One reported dead, several injured in Virginia Tech shootings

Sabia said:
Also I just wanted to say. If I lived in a place that I was sooooo scared that someone was going to break into my house and rape/kill my family, assault me in the street, kill me at school, or in fact, that everyone was out to get me, I wouldn't go out and buy a gun - I'd move.

Paranoia, oy!
Click to expand...

It isn't so much that people feel that it is very likely thet those things would ever happen, but if they were ever to happen why not be prepared.

Moreover, it would be super swell if someone who is still arguing about gun support etc. to actual respond to my post before...
 
Sabia said:
I'm arguing for stricter laws against guns who's only purpose is to kill people - not deer. Stuff like quick loading semi-automatic/automatic weapons.
Click to expand...

I'll buy this. I don't think that a guy who has a recent mental detention order levied against him should be able to get passed an FFA report. I also think that you should have to be a full-fledged, legal US citizen to be able to fall under the "Right to bare arms" umbrella.

Again, this guy was a kook, as further evidenced by the materials he sent to NBC. If guns were illegal, he would have either gotten them anyway, or found another way to kill, and judging by his "creative" writings, thinking up another way for mass murder would not have been that tough. Punishing and judging literally Millions of law abiding citizens for the actions of one moron will not solve anything.

As for that "30" number that my man Pako brought up, previous to Monday, guns hadn't caught that either.

Also I just wanted to say. If I lived in a place that I was sooooo scared that someone was going to break into my house and rape/kill my family, assault me in the street, kill me at school, or in fact, that everyone was out to get me, I wouldn't go out and buy a gun - I'd move.
Click to expand...

Damn woman, you live in an area with multiple reported rapes. What does it take for you to want to move? You have nerves of steel! :p

EDIT: I seem to remember seeing a picture of your closet somewhere. I know the REAL reason you don't want to move!
 
Last edited:
Skaw said:
And whats stopping people from rushing a guy with a gun, when he's shooting people at random in the first place?
Click to expand...


Nothing.

An old man was able to do just that and buy enough time for several people to get away. A number of kids also rushed the shooter and blockaided a door so he was unable to get in and continue shooting.

In this sense, thank God for the lesson of 9/11, as it seems people don't stand for nearly as much shit before they start making sacrifices for the better good.
 
Last edited:
alanon said:
I'll buy this. I don't think that a guy who has a recent mental detention order levied against him should be able to get passed an FFA report. I also think that you should have to be a full-fledged, legal US citizen to be able to fall under the "Right to bare arms" umbrella.

Again, this guy was a kook, as further evidenced by the materials he sent to NBC. If guns were illegal, he would have either gotten them anyway, or found another way to kill, and judging by his "creative" writings, thinking up another way for mass murder would not have been that tough. Punishing and judging literally Millions of law abiding citizens for the actions of one moron will not solve anything.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as stated before I know this guy and many others would have found ways around stricter gun laws (Stating again, not rifles and that sort of gun, but guns specifically made to do the most damage possible to a HUMAN target) but I just don't think that I"m not the only one disturbed by the fact that he bought this stuff legally. Everyone knew this guy was nuts long before he caused this horrific massacre. I'm not stupid and am well aware that guns don't kill people - people kill people but that doesn't mean you shouldn't at least put an effort in to try and make it harder for crazies to obtain weapons like this.

alanon said:
Damn woman, you live in an area with multiple reported rapes. What does it take for you to want to move? You have nerves of steel! :p

EDIT: I seem to remember seeing a picture of your closet somewhere. I know the REAL reason you don't want to move!
Click to expand...

Haha...I did move and it was a nightmare. But I don't know - I'm not paranoid. I don't think the worlds out to get me, my neighbors aren't terrorists and I'm not going to bunker down because something might happen. I'm just of the mind-set that as long as your smart you can avoid most terrible situations and the ones that brains can't save you from are going to happen anyway and there's not much you can do about it.

The rape thing is a good example. Yes there were 3 rapes in my neighborhood, one right behind my house. This sucks, I feel terrible for the girls that it happened too but I can't be scared of my neighborhood or my neighboors. I just made sure not to do stupid things like walk alone at night, made sure my roommates left all the lights on during nights that I was working late and told them to leave there windows open so I could call out if something did happen. It's not like this was a normal occurance, if this was like Africa or something I'd take more precautions - but it's Calgary, Rapes aren't normal. I've got enough to worry about in life without adding the whole "Everyones out to get me so I should get them first" Stress factor. I don't think I'd be a very happy person.


