Columbine survivor comes out against Obama’s gun control

- February 22nd, 2013

The gun control debate in the United States is not going away. I’ve added my two cents here and here but my views hardly carry as much weight as those of Evan M. Todd.

Todd is a survivor of Columbine. In the video below he describes being stopped my the two murderous thugs that patrolled the hallways of his high school looking for people to kill. His life was spared even though the lives of friends and classmates were lost.

Conventional wisdom would say that Mr. Todd would be in favour of gun control. He’s not.

Here is a portion of his letter to President Barack Obama.

Mr. President, in theory, your initiatives and proposals sound warm and fuzzy — but in reality they are far from what we need. Your initiatives seem to punish law-abiding American citizens and enable the murderers, thugs, and other lowlifes who wish to do harm to others.

Let me be clear: These ideas are the worst possible initiatives if you seriously care about saving lives and also upholding your oath of office. There is no dictate, law, or regulation that will stop bad things from happening — and you know that. Yet you continue to push the rhetoric. Why?

Here is Todd appearing on TheBlaze with Glenn Beck

Here is Todd appearing on Fox with Greta Van Susteren


Categories: Politics

Subscribe to the post

7 comments

  1. Sam says:

    So misguided as to be tragic. This obsession Americans have with their right to own weapons that can kill dozens of people in seconds is frightening.

    The collateral damage to ‘law abiding citizens’ who would no longer be able to own AK47′s or whatever other over-powered weapon of mass destruction they can pick up at the local Walmart is preferable to the all to frequent alternative.

  2. Percival says:

    I’m not really sure that a survivor telling a story constitutes ‘debate’. It’s a personal opinion – based on a personal story. The United States has a big elephant. He makes the same arguments that have been made a hundred times before, namely that gun control doesn’t keep guns out of the hands of criminals, it keeps them out of the hands of the general public.

    I’m sorry – but that’s not debate – it’s simply restating your opinion.

    If you want to answer the question “Does gun control work”, that is if you want to have an honest debate on the issue, you can’t simply find someone who agrees with you and who has some authority (or at least some public cache), and ask them. If that were true, it wouldn’t be hard to find a Columbine survivor who said the opposite, then you would have to conclude gun control both works and doesn’t.

    What you really need to do is look at data, all the relevant data – ask the experts, all the experts and do an analysis. It’s not the sort of thoughful considerdation you get on the internet.

  3. Brian Lilley says:

    Well Percival, Professor John Lott has looked at the relevant data. He published it in his book More Guns, Less Crime.
    Lott has examined the gun laws and the effectiveness of gun control. I suspect that you won’t like the result but if you have an open mind then watch the video below. Or read his book.
    Lott has taught at Yale, Chicago and Wharton.

    http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/featured/prime-time/867432237001/gun-hysteria/2072073694001

  4. Percival says:

    Yes but what about other professors? I’m pretty certain the there isn’t a sole authority on gun control.

  5. Percival says:

    Sorry, I just walked the video. I find it kind of offensive that you simply say “I suspect that you won’t like the result …”. I’m not sure why you would be so disrespectful. I’ll chalk that up to the nature of text versus speech, and apologize if you didn’t intend to be disrespectful.

    I will read his book – but, I would enjoy continuing this debate, if you’re open.

  6. John says:

    What is the true path of least resistance as viewed by the eyes of criminal and warlike behavior?

    Presently a non gun owner and advocate to a non violent society, like 99% out there in Canada I respect those in our history who gave their lives and those today defending the right to enforce resistance toward gun owners who would do harm. I agree the time has come for change although the change may not be as you expect.

    Is war the only unquestionable acceptable gun behavior where people draw the line? Where we wake up each day in the western world knowing the conflicts and still going out there collecting our daily bread without a whim. Today politicians around the world wage war in a criminal fashion and declare the exclusive right to do so. They don’t look for the path of least resistance, only lines on maps that move from side to side. They claim to do this for our benefit and that they hold the trust of the majority. I was never asked to be the beneficiary of the deaths of thousands. It got done.

    In Canada these same leaders who are voted into power make the same claim on us notwithstanding the fact that criminals are overrunning the streets. Media spin doctors are paid to loosely use the terms “war on crime” to soften the hardcore fact that criminals use the path of least resistance when committing gun crimes.

    Should murder be ruled out? Murder is murder and a car, knife, baseball bat or gun… well it just got done.

    Criminals disable their victims by any means possible by using a greater force. A criminal victim by definition is a disabled person and a dependent.
    A person who cannot defend an attacker by any means necessary.

    This brings to question what I’ve been asking myself for the last 40+ years. Who in their right mind allowed the Canadian government to disarm the public? Was it a criminal act on their part? Public idiocy is not. How could the government allow this to happen? On the surface it may look premeditated. Was it realized back in the day that future decisions made by the few may escalate to the extent of civil unrest that public disarmament is required? Has gun ownership transformed from a right (non-disabled) to a dependency privilege?

    I applaud the citizens of the USA who cherish individuality and the right to self appointment and determination to protect theirs and their loved ones. To those who believe in doing good by helping the less fortunate and protecting the non gun owners.

    To those who would cast down these rights… shame on you. I’d say it’s a tad bit criminal on your behalf and I’ll be dammed if your allowed to hold my life and liberty in your hands. But that’s exactly what I’m doing by not owning a gun regardless of your trust law of registration.

    I say every able Canadian turning 18 must undergo firearms training. Raising community safety above and beyond personal affiliations… criminal or non. Nobody should be forced to carry a gun and I hope that day never comes when…

  7. C Broad Arrow says:

    A spark of light and a ray of sunshine. Finally a thinking man! Bravo!

Comments are closed.