VA Tech

[Huck BB62]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

Sceond question: Why the fcuk not?

When I was in college in the 1980s living on campus, I bought a shotgun, which is about as deadly as you can get. I kept it at my brother's house. I used it to shoot doves, quail, and clay pidgeons.

It was stupid for them not to let me keep it in my dorm room. In some countries, like Switzerland, college-aged male ADULTS are in the militia and required to have their issued semi-auto rifle in their dwellings whether on campus or not. I bet you they don't have a lot of mass shootings on campus in Switzerland (which has the lowest violent crime rate in the Western world).

Well, times have changed. I guess here, where a UL listed gunsafe is required, maybe.

My second response to that Marinehawk (and I completely understand your consternation) is that this batch of kids are put together the same way as in years past. Yeah, we partied, we had fun, but we also had a very deep respect for the right and wrong. Have you looked at collegehumor.com, youtube and myspace? Yeah, I WOULD WANT a gun being around these kids, but they have a real disconnect from the real world if you ask me. (you college agers go ahead and unload, I stand firm) Nobody's saying they're all whacked out, I'm saying the percentages are way different, it's a far cry from "Leave it to Beaver" days.

For instance, a story recently aired where the HR people were searching myspace about their applicants. This guy (hmm, an oriental guy) was all cheesed because he never got interviews. On myspace he had all his partying stuff, and bragging about cheating in college on there. It was his opinion that this info shouldn't be used against him if he wanted to work for you!!??!!?? Another was this chick that was a real party animal, her blog read worse than a copy of the Happy Hooker. It was also her opinion that one thing had nothing to do with another. What do you guys think?

Again, if we don't get some common sense going here, we're going to lose it all.

[MarineHawk]

I guess we just disagree Huck. There were crazy-looking people with mohawks walking around the KU campus when I was there talking to themselves. I don't think that that should have been a reason to tell me that I could not own a shotgun. I will never move to California because of all the crazy laws and regs there.

Generally, when you have a country like ours where there are almost as many firearms as people, regardless of whether it would be good or not, you're never going to be able to make guns unavalable to the whackos. Lott's studies and common sense tell me that the more good, responsible people responsibly keeping loaded firearms around, the more outgunned the bad guys are.

People who don't have guns in D.C. (almost 100% of the population) live in fear because the criminals there commit crimes with impunity unless they run into a cop. People who don't have guns in places where guns are legal are safer (the statistics really do prove it) because the criminals don't know they don't have guns. In D.C., the criminals are pretty sure the single woman in the condo is unnarmed and fair game.

[MarineHawk]

This is interesting:

BLACKSBURG, Va. — A Virginia district court found that Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung-Hui was "mentally ill" and was an "imminent danger to others," according to a 2005 temporary detention order.
Cho "is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, and presents an imminent danger to self or others as mental illness, or is seriously mentally ill as to be substantially unable to care for self, and is incapable of volunteering or unwilling to volunteer for treatment," reads the order, obtained by FOX News.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266683,00.html

There's another one coming:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
That guy is a ticking time bomb too, but I do understand his fluorescent light bulb anger thing.

[NewHummerGuy]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

This is interesting:

BLACKSBURG, Va. ? A Virginia district court found that Virginia Tech killer Cho Seung-Hui was "mentally ill" and was an "imminent danger to others," according to a 2005 temporary detention order.
Cho "is mentally ill and in need of hospitalization, and presents an imminent danger to self or others as mental illness, or is seriously mentally ill as to be substantially unable to care for self, and is incapable of volunteering or unwilling to volunteer for treatment," reads the order, obtained by FOX News.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266683,00.html

There's another one coming:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1
That guy is a ticking time bomb too, but I do understand his fluorescent light bulb anger thing.

Yeah, but the only problem with the Colorado kid (judging from his dads remarks) is that they will sue the college and probably win for violating his amendments . Then after that his son will murder several people.