Anyway, I just like to talk about stuff like this because a lot of my friends are Americans and contrary to what a lot of you might think, I think Americans are pretty cool, smart people. Most of this board is made up of American's and a lot of people on this board are my friends, I like discussing issues like this with you and would really prefer if this was never to happen again, to anyone. Gun control may not be the best way to prevent something like this from happeneing again but this and many, many, many other issues need to be dealt with in order for people to feel safe again. If this had happened in Canada I'd be saying the exact same things I am now.

So, love you all - hope this never happens to you and once again, my best wishes go out to the families and friends affected by this tragedy.
 
Last edited:
pakomen said:
Bullshit. For the most part.

You will not manage to kill 30 people with a knife.
You will not manage to kill 30 people with a sword.
You will not manage to kill 30 people with a tire iron.
You will not manage to kill 30 people with a golf club.
You will not manage to kill 30 people with a basebal bat.

Unless you were a trained killer and you did it in stealth.

Show me the last school stabbing where 30 people were killed. With guns, you have range. Unless you're V, you're not going to take down 30 people by throwing knives around.

Bullets and bombs and chemicals are where it's at.
Click to expand...
*edit* better website -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre

It's not impossible. Granted, these people were brave enough to charge the attacker rather than just pray...had they done nothing, thing's would've been much, much worse.

And...as heartless as it may sound, I think the Virginia Tech incident could've ended much better if people'd attempted to take him down as well. But it's just my opinion...
 
Last edited:
One question for all you anti-gun people. Are you today glad that not one other student or teacher had a gun on Monday?
 
Sabia said:
I'm well aware that when someone wants to kill someone else they're going to do it
Click to expand...

I'd like to make a slight modification to this statement, for I feel that there's a subtle distinction here that should be made. What's more accurate is:

"I'm well aware that when someone wants to kill someone else they're going to try"

And there in one short word is where we differ. If it's possible for some nutbag who cares jack-all for the rules laid down by society to obtain a speed-loading semi-automatic weapon and try to kill others, it should be relatively easy for any law-abiding citizen to own one and try to defend themselves.

Keep in mind - police forces must remain reactive, because proactive police forces tend to go by such monikers as Gestapo. In a life-threatening situation, the first line of defense is and always will be self-defense.

Case in point: Appalachian School of Law Shooting

Would this guy have gone on to kill more people? Truthfully, we'll never know. Nonetheless, the fact remains that he wasn't afforded the opportunity.

As to whether or not the government fears me and my gun? No, that's laughable, but what about an entire nation? Furthermore, fear isn't even a necessary factor in the worst-case scenario. If things ever were to go horribly wrong, an armed populace would be better able to resist. I don't think that's an arguable point. If that sounds like an outmoded concept, I'd just ask you to please remember that from the American point of view, in a state of perfect anarchy, it still falls to the individual to police oneself.

With that out of the way, do I believe that there should be waiting periods to obtain weapons? Do I believe that it might not be a bad idea to have some form of psychological testing involved in the process of issuing a gun permit? To the former? Definitely. To the latter? . . . Maybe. All I'm pointing out is that all the gun legislation in the world wouldn't stop a lunatic like this one, so why not discuss instead what we can do to stop our society from churning out these losers?

And Matt? I hear ya man. I brought up some similar points of my own that have been totally swept aside by this all-important gun control debate, which, even though I've voiced and defended my point of view on the matter, is utterly sidereal to the true problem.
 
Last edited:
Jereme said:
One question for all you anti-gun people. Are you today glad that not one other student or teacher had a gun on Monday?
Click to expand...

The fact is, if anyone wanted to attempt to stop them, they could've tried. Trip him as he comes by and stomp on his head. Stab his ankle with a pen and take him down while he's temporarily shocked. You don't need a gun to stop a gun, and having one certainly doesn't make you invincible.
 
Mishaela said:
The fact is, if anyone wanted to attempt to stop them, they could've tried. Trip him as he comes by and stomp on his head. Stab his ankle with a pen and take him down while he's temporarily shocked. You don't need a gun to stop a gun, and having one certainly doesn't make you invincible.
Click to expand...

Very true. Having a gun doesn't make you invincible. The thing is you don't bring a knife to a gun fight. Someone with a concealed weapons permit is most likely someone who has at least fired that weapon or another weapon. They probably have a little better chance at ending this then someone without a weapon.
 
Jereme said:
Very true. Having a gun doesn't make you invincible. The thing is you don't bring a knife to a gun fight. Someone with a concealed weapons permit is most likely someone who has at least fired that weapon or another weapon. They probably have a little better chance at ending this then someone without a weapon.
Click to expand...

