The Real Gun Guys

Lt. Col. Grossman on the VT Report

Lt. Col. Grossman: Virginia Tech Tragedy Report Misses Point

A leading expert on mass violence has taken issue with a presidential task force report delving into the Virginia Tech shootings and school violence in general, saying it fails to address the key issues.

The report, released to the public on June 13, was issued by a panel that included Michael Leavitt, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and was officially titled “Report to the President on Issues Raised by the Virginia Tech Tragedy.”

But Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, a former West Point instructor, declared: “I think they missed the boat.”

Grossman is the author of several book including the Pulitzer Prize-nominated “On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society,” which is required reading for FBI recruits.

After reading the government report, Grossman told NewsMax exclusively:

“All they are reporting on is largely mental illness, sharing information about threatening individuals, keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, getting help to mentally ill people, and improving emergency preparedness and violence prevention.

“A full spectrum plan looks at: Deter, Detect, Delay, and Defeat.”
Grossman elaborated on each of the four points:

“Deter: The killer can be deterred. That is why there are seldom any successful workplace massacres in police stations. We need to start putting pressure on schools that refuse to arm their police.

“Most colleges and universities are small cities. Any city leadership that refused to arm their cops, and then had people murdered, would be put out business at the next election. We entrust our kids in the care of organizations that neglect the most fundamental aspect of public safety: armed cops.

“And of course we have the whole issue of not permitting concealed weapons permits to apply on campus. These are laws that disarm law-abiding citizens, and attract killers who want a body count.”

On “Detect,” Lt. Col Grossman told NewsMax:

“The whole focus of the president’s task force report was on detecting mentally ill killers before they strike. But most of the high school killers were not mentally ill. The kids that gave us Jonesboro in the middle school and Columbine in the high school are now showing up in the colleges. And the high schools are getting very good at identifying these wannabe killers. All the methodologies learned in blood in the high schools now must be applied in the college.

“An alternative is to identify (‘detect’) and list in a national database all the colleges that refuse to arm their police, and to recommend that parents not send their kids to these colleges. Instead of trying to detect the killer, just detect the negligent schools.”

As for “Delay,” Grossman says: “This generally means lockdown drills and securable facilities. Lockdown is to violence what fire drills are to fire. Every classroom must be quickly securable. How many teachers and professors and students have to die blocking doors with their bodies before we learn this lesson? “Also, every classroom must have two exits, even if one is out the window. And colleges have to do lockdown drills, just like high schools. The faculty must be briefed on where and how to secure their students.

“Defeat: This brings us back to our cops again. First, armed cops need to be onsite. The Virginia Tech shooter killed 32 in nine minutes. How many more would he have killed if armed police were not onsite?

“Secondly, the police need rifles so they can defeat body armor (the high school killer of seven at Red Lake, Minn., was wearing body armor) and so they can effectively engage snipers. The campus police need SWAT teams trained in explosive breaching so they can quickly and effectively respond to barricaded gunmen scenarios.

“Remember, if a gunman is trapped in a bank or convenience store with hostages, he isn’t there to kill people. But if a gunman takes hostages in a school, he can be there for only one purpose: to kill kids and to carve his name in history in your children’s blood.”

The expert concludes: “In these scenarios, seconds equal lives, and just as colleges have fire hoses and fire extinguishers on site, they need to have the tools to respond to violence on site.

“If they are not going to permit their citizens (students and faculty) to carry lifesaving tools (firearms), then they must provide those lifesaving tools, in the hands of trained professionals. This is a moral, legal obligation.”

© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved.

Share/Save

From The Shooting Wire…

The Fight We Knew Was Coming Is Here
By Russ Thurman
Editor, Shooting Industry Magazine

The mind-numbing events surrounding the shootings at Virginia Tech on April 16 provided a stage for some of the most bizarre actions of the anti-gun movement. On one side, there are hard-core, anti-gun advocates screaming for action, shamelessly seeing in the tragic shootings a grand moment to advance their cause. On the other side, there are the near-humorous antics of the Congressional leadership, who are more interested in power than advancing “gun control” — for now.

But make no mistake, there’s a firestorm raging. While most of us grappled with the tragedy, desperately trying to cope with the shock, terror and magnitude of the killings by a deranged 23-year-old student, the hardcore, anti-gun movement rolled out its well-prepared message: “Guns are to blame.”