[GLBLWARMR]

The way I see it there is not enough people armed with concealed weapons permits. There should be more out there. If there was the fear in people's minds that I do not know who has a gun I think there would be less of these incidents. Granted, I am not saying these incidents would not happen but I would guarantee you that if there were more people carrying guns those 32 innocent people would not have died. Maybe one or two would have got shot before someone put a bullet in the fvcker that was shooting.

You cannot blame the people that legally sold a gun to someone. If they followed the established steps for their state and the guy checked out then why not sell him the gun. There is no way to control this because if you cannot get one at a licensed dealer then you just go and see the local alley vendor and get one. Regardless what steps they try to enforce on gun control, if people want one they will find a way to get one.

All I know is there were a lot of races going fvck I hope this isn't us and when he came up south korean there were a lot of sighs of relief. South Koreans "tag your it." I am not trying to make a joke about what happened but I was sitting there going fvck I hope this wasn't a Marine that got out of the Corps after a couple tours in Iraq and had PTSD. The effects that would have had on everything going on would have thrown more **** into the fire and we do not need it right now.

I feel for the families that lost someone it's to bad but arm more people and I would guarantee 32 people would not have died.

[KenP]

He was a whack job, that's all there is to it.
Pics he sent:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/

The victims:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18143312/

[H2 OHHH!]

Well it seems the media is going to glorify this POS coward. So don't be surprised if it happens again within the next 2 months

[h2co-pilot]

I know! They are giving him what he wanted. Why don't they just bring the cameras on in to the crime scene? The media just plays this crap over and over. I get this in my face this morning.**

It's horrific in conjunction with what he did. Worse than any R/Horror movie I can imagine. I am traumatized by it and I'm only affected as a worried parent and the feeling of a vunerable citizen. I can't imagine what those involved with it feel like being so exposed to this so tardly accented psychofreak.

We don't hide this stuff from our children and we have forgotten decency. And this loss of decency and it's sordid exposure is what I believe to be the whole issue.

In my opinion, nothing could have been done and no one is at fault. Everyone did everything right, from the teachers, immigration, down to the gun salesman....

... with the exception of the media. The assumption that the general public is mature, strong and rational enough to endure such visionary is wrong and as long as it happens- nothing, strongly including "monkey see-monkey do" behavior, can be "prevented".

**(I attached 2 so you didn't have to look at it if you didn't want to)

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by Huck BB62

Well, times have changed. I guess here, where a UL listed gunsafe is required, maybe.

My second response to that Marinehawk (and I completely understand your consternation) is that this batch of kids are put together the same way as in years past. Yeah, we partied, we had fun, but we also had a very deep respect for the right and wrong. Have you looked at collegehumor.com, youtube and myspace? Yeah, I WOULD WANT a gun being around these kids, but they have a real disconnect from the real world if you ask me. (you college agers go ahead and unload, I stand firm) Nobody's saying they're all whacked out, I'm saying the percentages are way different, it's a far cry from "Leave it to Beaver" days.

For instance, a story recently aired where the HR people were searching myspace about their applicants. This guy (hmm, an oriental guy) was all cheesed because he never got interviews. On myspace he had all his partying stuff, and bragging about cheating in college on there. It was his opinion that this info shouldn't be used against him if he wanted to work for you!!??!!?? Another was this chick that was a real party animal, her blog read worse than a copy of the Happy Hooker. It was also her opinion that one thing had nothing to do with another. What do you guys think?

Again, if we don't get some common sense going here, we're going to lose it all.

Ann Coulter responded better than me:

Originally Posted by Ann Coulter

Let's make America a ?sad-free zone?! By Ann Coulter

From the attacks of 9/11 to Monday's school shooting, after every mass murder there is an overwhelming urge to "do something" to prevent a similar attack.


But since Adam ate the apple and let evil into the world, deranged individuals have existed.

Most of the time they can't be locked up until it's too late. It's not against the law to be crazy ? in some jurisdictions it actually makes you more viable as a candidate for public office.

