I know the timing is a bit insensitive, and it will probably piss off some folks for me to go there right now, but dwelling on the tragic mass shooting today at Fort Hood, in which 12 have been killed and 31 injured, I couldn’t help but think about the debate that raged in the comment threads here and elsewhere after the Virginia Tech shootings.
There was an argument at the time, strongly made by gun rights advocates, that the death toll at Virginia Tech could have been dramatically lessened, or even averted, had faculty and students been likewise armed. Virginia Tech, like many schools, was a gun-free zone, and that, gun control critics argued, made the shooter’s defenseless victims less safe.
Fort Hood, on the other hand, is most definitely not a gun free zone. In fact, I’m pretty sure that military bases are filled with men and women who carry arms, and are highly trained in the skills to use them.
And yet… 12 dead, 31 injured before the shooter was finally taken down.
I’m not saying that the Fort Hood and Virginia Tech tragedies make an argument one way or another for gun free zones. Rather, I’m saying the exact opposite.