Brady at it again

Read this in the N Y Daily News

Colin Goddard, survivor of tragic Virginia Tech shooting, has message with film 'Living for 32'

Joanna Molloy

Wednesday, November 17th 2010, 4:00 AM

Colin Goddard still has three bullets from Virginia Tech shooter inside his body, who murdered 32 people with two semiautomatic handguns three years ago.

Colin Goddard is a walking, talking poster boy for gun control - and with the murder rate up 16% in New York City this year, we'd do well to listen.

Goddard still has three bullets in his body courtesy of the deranged Virginia Tech shooter who murdered 32 people with two semiautomatic handguns and 400 rounds of ammunition three years ago.

All countries have nuts; we're the only one that arms them.

Excerpt ... Read more at http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local...ntary_on_guns_by_va_tech_massacre_surviv.html

Someone needs to ask Goddard how many fewer people would be dead and how many fewer bullets he'd have in his body if just one lawfully armed citizen had been around to take the shooter out.

The laws (or rules?) against carry on the campus did little to help the 32 dead people or Goddard. If the law allowed it, one carrier could've saved many lives. So Goddard ignorantly thinks that more rules would've stopped a determined spree shooter?

He needs to listen to Dr. Hupp's take on how she wishes she had dealt with a spree shooter.

Goddard's reaction and subsequent activist agenda is pretty normal behavior for those people who have a fear, loathing, and/or distrust of guns and their owners. When such an event occurs in their life, they turn in a direction which to those of us who do not share their contempt, would seem to any rational person to be counter to common sense. To them, it is merely more proof that more needs to be done to restrict the ownership and carrying of arms. They truly believe that if we just pass more laws, the slaughter will stop. They do not think like us because they fail to see how defending one's self is a natural human instinct. To these people, this instinct is an embarrassment at best and both repugnant and to be ignored wherever possible. It's like having your home broken into and then deciding the best course of action would be to leave the doors unlocked so the burglar will just take what he wants and leave you alone.

Bad people do bad things. And given the choice, they are going to seek out and attack those things, and those people, least likely to protect against an attack. A school zone, college or university, or posted shopping mall are prime targets for body counts. It never ceases to amaze me that when a tragic event takes place, people who think like this want to create more places and situations where more tragic events can take place in the future. So ridiculous laws get passed, signs go up, and the slaughter continues resulting in more laws, more signs and more slaughter.

You will in my little text here at the bottom about a cell phone and a gun, and a very poignant question which leaves little to no wiggle room for an answer. I have posed this questions quite a few times with people of a mind like Mr. Goddard. It becomes immediately obvious that their body language and demeanor suddenly change and they get caught a bit off guard. On fellow I worked with on my last job (very nice man, but rather liberal in a number of ways) and I got into a brief conversation about the carrying of arms. I posed this little question to him and he twisted and squirmed, then answered, "I'd rather neither one of them had a gun". Of course, the question does not indicate the killer has a gun - he just assumed that to be the case. But his answer told me everything I needed to know. His position was that; 1) this is a scenario of an encounter with which he is uncomfortable considering, or 2) regardless of what was happening to him, he did not have the desire to use a firearm for his protection.

Mr. Goddard would do his former university a lot more good if he would seek ways in which students who have permits can freely arm themselves as they go about their daily activities at school. The question remains;

"... what would you rather have in your hand?"

to which can be added, "nothing" in the case of the victims unless policies are changed to allow them a chance at life.

Suzanna Hupp, one of the survivors of another, similar active shooter attack- the one on the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, TX, has a different view.

She believes that had she been allowed by law to carry her gun in the restaurant (it was left behind in her vehicle, as required by Texas law), her parents may not have been brutally executed by that monster.

People who are afraid of guns, and jealous of those who have the courage to take responsibility for their own defense should not be allowed to disarm those of us who have the will and the means to do so.

That's not the TX legislature. One of the legislators is Chuckie Schumer. I don't know if that is Congressman Schumer or Senator Schumer. That would depend on the date of the hearing.

Great presentation by Hupp, though. We should all watch and rewatch this testimony.

has anyone bothered to ask goddard if he wished he'd been able to have a gun on that day?

DKSuddeth said:

has anyone bothered to ask goddard if he wished he'd been able to have a gun on that day?

Click to expand...

I'd guess that he'd say no. He has already demonstrated the flawed thought pattern associating the gun with the evil that was perpetrated that day. He would likely see his own possession of a gun as wrong.

First off..., Virginia Code 18.2-308.1 ONLY Prohibits Firearms on School Property enumerated for Grades K-12.
College Carry AND Campus Carry are LEGAL in The Old Dominion!

Virginia Tech's Policies were, at the time of the Shooting, contrary to The Laws of The CommonWealth.

No Law, regardless of The Penalities attached thereto, will stop anyone who is Content on Hurting another.

The Problem is Goddard, and The Brady Bunch, not with The Law, or even with Seung-Hui Cho.

Colin Goddard is a walking, talking poster boy for gun control - and with the murder rate up 16% in New York City this year, we'd do well to listen.

Click to expand...

Am I the only one that noticed they used NYC as the statistic to use supporting gun control?