It's certainly not against the law to be an unsociable loner. If it were, Ralph Nader would be behind bars right now, where he belongs. Mass murder is often the first serious crime unbalanced individuals are caught committing ? as appears to be in the case of the Virginia Tech shooter.

The best we can do is enact policies that will reduce the death toll when these acts of carnage occur, as they will in a free and open society of 300 million people, most of whom have cable TV.

Only one policy has ever been shown to deter mass murder: concealed-carry laws. In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the inestimable economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect.

And the effect was not insignificant. States that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60 percent and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80 percent.

Apparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can't shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic "Gun-Free School Zone" laws.

From the people who brought you "zero tolerance," I present the Gun-Free Zone! Yippee! Problem solved! Bam! Bam! Everybody down! Hey, how did that deranged loner get a gun into this Gun-Free Zone?

It isn't the angst of adolescence. Plenty of school shootings have been committed by adults with absolutely no reason to be at the school, such as Laurie Dann, who shot up the Hubbard Woods Elementary School in Winnetka, Ill., in 1988; Patrick Purdy, who opened fire on children at Cleveland Elementary School in Stockton, Calif., in 1989; and Charles Carl Roberts, who murdered five schoolgirls at an Amish school in Lancaster County, Pa., last year.

Oh by the way, the other major "Gun-Free Zone" in America is the post office.

But instantly, on the day of the shooting at Virginia Tech, the media were already promoting gun control and pre-emptively denouncing right-wingers who point out that gun control enables murderers rather than stopping them. Liberals get to lobby for gun control, but we're disallowed from arguing back. That's how good their arguments are. They're that good.

Needless to say, Virginia Tech is a Gun-Free School Zone ? at least until last Monday. The gunman must not have known. Imagine his embarrassment! Perhaps there should be signs.

Virginia Tech even prohibits students with concealed-carry permits from carrying their guns on campus. Last year, the school disciplined a student for carrying a gun on campus, despite his lawful concealed-carry permit. If only someone like that had been in Norris Hall on Monday, this massacre could have been ended a lot sooner.

But last January, the Virginia General Assembly shot down a bill that would have prevented universities like Virginia Tech from giving sanctuary to mass murderers on college campuses in Virginia by disarming students with concealed-carry permits valid in the rest of the state.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker praised the legislature for allowing the school to disarm lawful gun owners on the faculty and student body, thereby surrendering every college campus in the state to deranged mass murderers, saying: "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."

Others disagreed. Writing last year about another dangerous killer who had been loose on the Virginia Tech campus, graduate student Jonathan McGlumphy wrote: "Is it not obvious that all students, faculty and staff would have been safer if (concealed handgun permit) holders were not banned from carrying their weapons on campus?"
If it wasn't obvious then, it is now.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/coulter041907.php3

[RubHer Yellow Ducky]

I'm sorry the inncent are dead.

Lets move on......

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by RubHer Yellow Ducky

I'm sorry the inncent are dead.

Lets move on......

So am I. I didn't realize that no more discussion was allowed by anyone on how to deter this type of event.

If you don't want to read, don't click.

[RubHer Yellow Ducky]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

So am I. I didn't realize that no more discussion was allowed by anyone on how to deter this type of event.

If you don't want to read, don't click.

SORRY, wasn't trying to come on like a censor...

Network TV is just showing too much of it.
your right, I won't click this thread anymore

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by RubHer Yellow Ducky

SORRY, wasn't trying to come on like a censor...

Network TV is just showing too much of it.
your right, I won't click this thread anymore

I was probably beating a dead horse. I haven't seen much of the TV coverage. About all I watch anymore are things like Rome, Deadwood, Sopranos, Military Channel, History Channel, etc ...

I guess I am wasting this reply since you're not looking. If you're there RYD, have a good evening.

[Huck BB62]

Originally Posted by MarineHawk

Ann Coulter responded better than me:

That's very well said, and I can't say I disagree.

