Shooting at Virginia Tech - Page 4

[Infarction]

On the gun issue that seems to be the flotation device of this thread, I think they should make bullets extremely exspensive for firearms used for other than hunting i.e. handguns, semi-auto handguns/rifles, and of course fully automatic firearms. Atleast that way anyone looking to harm of this nature (god forbid, it NEVER happens on this scale again) would have a lot harder time trying to conceal a hunting rifle.

Aside from the people who have legitimate uses for ammo, that idea is almost workable. The only problem is ammo sizes where a rifle and a pistol use the same size. A .22 comes to mind, though I'm sure there are many others.

[edit:] And another thought: people can still roll their own when it comes to ammo. Reloading equipment runs at a couple hundred bucks IIRC, but it's even cheaper in the long run (again, for legitimate uses... else there wouldn't be much of a long run)

[jbennet]

Wont work as a .22 for example is used in both revolvers and hunting rifles. And whats to say someone doesnt buy some 7.62 for hunting purpouses and then load a machine gun with it?

[Mattethington]

Wont work as a .22 for example is used in both revolvers and hunting rifles. And whats to say someone doesnt buy some 7.62 for hunting purpouses and then load a machine gun with it?

Excellent point, I guess that rules that out.:-/

[dcc]

but apparently they didn't catch it in time or didn't try hard enough.

I think its the latter. /QUOTE]

They did what they could to the letter of the law. Without someone pressing charges against him for the stalking there was no legal action that would have applied to him. These laws that protect us can also work against us. There's that paradox agian.

[Serunson]

now they say that the shooter had a 'history' of mental health problems.
Why wasnt this guy kept under survalence or summit?

[jwenting]

Christina, guns were already illegal at that university.
In fact the spokesman responded to the signing of the bill that bans guns from schools last year that it will make universities a lot safer for everyone.

A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly.

House Bill 1572 didn’t get through the House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety. It died Monday in the subcommittee stage, the first of several hurdles bills must overcome before becoming laws.

The bill was proposed by Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah County, on behalf of the Virginia Citizens Defense League. Gilbert was unavailable Monday and spokesman Gary Frink would not comment on the bill’s defeat other than to say the issue was dead for this General Assembly session.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. “I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.”

from: http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658

Had even one of the people near that killer had a gun things would have gone quite differently...

People who want to harm others will always find a way.
Guns have been outlawed here since before WW2, yet there are dozens of guncrimes each year in a country smaller than Rhode Island.
Same all over Europe. Guns are easy to get, if you get into the black market (or so I hear, I've not tried to get one). Borders are porous, and with none of your victims carrying you're God if you have a gun as a criminal (and with the police afraid to use their guns for fear of being arrested if they hit someone and incapable of shooting straight through lack of practice there's nothing to fear from them either).

I don't think it would be a bad idea to ban some more-dangerous weapons, but making guns illegal altogether would be just silly.

And how would you define that? Here they declared toy waterpistols "dangerous weapons" if they look "too much" like real weapons, with the interpretation of "too much" up to the officer responding.
In fact last year an importer of toys was arrested for smuggling illegal weapons when he brought a shipment of plastic toy guns into the country.
He'd prudently asked a police officer first whether the design was legal, which was confirmed.
But the customs officer inspecting the shipment thought otherwise and issued a warrant for his arrest and had the toys confiscated for destruction.

Once you start declaring subcategories illegal as "too dangerous" that's what you in the end end up with.

[jwenting]

;)

But seriously...
This thread had much more meaning in it until he had to throw in his negative attitude. It's just sad.
I mean, sure, he's got some good points... but not everything in life is a debate.

Yours is the more negative attitude. You want to ban things you don't like, restrict the rights of people and control their lifes, put them at the mercy of whomever wants to harm them.

Because that's what banning posession of the means with which citizens can protect themselves inevitably leads to.

One of the first things a tyrany does is take away peoples' rights to their own lifes and property.
That's what the 2nd is meant to make impossible, the government taking away the means of the People to protect themselves from the government should that become necessary.

[christina>you]

Christina, guns were already illegal at that university.

Uhh, okay? What does that have anything to do with it?

[Serunson]

Actually they were legal! suprising as it was
they said on the news, and a cop said summit like "He was not breaking the law when he brought a conceled firearm onto the university grounds".
summit like that ~ totaly daft if u ask me

[christina>you]

Yours is the more negative attitude. You want to ban things you don't like, restrict the rights of people and control their lifes, put them at the mercy of whomever wants to harm them.

Because that's what banning posession of the means with which citizens can protect themselves inevitably leads to.

One of the first things a tyrany does is take away peoples' rights to their own lifes and property.
That's what the 2nd is meant to make impossible, the government taking away the means of the People to protect themselves from the government should that become necessary.

