Monday, October 25, 2010

Colin Goddard on Oprah

Laci mentioned the Colin Goddard appearance on Oprah and included this quote from the young man.

I will always believe I was in the right place at the right time in class at 9:00 am. And despite the horror, I survived as one of the luckier ones.
For the 32 Hokies who were lost that day, and for the 32 Americans who are lost everyday to gun murders, I’ve decided to devote this time in my life to making a difference, so their memories might be honored and the damage to our society lessened.
Many people say we can’t or shouldn’t improve the gun laws in this country. I’m part of the next generation, I reject that premise, and I say we can and should do better.
What's your opinion? Why would the pro-gun folks talk so badly against him? He seems intelligent and just the perfect example of common sense.

Please leave a comment.


  1. "Why would the pro-gun folks talk so badly against him? He seems intelligent and just the perfect example of common sense."

    So a criminal gun trafficker that makes illegal gun purchases and straw purchases is a perfect example of common sense? I'll have to remember that.

  2. The reason gunloons attack him is because he doesn't adhere to their viewpoint. Even worse, he's effective because he's actually been involved in a real-life horrific instance of gun violence.

    These two factors make him History's Greatest Monster in their eyes.

  3. Or how about the fact that he's just a useful idiot for the Bradys.
    Wouldn't the enforcment of the "gun-free" zone have done more to prevent the shooting?
    I'm sure it would do more than closing the Private sale "loophole".

  4. Kevin H: Here's the problem.

    If you assert he's a "useful tool" for the Bradys--you're suggesting he's just in it for the money and fame or whatever.

    But isn't it true that if he came out and said, "Gee, I really wish I had an assault weapon at Va tech..I could have stopped the whole massacre."--he'd stand to gain much more from the NRA?

  5. I think "useful idiot for the Bradys" IS an appropriate description here. He was injured in an act of criminal gun violence having absolutely nothing to do with the so-called "Gun Show Loophole," the closure of which he is advocating. He isn't using his personal experiences for his own crusade to make "gun free zones" like schools actually function the way they claim, restrict and/or ban handguns or even try to reform the NICS system that allowed a sale to someone with mental health issues; if he was, I wouldn't necessarily agree with him, but I could respect him as a man of his convictions, not a duped pawn for the antis like he is. However, all he is doing is allowing the Brady Campaign to use him in his celebrity status as a VA Tech shooting survivor to play the sympathy card in their crusade against the alleged "Gun Show Loophole." This pattern is frequently seen in the anti-gun community; the Brady Bunch finds a sympathetic individual somehow connected to gun violence, reinforces their belief that "guns are bad, m'kay," and then convinces them that closing the fictitious "Gun Show Loophole," or banning "assault weapons," or whatever else the cause du jour might be is the answer to making sure no one else has to experience whatever it was that they did. Just look at Japete's blog; her sister's murder had absolutely nothing to do with the so-called "Gun Show Loophole" either, yet that is the primary focus of the "common sense" gun control laws that she advocates for. There's absolutely no connection in either case, but they both have celebrity victim status, so the Brady Bunch will continue to use them as "useful idiots" whenever they need to play the sympathy card. Since the Brady position lacks demonstrable, unbiased factual support, they need to attach all the emotional baggage that they can get to the issue of gun control.

  6. Gosh, Colin, why is it gun violence victims tend, overwhelmingly, toward being "useful idiots" as opposed to knowledgeable gunloons such as yourself who hasn't experience gun violence outside of a Nintendo game?

  7. Once again, you open your mouth and insert your foot, Guy. I'm an Iraq war vet with 25 months in a combat zone; I've seen the elephant so to speak. What are your qualifications? Certainly not anything pertaining to English grammar either, as evidenced by your last post.

    I can definitely understand why some individuals that have been affected by gun violence choose to advocate for gun control, but that doesn't mean I agree with their position or the conclusions that led them there. I also don't see much honor in them serving as poster children for issues that don't apply to their personal cases, because I would personally hate to be misled and/or told to think by someone else like that. Conversely, many people have been victims of gun violence and have decided that they would rather advocate for everyone to be able to adequately defend themselve; see the case of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp, whose parents were killed in front of her at the Luby's massacre in Killeen, TX.

  8. You've seen the elephant? Have you the thousand yard stare? Are you short? A hundred days and a wakeup?

    I'm sure I could come up with more cliches.

