A few years ago while sitting at breakfast with the chief of
police from my town of Londonderry ,
NH , I expressed concern over the
fact that a home in my neighborhood had been recently burglarized. Now in our
bedroom community of Londonderry ,
New Hampshire , any type of crime
was a rarity. But, since I lived about 15-min. from the police station, I
wanted to know what the police response time would have been if someone were
trying to break into my home or threaten my family. Chief Ryan gave me a
deadpan look like "Are you serious?" and then said in a
matter-of-fact manner that the best that the Londonderry Police Dept. could do
would be to show up to take a report. He went on to tell me that rather than
trusting in my local police to protect me, I'd be better off purchasing a gun
and learning how to use it. True story! Thank-you Chief Ryan for the wake-up
call!

Last Friday,
immediately following the Century theater massacre by lone gunman, James
Holmes, the nanny mayor of New York
City , Michael Bloomberg (who will never allow a
tragedy to go without being used to advance his political agenda) began calling
for more gun-control laws. Now this is the same elitist mayor who wants to
limit the size of sodas in NYC to 16 oz. or less. If we don't need guns, then I
challenge Mayor Bloomberg to give up his security and make sure that his police
detail no longer carry guns. Why should he have all this extra protection when
he wants to deny every other American the same right?
Economist
John R. Lott has written a book, "More
Guns, Less Crime" where he makes a convincing argument that allowing
people to own or carry guns deter violent crime. Lott presents data that armed
citizens stop crimes. The more armed citizens you have, the lower your
rate of violent crime -- criminals are stupid, but they're rational, and they don't
want to get shot any more than you do.
John Lott writes: "Concealed
handgun laws reduce violent crime for two reasons. First, they reduce
the number of attempted crimes because criminals are uncertain which potential
victims can defend themselves. Second, victims who have guns are in a much
better position to defend themselves."
![]() |
Virginia Tech students praying after the shooting rampage |
Here's what both the Virginia Tech shooting and the
At both tragedies: Virginia Tech and the Century Theater
shootings--had students and movie-goers been allowed to carry concealed weapons,
there would most likely have been far fewer people killed. Do you mean to tell
me that if several movie patrons at the midnight screening of "The Dark
Knight Rises" had been packing concealed guns, that James Holmes
would not have been taken out, and the death toll and number of injuries would
have been greatly reduced? And when the deadliest campus massacre in the U.S.
took place at Virginia Tech where 33 were killed and 16 were wounded, do you
mean to tell me that if students and professors had been packing concealed weapons--that some student or professor would not have taken out the lone
gunman, Seung-Hui Cho, and maybe far fewer individuals would have been killed
or wounded?
So my contention is that we don't need fewer guns, we need
to change local laws in every state so that more citizens can carry concealed
weapons. If you don't agree, then next time you're in a situation where someone
is pointing a gun at you and threatening your life, try calling 911 and see how
that goes.