RichmondLiberty.org

by Robert Russo

As Virginia Tech becomes an increasing battlefield over how to deal with student violence all over the country, fifty relatives of the victims and three survivors are now pushing congress to further refine the criteria of background checks when buying a handgun, specifically mental health history.* Most Richmond libertarians and affiliates look to VCDL and other sources for info like Students for Concealed Carry on Campus founded by senior Andrew Dysart, so news of what the opposition is doing is only reported in protestation; or else it is assumed that it is everywhere, a natural reflex of the majority in their campaign for gun control that never abates; or something besides what it actually is (and it doesn't help when gun control advocates themselves misstate their issue).

The letter states "Every day that passes, dangerous people, who our laws have determined should not have guns, may be arming themselves…".* This is a sensible concern to anyone who agrees people like Seung-Hui Cho should not be armed, in fact it hurts the gun rights movement not to set apart people like Cho. That separation will lead to a distinction in the public mind between qualified gun owners and criminals. It is only when all gun owners are labeled "dangerous people" that the words have no meaning. When such judgment is lumped into the Brady Campaign it loses its integrity and we disagree where law-abiding citizens would otherwise concur. A similar bill sponsored by the NRA passed the House and is now stalled in the Senate over spending questions.* Permit holders should be at the forefront of the discussion on keeping those permits out of the hands of terrorists, it is to their own credit that they do so, so if these two groups within Virginia Tech could agree on basic tenets of mental illness it would set an example for all campuses.

If not, this rift will mark every school where any semblance of peace and tolerance still exists. Now "student militias" are forming in colleges like Georgetown.** Every gun carrier has non-carrying friends who don't overstate their preference, but families of murder victims have the justification they need for almost any course, much like James Brady and his wife. Anger destroys tolerance. Finding common ground fights intolerance and violence.

Civilian militias are a good idea (so long as they aren't actual militias that can be manipulated), but we have all seen the hand of fate that majority rule eventually brings down on any minority. Every individual gun owner sooner or later finds himself standing alone. Joint legislation and unity can change this, association with solutions instead of the problem, until misgivings about open carry are reduced to the private preference they are. Of course the simplest way to rid institutions of violence is to get rid of the institution. Schools are a breeding ground, a powder keg waiting to explode. Twelve family members of the victims are supposed to speak at a news conference at the Capitol today. There is more on this story at http://www.timesdispatch.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2007-10-16-0150.html.

*http://www.timesdispatch.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2007-10-16-0150.html
** http://www2.vcdl.org/cgi-bin/wspd_cgi.sh/vcdl/vadetail.html?RECID=1846048&FILTER=

Question of the Week: What situation would be best for extending an olive branch between advocates of gun rights and gun control, to rid this debate of unnecessary grudges and slander? Communion between victims of violence and their families? Student societies? People from opposing sides who have solid friendships? Send your opinions to russo@richmondliberty.org.

If you have topics of interest to libertarians please let us know. We welcome your input!