http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/16/vte...ing/index.html
Just wrong. What a waste of life. :(
Printable View
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/16/vte...ing/index.html
Just wrong. What a waste of life. :(
My friend IMed me that earlier. I couldn't believe it. Can't wait to find out what caused this guy to blow a gasket.
Whatever his reason, it wasn't justified.
It never is. I was just curious what his particular flavor of insanity was.
what in the hell is this world coming to.
You would think the vast majority of people who don't own weapons would be getting very weary of this and demand change through their reps, sort of if you don't put gun control on your ballot, we ain't voting for ya...plain and simple would make all of those NRA donations sort of useless in the long run.I mean why back a losing horse...:drink:
Change will come about when this stuff happens to those who perpetuate the manufacturing and sales of said weapons, it was only 6 Mths ago that the Hamish came face to face with this..:fpissed:
Its a little early to jump on the political bandwagon isn't it Dalek? Jack Thompson is already manning that front anyway....
As for the incident one of the prevailing theories right now is that it stemmed from some kind of relationship meltdown or something similar. Of course that doesn't fully explain it since it would seem in such an instance dude would have just shot the ex, whomever she was currently with, then himself. The fact that he went around offing random people seems to point more towards and overall head problem rather than something specific which doesn't tend to become a random shooting spree.
This one surely will be interesting to see how it plays out in the following days and how they try to tie it into the upcoming anniversary of the Columbine shooting. I also suspect we shall see some radical legislation be attempted either at the federal level or more likely the state level, its only a question of when and how crazy.
arghhh, man, thats horrible, and scary, considering its just miles away from where I live..
believe it or not, i heard about this in school today before we even got out, somewhere around noon. Its rediculous how fast news spreads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalek
Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If this loser ran his car thru the lunchroom would you be shouting "ban the cars!"? I think not so let's just offer our prayers to these folks and climb off the soapbox.
Fact is that the guy didn't run his car through the lunchroom to murder 32 people, though - neither did he use a knife, a hammer, or any other tool that the NRA likes to use in its illogical "you can use [insert tool here] to kill someone, too; why aren't you asking for a ban on [tool]?" 'argument.' Neither did the UT Austin murderer when he killed 16 people back in '66. Neither did the Columbine kids when they murdered 12. Neither did the Red Lake shooter when he killed 9 in 2005. Neither did the guy who killed the 5 Amish kids a while back.
Those people wanted to murder others; in your world, they could have gone to the local Ford dealership to pick up their murder weapon. In the real world, they don't. They don't go to the local Target to pick up steak knives, either. They don't go to Home Depot to pick up a hammer. In the real world, they use guns, no matter how often you say that guns don't kill people - and you're right, guns don't kill people; bullets do :/
Ah I see. SO what we REALLY need to ban are relationships.
I wish that there werent so many gun control nuts around because if anyone on that campus would have had a CHL ( concealed handgun license) then alot less people would have died. It is too bad no one was able to properly defend themselves against him. Keep in mind people this is all IMO. the end.
You might just be onto something there, perhaps the most sensible solution I've heard yet!Quote:
Originally Posted by JPnyc
Neg...if you take away the guns they'll just find something else to use. Fact: gun ownership is a constitutional right that is as old as this country. It's just as important as your right to vote. You outlaw guns then (besides the police) only outlaws will have guns. You wanna tackle an intruder at 2 a.m. with a steak knife be my guest. Me? I'm gonna shoot the sorry low-life non-workin' thievin' piece of $h1T and save the state some money. Don't know how it is there, but in my home state I have that right and someone busts in during the night I'll exercise that right to it's fullest!
@ allenb1963
The state of Virginia is kind of flaky on where we can exercise deadly force to protect ourselves.
Going by that logic if someones in my apartment trying to rip off my tv and I come down stairs to confront them if they pull a knife on me and I have a clear path to the door I have to leave whilst they continue to rob the place and wait for the police to hopefully show up in time to catch them, they would have to aggressively come at me with the obvious intention of attacking me in order for deadly force to be used and even then I'm supposed to retreat as far as possible and essentially tell them I plan on running away; if they still come at me with some form of weapon (or if they are obviously physically stronger than I am (such as the case of a 5' woman vs 6.5' dude) then I can use deadly force, otherwise you best not even point that gun in their direction lets you find yourself up on some bullshit charges of endangering their lives, etc.Quote:
Virginia has no law on deadly force, per se. Instead Virginia covers deadly force with case law and common law.