I guess my concern comes from the disconnect link in their instacheck system. In my opinion, the mental institutions and courts should be on that database. When a nutjob is well documentented as this sackof**** was, his name should've been flagged, period. If we're going to be able to keep our guns, we need to be able to weed out these people. They're krappin' in the punchbowl. Gun registration is here to stay, it should be worth something more than a revenue generator and a way to hassle the law abiding gun owners. Since we have to do it, let's use it to our advantage and weed out the kooks and criminals and lend legitimacy to our cause. After thousands and thousands of gun laws haven't prevented this kind of thing from happening, perhaps there IS a solution already at hand and we aren't utilizing it? It's all very reminiscent of the 911 attack. People knew, it still happened. As in the 911 attack, the flight instructor schools copped out to "We did nothing against the law, neither did they", the shop that sold sackof**** the guns is saying basically the same thing.

Yeah, technically, nobody did anything wrong, but added up, it sure did add up to a whole hell of a lot of wrong.

Common sense. We're sorely lacking.

[MarineHawk]

Originally Posted by Huck BB62

That's very well said, and I can't say I disagree.

I guess my concern comes from the disconnect link in their instacheck system. In my opinion, the mental institutions and courts should be on that database. When a nutjob is well documentented as this sackof**** was, his name should've been flagged, period. If we're going to be able to keep our guns, we need to be able to weed out these people. They're krappin' in the punchbowl. Gun registration is here to stay, it should be worth something more than a revenue generator and a way to hassle the law abiding gun owners. Since we have to do it, let's use it to our advantage and weed out the kooks and criminals and lend legitimacy to our cause. After thousands and thousands of gun laws haven't prevented this kind of thing from happening, perhaps there IS a solution already at hand and we aren't utilizing it? It's all very reminiscent of the 911 attack. People knew, it still happened. As in the 911 attack, the flight instructor schools copped out to "We did nothing against the law, neither did they", the shop that sold sackof**** the guns is saying basically the same thing.

Yeah, technically, nobody did anything wrong, but added up, it sure did add up to a whole hell of a lot of wrong.

Common sense. We're sorely lacking.

I wish we could distinguish the truly dangerous types of nuts in advance from the non-dangerous ones, but I'm skeptical. Preventing 9-11 would probably be a lot easier because you had a number of people communicating and planning a group terrorist attack. The VT gunner was a nut, but he was a loner and probably didn't tell anyone he was going to commit mass murder. He just never talked to anybody. He wrote crazy stuff, but there's a lot of that going around. Major mass shootings here have been occuring every eight years in the U.S. I can't see people allowing the state or federal governments to round up the hundreds of thousand of wierdos in this 300,000,000-person country to prevent a mass shooting every eight years or so.

For example I heard Sean Hannity on the XM radio repeatedly express outrage that no one took serious action against the VT gunner, even though he weirdly didn't respond in the dorm to routine hello-type greetings. He just weirdly looked away. It's wierd I know, but a partner in my law firm does the same thing. I can't see them descending on his home, taking his computer, and seriously investigating him on that basis.

It would be open to serious abuse. According to our Surgeon General: "According to current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year (i.e., 1-year prevalence)." http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/librar...r2/sec2_1.html

Are we going to have our government and gun stores identify and investigate 60,000,000 mentally ill people (30M/5) to prevent the next mass shooting? Even if appropriate, I don't think it's possible. We live in a free society. We enjoy great benefits from that. We also face some greater dangers.

Germany has the most absolute form of gun control, and that didn't prevent the Erfurt Massacre--a school shooting there in 2002 involving 16 fatalities. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erfurt_massacre

[Huck BB62]

So we have ourselves a dilemma. We have on the one hand a segment of the society that wants no controls on anything morally, thereby establishing a morally bankrupt society. Products of this society are becoming more commonplace and commit atrocities like this guy did. Now it looks like we get to pay for it twice. We get to live in an ever increasingly morally disfuctional society with all of the costs that this incurs (again, check out the evening news, collegehumor.com, youtube, hell, the entire internet, hell, watch CSPAN!) and we get to lose our rights because their "freedom" is fuggin' up our society?

