Caveman_Nick Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 this thing is quickly downgrading to very simplistic gun control debates across many talk radio shows. one side wants to ban all guns and the other wants to arm more good people with guns to be ready for when chit like this goes down. then it breaks down into a liberal/conservative thing about guns and the shows spin their wheels on this for a few days. i want to know what motivated this kid and brought him to the place where he could do such a horrible thing. maybe the root cause of his anger may shine some light on something systemic that we all could use to learn from, but i suspect that this kid is the result of the unique combination of his personal upbringing, his dna, the circumstances leading up to yesterday, and a reaction that may or may not have been repeated if the situation played out multiple times. it's not a very sexy discussion, so it won't be had, and it probably would not do any good anyway. we can't set up our laws, processes, and rule systems based on eliminating the possibility that someone may snap like this - it is just not practical. it is just a sad, unfortunate, crazy situation ... more cookies and hugs. less xbox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolverines Fan Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 i want to know what motivated this kid and brought him to the place where he could do such a horrible thing. maybe the root cause of his anger may shine some light on something systemic that we all could use to learn from, but i suspect that this kid is the result of the unique combination of his personal upbringing, his dna, the circumstances leading up to yesterday, and a reaction that may or may not have been repeated if the situation played out multiple times. it's not a very sexy discussion, so it won't be had, and it probably would not do any good anyway. we can't set up our laws, processes, and rule systems based on eliminating the possibility that someone may snap like this - it is just not practical. it is just a sad, unfortunate, crazy situation ... I'd like to know, too. Why would the shooter, who is an english major, kill people at what they say is a building where they taught engineering classes? Was he looking for somebody in particular? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 im shocked that more schools dont require someone to get buzzed in at the front office. people can just walk right in if they want to in most schools in my area. My kids school has a buzzer...everyone needs to be buzzed in. That being said, the attached intercom is NEVER used. I ring the buzzer, the door buzzes and I am , no quetions asked. My hard-earned school tax dollars at work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted April 17, 2007 Author Share Posted April 17, 2007 I'd like to know, too. Why would the shooter, who is an english major, kill people at what they say is a building where they taught engineering classes? Was he looking for somebody in particular? some witnesses said he kept looking into the classroom before he actually came in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 He was Korean. Those people are nuts. The Middle East has seen less civil war than Korea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Holy Roller Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 my wife shoots 3 1/2's from my mossberg, girly man. Oh I can shoot them. I just don't need to. Gettem within 10 yards and it's easy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 I'm just waiting for someone to suggest that the Virginia Tech killer was paid by the Bush Administration so as to deflect coverage of his Gonzales hearings/scandals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yukon Cornelius Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 Oh I can shoot them. I just don't need to. Gettem within 10 yards and it's easy. white ones dont count Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 I'd like to know, too. Why would the shooter, who is an english major, kill people at what they say is a building where they taught engineering classes? Was he looking for somebody in particular? And being an English major, wouldn't it be more logical to kill everyone with a reading of some really boring olde book? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 gun control.....nah, people kill people Right. That body count would have been the same with guns, knives, or if he'd beat the people to death with a baseball bat. Absolutely no difference at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) I do think there should be a bigger effort to keep assault weapons out of people's hands. Why? The horrible crime yesterday was committed with a simple little Glock - like cops carry. So-called assault weapons are involved in something like 2% of all gun crimes. I guess they look scary to some people, so by all means, let's ban them. As tragic as yesterday was, this is no time for knee-jerk legislation on guns. I'd pretty much bet the farm that if some nut tried that in a local university, he'd have been engaged and mowed down by multiple CCW holders. Permits are easy to get here and we can carry on campus - unlike in the state of Virginia. Banning any type of gun will do a couple of things - A) create a black market that will drive prices up B ) encourage criminal activity (see the UK and Austrailia statistics since restrictive measures were put in place) C) turn ordinary citizens into criminals because some of us flat won't give up our guns. Ayn Rand wrote in Atlas Shurgged, There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system. She also wrote, "A government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights: it holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims." Any person that doesn't get that or the well documented fears about and travesties committed by oppressive governments throughout history is pretty darn Edited April 17, 2007 by Jimmy Neutron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 I'm just waiting for someone to suggest that the Virginia Tech killer was paid by the Bush Administration so as to deflect coverage of his Gonzales hearings/scandals. I don't get why the Gonzales hearing DOESN'T occur. Unless some of the principals have family who were killed in Blacksburg, it really has no effect on them. Well, other than to create a swell chance for photo ops by visiting campus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spain Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 Right. That body count would have been the same with guns, knives, or if he'd beat the people to death with a baseball bat. Absolutely no difference at all. And if guns were outlawed, i am sure he would NOT have been able to get his hands on one. Just like Josh Gordon... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 And if guns were outlawed, i am sure he would NOT have been able to get his hands on one. Just like Josh Gordon... I don't think guns should be outlawed. But to say that the perp having a gun makes no difference in situations like this is just stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whosyourdaddy Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 I don't think guns should be outlawed. But to say that the perp having a gun makes no difference in situations like this is just stupid. He purchased these guns legally. The only way to change that is ban all guns in the entire country. No other law will work....not that that would really work either. It is unbelievably stupid for some of our politicians to immediately come out and spark a gun control debate. Leahy and Boxer for example. Idiots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 He purchased these guns legally. The only way to change that is ban all guns in the entire country. No other law will work....not that that would really work either. It is unbelievably stupid for some of our politicians to immediately come out and spark a gun control debate. Leahy and Boxer for example. Idiots. Again, I'm just saying the "people kill people" line just doesn't wash. Maybe there isn't a solution, but the fact of the matter is guns make it MUCH easier to kill people. Click-boom. I wish I cleaning my house was that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) Any person that doesn't get that or the well documented fears about and travesties committed by oppressive governments throughout history is pretty darn I hear ya. But we haven't seen an oppressive domestic government in a long time. What we have seen is an increasingly violent and well-armed population. While we would be fools to forget the past, we'd be doubly so to ignore the present. No, banning all guns isn't going to happen. But a system that legally sold a firearm to a non-US citizen as deranged as this school killer was is clearly broken. Yeah, if he *really* wanted a gun he could have found it on the street. But that's a retarded reason to make no efforts at all. My toe nails are gonna grow no matter what, but that doesn't mean I'm going to quit cutting them. And violent, crazy people are going to keep commiting violent, crazy crimes. But that doesn't mean we should quit trying to curb them on the front-end. As we have discussed before, sensible regulation of gun ownership is perfectly consistent with the 2nd amendement. Maybe if the gun lobby were more willing to meet law makers half way on sensible regulation I'd view this issue differently. But at this point I'm a lot more affraid of this country's armed population than I am of its government. However, take all the guns away and I'm sure it'd shift the other way. Therefore, balance is what we should be striving for. Edited April 17, 2007 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 I hear ya. But we haven't seen an oppressive domestic government in a long time. What we have seen is an increasingly violent and well-armed population. While we would be fools to forget the past, we'd be doubly so to ignore the present. No, banning all guns isn't going to happen. But a system that legally sold a firearm to a non-US citizen as deranged as this school killer was is clearly broken. Yeah, if he *really* wanted a gun he could have found it on the street. But that's a retarded reason to make no efforts at all. My toe nails are gonna grow no matter what, but that doesn't mean I'm going to quit cutting them. And violent, crazy people are going to keep commiting violent, crazy crimes. But that doesn't mean we should quit trying to curb them on the front-end. As we have discussed before, sensible regulation of gun ownership is perfectly consistent with the 2nd amendement. Maybe if the gun lobby were more willing to meet law makers half way on sensible regulation I'd view this issue differently. Partly because of that, at this point in history I'm a lot more affraid of the armed population in this country than I am of my government. But take all the guns away and I'm sure it'd shift the other way. Does your wife strap it on when you have sex, you tree-hugging America-hater? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 17, 2007 Share Posted April 17, 2007 I hear ya. But we haven't seen an oppressive domestic government in a long time. What we have seen is an increasingly violent and well-armed population. While we would be fools to forget the past, we'd be doubly so to ignore the present. No, banning all guns isn't going to happen. But a system that legally sold a firearm to a non-US citizen as deranged as this school killer was is clearly broken. Yeah, if he *really* wanted a gun he could have found it on the street. But that's a retarded reason to make no efforts at all. My toe nails are gonna grow no matter what, but that doesn't mean I'm going to quit cutting them. And violent, crazy people are going to keep commiting violent, crazy crimes. But that doesn't mean we should quit trying to curb them on the front-end. As we have discussed before, sensible regulation of gun ownership is perfectly consistent with the 2nd amendement. Maybe if the gun lobby were more willing to meet law makers half way on sensible regulation I'd view this issue differently. Partly because of that, at this point in history I'm a lot more affraid of the armed population in this country than I am of my government. But take all the guns away and I'm sure it'd shift the other way. VERY well said. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chavez Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I have changed my avatar to indicate my support for gun rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 B ) encourage criminal activity (see the UK and Austrailia statistics since restrictive measures were put in place) This is correct. However, the total number of murders in the whole of Britain for 2005/6 was 765, including the 52 who died in the subway bombings. That's about the same amount as one of our cities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 I hear ya. But we haven't seen an oppressive domestic government in a long time. What we have seen is an increasingly violent and well-armed population. While we would be fools to forget the past, we'd be doubly so to ignore the present. No, banning all guns isn't going to happen. But a system that legally sold a firearm to a non-US citizen as deranged as this school killer was is clearly broken. Yeah, if he *really* wanted a gun he could have found it on the street. But that's a retarded reason to make no efforts at all. My toe nails are gonna grow no matter what, but that doesn't mean I'm going to quit cutting them. And violent, crazy people are going to keep commiting violent, crazy crimes. But that doesn't mean we should quit trying to curb them on the front-end. As we have discussed before, sensible regulation of gun ownership is perfectly consistent with the 2nd amendement. Maybe if the gun lobby were more willing to meet law makers half way on sensible regulation I'd view this issue differently. Partly because of that, at this point in history I'm a lot more affraid of the armed population in this country than I am of my government. But take all the guns away and I'm sure it'd shift the other way. You have far more trust in the government than I do. It will be interesting to see if procedures were followed when this guy bought the guns. I wonder if his psych problems showed up on the background check. I wonder if the background check was done correctly. There are measures in place to prevent disturbed individuals from buying guns, the problem is that the government administers it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 (edited) You have far more trust in the government than I do. Hey, I never said I trusted the government. Merely that I'm more freightened of our increasingly well-armed, increasingly violent population than I am of our current government. Edited April 18, 2007 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 This is correct. However, the total number of murders in the whole of Britain for 2005/6 was 765, including the 52 who died in the subway bombings. That's about the same amount as one of our cities. A good read. 765 is as high as a few of our cities, namely NY and DC, which have strict gun control. DC continues to lead the world city murder rate after 27 years of banned handguns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted April 18, 2007 Share Posted April 18, 2007 They interviewed the guy that sold him the gun and he provided three forms of ID and was placed in a background check by state police as was mandated. It was all clear so he was sold the gun. Amazingly, background checks only have a chance to catch someone the second time they try to buy a gun legally. No doubt this tragedy will be used to serve the agendas of people, but it was likely unpreventable. I cannot believe how the media has been ripping apart the VT security and police. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.