Basically a person may stand his ground as long as he was not a part of the initial confrontation. If he was part of the initial confrontation, then he must retreat as far as possible and announce his intentions to leave the confrontation before he can use deadly force to defend himself.
An innocent third party can also be defended with deadly force.
Deadly force can only be used against deadly force, where the victim could be killed or greviously injured.
Actually to add insult to injury under VA law if someone has hopped your 7 foot privacy fence that is posted with no trespassing signs and happens to step on a rake you knowingly left outside and injures themselves on the way to robbing your house you are liable for it, even though they were trespassing on posted property and hopped a 7' privacy fence.
Oh the joys of being a CCW permit holder or even a gun owner in general in the Commonwealth of Virginia...
The Columbine crew had also made at least one homemade bomb using 20lb propane tank. Do you know what a 20lb propane tank could have done to a full high school lunchroom?
I choose not to own a firearm (I have a lot of archery equipment). However, I wouldn't walk on the current rights to own a firearm. Firearms are easy enough to acquire in and outside of the law. Restricting law abiding citizens from obtaining them isn't the answer.
I live in a rural area. If someone is willing to break and enter into my home inspite of an alarm and a dog, I have to assume it's for more than my TV. My state (Vermont) has the fewest gun laws on the books, we had a D- on Handgun Control Inc's report card. We also have the least violent crime per capita. It's not the guns causing the problem.
I admit that the firearm makes it easier for a deranged maniac to cause a spectatcular display, not unlike a suicide bomber. More kids are dieing in swimming pool accidents than shootings. Are you going to outlaw swimming pools?
Horrible news to wake up to.
Seriously, in europe where guns are that much harder to obtain the school shootings and postal shootings happens very rarely compared to the US. As for the "if they cant get a gun they find some other way" theory, yes they will but it's very unlikely that he would succede in killing that many people with a knife/axe/pipebomb etc. and you at least give the victims more of a fighting chance.
The only problem with gun control is that there are so many guns in circulation that even if they got banned completely it would take the US hundreds of years to get rid of em all.
As for the "if everyone had a consealed gun on them, everything is fine" theory... well one word Nuts! It would be the wild west all over again and we all know that gunfights rarely happen back then.
and for fourdc you make a nice point you make with the swimmingpool, and my answer is, yes it should be outlawed if u had the ability to put it in your pocket got to the local mall and massdrown innocent people in it.
Wake up, please stop clinging to a piece of paper that says its your constitutional right to do this and that. The world has moved on since it was written and you should seriously move on too.
You should focus more on the fact that your kids will inherit the world in the state we leave it in... So for gods sake try to make it more safe, nice and better than than the one we were born into.
The question is so much about baning guns but controlling them. If you want to drive a car you have to pass your driving license. If you are using a car while under the influance of drink, drugs ect you are in deep trouble. Also if i remeber rightly, correct me if i am wrong, it was not a consitutional right to have a gun but an obligation like in switzerland where all able bodied men were already armed when the state milita called them up.
Saying the problem is not with guns is a cop out. If that was the case europe as a whole, which has a much bigger population than the US, should have more such shootings than the US following the logic of the pro gun group. Unless of course it just means that the the US has a much higher percentage of mentally unstable people!
Well I may be entirely mistaken about this, but aren't most gun related crimes committed by those NOT in legal possession of a firearm?
Most scholars these days disagree with that interpretation of the Second Amendment. "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." is an extremely awkward sentence, but more and more is being interpreted as only applying to that "well regulated militia." Most Americans aren't part of a "well regulated militia", and all the shooters I listed previously certainly weren't. I don't have a problem with people owning guns; the problem in this country is with how ridiculously easy it is to get one.Quote:
Fact: gun ownership is a constitutional right that is as old as this country.
How do you define "illegal possesion"? How many americans are in illegal possesion of firearms? Also how hard is it to acquire gun illegally?
Surveys here might be of help. Ultimately, no matter what is decided there are still 33 lives gone. One life is one too many no matter what is used.