I have a negative attitude about it because this thread is about the "Shooting at Virginia Tech," hasn't anyone read the title? It's about the biggest massacre to ever take place in U.S. history. Haven't you watched "Bowling For Columbine?" - that would definitely make everyone here look ignorant.

If "banning things I don't like" means banning the ownership of guns because people's lives are at stake, then yes. I feel that way, and that's my opinion about it. If "controlling their lives" means controlling the amount of murders in this country, then yes. I also feel that way. And "put them at the mercy of whomever wants to harm them," that statement isn't even relevant. There wouldn't be as much fear if there was gun control or rather, no guns at all.

All I've heard in this thread is how it's people's rights and yadda yadda, 2nd amendment, blah blah blah. You know, of course people should have their rights but I think those students had a right to their LIFE. And to me, that is much more important than the right to own a gun.

I'm sure you'd feel the same way if you were in that classroom on 4/16/07 or if you were part of the victim's families. Think about how they must feel, how scared the students were. How incredible the amount of agony there must be in Blacksburg, right now. Put yourself in their shoes for once. It's not always about the 2nd Amendment.

I'm sorry if I sound mean. But, please just have some sympathy. This topic is too sensitive to put politics in it.

[christina>you]

Actually they were legal! suprising as it was
they said on the news, and a cop said summit like "He was not breaking the law when he brought a conceled firearm onto the university grounds".
summit like that ~ totaly daft if u ask me

Interesting.
So I guess jwenting was wrong... ?

[Serunson]

yeah or that BBC news is wrong
and also some copper is wrong

[jbennet]

I thaught concealing a weapon was always illegal in the US unless you had a permit?

on the bbc site it also says he didnt have a valid green card?

if he was illegal then how the hell did he get a gun?

[christina>you]

I thaught concealing a weapon was always illegal in the US unless you had a permit?

on the bbc site it also says he didnt have a valid green card?

if he was illegal then how the hell did he get a gun?

I think he did have a valid green card. I'm not so sure though. He couldn't have gotten a gun without it.

[Infarction]

I have a negative attitude about it because this thread is about the "Shooting at Virginia Tech," hasn't anyone read the title? It's about the biggest massacre to ever take place in U.S. history. Haven't you watched "Bowling For Columbine?" - that would definitely make everyone here look ignorant.

Haven't seen it. I've seen other productions by Moore and he's full of crap. Some of the parts from Bowling puts most comedians to shame.

If "banning things I don't like" means banning the ownership of guns because people's lives are at stake, then yes. I feel that way, and that's my opinion about it. If "controlling their lives" means controlling the amount of murders in this country, then yes. I also feel that way. And "put them at the mercy of whomever wants to harm them," that statement isn't even relevant. There wouldn't be as much fear if there was gun control or rather, no guns at all.

I was in a car accident about 3.5 months ago. T-boned on my driver door. I now am actually rather afraid when I'm driving. Using your logic, we should ban cars. Lives are at stake, and people are afraid. And I'm a lot more scared of traffic than I am of random gun incidents.

It's not always about the 2nd Amendment.

No, but an implication of allowing gun ownership is to allow people another methody by which to defend their right to life when someone does flip out.

[jbennet]

turns out he was admitted to a mental hospital

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6568781.stm

Heres his bio:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6564653.stm

It says "Cho had resident alien status, and had last renewed his green card in October 2003". Doesnt that mean he shouldnt of had a gun?

[christina>you]

Haven't seen it. I've seen other productions by Moore and he's full of crap. Some of the parts from Bowling puts most comedians to shame.

Huh? It's not a comedy.

I was in a car accident about 3.5 months ago. T-boned on my driver door. I now am actually rather afraid when I'm driving. Using your logic, we should ban cars. Lives are at stake, and people are afraid. And I'm a lot more scared of traffic than I am of random gun incidents.

Yeah, I'm not ignorant about car wrecks. My boyfriend was in a deadly car wreck because of a woman that didn't see him coming. His car and hers were both totalled... But hello?! - Was that on purpose? Of course not! But killing someone with a gun is! I wish people would stop comparing car accidents and mass shootings. That's why it says "accident."
The shooting at VT was not a "random gun incident."

No, but an implication of allowing gun ownership is to allow people another methody by which to defend their right to life when someone does flip out.

Why use a gun?

[jbennet]

Yeah, infacrtion. you said guns are for defence but let me ask you, where were the defence guns then eh?

[TheNNS]

going along with this, there was a bomb threat today at my school, and man did that freak us out!
We had to evacuate the building, and the cops came with dogs and everything. According to rumors it turns out that there wasn't a bomb, but at least we classes got canceled.

[jbennet]

for real?

[joshSCH]

I have a negative attitude about it because this thread is about the "Shooting at Virginia Tech," hasn't anyone read the title? It's about the biggest massacre to ever take place in U.S. history. Haven't you watched "Bowling For Columbine?" - that would definitely make everyone here look ignorant.