    But once more, you are trying to portray the YooEssAy with a war zone. There's no comparison. They are different things altogether. Moreover, Hupp does not know that she could have stopped the gun man.

  9. You probably could come up with more cliches, Guy; coming up with random BS is kind of your specialty from what I've seen. You still wouldn't have enough substance to disguise the fact that you didn't answer my question. Have you ever served? If not, I'd ask that you keep your disparaging comments to yourself; you're just offending those of us who have, and embarrassing yourself to boot. Besides, you're all talk and bluster, and you're just left looking like a stammering idiot when your "gun violence experience solely through the Nintendo" is shown to be patently false. Why don't you just man up and admit that you were wrong for once?

    Anyways, gun violence is gun violence, and my point was that I've seen firsthand the effects of evil men with guns--it doesn't really matter where, although I'm quite aware that there's a difference between Iraq and the US--and not just from a Nintendo game.

    To address your last point, no one is ever "sure" that they can stop a criminal from hurting someone by going armed in public; on the blog Mike posts plenty of stories about even the police being shot by criminals. However, that doesn't mean we should be forced by the government to cower in a room and wait for the cavalry or for the shooter to end his life (like in the VA Tech shooting). YOU may CHOOSE to make such a choice for yourself, but I prefer at least an illusion of being in control of my own destiny. It's part of what makes the "YooEssAy" such a great place to live.

  10. Well, Colin, given I attended and graduated from one of the YooEssAy's Federal Military Academies--I'm somewhat familiar with the military.

    BTW, I'm never wrong--it's a gift.

    The fact is you can't distinguish between combat and crime is troubling. Since you're obviously the greatest military figure since Chesty Puller surely you understand combat is purely offensive; the idea is to amass superior firepower--quickly--in order to overwhelm an enemy. OTOH, in the civilian world, such displays are usually counterproductive.

  11. BTW, Colin, your mon and dad paid for my education so be sure to thank them for me.

  12. Well, don't sit too high on your horse there, Guy, because that makes two of us, although I'm ashamed to admit to an association with you, even one as tenuous as this is. Your argumentative skills leave so much to be desired that I really hope you don't represent my alma mater. I don't think you do, because judging by the fact that you (a) referenced a Marine, and (b) live in Maryland, I suspect that you're a USNA grad. That being said, at least we finally got a straight answer from you; maybe there's hope for you yet.

    Never have I claimed to be God's gift to land warfare, and once again you missed my point entirely. I understand the difference between warfare and civilian violence; I was merely debunking your claim that I was a so-called "CounterStrike kiddie." Once again you use snide remarks and innuendo rather than furthering the discussion in an adult fashion.

  13. You paid for my eduction, so what's your point?

  14. Jade: “Moreover, Hupp does not know that she could have stopped the gun man.”

    But closing the “gun show loophole” would have stopped Cho?

  15. Goddard never says background checks would have prevented VA Tech, as far as I know.

    What he does say is requiring background checks on gun purchases is a good thing.

    What's wrong with that?

  16. Well, MikeB, his message isn't what you initially asked about.
    Still, he (and by extention, the Bradys) should come clean and stop lying about the Private Sale "Loophole" that may or may not take place at a Gun Show.

  17. Mike, I have a problem with what Colin Goddard is doing, but not because of the usual cry of “Cho had nothing to do with gun shows”. It is all one big stinking pile of gun control, and those in favor tend to stick to the same talking points and concentrate of whatever they think they can pass in legislation. My point was the irony of Jade saying “Hupp does not know that she could have stopped the gun man”.

  18. Sorry, TS, what you consider a stinking pile of the same old gun control, to us makes good sense.

    Background checks on private sales comes first. What should logically follow is registration and licensing.

    If you're a law-abiding citizen, why would you object? These measures would make a bit difference. You'd be inconvenienced, that's true, but wouldn't it be worth it?

  19. MikeB: “If you're a law-abiding citizen, why would you object? These measures would make a bit difference. You'd be inconvenienced, that's true, but wouldn't it be worth it?”

    Ok, show me the worth. I’m already inconvenienced. I live in CA and go though the waiting, the hundreds of dollars in transfer costs, and registration. Now show me that bit of difference. Then it would make sense to me as well.