[Update: Apparently the post title is attracting some traffic. Sorry, no pics of me with a bazooka in each hand or anything fun like that. Daddy bought me my first rifle, a Remington Model 514 bolt action .22 single shot, about 45 years ago and it's still in the closet right next to my blogging corner. In that 45 years my brother learned to use it, my sister learned to use it, and so far two nephews have learned to use it. In that time I've owned .22 and .380 semi-autos, a Ruger .357 Security Six revolver and a bolt action .243 Winchester varmint rifle. I've also been trained to government standards with a Smith and Wesson Combat Masterpiece and an M-16. I meant what I said.]

Another Police State Liberal Attempts to Subvert the Constitution
Confederate Yankee

The Second and Fourth Amendments?

Toss them out the window.

Now, how would one disarm the American population? First of all, federal or state laws would need to make it a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine and one year in prison per weapon to possess a firearm. The population would then be given three months to turn in their guns, without penalty.

Second Amendment? Just ignore that.

But Bill Clinton's former Ambassador to the Congo isn't done yet: now comes the police state. If this liberal has his way, kiss your Fourth Amendment search and seizure rights goodbye as well:

The disarmament process would begin after the initial three-month amnesty. Special squads of police would be formed and trained to carry out the work. Then, on a random basis to permit no advance warning, city blocks and stretches of suburban and rural areas would be cordoned off and searches carried out in every business, dwelling, and empty building. All firearms would be seized. The owners of weapons found in the searches would be prosecuted: $1,000 and one year in prison for each firearm.

Mr. Simpson's staggering suggestion to subvert the Bill of Rights is not the first we've heard in the past weeks, but coming from a former American diplomat who was presumably charged with acting within Constitutional bounds, it is among the most disturbing.

Perhaps Simpson doesn't see the obvious irony that the Founders created the Second Amendment not to ensure hunting, but to protect American citizens from men precisely like himself. ...

Below the fold (newest items at the top):

• Some VTech students findin’ it hard to stay mad at Cho
• Teaching a new doctrine in light of the Virginia Tech massacre
• Gun Grabber: Let’s turn America into a full-
  blown police state to get guns off the streets 
• Your Friendly, Gun-Free Police State

*** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***     *** ***

Some VTech students findin’ it hard to stay mad at Cho
Allahpundit

Aw. Maybe they can give him a cutesy nickname to help ease the feelings of alienation.

I suggest “Cho Cho.” ...

I suggest "Dumb Shit." Go read it if you're that interested.

***

Teaching a new doctrine in light of the Virginia Tech massacre
Marc Danziger

WASHINGTON (Map, News) - My oldest goes to college in Virginia. Fortunately, he is at the University of Virginia — not Virginia Tech — so when the news of the shooting broke, and I started getting concerned calls from friends, I had general anxiety, not the frightening and personal one I’m sure the parents of students at Blacksburg felt.

Afterward, I spoke with my sons about it — two are in college and one in fifth grade. I spent time reassuring the 10-year-old that he was more likely to be badly injured by bee stings than by something like this.

And as I watched the discussion unfold online about the tragedy and learned more about the events, a few have things have become clear to me.

Immediately after the murders, a left-right split developed as conservative commentators wondered why the students were apparently so passive in the face of the killer. Liberal pundits were aghast, arguing that this wasn’t necessarily true, it was “blaming the victim,” and claiming an unwarranted level of personal courage on the part of the conservatives.

But the facts as they have come in since then do support the notion that the students did not confront the murderer. The Associated Press carried this story yesterday: “Dr. William Massello, the assistant state medical examiner based in Roanoke, said Sunday that Cho died … after firing enough shots to wound his 32 victims more than 100 times. … Those victims apparently did not fight back against Cho’s ambush. Massello said he did not recall any injuries suggesting a struggle. Many victims had defensive wounds, indicating they tried to shield themselves from Cho’s gunfire,” he said.

And the Washington Post carried a story citing students who had been in the classrooms that were attacked. “I quickly dove under a desk,” Clay Violand, a Virginia Tech junior, told the Post. “That was the desk I chose to die under.” ...

The students didn’t fail to act correctly by not attacking their attacker. The doctrine they were operating under — the one we have trained them in all their lives — failed them. ...

***

Gun Grabber: Let’s turn America into a full-
blown police state to get guns off the streets
Bryan Preston

The V Tech tragedy should have been a mostly apolitical event: One lone nut with no obvious or even tentative connections to any larger criminal or political conspiracy went off and killed a lot of people. To be sure, there are side issues that the tragedy does raise, from gun control to how we deal with the mentally ill and the like, but our fundamental rights as law-abiding citizens should not be at issue. Guns didn’t commit the crime, nor did stable, law-abiding citizens. One man’s heinous crime should not become the reason that 300 million Americans lose a fundamental Constitutional right. If anything, I would argue that Cho’s crime highlights the need to increase concealed carry permits. Countering his force with equal or greater force might have saved some lives.

Dan Simpson, a former ambassador writing in the Toledo Blade, doesn’t see it that way. At all. ...

[...]

Let’s form special police squads to invade every home in the United States and search them for guns. And while we’re at it, let’s have police stop-and-search people randomly on the streets, who haven’t done anything wrong, and lock ‘em up for exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. That’s beyond the pale on the invasive scale. Hand guns are small and easy to hide. To find them, every home in America would have to be torn apart nearly brick by brick. Every car, shed, basement, attic and air duct would have to be searched. Every yard, searched with metal detectors. And it’s laughable to think that even that would work. We’re a big country. There are a lot of place to hide guns. ...

***

Your Friendly, Gun-Free Police State
Ed Morrissey

Ever wonder how liberals would implement a gun-free America? After incidents like the mass murder at Virginia Tech, arguments for total gun control appear faster than anyone can say Ismail Ax, but they never quite explain how to get from point A to point Z. Fortunately for us, Toledo Blade columnist Dan Simpson takes us step by step through the process. The retired diplomat assures us that he's no "crazed liberal zealot" as he skips merrily down the path to a police state (via QandO).

It starts off quietly enough:

Now, how would one disarm the American population? First of all, federal or state laws would need to make it a crime punishable by a $1,000 fine and one year in prison per weapon to possess a firearm. The population would then be given three months to turn in their guns, without penalty.

One might think to start with a Constitutional amendment first. Simpson appears to have forgotten that pesky little 2nd Amendment -- you know, the one that the Founding Fathers thought so unimportant as to put it before unreasonable search and seizure.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. ...