Even before the killer had been identified, even before the bodies had been removed from classrooms, even before relatives knew if their sons, daughters, husbands, wives, brothers or sisters were among the dead, the call for more gun control sounded across the country, encouraged by a willing media that thrives on “if it bleeds, it leads.”

Not even a rebuke from Virginia Governor Tim Kaine deterred the overly eager anti-gun media. At a press conference on April 17, following the emotion-filled convocation at Virginia Tech, a reporter asked the governor if it wasn’t time for more gun control. Governor Kaine responded harshly: “I think that people who want to take this within 24 hours of the event and make it their political hobby horse to ride, I’ve got nothing but loathing for them. To those who want to try to make this into some little crusade, I say take that elsewhere.”

But hard-core, anti-gun advocates would have none of that. The call for more gun control, even an outright ban, grabbed large chunks of talk radio airtime and network and all-news television segments. In a shameless pampering of the anti-gun movement, Chris Matthews threw the softest of pitches on MSNBC’s “Hardball,” as he provided House Representative Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) a soapbox she never thought possible a few days earlier.

In February, McCarthy introduced H.R. 1022: “Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007,” which is a greatly enhanced version of the Clinton-era law. H.R. 1022 would ban hundreds of present firearms and “Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device(s).” On March 15, the proposed bill had 26 cosponsors. On April 19, it had 38.

On “Hardball,” McCarthy greatly misrepresented her position on gun control, sounding supportive of the Second Amendment. She misstated the effectiveness of the original Assault Weapons Ban and the purpose of H.R. 1022. Matthews eagerly fed her the “right” questions.

McCarthy, who most Americans would not have recognized before April 17, was featured on all the television news programs and ABC placed her interview with Sam Donaldson on its Web site. Overnight, McCarthy was the face of “reasonable gun laws,” one who wasn’t afraid to prod her colleagues into action.

“For too long Congress has stood idle while gun violence continues to take its toll. The unfortunate situation in Virginia could have been avoided if Congressional leaders stood up to the gun lobby,” McCarthy said. Translation: It’s not the fault of the person who pulled the trigger, but those who made the trigger and those who support gun ownership.

The Brady Campaign stooped to a new low following the shootings. On April 17, it spewed its standard mantra about guns, the “gun lobby,” etc., etc., including its ever-present, “Please make a contribution to keep the momentum going.” By the end of the week, the Brady Campaign had taken its fundraising to a despicable level. Instead of the Brady home page, visitors to bradycampaign.com, were greeted with a fundraising pitch: “CRISIS RESPONSE: Elected officials continue to ignore our gun violence epidemic. It’s time to answer one question, ‘What are YOU going to do about it?’ DONATE NOW!” Obviously, Brady didn’t see blood in the Virginia Tech shootings, but money.

Gun Control? Never Heard Of It.

Despite the screeching call for action, the Congressional Democratic leadership wasn’t about to step into the gun-control fray. No Congressman of any prominence is going to publicly utter the words “gun control.” Yes, Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said the shootings would “reignite the dormant effort to pass common sense gun regulations in this nation,” but the normal anti-gun shrillness was missing.

If not for the seriousness of the week, the actions of some ardent anti-gun politicians would have been comical. Democrats in Congress did everything they could to avoid talking about “gun control.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s unwillingness to address the possibility of such legislation so exasperated the anti-gun editors at ABC News, they panned her on their Web site, saying, “But this week, when directly asked (by ABC) about Congress’ mood to pass gun control after the worst school shooting in American history, liberal House Speaker Nancy Pelosi acted as if she’d never even heard the term.”

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said, “I hope there’s not a rush to do anything. We need to take a deep breath.”

If you didn’t know any better, you would have thought Pelosi and Reid were on the NRA’s board of directors.

Why the seeming lack of backbone by the Democratic leadership? Timing. Power. Now is not the time to push for gun control in Congress. The Democrats’ control of Congress is razor-thin, and a number of freshman Democrats, who gave the party control, are not rabid anti-gunners.

More important, Democrats remember 2000 well. Gore’s anti-gun position contributed to his losing Tennessee, Arkansas and West Virginia. Had Gore taken one of the states, he would not have needed Florida to take the presidency. With that misstep, word went out, “Abandon gun control in future elections.”

