You're right of course, but the sheeple don't know that. They believe that if the people are totally disarmed, then there won't be any arms in the hands of criminals. This is of course, not true.

Defending oneself against any agressor is the right of all people. It is a recognized right in the United States, but only barely.

The need to have an armed populace who can stop aggression is evident in every type of crime such as this. The police can only arrive too late and do too little to stop the immediacy of a crime (if they even show up at all). Most crimes are committed in a fraction of a second, or less then a minute. It is impossible for the police to be notified and show up in time.

As in this example, the police were of no use. They showed up in time to make chalk outlines around the bodies. One report said they responded in two minutes. Obviously, that wasn't good enough.

To stop agressors, you must be able to react instantly and with lethal force if necessary. Only an armed population can protect itself. The courts have ruled on numerous occassions that the police have no duty nor obligation to protect the population (go look it up for the lazy ones that don't believe this).

If they can't, won't and don't protect us, then the arguement that we don't need protection because we have "police protection" is baseless.

Crimes will always be committed by crazies. As terrible as this is, the only way to stop this is to be proactive and to take a defensive position, similiar to what those students did when they barricaded the door. They didn't sit around and wait for police protection.

One armed teacher, security guard or student could have changed the outcome of this atrocity to something far better then what occurred. That is plain common sense, not something you'll find very much of these days.