Oathkeepers had this to say about the massacre in Connecticut.  Simply superlative.

This shooting is yet another tragic example of the failed, grotesque insistence on helpless victim zones where any crazed gunman can be assured of a large number of disarmed, undefended, helpless victims, all crammed into one place, where he can kill many children before an armed defender arrives from elsewhere.  It is disturbing and sick that the federal government so hates the right of the American people to bear arms, and so hates their natural right to self defense, that the government insists on making them helpless, disarmed victims for anyone who cares to kill them.   And in this case, all of the teachers and staff were willfully disarmed by the Federal Government, by force of law and threat of prison, to ensure that they would be disarmed and incapable of saving the lives of the children entrusted to their care.


UPDATE:  President Obama Issues Statement

Just hours after yesterday’s tragic mass shooting at a Connecticut Elementary School, President Obama issued a statement, in which he said this:

As a country, we have been through this too many times.  Whether it’s an elementary school in Newtown, or a shopping mall in Oregon, or a temple in Wisconsin, or a movie theater in Aurora, or a street corner in Chicago — these neighborhoods are our neighborhoods, and these children are our children.  And we’re going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics.

For once, I agree with something Obama says.  I agree we have been through this too many times, and we are going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics – by finally, and completely removing restrictions on the ability of teachers and other school staff to carry firearms to protect the children in their care.   It is clear and obvious that the fact that the teachers were disarmed by force of law was a direct cause of their inability to defend the children in their care.   The police could not and did not get there in time to protect the kids.   The idea that the teachers should wait for professional “authorized” armed defenders to arrive obviously failed, as it failed at Columbine, and as it failed at Virginia Tech, and as it has failed in every other school shooting, from grade schools, to high schools, to colleges.  Those were all senseless tragedies of helpless victims that were made possible because of illogical  politics.  We need to set aside political agendas and do what is best for the children – arm their teachers and school staff, or at least let them protect the children if they so choose.   After all, we trust these teachers and staff with our kids every day.  Surely we can trust them to also be armed so they can competently defend our kids.  So nice to see Obama finally express a willingness to talk about solutions that will actually work.  It is about time.

Oh, wait … do you mean to say Obama didn’t meant we should do the obvious, logical thing and arms the teachers and the staff, who are already vetted, trusted caretakers?  You mean to say he is talking about the exact opposite –  more victim disarmament as the solution?   That he STILL doesn’t trust the teachers and staff with guns, and he still wants them to be unarmed, and unable to defend the children?  And he wants to pile on even more restrictions on the right of the people to defend themselves?  No, say it isn’t so!   [Sarcasm off]

6 thoughts on “Oathkeepers nail it: Fed gov is complicit.”
  1. Agree 100%. Secure carbines in lock boxes at strategic locations around the campus, giving trained volunteer teachers and staff keys to the lock boxes. Keep clearly identifiable Level IV vests with the carbines, to protect the staff and identify them to responding police.

    May not keep all victims from dying, but it would lower the body count by orders of magnitude, and frighten off many wannabe monsters who prey on victim disarmament zones.

  2. When a lunatic has decided to arm himself and go to a public place to kill as many people as possible, I would say that you’ve reached your last resort scenario. And you that want to be free FROM guns will be “disarmed” and a “victim”, not by my labeling but from the lunatic that preys on you.

  3. That’s the beauty of America, Ken. You can live wherever you want and choose not to own guns.

    Nobody is forcing you to own guns.

    However, if you choose not to own a gun, then you get to enjoy the consequences of that decision.

    As a resident of Westville, IL, I’d say you might be happier living either in Chicago with its relatively strict gun bans or perhaps to Mexico with its near total prohibition of private gun ownership.

    Of course, the crime rate in those respective gun control utopias is Way, WAY higher than it is here.


  4. More guns equals less crime, but they have to be available to be used. Seat belts, air bags, fire extinqushers, all save lives, only if they are used. Safety comes first, not last. Police are not there to protect you, but to write reports and investigate crime. Gun free zones have been killing fields for many years. Not the guns fault, but the people who use them.

  5. I am a teacher and a strong supporter of what the Oath Keepers stand for. I also own a lot of EBRs and understand why I have and need them. However i have to agree that having armed teachers and for that matter police is a bad idea on most school grounds except in heavy crime and gang infested areas. However, now that we have repeatedly made it clear our schools are vulnerable those that wish to do us harm will have free reign. i have studied Beslan(sic/) Russia as has the local SO in charge of the SWAT team who we drill with once a year in school shootings. The day that terrorists figure out how vulnerable our schools are especially in rural America and God forbid bus routes it is on. Then we will most likely have to adopt the Israeli response to threats of violence.
    We are over run by violent personalty types wether they are gang bangers, 1% motor cycle clubs, the growing paramilitary drug culture and the violent mentally ill.

  6. Ken,
    I can appreciate and respect your questions. Allow me to respond in kind. First, let me ask you what benefit are your fire alarms and extinguishers in your home? Are you guaranteed that should you have a fire they would notify you in time and allow you to extinguish it before serious harm came to your property of family? I would say not. But they do increase your odds of reducing the amount of damage and harm done and possibly negating it completely. They are safety tools. Just as a firearm is a safety tool (of last resort). It’s one of those things that it’s better to have and know how to use it correctly and not need it than to need it and not have it or know how to use it properly.

    Violence happens. Been happening since Cane slew Able. Fires happen too. A lot more often than school shootings. Being prepared to deal with the situation can be nothing but a good thing. Would you tolerate having schools where if a fire broke out in your classroom the policy was to lock yourself in that room with no alarm or extinguisher and hope and pray somebody finds you before you were killed by the flames and/or smoke?

    In answer to your second point, those restrictions you speak of are not just for violent people because the government cannot know the hearts and minds of every person in America. Those restrictions will be placed upon all people regardless of their mental state “for the safety and benefit of everyone”. All it will accomplish is further victimization of good people because bad people do not follow rules and will not obey those laws and restrictions. Armed and dangerous people are a much higher deterrent to people who would entertain such evil thoughts than laws that cannot be forced upon them to comply. Evil does not fear the consequences. It only fears resistance and failure.

    The United States did not pass a bunch of laws to deter Russia from attacking us all of these years. It built a nuclear arsenal to deter then from attacking. The Russians knew it and mutual assured destruction has kept the peace ever since. Bad and evil people are the same and only their potential assured (or preemptive) death truly has any chance of keeping them at bay.

Comments are closed.