Illegal meaning not having a license. I think it's a helluva lot easier to get an illegal weapon than it is to get it legally.
Not in europe! So how many americans have illegal weapons and are they all criminals or just people who haven't registered they have a gun?
edit : just took a quick look at the first file on the site posted by Ms Mittens isin't it strange that in a country where you need to be 21 to buy alchool you can buy a gun from the age of 12 up. Most states dont have restrictions on assault weapons which are very usefull i suppose for when you go hunting.
Well.. Honestly (being a non-american) I cannot understand why you would think an incident such as this will really move people to pass an ammendment outlawing guns.
As I understand your system, such a proposal would have to first:
pass the house of representatives (representatives are sitting for periods of 2 years, so they're almost always "on campaign" in some way or another, thus they're unlikely to pass unpopular bills)
-IF- it passes, then it'll have to pass the Senate (senators are sitting for six years in a row, so they're more likely to make unpopular decisions [which may be wise!] )
Even if it passes the senate, then the president could refuse to let it pass, in which case it must go back to the senate and two thirds of the senate would have to vote yes to passing the bill in order to make it pass.
Now. As I understand it, the republicans are most often in favour of giving the citizen the right to arm himself while some (maybe the majority?) of the democrats would appreciate if that right would be suspended -- because, as you point out, guns are often used to harm people.
Now.. With that in mind. Don't you honestly agree that the chances of outlawing guns look bleak to say the least ? You can be almost certain that Bush would use his veto-rights and it's doubtful (to say the least) that two thirds of the senate would let it pass.
Anyway, just my two cents.
Well the drinking age limit is a federal one. Gun laws are under state jurisdiction, so you'll find they differ from state to state. Some states have a tradition of owning firearms, like many of the southern states, and the midwest. Yes, the overwhelming majority of those committing crimes are using illegally gotten weapons and they are criminals.Quote:
Originally Posted by MURACU
Actually from what i can read from Msmittens post most of the guns are leagally bought. you should run through it it makes for interesting reading. especially the section on how the buying and selling of arms in the US works.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/...n2692899.shtml
Quote:
A student gunman originally from South Korea was behind the deadliest massacre in U.S. history, killing 32 people on the campus of Virginia Tech, before taking his own life, police said.
The shooter's name is Cho Seung-Hui, a 23-year-old, who was a senior and an English major at the school, police said.
Paperwork found in the gunman's backpack allowed authorities to trace one of the two handguns used in the shootings, though the serial numbers for both weapons were wiped clean, CBS News reports.
Ballistics tests show one of the guns found after a deadly shooting at Virginia Tech was used in both shootings, at the dormitory and at the classroom building, police said.
If the guns were legally his, why wipe the serial numbers off? That's only done so a gun isn't traceable when sold illegally.
I was born in the US and I kind of like being able to shoot. My best friend has an AK and an M-14 we would use most of the time. We don't have many school shootings in Michigan but I've personally been stabbed 3 times.
Guns and the laws seem to really have people goign here so I'll go ahead and point out the obvious yet forgotten:
A butcher knife makes a better horror movie
It doesn't run out of bullets
It costs a WHOLE lot less than a gun
A 12 year old can buy one.
Hmm...
And let's not forget Jack the ripper, he didn't use a gun to kill hookers.
In fact most remembered Serial Killers used everything BUT guns. I realise this guy wasn't a Serial Killer.
It's easier to shoot someone with a gun from a distance than trying to throw a knife at them but from what I saw on the news here the guy wasn't exactly a long distance shot.
Now, just for the sake of arguement to make sure both sides are well represented, I could easily shoot someone in the head and take them out, but it's a hell of a lot more news worthy if I gut 12 people like a fish and cut through a few limbs with a knife that isn't running out of bullets.
Hell, in Michigan, I could then SELL that knife in a garage sale to a random person as it's fairly common to sell kitchen items in a sale, and no one would think twice. However if I sold a gun that way someone would remember and I'd probably be facing charges if I didn't have papers.
Also I won't go into how there wouldn't be gun powder residue left on clothing as evidence.
EDIT:
Neg come on now, don't tell me you forgot about Meiwes ;) If he used a gun that would have been a LOT harder (Literally *giggle*).