All-Out Fight

Make no mistake, the fight we knew was coming is here. The tragedy at Virginia Tech is being used to its fullest by hard-core, antigun forces to change the way Americans view gun ownership and those who make firearms. This is indeed their grand moment and they are exploiting it to the fullest.

For anti-gun forces in Congress, they are just waiting for the right time. The seemingly pro-gun, or at the least, neutral-gun position of the Congressional leadership has nothing to do with the issue, it has to do with staying in power. Democrats want to stay in power, increase their numbers in Congress and elect a Democrat president. Once that’s accomplished, anti-gun legislation and laws will again become fashionable and the order of the day.

For the industry’s part, this is not a time for the faint of heart. While there’s plenty of fighting ahead, there’s also optimism. The American people are not buying the anti-gun rhetoric wholesale.

On ABC News, Donaldson, in opening his April 18 interview with Rep. McCarthy, said, “Our latest polls, and consistently for the last 20 years, show that over 60 percent of the public wants stricter gun controls.”

However, on its Web site, ABC asked, “Do you think this incident is a reason to pass stricter gun control legislation?” As of April 19, here are the results:

- 78,139: No. Violent shootings are isolated incidents and it’s irresponsible to link them to gun control.

- 25,169: Yes. This shows the violence that can occur when someone has access to handguns.

- 1,873: I’m not sure. I need more information.

So, despite the ranting of anti-gun advocates, the American people are not stupid. However, their minds can be changed and often are in the volatility of a national election. The 2008 elections loom even more important now.

To prevail in this fight, it will take banding together as an industry as we’ve never done before. Fortunately, over the past 10 years, the industry has developed a strong solidarity.

The Hunting & Shooting Sports Heritage Fund of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) was pivotal in defeating industry-wide litigation cases, the passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the Vote Your Sport campaigns and other initiatives. However, there was an imbalance in the number of companies contributing to the fund and those benefiting from its work. Less than 150 companies took part in the fund. That is remarkably low, considering there were 1,846 exhibiting companies at SHOT Show 2007. If you were a member of the Heritage Fund, thank you. If you were not, now is the time to join the fight.

As the industry prepares for the battles ahead, the vital work of the Heritage Fund is now being assumed by the entire NSSF organization. We at FMG Publications were longtime members of the Heritage Fund and as members of the NSSF will continue our support of the organization as it battles lawsuits and hostile legislation, and unveils its voter education programs. If your company is not a member of the NSSF, now is the time to join. If your business profits directly or indirectly from the firearm industry, you need to support its fight against those who would destroy it. Visit nssf.org. Join.

We also need to strongly support the NRA and its efforts. It really was the NRA’s strength that pushed through the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and the organization has fought alongside the industry in countless battles at all levels of government. The NRA will play a vital role during the upcoming presidential campaigns and election. We need to support them.

A major industry-backed campaign will launch soon to strengthen the NRA membership, its get-out-the-vote campaigns and its support for the firearm industry.

As always is the case following such tragic events, everyone has an answer as to how it could have been prevented. One side proposes eliminating guns and the industry that makes them. It’s up to us — all of us — to ensure that doesn’t happen.

Contact:
Russ Thurman
(434) 929-6321
russ@shootingindustry.com

Share/Save

Fred Thompson on "Gun-Free Zones"

Signs of Intelligence?

By Fred Thompson

One of the things that’s got to be going through a lot of peoples’ minds now is how one man with two handguns, that he had to reload time and time again, could go from classroom to classroom on the Virginia Tech campus without being stopped. Much of the answer can be found in policies put in place by the university itself.

Virginia, like 39 other states, allows citizens with training and legal permits to carry concealed weapons. That means that Virginians regularly sit in movie theaters and eat in restaurants among armed citizens. They walk, joke, and rub shoulders everyday with people who responsibly carry firearms — and are far safer than they would be in San Francisco, Oakland, Detroit, Chicago, New York City, or Washington, D.C., where such permits are difficult or impossible to obtain.

The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so.

Still, there are a lot of people who are just offended by the notion that people can carry guns around. They view everybody, or at least many of us, as potential murderers prevented only by the lack of a convenient weapon. Virginia Tech administrators overrode Virginia state law and threatened to expel or fire anybody who brings a weapon onto campus.

In recent years, however, armed Americans — not on-duty police officers — have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge.

