WHAT'S WITH THESE RIGHT-WING DOUCHEBAGS?

Whenever I hear about tragedies like the Virginia Tech shooting, something in my brain forces me to think about what the attack must've been like for victims. On Tuesday morning, after hearing preliminary details, I automatically found myself thinking about groggy college students attending Monday morning classes, and wondered how it would have felt to come face-to-face with an attacker brandishing two handguns?

I wondered how the shooting took place? Did he enter classrooms and shoot from the doorway? Did he approach victims one by one? Did he ever reload his weapons in front of his victims? I know it sounds morbid, but there's something inside of me that finds myself thinking about what I would do in a moment of sheer panic like this.

However, one thing I would NEVER do is question the actions of those who actually dealt with these circumstances. After all, what these kids (and teachers) went through is nothing short of a living nightmare, and only the victims know the circumstances that allowed this deranged man to kill 30+ people during his rampage. However, this inability to second-guess people apparently lessens my chances of ever becoming a right-wing journalist.

You see on Tuesday morning at 11AM, roughly 24 hours after the tragedies took place, John Derbyshire of the National Review wrote this blog entry:

As NRO's designated chickenhawk, let me be the one to ask: Where was the spirit of self-defense here? Setting aside the ludicrous campus ban on licensed conceals, why didn't anyone rush the guy? It's not like this was Rambo, hosing the place down with automatic weapons. He had two handguns for goodness' sake—one of them reportedly a .22.

At the very least, count the shots and jump him reloading or changing hands. Better yet, just jump him. Handguns aren't very accurate, even at close range. I shoot mine all the time at the range, and I still can't hit squat. I doubt this guy was any better than I am. And even if hit, a .22 needs to find something important to do real damage—your chances aren't bad.

Yes, yes, I know it's easy to say these things: but didn't the heroes of Flight 93 teach us anything? As the cliche goes—and like most cliches. It's true—none of us knows what he'd do in a dire situation like that. I hope, however, that if I thought I was going to die anyway, I'd at least take a run at the guy.

Does he really expect people who are being SHOT AT to "count the shots" in order to time their "jumping" of the attacker? Does he also think its plausible for the victims to visually identify one of the two handguns as a .22 caliber and inherently know that the bullets "need to find something important to do real damage"? In case you're wondering, here's photos of THE ACTUAL guns used by the shooter:
Can you immediately spot the .22? Could you do it if the man holding them were shooting at you? My guess is that Mr. Derbyshire couldn't either. (Note: The gun on the right is the .22)

However if one idiot wasn't enough, later that day the National Review article was echoed by another conservative voice. This time it was college right-wing journalist Nathanael Blake from Human Events who, after referencing Derbyshire's entry, wrote this:

Well, there was one who seems to have actively resisted instead of just ducking and barricading doors. "Professor Liviu Librescu, 76, threw himself in front of the shooter when the man attempted to enter his classroom. The Israeli mechanics and engineering lecturer was shot to death, "but all the students lived - because of him," Virginia Tech student Asael Arad - also an Israeli - told Army Radio."

College classrooms have scads of young men who are at their physical peak, and none of them seems to have done anything beyond ducking, running, and holding doors shut. Meanwhile, an old man hurled his body at the shooter to save others.

Something is clearly wrong with the men in our culture. Among the first rules of manliness are fighting bad guys and protecting others: in a word, courage. And not a one of the healthy young fellows in the classrooms seems to have done that.

When Kip Kinkle opened fire in Thurston High School a few years back, he was taken down by students, led by one who was already wounded. Why didn’t that happen here?

Like Derb, I don’t know if I would live up to this myself, but I know that I should be heartily ashamed of myself if I didn’t. Am I noble, courageous and self-sacrificing? I don’t know; but I should hope to be so when necessary.

Wow! After reading the first entry, I didn't think there was any way to further insult the victims of a tragedy like this, but I stand corrected. This Monday Morning Quarterback even has the nerve to imply that those who didn't leap at the attacker should be "heartily ashamed" of themselves. Who the hell raised this kid? And if he's so friggin' "brave", why not ship his ass off to Iraq? Does anyone have a conscience anymore?

However, what I find most disturbing is how both of these morons feel compelled to end their entries. They're not happy with simply dragging these survivors through the mud for their lack of valor, but they also have the balls to imply that their actions in similar circumstances would somehow be different.

Which made me think, "So just what do these "superheros" look like?"

John "Captain Weakchin" Derbyshire

Nathaniel "C. Everett Koop Beard" Blake

Now is it just me, or do these two look like the type of guys who'd dress up like women in order to escape the Titanic? I thought so.