© 2007 Michael Swickard, Ph.D.
“Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it.” – Old West saying
The very people in Congress who pass laws to keep us from using guns to protect ourselves are themselves well protected by guns while in Congress. If attacked, they immediately have a gun for defense. But many of them do not want you to have a gun for your defense.
Are we safer if only the police and criminals have guns, or should citizens have guns? Take the August 2005 case of 46 year-old Joyce Cordova in
At about 5:30 p.m. while she was working at a Wal-Mart deli, he came into the store, grabbed a knife and started attacking her. The police were called. The first unit arrived in 10 minutes. Not surprisingly, the fracas was already over. Can you visualize the crime scene?
But there was a surprise ending. When police officers arrived they found a dead attacker and Ms. Cordova injured but not dead. How could this be?
A 72 year-old man was shopping in that department when Vigil ran in and started attacking his ex-wife. This inadvertent witness correctly assessed that any time spent doing anything but saving her life would allow her to be killed.
He had a conceal carry permit and was armed with a pistol, so he stepped up and killed Vigil to save Cordova’s life. Critics wanted this man charged with murder for killing a potential murderer in act of attempting to murder someone. Unable to get him charged with that, critics said he should have fired warning shots and then shot to disarm or distract Vigil rather than to kill him.
What did Cordova think? She was happy he was there and knew that without his quick thinking and actions she would have been murdered.
Saving lives
Perhaps if this same 72-year-old man had been at Virginia Tech, sitting in a classroom during that attack, the assailant would have been prevented from killing all those people. But he could not be there legally since Virginia Tech would not allow his conceal carry license and gun. Are we really safer with our citizens having no effective defense of themselves?
Do we die happy because the same government that cannot protect us spends millions of dollars trying the criminals and housing them after conviction?
The bottom line is that if some Americans want to leave their doors unlocked, it is their business. But when they insist that I sleep behind an unlocked door, then I have a problem. The U.S. Constitution values our safety above all else.
Fundamentally, guns are important because of the size and experience differential between victims and victimizers. Further, many criminals use pain-threshold altering drugs to the point that those self-defense kicks and punches will cause the attacker to say “Ouch!” the next day, but not during the attack.
There are five different populations of people you may have a hassle with in the streets. The first are just obnoxious intruders. A curt word is usually enough to send them away. Second, there are parasites that try to lift your possessions but can be caught and held by 80 year-old women. Third, there are possession predators who specialize in robbery. They try to not hurt you. Fourth, there are people predators who kill quickly and with no remorse. You have to shoot them or die. Finally, what has gotten our attention are the crazies out there like the Virginia Tech shooter. He never thought someone would shoot back while he was just shooting fish in a barrel.
We never know which of the above will threaten us. Some of the threats are rather inconsequential. But other threats have to be dealt with in seconds, not the minutes it takes for the police to arrive. If you do not want to participate in your defense, fine. But do not take my ability to survive away from me.
You must be allowed to defend yourself
I mean no disrespect for members of law enforcement. I just know that officers cannot foresee our need and so they will routinely be minutes away when we only have seconds. This is not their fault; it just points out that if we are to survive, we must have the tools to do so.
The framers of our Constitution would be very surprised at the notion some of our leaders have that death by assailant is preferable to citizens being able to protect themselves. If you want all of these shootings to stop, put guns in the hands of citizens. The criminals already have guns.
One night a monster may be kicking your door down as you stand with your wife and kids trembling behind you knowing the police will not arrive in time. You are not required by law to defend yourself, but no one should be able to tell you that you cannot.
Swickard is a weekly columnist for this site. You can reach him at michael@swickard.com.