So Virginians asked their legislators to change the university’s “concealed carry” policy to exempt people 21 years of age or older who have passed background checks and taken training classes. The university, however, lobbied against that bill, and a top administrator subsequently praised the legislature for blocking the measure.

The logic behind this attitude baffles me, but I suspect it has to do with a basic difference in worldviews. Some people think that power should exist only at the top, and everybody else should rely on “the authorities” for protection.

Despite such attitudes, average Americans have always made up the front line against crime. Through programs like Neighborhood Watch and Amber Alert, we are stopping and catching criminals daily. Normal people tackled “shoe bomber” Richard Reid as he was trying to blow up an airliner. It was a truck driver who found the D.C. snipers. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that civilians use firearms to prevent at least a half million crimes annually.

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.

Many other universities have been swayed by an anti-gun, anti-self defense ideology. I respect their right to hold those views, but I challenge their decision to deny Americans the right to protect themselves on their campuses — and then proudly advertise that fact to any and all.

Whenever I’ve seen one of those “Gun-free Zone” signs, especially outside of a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I’ve always wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don’t mean much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.

— Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.

Share/Save

NOW IS TIME FOR DEEP REFLECTION, NOT DANCING IN BLOOD

–from the SAF

BELLEVUE, WA - Today, as the nation is mourning Monday’s horrible loss at Virginia Tech, this should be a time of deep reflection and offering our prayers for the victims and their heartbroken families.

Sadly, noted Alan Gottlieb, founder of the Second Amendment Foundation, some groups and individuals are using this terrible crime to further their own political cause: the continued erosion of
firearm civil rights and the abolition of firearm ownership in the United States.

“Almost from the moment the first news broke about this monstrous crime,” Gottlieb said, “we at SAF have been forced to respond to staccato attacks from gun control organizations whose goal is to
destroy the Second Amendment. Perhaps we should be astonished, but in fact, we are once again simply disappointed in the morbid exploitation of this event. We are grateful, however, that the media
has given us an opportunity to respond to these attacks. There was a time in the past when that did not happen.

“These groups, that so quickly have tried to politicize Virginia Tech’s sorrow and loss, have a well-documented history of shamelessly dancing in the blood of crime victims to advance their agenda,” he continued. “Such deplorable behavior should not be forgotten by the American public. Eighty million law-abiding gun owners in this country did not go to Virginia Tech or some other college campus yesterday to unleash carnage. They have harmed no one, and their civil rights should not be erased in response.

“Today, we should all stand together as Americans with broken hearts,” Gottlieb added. “Today, we are all Virginia Tech students and alumni. Today, we are all diminished by this great loss.

“There will be plenty of time in the days and weeks ahead to analyze what happened, to try and make some sense of such a senseless act, and to examine what may have gone wrong and learn from it,” Gottlieb stated. “For now, let us direct our emotions toward where they will do the most good. Let us offer our prayers and support to the families of the victims, and to the thousands of students whose lives will be forever changed by this despicable, cowardly act.”

Share/Save

LawDog on the Virginia Tech Shootings

Often I run across someone who says something better than I could ever do. This is such a time. Read what the LawDog has to say about todays horrible events. -Yuri

–by LawDog (click to read the whole thing)

“Oh, Christ, here we go again.

Some maladjusted little bugsnipe gets his mental panties into a bunch and goes flat boiling nutters with a gun in one of the few places where he knows someone isn’t going to put him down like a rabid dog during his first magazine.

And — as usual — the Mainstream Media is bleating about needing more Gun Control.

Gun Control is a failure. You simply can not expect those who would do murder — those who would violate the highest law — you can not expect them to obey a lesser law.”

Share/Save

Here Come The Gun Banners

–by Tom Gresham, host of Gun Talk

“April 16, 2007, just might be a turning point in the battle to restore gun rights to Americans. The tragedy at Virginia Tech today, with more than 30 people being killed in a premeditated murder spree, will be the fulcrum upon which the anti-gun rights forces leverage their efforts to restrict (destroy, if possible) your right to not only own guns, but to protect yourself and your family.

Quite simply, this is the mass shooting the anti-self defense forces have been waiting for, as we will see over the coming days and weeks. The papers are already drawn up; the proposed restrictions were penned long ago; they have merely been waiting for this moment.