What a mess.

I do believe we're on the same page here, we've seen the enemy, and it is us.

[GLBLWARMR]

Interesting read:

Signs of Intelligence?

By Fred Thompson

One of the things that's got to be going through a lot of peoples' minds now
is how one man with two handguns, that he had to reload time and time again,
could go from classroom to classroom on the Virginia Tech campus without
being stopped. Much of the answer can be found in policies put in place by
the university itself.

Virginia, like 39 other states, allows citizens with training and legal
permits to carry concealed weapons. That means that Virginians regularly sit
in movie theaters and eat in restaurants among armed citizens. They walk,
joke, and rub shoulders everyday with people who responsibly carry firearms
- and are far safer than they would be in San Francisco, Oakland, Detroit,
Chicago, New York City, or Washington, D.C., where such permits are
difficult or impossible to obtain.

The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second
Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence
of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated
criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they
decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so.

Still, there are a lot of people who are just offended by the notion that
people can carry guns around. They view everybody, or at least many of us,
as potential murderers prevented only by the lack of a convenient weapon.
Virginia Tech administrators overrode Virginia state law and threatened to
expel or fire anybody who brings a weapon onto campus.

In recent years, however, armed Americans - not on-duty police officers -
have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence
from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious
terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence
from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime
rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge.

So Virginians asked their legislators to change the university's "concealed
carry" policy to exempt people 21 years of age or older who have passed
background checks and taken training classes. The university, however,
lobbied against that bill, and a top administrator subsequently praised the
legislature for blocking the measure.

The logic behind this attitude baffles me, but I suspect it has to do with a
basic difference in worldviews. Some people think that power should exist
only at the top, and everybody else should rely on "the authorities" for
protection.

Despite such attitudes, average Americans have always made up the front line
against crime. Through programs like Neighborhood Watch and Amber Alert, we
are stopping and catching criminals daily. Normal people tackled "shoe
bomber" Richard Reid as he was trying to blow up an airliner. It was a truck
driver who found the D.C. snipers. Statistics from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention show that civilians use firearms to prevent at least
a half million crimes annually.

When people capable of performing acts of heroism are discouraged or denied
the opportunity, our society is all the poorer. And from the selfless
examples of the passengers on Flight 93 on 9/11 to Virginia Tech professor
Liviu Librescu, a Holocaust survivor who sacrificed himself to save his
students earlier this week, we know what extraordinary acts of heroism
ordinary citizens are capable of.

Many other universities have been swayed by an anti-gun, anti-self defense
ideology. I respect their right to hold those views, but I challenge their
decision to deny Americans the right to protect themselves on their campuses
- and then proudly advertise that fact to any and all.

Whenever I've seen one of those "Gun-free Zone" signs, especially outside of
a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I've always
wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don't mean
much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.

- Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.

C ABC

[MarineHawk]

I thought that was good too. Another from Goldberg, who is one of my favorites at getting at the point:

Originally Posted by Jonah Goldberg

... With the light of hindsight, some say the warning signs should have been spotted. But this assumes that strange and disgruntled people are a rarity and that all of them are candidates to become mass murderers. The reality is almost exactly the opposite. Strange minds and tortured souls are all around us, particularly on college campuses.

Shall we now have the psychological equivalent of the zero-tolerance mania that causes children with aspirin to be carted off by police? Shall we unleash the white coats on every misanthrope and muttering grudge holder?

I confess, I’ve played the game of trying to find meaning in tragedy more than once myself and I probably will again. But not this time. Not with Cho. The only meaning I can find supported by the horrific, heartrending evidence is that once again the mystery of evil has been corroborated, the permanence of tragedy confirmed.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...2YzOTYxMGM2OTE=

[KenP]

Originally Posted by GLBLWARMR

- Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.

C ABC

And hopefully a presidential candidate since Jim Gilmore can't get his off the ground.