No one here is trying to take anything away from what happened.. We are simply trying to logically work out solutions.. and banning all guns is NOT a logical solution..

All I've heard in this thread is how it's people's rights and yadda yadda, 2nd amendment, blah blah blah. You know, of course people should have their rights but I think those students had a right to their LIFE. And to me, that is much more important than the right to own a gun.

The 2nd amendment is very important.. If the government can just nullify an amendment or ignore it.. then whos to say the whole bill of rights wont fly out the window? It's the fundamental idea that is important here.. The idea that we are American citizens, and we have rights.. These rights protect us from the government.
What has happened at VA Tech is a tragic accident. But the last thing we need is people overreacting.. Obviously, the gun control laws in the U.S. aren't working.. so what can we do to fix them? This should be the main focus here.. Innocent people have died, but there is nothing we can do about it. If we don't work on fixing the problem now, then even more people could die tomorrow.

[TheNNS]

yeah, it was scary, there were cops, fire trucks, even a news station. this week there's been more bomb threats and crap like that, than just these past few months.

['Stein]

Yea, it's really awful. After big school-related traumas, copycats try to follow on the wave. A classic example is all of the school shootings that occured after Columbine.

[christina>you]

No one here is trying to take anything away from what happened.. We are simply trying to logically work out solutions.. and banning all guns is NOT a logical solution..
The 2nd amendment is very important.. If the government can just nullify an amendment or ignore it.. then whos to say the whole bill of rights wont fly out the window? It's the fundamental idea that is important here.. The idea that we are American citizens, and we have rights.. These rights protect us from the government.
What has happened at VA Tech is a tragic accident. But the last thing we need is people overreacting.. Obviously, the gun control laws in the U.S. aren't working.. so what can we do to fix them? This should be the main focus here.. Innocent people have died, but there is nothing we can do about it. If we don't work on fixing the problem now, then even more people could die tomorrow.

Okay, then what is your magical solution?
I'm not overreacting. People don't realize how serious this really is. =/ I'm sorry, but this is not a "tragic accident.." the shooting could have very well been prevented with the right kind of control in this country. Accidents cannot be prevented.

[joshSCH]

Okay, then what is your magical solution?
I'm not overreacting. People don't realize how serious this really is. =/ I'm sorry, but this is not a "tragic accident.." the shooting could have very well been prevented with the right kind of control in this country.

I do realize how serious this is. However, I do not think we should just blame guns, as he could have easily used anything else... It was a freak accident... There was nothing we could have done to prevent it.. the killer just went berserk.. How can you defend some1 going crazy like that?

Accidents cannot be prevented.

precisely

[dcc]

christina>you...are you "for sure" you're not a bond? You ideas are idealistic...not practical.

joshSCH...I had hoped that I had helped you with the correction of the meaning of the second amendment, it is not "the right to bare arms".
I'm also curious as to your definition of "accident", massacre is a lot more accurate when describing this event.

[Duki]

I still don't see how people are using their common sense... I mean its one thing to be intellectual... it's another to be capable of utilizing your common sense.

If people had to use knives instead of guns to kill people the death toll would go down... duh. Come one people... stop trying to be so intelligent and think about what you're saying! Why do you NEED handguns? What the crap... I think this thread has turned into an ego issue rather than a sensible debate. You expect everyone in the world to be oh so open-minded when you're picking apart every post we make... take your own medicine for crying out loud. That's all i have to say about it... go ahead, post and bash my message. Prove me right.

[christina>you]

christina>you...are you "for sure" you're not a bond? You ideas are idealistic...not practical.

Whatever you say...
You should read Duki's post. ^

[christina>you]

I still don't see how people are using their common sense... I mean its one thing to be intellectual... it's another to be capable of utilizing your common sense.

If people had to use knives instead of guns to kill people the death toll would go down... duh. Come one people... stop trying to be so intelligent and think about what you're saying! Why do you NEED handguns? What the crap... I think this thread has turned into an ego issue rather than a sensible debate. You expect everyone in the world to be oh so open-minded when you're picking apart every post we make... take your own medicine for crying out loud. That's all i have to say about it... go ahead, post and bash my message. Prove me right.

Finally, someone who agrees with me.

[Duki]

christina>you...are you "for sure" you're not a bond? You ideas are idealistic...not practical.

joshSCH...I had hoped that I had helped you with the correction of the meaning of the second amendment, it is not "the right to bare arms".
I'm also curious as to your definition of "accident", massacre is a lot more accurate when describing this event.

read before you post please.

She said accidents can't be prevented response the guy who compared it to a car wreck. And why the personal insults... this isn't the place to make yourself look good by bashing others personally. kthx