Yawn, and another yawn.... Who is listening? The early 90s are over and the hysteria after a shooting are becoming diminished. The Brady bunch organization has become so weak over the years that they had to merge with another like group to survive. Sarah Brady and her agenda has become an answer to a trivia question. How weak is the anti-gun establishment when they couldn't get one anti gun owership law passed with total control of the political system with the democrats in power. Brady exposed her weakness in being unable to stop 40 states from passing
shall issue carry laws. That was the beginning of the end for her.
Like the pathetic congresswoman from Long Island, Carolyn McCarthy, this Goddard clown is preaching to his own choir and even they are singing a song of desperation. Firearm ownership is even trickling down to traditional democrats and otherwise liberals. I invite these types to go shooting on a regular basis.
Even so, we should keep vigilance against these idealogs.

sultan I copied the story from a NY paper so they used NY numbers in it but the Mayor of NY is a raving anti-gun lunatic you have to look up other stories of him trying to influence gun law.

DKSuddeth said:

has anyone bothered to ask goddard if he wished he'd been able to have a gun on that day?

Click to expand...

I'd be willing to bet the Brady Bunch is taking care of a lot of his personal expenses so he will be a spokesman for them. I'm betting it's not a lot of his money taking him all over the place to voice his fears.

sultan62 said:

Am I the only one that noticed they used NYC as the statistic to use supporting gun control?

Click to expand...

I noticed that too. They might as well say that gun control is working so well here (in NY), that our murder rate went up by 16%. It works so good, you should git some too. It almost sounds like they want violent crime to increase.

As for the brady bunch's relevance, they are now just a fund raising group of propagandists paying the salary of the top weasels. Every shooting is an opportunity for them to celebrate with a fund raising e-mail to their dwindling numbers. They are a sad, pathetic group of hate-filled loonies.

Comparing Colin Goddard to Suzanna Hupp is like comparing a Honda Civic to a Ferrari. Goddard probably never gave the idea of owning a gun much thought, whereas Suzanna Gratia Hupp was a gun owner who had been required to leave her gun in the car. In other words, she owned the means to protect herself, but was forbidden from carrying it on her.

Other than their respective attitudes I see both situations as being identical. Citizens of this country were denied the ability to defend themselves and those they cared for by people in a position of authority. As a result people died and the those in authority should be held accountable.

Tess said:

I'd be willing to bet the Brady Bunch is taking care of a lot of his personal expenses so he will be a spokesman for them. I'm betting it's not a lot of his money taking him all over the place to voice his fears.

Click to expand...

Ya' think?

They look for people like this, groom they, then send them out with their message. Our side does this, too though I would bet we don't do as much of the pay-them-and-let-them-be-a-spokesman thing.

They need slaughters and victims to spread their message. We need people who stand up to evil and come out both alive and as an example of the importance of individual liberty. Cho broke no laws but if you listened to their message, it is right on the cusp of him doing so. And they link his purchase with their favorite whipping boy; the "gunshow loophole". This is their sacred cow and has taken over first place from "assault weapon/rifle" with them. That one was going nowhere so the loophole thing is message ONE now.

The old adage: "If you tell a lie long enough and often enough, it becomes the truth".

Bookman said:

Citizens of this country were denied the ability to defend themselves and those they cared for by people in a position of authority. As a result people died and the those in authority should be held accountable.

Click to expand...

Right. It is more than unconscionable... it is more than anti-constitutional... it is more than anti-American... it is downright criminal to restrict Americans and make their self-defense virtually a criminal act. The most basic of human rights is that of self-preservation. God didn't make any mistakes. To limit, restrict, or attempt to remove this right should be grounds for immediate removal from office followed by severe fines and long prison sentences. It is a very serious breech of the public trust and of the Constitution, on a par with treason and espionage.

Personally I am getting pretty fed up with hearing about these events (slaughters) and then seeing the pestilent maggots come out of their holes, crying for more controls, stiffer restrictions, and outright bans as their "fixes" for this "societal menace". I am rapidly losing my patience for these sorts of mental gymnastics and the fixes these idiots want to see imposed upon good and decent Americans because they don't have the intestinal fortitude and will to do what really needs to be done. The funny thing is it is these types of people who have brought this all on us over the last three+ generations and now they are screaming for us to accept and welcome their fixes. Sound like something at work here? You bet it is.

the last gunfighter said:

sultan I copied the story from a NY paper so they used NY numbers in it but the Mayor of NY is a raving anti-gun lunatic you have to look up other stories of him trying to influence gun law.

Click to expand...

I was referring more to the difficulties involved in legally carrying a handgun in NY.

legal carry in NY doesn't happen unless you have "friends" I lived 34 yrs in NJ 30 min from NY.

Slayer of Paper said:

Suzanna Hupp, one of the survivors of another, similar active shooter attack- the one on the Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, TX, has a different view.

She believes that had she been allowed by law to carry her gun in the restaurant (it was left behind in her vehicle, as required by Texas law), her parents may not have been brutally executed by that monster.

Click to expand...

That just proves Suzanna "gets it," while Goddard does not. Then again, as a Virginia Tech graduate myself, I can attest to the relatively deep-seeted mentality of most of the university professors and administration.

the last gunfighter said:

Colin Goddard is a walking, talking poster boy for gun control - and with the murder rate up 16% in New York City this year, we'd do well to listen.

Click to expand...

So let me get this straight...

In a city that has some of the most restrictive gun ownership laws in the nation--a city where is it nearly IMPOSSIBLE for an ordinary citizen to purchase, let alone carry a firearm lawfully for self-defense, the murder rate is UP 16%...

And making it MORE difficult for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves is going to help keep crime down HOW???

If anything, the current murder statistics for NYC prove that "gun control" laws actually CAUSE crime...