Yah that's good, explain that reasoning to the parents of these kids, I'm sure they would understand your logic. To compare cars and guns is sort of like apples and oranges don't you think, hard to conceal a hummer in my waistband for when I want to whip it out and crush someone, oh and yeah, on most nights you can see the local TV newsheads talking about the numerous murders by people in their Saturn's.Quote:
Originally Posted by allenb1963
You don't think that today's kids should have an expectation of safety whenever they travel in public or attend schools.
This "right to bare arms" crap is old news, this was drafted up over 2 hundred years ago, when local farmsteads were being attacked by the natives and the odd stranded British soldier...:D seriously, do you honestly think they had SAR's in mind when they made this up, I believe they were still using ball and shot from a fecking musket, point one of those at me and I gurantee, you only get off one shot as long as the powder is dry, and the marksmanship of those things were negligible at best, so the chances are you would miss and I would tomahawk your ass....
gore, the difference between being attacked by someone with a knife or a gun/rifle is no comparison, for one thing to stab someone you have to oh I would guess...be right next to them unless your Segal of course.
no but when your told to stand at the point of a gun, your perspective changes, if you tell me to stand or kneel at the point of a knife and there is 20 of us, guess what, it ain't going to happen, but a pistol is different, who is going to take the first bullet?Quote:
It's easier to shoot someone with a gun from a distance than trying to throw a knife at them but from what I saw on the news here the guy wasn't exactly a long distance shot.
So Dalek, by your logic, since we didn't have radio, TV, the internet, etc. back in the days when they drafted the Constitution, then our right to freedom of speech doesn't (or shouldn't) apply to those mediums?
btw, politics aside, I want to say that my heart goes out to the families of the people harmed or killed in this needless tragedy. It's a dark day when a human being sees no value in the lives of other innocent people. The killer must have been a very sad, mentally ill person to have gotten to that point in his life. What a shame, and tragedy for all involved.
A pistol only holds 6 bullets, telling 20 people to get down wouldn't work anyway unless they were REALLY scared. I'm not saying holding someone to knife point is not different, just saying it's just as dangerouse.
And for the record, on the cars thing, more people die each year for accidents than shootings. Gas prices are probably keeping drive bys at bay for now.
Sometimes common sense is very hard to find..I believe it's an inherent trait and not something learned.Quote:
Originally Posted by intmon
Being glib isn't one of them....:rolleyes:
Not sure what version of the 9 mm he had but...
Quote:
A pistol only holds 6 bullets, telling 20 people to get down wouldn't work anyway unless they were REALLY scared. I'm not saying holding someone to knife point is not different, just saying it's just as dangerouse.
http://www.topglock.com/catalog/sunset.htmQuote:
Glock model 18 magazine 31 rounds fits all 9mm Glock pistols and is extended
He had two of them.:(
Well the ability to conceal the weapon isn't really an issue here since cars are capable of sufficient speed that no matter what, the attack would be a surprise. So that pretty much renders the concealment aspect moot.
Ahh, sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by dalek
Want gun control... make rap and rap videos illegal. "Guns don't kill people, rappers do"
Or as a society we can look at the issues we face in a modern world. It is actually much harder to get a gun NOW than it was when I was a child. Barely a peep on the **** head mass murder scene back then. I blame, psycho's and our modern hands off society, where people are unable to cope with the most basic of emotions without violence or drugs, not guns. The same society that sensationalises these things into a dark kind of entertainment venue. Where it becomes "cool" to be bad. Besides, people get shot by the thousands everywhere. Even in the socialist utopias of Europe where hand guns are illegal.
That I agree with. We now have a whole subculture wherein criminals are exhalted and deified. An intelligent society would spend more time trying to cure that than cancer. But no, we spend more research dollars on curing obesity.
I feel the same way, and like with this incident, it's not their fault that they are obese and have Type 2 diabetes. All of which, except in EXTREME cases, can be cured with a simple regiment.... health food and excercise. Our modern answer, pills and misdirected responsibility and motivation. In this case it's not a troubled youth and a failed social structure, it's guns. We will soon hear about how horrible his life was (the shooter) and how extra wonderful the lives of the victims were. And how it could have all been prevented whith gestapo security practices and we'll try an blame the school, guns, politicians, other student and the police with be investigated.Quote:
But no, we spend more research dollars on curing obesity.