Madness.

As usual, the mainstream media is imploding with madness over the lastest tragedy to hit America. Instead of thinking about what we can do in the future, a few bored writers decided to start conjecture on what they would do differently if put in the same situation as those who lost their lives.

From DailyKos by way of ThinkProgress by way of TimeBlog:

As NRO’s designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn’t anyone rush the guy? It’s not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness’ sake—one of them reportedly a .22.

At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him. Handguns aren’t very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can’t hit squat. I doubt this guy was any better than I am. And even if hit, a .22 needs to find something important to do real damage—your chances aren’t bad.

Yes, yes, I know it’s easy to say these things: but didn’t the heroes of Flight 93 teach us anything? As the cliche goes—and like most cliches. It’s true—none of us knows what he’d do in a dire situation like that. I hope, however, that if I thought I was going to die anyway, I’d at least take a run at the guy.

John Derbyshire of National Review

Something is clearly wrong with the men in our culture. Among the first rules of manliness are fighting bad guys and protecting others: in a word, courage. And not a one of the healthy young fellows in the classrooms seems to have done that. …

Like Derb, I don’t know if I would live up to this myself, but I know that I should be heartily ashamed of myself if I didn’t. Am I noble, courageous and self-sacrificing? I don’t know; but I should hope to be so when necessary.

Nathaniel Blake at Human Events Online

Blake goes on to praise one individual for his heroism but in general, Human Events Online prematurely bashed the New York Times for prematurely calling for gun control but interestingly linked to the NYTimes in a positive light earlier in the same article.

James Alan Fox of the LA Times claims to know the impossible in his article ‘Why They Kill,’ a both well-intentioned and a objective view of these cases in general.

Oddly enough, Fox News’s reporting hasnt been terrible, although Shepard Smith conducts an interview with a surprisingly fake sense of sympathy. Rush Limbaugh doesn’t even try to fake it. The O’Reily Factor is sure to entertain tonight.


Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Categories

Random Posts

  • Update: List Of Advocates Who Have Argued Twice In A Month: Four days ago, I posted a list of the advocates who have argued twice during a single month since 2003. Well, that chart is already outdated...
  • Updated Term Charts: Starting this week, I'll be posting my updated charts on SCOTUSblog. You can find the first SB version of my charts here. More spec...
  • Predicting the April Sitting: I run into the exact same debate every year around mid-January: which cases will be heard during the current term and which will be pushed o...
  • Advocate Watch: With the Term quickly approaching it's midway point, we can take a look at which advocates have made the biggest mark on the Term. Hearing L...
  • Advocates Arguing from Private Practice (OT 2000-2011): In my last post, I provided a list of the top Supreme Court advocates of the twenty-first century who had never worked in the Office of the ...