illegally procured. That means only 0.1% of Legal Gun Owners use their guns for any criminal activity and a majority of these crimes are crimes of passion. Gun bans and Gun free zones though seemingly well intended have proved to be counterproductive . All this is factual data...
An armed society is a safe and polite society. When the law abiding are denied the right and tools to self defence the lawmakers and such laws unknowingly help the criminal victimise the common man and woman. When you outlaw guns only outlaws have guns. Only tyrants and dictators are afraid of an armed common citizen. All colonisers,dictators and tyrants have forcibly disarmed their subjects . An armed man is a Citizen and a Disarmed man a Subject. On the tragic night of 26/11 in Mumbai if some Hotel Guests or Hotel Security Staff had been armed the tragedy would have had been on a smaller scale. The carnage could have been stopped earlier. If nothing else then some of these people could have killed one or two terrorist and or at least gone down fighting and not been victimised and shot at point blank as being unarmed they were helpless ,forced to be on their knees by an armed terrorist . A gun is a force equaliser.
Citizens who own or are seeking legal guns are not looking for trouble, they carry guns because they want to be left alone. The gun is like an insurance policy against crime, because crime like accidents and calamities does not come with a prior warning. They refuse to be victims. They value their life and personal property and that of their fellow citizens. They carry and want to carry a personal firearm not because they are afraid but because it boosts their confidence, that if faced with a life threatening situation they are adequately equipped to counter it. A gun is the only proven force equaliser when one is threatened by an adversary superior in physical strength or numbers. In the right hands guns safeguard people against crimes like rape ,murder and extortion. No country can deny its citizens the right to self defence and like it or not a gun is the most effective tool for self defence. Then why should the honest law abiding citizens be denied means to defend themselves? The state and police can not protect you at all times and neither do they claim to do so. Zameen Pe Apni Hifazat Khud Karo, Khuda to Yaaron Aasmano Main Hai... Take the responsibility to defend your self on Earth, For the Gods reside in the Heavens above you. Support freedom and liberty.. Support the citizens rights to self defence and the privilege to bear arms. Fight for your rights....Join and Support NAGRI.....
Rakshit Sharma.
. I cannot help but agree with everything you have written. It is usually a knee jerk reaction that generally makes people in power as well as the media want to have all guns banned or regulations made " tighter" when ever a gun crime takes place. The good guys have to jump through all sorts of hoops, and be discriminated against, and termed " violent" or "gun nut" etc, while the bad guys get their guns anyway they can.