For those who don't know, actor and former Sen. Fred Thompson (R-TN) is all but in the race for the GOP nomination. Having said that, I thought that my fellow Virginians should know what another presidential aspirant thinks of the events last week at Virginia Tech. We expect a nutjob like Malkin, Coulter, or Limbaugh to blame liberals and the victims themselves for this tragedy. Not a "straight-talker" who's supposed to bring "Reagan Democrats" back to the GOP, like some on the right have claimed. Not Fred Dalton Thompson!He titled this op-ed piece, Signs of Intelligence? If and/or when he is a candidate for President, he must be held accountable for this "I told you so" rhetoric that I'm already sick and tired of.
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.
I am sad to see both sides of the gun debate turning this tragedy into a political football though.
He says that Cho had time to reload as if this is a significant amount of time. Surely Thompson has read the report that Cho was carrying a Glock semi-automatic. If Fred doesn't know how long it takes to reload a Glock surely he could ask someone on his security detail. I'll save you the trouble, it is less than 2 seconds.
Actually, all Fred had to do was watch a rerun of his movie, Die Hard 2, where all the bad guys carried Glocks. Drop the clip out, slip the new clip in, press the slide release. Done. Ready to fire another 15 rounds or so.
Now you might ask how many clips Cho had with him, and I have not read any reports on that. But typically a new Glock comes with 2 clips, and additional clips are available at any gun shop or by mail order. (Congress repealed the ban on clips that held more than 8 rounds a few years ago). So even if Cho was reloading a clip as he walked, he still had a loaded pistol ready to fire 15 rounds plus the second pistol.
Now lets look at the rest of Thompson's argument. It is a little strange. He cites four examples to support his contention that allowing concealed handguns on campus might have limited the tragedy: neighborhood watch groups, the group that prevented the shoe bomber from blowing up his airliner, the truck driver who reported the DC sniper, and the United Flight 93 passengers who forced their plane to turn away from its target. An interesting choice of examples since NOT ONE OF THEM INVOLVES THE USE OF A FIREARM!
He tells us that "civilians use firearms to prevent at least a half million crimes annually" yet he doesn't cite a single example.
Finally, I think the point that Thompson and a whole host of people who are arguing the gun control issue are missing is this: The reason guns are not permitted on campus is not to prevent the masacre in the classrooms. I think that is too horrific to have been the major concern. Rather, it was that first shooting of the young woman in the dorm when she told Cho she did not want to see him. It is the right of young women to determine that they do not want to date someone without fear that the person will stalk them with a gun.
And before someone suggests that the young woman could arm herself to protect herself, remember that she was not yet 21, the legal age to purchase a handgun even if they were allowed.