Late last week, while I was at work, I heard a co-worker say, about the Virginia Tech shootings, “I think we do need to have the gun control argument again. This sort of thing doesn’t happen in countries where guns are outlawed.” Considering that I’ve learned that political debates should stay out of the workplace (people get angry, which is not good for a workplace environment), I opted to keep my mouth shut, though I told myself that I’d write a post about it later to get it out of my system.

Of course, as tends to happen, I discovered that the post had already been written, and been written better than I could have done, in several places. One of which is, of course, on the blog of Connie du Toit:

The person who is willing to murder someone has already crossed the line. The person wanting to murder someone is already planning to break the most critical of all laws: Murder. But somehow the criminal will think, “Ohhhhhhh, guns are illegal. Guess I can’t murder anyone then and I’ll have a V-8.”

Shall we make murder illegal again? Write it down twice (or three times) or write the law in gold ink, clicking our heels together three times while passing it, and then people will stop committing murder?

I really don’t understand how anyone can think that someone would go through the thought process that making the purchase of a gun illegal will stop someone from doing something already illegal (regardless of weapon choice) with a gun. It makes no sense at all.

…

Guns are illegal in Japan, yet the Mayor of Nagasaki was shot and killed yesterday, with a gun. Folks need to think that through. Guns were illegal, but somehow, someone got a gun. How’d that happen if guns were illegal? How’d that happen in an island country where people can’t own guns?

PEOPLE BREAK LAWS.

Let me say this again, just in case it isn’t really understood: No matter what laws you pass, no matter how many pounds of fairy dust you sprinkle on the earth, no matter how many pennies you throw in wishing wells, or offerings you make to the Gods, YOU CANNOT MAKE GUNS GO AWAY.

Guns are here to stay, just as there will always be clubs, knives, and swords.

Criminals do not obey the law. You’d think that was apparent in the use of the word “criminal” but some folks just don’t seem to allow that to sink in.

They’re C-R-I-M-I-N-A-L-S. Criminals break laws. Criminals will be able to get guns (or other weapons) no matter how many laws you pass. No matter how many hurdles you put in place to prevent law-abiding people from buying guns, or even the complete eradication of all laws which allow their possession (as in Japan), criminals will always be able to get a gun… or a knife… or gasoline to make a Molotov cocktail… or a kitchen knife… or a club… or a shovel.

The possession of a gun isn’t like the chemical compound in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. A hunk of forged metal in someone’s hand doesn’t turn an ordinary person into a lunatic. They were a lunatic BEFORE they had the gun in their hand.

As always, the whole post is worth reading (as is her Fax to her Congresspersons).

I really do understand why some people believe that the proper response to incidents like the Virginia Tech shooting is to ban guns (or, since it was, as I understand it, already illegal to have guns on campus, to ban them harder), but I think that ultimately, that desire is misguided. In the wild, predators don’t tend to go after the prey that will fight back if they have a choice. The best way to defend ourselves against criminals like Cho Seung-Hui is to give responsible, law-abiding citizens the means to fight back (if they so choose — I’m not advocating forcing guns on anyone who doesn’t want to use them), not to continue to strip them of those means.