Fred On Gun Control

The more I hear from Fred Thompson, the more I am convinced he's the right man to hold the Oval Office after George W. Bush.

If anyone had any doubts about where he stands on the Second Amendment, particularly in light of the mass murder at Virginia Tech, then this piece ought to set their minds at ease.

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.

But that doesn't stop the gun-grabbers from trying to take our guns away from us. They see guns as an object capable of committing evil acts when in fact it is the evildoer committing the evil act. If they didn't use a gun they'd use something else. The fact is they'd still commit that same evil act. A perfect example of this is the UK. They have very restrictive gun laws. Supposedly these laws would help decrease the number of violent crimes because guns wouldn't be available. However, just the opposite has happened. Violent crimes have skyrocketed and the only people carrying guns other than the police are criminals. The UK citizenry aren't safe in their own homes. They aren't even allowed to defend themselves against criminals breaking in to their homes.

If you want an example closer to home all one has to do is look to Washington, DC. The number of violent crimes per capita is very high. Again, the only 'citizens' carrying guns there are the criminals. Again, the citizens aren't allowed to defend themselves against these thugs. Again and again, Washington. DC has the on-again/off-again distinction of being the murder capitol of the US. Tell us again how the gun laws have protected the people of our nation's capitol?

Fred certainly understands this. He also knows how ludicrous the so-called gun-free zones are.

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.

Nor to drug dealers, psychopaths, or just plain bad people.