Columbine Survivor To Obama: Your Gun Control Initiatives Are More Of A Detriment Than A Help (Video)

Columbine Survivor To Obama: Your Gun Control Initiatives Are More Of A Detriment Than A – Gateway Pundit

………………

Columbine High School shooting survivor Evan Todd told FOX News today that he wrote a letter to Obama after the recent gun control legislation proposed by Democrats after the Newtown shooting. Todd said,

“The key points I wanted to make were, point by point, the initiatives the president and a lot in Washington are wanting to pass are going to more of a detriment than a help.”

Todd was shot in the back by the Columbine killers.

Via Happening Now:

.

.
Click HERE For Rest Of Story

What we SHOULD have been doing years ago to prevent school shootings?

No one with a shred of morality could help but be devastated by yesterday’s horrific events. Evil was visited upon us and the toll, is, in ways immeasurable. There is no more heinous an act than what was perpetrated yesterday. Babies slaughtered by an evil man, so close to Christmas. Dear God this is awful. I can not imagine how any parent, or grandparent or sibling copes with such an atrocity. I do not know if I could. Our national heart has been broken, but the hearts of these families? I pray God gets the through, and, in fact, I think ONLY God could get anyone through such a time. I so wish we could, as a nation, simply grieve and look at ways to be pro-active, rather than reactive in such a time. But, the usual inane blame game has started already, and that simply adds to the sadness I feel.

No, it was not video games, or movies, or guns that caused this act. Only two things are to blame, and only one of those can we hope to have any control over. The one thing we cannot control is the severe mental illness that drives such murderers. I know  many work diligently to find ways to predict certain behaviors. Maybe one day they will find a way. Should we look at institutionalizing people with certain mental abnormalities? The Other McCain, whom I respect, raises this topic

Psycho, loony, bonkers, daft, zany, berserk and cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs.

Advocates for the mentally ill discourage such colloquial terms as tending to stigmatize psychiatric patients. But we might ask whether stigma — and the consequent damage to the fragile self-esteem of kooks — is really worse than turning loose a homicidal schizo who kills 27 people.

I saw we might ask that, except that it’s politically incorrect to do so. We have been carefully taught that wackos are victims, and we’re not supposed to talk about the possibility that they might also be dangerous, lest we infringe the “rights” of murderous lunatics.

To quote Dirty Harry, “Well, I’m all broken up over that man’s rights.”

You’ll excuse me if I sound somewhat bitter about it, but this school shooting kind of spoiled my plans for the day. And also, some kids in Newtown, Connecticut, will miss the rest of their lives.

Our culture has lost all sense of perspective, of reasonable balance, so that we are unable to make common-sense judgments about risks. Which is the greater danger: That a schizophrenic might have his feelings hurt, or that a schizophrenic might go off his meds and kill people?

Common sense is quite nearly illegal nowadays and it’s certainly unfashionable in the Obama Age. So the usual liberal dingbats — including the ACLU types who assured us it was “a fearless, independent life style” for a crazy woman to defecate in public on the streets of Manahattan — are telling us we need more gun control.

And I say, no, what we need is more kook control. But no member of Congress in either party would have the guts to introduce “The Dangerous Lunatic Incarceration Act of 2013,” which would put wackjobs like Adam Lanza some place where they couldn’t kill people.

The question here, to me, is this. Do I trust the government to judge who is a “danger”. That, of course is a big one isn’t it? To be sure some people ought to be locked up, in a mental health facility, but, who do I trust to use such a responsibility properly? I doubt Congress, as inept as it is, could be trusted not to screw that up. I know that McCain IS on the right track here. It is who decides that concerns me.

Now, the other thing to blame is pretty straight forward, certainly it is not as complicated as who should be taken to the Padded Wall Hotel.  That other thing that SHOULD have been in place ever since Columbine. That other thing being this. We spend money on top of money on education, yet none goes to properly securing our schools? That other thing that, I am almost sure WOULD have stopped the act yesterday, and would have stopped most, if not all recent school shootings is to have armed security in our schools. Yes, I know, Liberals will howl over this idea. I can hear them now. “What kind if country do we want to live in?” Well, how about a country that acts pro-actively to protect our children? That IS, after all, one responsibility our government actually does have. So what is the plan? Here it is…

Driving home yesterday, a caller to the Medved Show, a retired police officer suggested that we hire retired police officers to protect our schools. His argument was sound. These who are trained, and know what to do. Their job would be one thing. To prevent such atrocities. I would add some particulars. I would prefer that private companies handle this security. In my view they would be more trustworthy than some government agency. The only provisions would be that they hire former, or current police officers, especially former SWAT, former FBI agents, or Secret Service agents, former U.S. Marshals, military personnel, especially former special forces Rangers, SEALS, Green Berets, Marine Recon, etc. In other words people with particular skill sets that could be trusted to neutralize threats to our children in school. The answer to violence is not to be found in metal detectors, ID badges. It is in having trained, armed personnel who have the ability, and willingness to take deadly action to stop violent predators.

Such a plan, in my view would have two immediate impacts. First, the security measures these people would implement would certainly be much more effective than current ones. Second, the temptation to attempt such an act of horror, and do not delude yourself into thinking that such acts are not beyond the minds of terrorists, would be greatly reduced. There is a reason these mass killings tend to happen in “gun-free zones”. However twisted the minds of these killers may be, they never seem to target areas where they might encounter armed resistance. And yes, it is true that a truly deranged person might attempt to shoot up, or attack a school in some other way. In that case, who do you want in place to stop them? Someone asking for ID or a highly trained warrior who will not hesitate to terminate the threat?

Yes, I know, I can hear it now. Some Liberal will ask where the money would come from to pay for this. I would answer FIND the money. Maybe by using some of the money we waste so freely now? Further I recognize that such a plan will not happen. It just makes too much sense. And common sense is an endangered species it seems Yes, I know Liberals will cringe at the prospect or armed security. Liberals hate guns, they see them as the problem, not as a tool that can as easily prevent tragedy as it can be used to commit an act of evil. Liberals do not get that and most never will, I do not care about them. Let them wallow in their ignorance. I care about protecting our kids.

So there it is, a fairly simple plan to secure our schools. Perhaps we can present such a plan to our Congressmen, and Senators? Both on the federal and state level? Who knows, we might just be able to push some rational ideas into their heads.