I agree, the odds aren't in your favor if you try to fight them. But the guy's not looking for a fair fight to begin with, and doing nothing at all certainly isn't gonna help the situation. =/
 
Mishaela said:
*edit* better website -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_school_massacre

It's not impossible. Granted, these people were brave enough to charge the attacker rather than just pray...had they done nothing, thing's would've been much, much worse.

And...as heartless as it may sound, I think the Virginia Tech incident could've ended much better if people'd attempted to take him down as well. But it's just my opinion...
Click to expand...

That's also only 8. And they were tiny kids. So it's kind of an exception.

I understand what you're saying. I understand that if you broke into a nursery with a butterknife, you could probably kill everyone in the room. When I typed my post, I guess I was thinking more about average sized not-tiny-people. lol.
 
Sabia said:
I just don't think that I"m not the only one disturbed by the fact that he bought this stuff legally.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I know if it was illegal to buy guns and he got one anyways, I'd think, "Well, at least he didn't get that gun legally. I sure do feel safe."
 
New theory: Blame women (not all), too many stuck up girls in the last 20yrs or so, many kids are growing up not knowing a womans love. Men just need a little more love in their lives.
 
Bustaballs said:
Yeah. I know if it was illegal to buy guns and he got one anyways, I'd think, "Well, at least he didn't get that gun legally. I sure do feel safe."
Click to expand...

Holy cow! You're absolutely right! We should just give them away to everyone! Crazy, sane, young, old, who cares!

I thought I mentioned I was disturbed by the fact that someone with obvious mental health problems was able to obtain 2 guns legally. I must be over-sensitive or something.
 
Sabia said:
Holy cow! You're absolutely right! We should just give them away to everyone! Crazy, sane, young, old, who cares!

I thought I mentioned I was disturbed by the fact that someone with obvious mental health problems was able to obtain 2 guns legally. I must be over-sensitive or something.
Click to expand...

I know you're being sarcastic, but the truth is, if everyone had guns, it'd all be fair. Now, would it work? Not bloody likely.

What I think would be a better deterent would be a nation wide concealed carry law. Because then, everyone *might* have a gun. Like myself, I usually carry my .22 pistol (got my concealed carry permit via a PI lisence) and it makes me feel a whole shitton safer then campus security. I mean sure, there are panic boxes about every 250 feet, and campus police will respond to those within 4 minutes, but I can draw alot quicker then 4 minutes should the situation require it.
 
I think that Sabia ,et al make a rational argument for selective gun control. The issue is that this rational argument (which I agree with) often fails with poor implementation. Criteria needs to be identified to categorize the weapons you are looking to limit. For example, in California here are the criteria:
Rifle
* Folding or telescoping stock
* Protruding pistol grip
* bayonet mount
* threaded muzzle or flash suppressor
* grenade launcher

Pistols
* Magazine Outside Grip
* Threaded muzzle
* Barrel Shroud
* Unloaded Weight of 50 ounces or more
* Semi-Automatic Version of a fully Automatic Weapon

Shotguns
* Folding/Telescoping Stock
* Protruding Pistol Grip
* Detachable Magazine Capacity
* Fixed Magazine Capacity Greater than 5 rounds.

Source: http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issues/?page=aw

Does this limitation make me feel any safer? No. Did the Virginia Tech (VT) shooter's guns meet this criteria? Yes. So, if this criteria existed in Virginia, would it have saved lives like the lawmakers of California intended? Nope.

It should be noted that the VT Shooter obtained his guns illegally. He lied on his application on a section that would have instantly denied him the ability to purchase a gun. While reforms may need to take place to mitigate this risk, I wonder if the American Taxpayers are willing to pay to have this loophole plugged.
http://www.thestar.com/News/article/204854
 
Last edited:
crookedmidget said:
Rifle
* Folding or telescoping stock
* Protruding pistol grip
* bayonet mount
* threaded muzzle or flash suppressor
* grenade launcher

Pistols
* Magazine Outside Grip
* Threaded muzzle
* Barrel Shroud
* Unloaded Weight of 50 ounces or more
* Semi-Automatic Version of a fully Automatic Weapon

Shotguns
* Folding/Telescoping Stock
* Protruding Pistol Grip
* Detachable Magazine Capacity
* Fixed Magazine Capacity Greater than 5 rounds.

Source: http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/issues/?page=aw
Click to expand...
It's the Brady Weapons Guide! It can't be that accurate...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top