Lost in the coming cacophony will be the utter failure of the “perfect” gun law — a total gun ban. You see, on that university campus, no one is allowed to have a gun for self protection in dorms or classrooms. It is the latest in a long string of murderous failures of “gun free” zones, or as they are better called, “victim-rich environments.”

According to the school’s “Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention Policy”:

“The university’s employees, students, and volunteers, or any visitor or other third party attending a sporting, entertainment, or educational event, or visiting an academic or administrative office building or residence hall, are further prohibited from carrying, maintaining, or storing a firearm or weapon on any university facility, even if the owner has a valid permit, when it is not required by the individual’s job, or in accordance with the relevant University Student Life Policies.

Any such individual who is reported or discovered to possess a firearm or weapon on university property will be asked to remove it immediately. Failure to comply may result in a student judicial referral and/or arrest, or an employee disciplinary action and/or arrest.”
(Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Policy 5616, Campus and Workplace Violence Prevention Policy, http://www.policies.vt.edu/5616.pdf)

A similar situation to the one that happened at Virginia Tech occurred on January 16th, 2002 at Appalachian Law School in Grundy, Virginia. A disgruntled former student began a similar shooting spree. The difference in this case was that the attack was stopped by three individuals, two of whom were legally armed with handguns. Unfortunately, the attack was not stopped until three people had been killed and three more wounded. Why did it take so long to stop the attack? The good guys had to retrieve their guns from their parked cars before they could confront the gunman. ALS was a gun-free zone, you know.

Barely more than a year ago House Bill 1572 couldn’t even make it out of committee in the Virginia General Assembly. The bill would have made it legal for students and staff at Virginia universities to have guns for their own protection. Today’s shooter did not wait for such a law, and took advantage of the government-mandated victim-state.

When House Bill 1572 was defeated, state newspapers reported: “Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. ‘I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.’”

Once again, the desire to “feel safe” prompts decisions which actually make people less safe.

What does it mean to America’s gun owners? It certainly sounds the battle cry for those who enacted, then lost, the ability to ban full-capacity magazines for defensive firearms. Expect a quick call for limiting magazine capacity–and thus, the ability to fully protect yourself and your family. There may well be calls for the banning of all autoloading (semi-automatic) firearms, even though those have been in use for more than 100 years.

Fortunately, the political landscape is much different than it was when the Brady Bill and the Clinton Gun Ban were passed in the early 1990s. Those acts helped pull together a fragmented firearms industry which, until then, had kept out of politics, leaving that to the NRA. The firearms industry now understands the threat, as do individual gun owners who use guns for recreation, but especially for self-protection. Passage of the so-called “assault weapon” ban resulted in the Republican Party taking control of Congress, according to President Bill Clinton. The gun issue is largely credited with keeping a Republican in the White House since then. Elected officials of all stripes know that any proposal to infringe on gun rights is a third rail, capable of cutting short almost any political career.

Certainly, some closet gun banners will be emboldened by this tragedy and will come forward, counting on a groundswell of public outrage to carry the day for repressive gun control laws, much as it did in England and Australia after those countries experienced similar shootings. The disturbing fact that the violent crime rate skyrocketed in both countries following the confiscation of guns from honest people will not quell the zeal of those who dream of a country where the criminals are free to prey on the defenseless.

They long for the day when they can bring the failed experiment of “gun free” zones to every town, neighborhood, and home in America.

Until Monday, April 16, it was thought that gun control would be an issue politicians would try to duck over the next 18 months. That may have changed. What has not changed, though, is the awareness of the American public that they need firearms for personal protection. The vivid images of helpless people during Hurricane Katrina being victimized by thugs, with no police to help, crystallized the understanding that each of us is responsible for our own safety,. Today, we all know we can certainly take advantage of help from official sources, but we also are clear that we should never give up our ability to help ourselves.

Today’s shootings are terrible. Our hearts go out to the victims and their families. We don’t want to inject politics into this, but to ignore this is to pretend the sun doesn’t rise each day. The assault on our rights surely will come.

Whether we gun owners get swept away by a tsunami of gun restrictions, or swim to the top with logic and organized persuasion depends, I think, on the intensity and the quality of our reaction. One thing is for sure. This is the fight which will determine the future of gun rights, the firearms industry, our ability to protect our families, and the strength of our Constitutional protections.”

Share/Save