Not mine though, but Pierre Lemieux's, can be found here. This great article summarizes the issue quite well, and brings a refreshing point of view on the misplaced gun control debate. Extract :
In Blacksburg today, the tragic spectacle of tens, if not hundreds, of heavily armed policemen, with at least one armoured vehicle, all powerless to prevent a single gunman from killing and maiming more than 30 people reminds us of a dire fact: it is impossible to be totally protected against madmen, except by turning society into a convent or a jail.
One question needs to be asked, though. What if a student or a professor had been armed today at Virginia Tech? This possibility was very remote since guns are illegal on the Virginia Tech campus, and non-criminals usually try not to become criminals. At Dawson, what if the security guard who, we are told, helped some students flee and was not far from the killer had been armed? In all these tragic events, how many students wished, before dying, that they had a gun?
Those who call for increased gun controls should ask themselves whether their motives are rational or emotional. If they're rational, then the answer is simple : just think about it real hard for a couple of hours and you should deliver yourself from these fallacies.
If it's emotional (and I suspect it is for the vast majority), then simply read over again, and again, the last sentence from the previous extract. I'll restate it here, just in case :
In all these tragic events, how many students wished, before dying, that they had a gun?
I think this says it all.