Friday, April 20, 2007

Ongoing Idiocy

Conservatives are now yelping about how liberals are "abusing" the Virginia Tech tragedy to agitate for their anti-gun agenda. This would be more effective if Conservatives weren't doing the same exact thing. Cut the B.S., guys; we can all be exploitative jerks together.

Fred Thompson: The problem was VT's no-guns-on-campus policy.

When people capable of performing acts of heroism are discouraged or denied the opportunity, our society is all the poorer. And from the selfless examples of the passengers on Flight 93 on 9/11 to Virginia Tech professor Liviu Librescu, a Holocaust survivor who sacrificed himself to save his students earlier this week, we know what extraordinary acts of heroism ordinary citizens are capable of.

Stay tuned next week, when Fred will propose letting us all get concealed-carry permits for airplanes.

The Baltimore Sun has another example of this sort of argument. And here's another.

Then there are the weirder examples. Supreme Bozo Michael Tremoglie blames the massacre on liberalism.

The first evidence that liberal ideas either contributed to, or were the cause, of the VA Tech tragedy is that of the very words of the murderer, Cho Seung-Hui. A videotape and some writings he made before, and during the killing spree, which he sent to NBC, revealed his motivation. Among his reasons were his resentment of "rich kids," and their "Mercedes," their "golden necklaces," their "trust funds," their "debaucheries" and their "hedonistic" lifestyle.

This hatred of the "rich" is right out of the leftist and liberal Democratic Party philosophy of class warfare. It is they who are always demonizing the wealthy - claiming they want to starve the poor, or send the poor to war for oil so they can profit from it. Democrat leaders like Charlie Rangel, Ted Kennedy, Harry Reid, and Howard Dean, among others, routinely portray the wealthy as greedy and evil.

The second substantiation that liberal concepts caused the massacre was that the murderer, despite having a history of criminally insane behavior, was not incarcerated. Almost 18 months ago, a Virginia court order, dated December 13, 2005, stated the murderer "is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, and presents an imminent threat to self and others as a result of mental illness..." He was taken by police to a psychiatric facility, Carilion St. Albans Behavioral Health Center, where the next day Dr. Roy Crouse, a psychiatrist found that he was "mentally ill," yet did "not present an imminent danger to himself/others" and did, "not require involuntary hospitalization." (This is contradicted by another form signed by a Judge Paul Barnett which states the murderer is a danger to himself, yet recommends outpatient treatment).

The killer was represented by an attorney at that time. This was a requirement established "civil libertarian" attorneys. Indeed the "danger to himself or others" sole criterion for involuntary hospitalization is the direct result of the "civil libertarian" philosophy of not placing mentally ill people in institutions. Indeed, "civil libertarians" are quite proud of the fact that they changed these laws. They rejoice that they caused millions of mentally ill people to roam the streets and make it difficult for them to be arrested. This was essentially codified by a 1975 Supreme Court ruling.

The third proof that liberalism was responsible for the Virginia Tech carnage was the leftwing policy that Va. Tech's campus was a "gun free zone." Guns were not permitted to be carried on campus. Consequently, the students were unable to defend themselves and kill the murderer.


So, because liberals want higher taxes and wealth distribution, support people's right to an attorney, and are uneasy with the thought of everybody packing in a classroom, it's their fault Cho did what he did. Brilliant. Also, is it just me, or don't Republicans also throw around some of that class warfare BS rhetoric, too? I'm especially thinking of the trust fund, fancy-car, debauchery, hedonism stuff. No? Must be my bad memory.

A bunch of commenters are following suit, ridiculing the students for not using their telekinetic powers to stop Cho in his tracks. See X-Men, this is why we have a Danger Room.

Limbaugh blames PC, saying that if Cho was white somebody would have stopped him before he flipped. No news yet on where Rush is getting is information from, aside from his ass.

Michelle Malkin
says Universities have coddled students through such egregious institutions as segregated dorms, PC academic departments, and "safe spaces" for student groups. Those bastards!

Instead of teaching students to defend their beliefs, American educators shield them from vigorous intellectual debate. Instead of encouraging autonomy, our higher institutions of learning stoke passivity and conflict-avoidance.

And as the erosion of intellectual self-defense goes, so goes the erosion of physical self-defense.



You know, as far as prevention arguments go, this one's really terrible. At this the pro-gun doofuses can at least claim that having a weapon could have ACTUALLY changed the situation. Maybe it's my enlarged bleeding heart, but I don't see how co-ed dorms or more intellectual/political diversity (including, I suppose, many more angry debates between College Dems and Reps) on campus would have changed a damn thing here. Would they have quoted the Constitution at him? Robert's Rules? Get real.

Mark Steyn stoops even lower, challenging the masculinity of dead students.

Point one: They’re not “children.” The students at Virginia Tech were grown women and — if you’ll forgive the expression — men.

...Nonetheless, it’s deeply damaging to portray fit fully formed adults as children who need to be protected. We should be raising them to understand that there will be moments in life when you need to protect yourself — and, in a “horrible” world, there may come moments when you have to choose between protecting yourself or others. It is a poor reflection on us that, in those first critical seconds where one has to make a decision, only an elderly Holocaust survivor, Professor Librescu, understood instinctively the obligation to act.


I guess that makes all other Holocaust survivors nothing but girly-men?

And of course, there's John Derbyshire, who blames the victims for not "rushing the guy".

Thank God for Conservatives with brains (and hearts) who police their own.

Incidentally, last night O'Reilly was trying to walk a fine line by yelling (repeatedly) that the federal government should have a court-mandated database which puts violent people on a "no buy list" when gun stores run background checks on them. Frankly, I'm impressed- if a tad amused. I guess the government's good for something, after all.

P.S. Some Conservatives seem irked by the fact that killer was neither Muslim nor an illegal alien, so they're trying their hardest to make him a convenient ideological enemy. Good luck, guys.

Hat-tip: Too Sense.

No comments: