I honestly think that this is horrible.
It makes me sick to my stomach that someone would do something like this, let alone think of doing something like this.
Taken from CBC
| Quote: |
| "Today the university was struck with a tragedy that we consider of monumental proportions," university president Charles Steger said. "The university is shocked and indeed horrified." |
I totally agree with what the president of the university said. It's shocking/ horrifying and utterly tragic.
I just feel for the parents, friends, family and any acquaintance of a wounded or deceased. For them, this is a horrible day. I will make sure to pray for them this evening.
| Quote: |
| "This is every parents' nightmare, even if your child is not directly involved," he said. |
Honestly, if I was a parent involved with this, I would already have had a heart attack.
Let God punish those who created this event. It's already 33, including the shooter. More information at Wikipedia, they're incredibly fast. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Tech_shootings
It makes me feel sick too, being on a university campus myself. In just a few hours, one person ruins so many peoples life (and all the parents/friends). I hate to say it but its the other peoples fault at school Bullies man...there like a grouth adding to a kids will to kill cause he/she doesnt fit in or doesnt have friends is made fun of Iv been told like a billion times just talking to them,help em out, or back them up is all that matters to that person at least he/she knows that not everyone is a jerk
Chills just ran down my spine after reading those articles. 
I can't believe how one person could easily take other people's lives like that. So many lives have been lost, and surely, the incident's survivors are going to be scarred for life.
I'm also attending university, and I just can't imagine anything as horrible as that happening on our campus... But knowing the world we live in today, it could happen anywhere if we don't do anything about it.
I agree with Master_Link--If we would show those who are treated like outcasts that we care, maybe somehow, that little gesture would make a difference. Of course, any amount of gun control or being nice won't prevent all these incidents from happening, but I think that it's better than not trying to do anything at all. I haven't read any updated articles, but is it really bullies?
I read that there were issues between him and the girlfriend, where the RA then tried to intervene to help them -- thats when he shot them both. He also went to a specific building to commit the shoot out so there may be some issues he had with administration.
I'm thinking mental issues are involved here, as reported students stated that he carried out the killing seriously and calmy without even speaking a word.
Last edited by Liu on Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:35 am; edited 1 time in total
| darvit wrote: |
Chills just ran down my spine after reading those articles.
I can't believe how one person could easily take other people's lives like that. So many lives have been lost, and surely, the incident's survivors are going to be scarred for life.
I'm also attending university, and I just can't imagine anything as horrible as that happening on our campus... But knowing the world we live in today, it could happen anywhere if we don't do anything about it.
I agree with Master_Link--If we would show those who are treated like outcasts that we care, maybe somehow, that little gesture would make a difference. Of course, any amount of gun control or being nice won't prevent all these incidents from happening, but I think that it's better than not trying to do anything at all. |
Gun control has nothing to do with it! It has more to do with the systems in place, the response of the police and university leadership, and the way people are brought up.
I've just been watching Sky news, they covered this incident, as well as the fact that there are 200,000 abortions a year in the UK and some doctors are now raising objections as some woman are having multiple abortions. They also covered the fact that dishonesty is up - they experimented by leaving cell phones etc. around to see if they would be returned - apparently only 24% were returned in London.
The message is clear - bring back corporal punishment in the schools, employ the death penalty for crimes like murder, armed robbery and rape, and force government ministers to take responsibilty for their portfolios. In fact
When I was at school, we had corporal punishment (caning). Nobody in
our school committed any serious crimes and the majority that I know of went on to have decent careers or become businessmen.
After school I spent time in the army, but right now I don't own a gun. It's not the guns that are the problem. How they're made available and who they're made too should be tightly controlled.
The way the police reacted is also crucial in this case and should be looked at more closely in the light of current facts. | Tiger wrote: |
| darvit wrote: | Chills just ran down my spine after reading those articles.
I can't believe how one person could easily take other people's lives like that. So many lives have been lost, and surely, the incident's survivors are going to be scarred for life.
I'm also attending university, and I just can't imagine anything as horrible as that happening on our campus... But knowing the world we live in today, it could happen anywhere if we don't do anything about it.
I agree with Master_Link--If we would show those who are treated like outcasts that we care, maybe somehow, that little gesture would make a difference. Of course, any amount of gun control or being nice won't prevent all these incidents from happening, but I think that it's better than not trying to do anything at all. |
Gun control has nothing to do with it! It has more to do with the systems in place, the response of the police and university leadership, and the way people are brought up.
I've just been watching Sky news, they covered this incident, as well as the fact that there are 200,000 abortions a year in the UK and some doctors are now raising objections as some woman are having multiple abortions. They also covered the fact that dishonesty is up - they experimented by leaving cell phones etc. around to see if they would be returned - apparently only 24% were returned in London.
The message is clear - bring back corporal punishment in the schools, employ the death penalty for crimes like murder, armed robbery and rape, and force government ministers to take responsibilty for their portfolios. In fact
When I was at school, we had corporal punishment (caning). Nobody in
our school committed any serious crimes and the majority that I know of went on to have decent careers or become businessmen.
After school I spent time in the army, but right now I don't own a gun. It's not the guns that are the problem. How they're made available and who they're made too should be tightly controlled.
The way the police reacted is also crucial in this case and should be looked at more closely in the light of current facts. |
hear!hear! bring back death penalty.... end gun ownership to public... and half of our problems will be eliminated@Tiger, harsher punishments don't seem to have any influence on severe crimes like murder and rape. Especially in this case, the death penalty wouldn't have changed anything, as he killed himself afterwards.
@Liu, I didn't hear anything about bullying either. I rather think that Master_Link didn't take the time to read the topic and was confused because he also posted in a topic about bullying.
| Liu wrote: |
| I haven't read any updated articles, but is it really bullies? |
Not always bullies its family and friends also you think that friends will be there for you some of em are jerks same thing for the family are abusive and they care but they dont care as much as they should | Tiger wrote: |
Gun control has nothing to do with it! It has more to do with the systems in place, the response of the police and university leadership, and the way people are brought up.
|
I didn't say gun control had something to do with it, I was just citing it as an example of a popular "solution". And I agree with you -- I don't think that gun control would help, to be honest.
I mentioned bullying because [well, Master Link mentioned it and] the whole incident is reminiscent of the other shootings where suspects all had grudges against the students/school system--sort of. Nothing has been mentioned about bullies, though. It would be sad actually, old as you are and in a university, if people would still be immature enough to bully you.
| Liu wrote: |
I'm thinking mental issues are involved here, as reported students stated that he carried out the killing seriously and calmy without even speaking a word. |
Looks like a mental issue. Maybe his anger took over, and add that to a [possible] family history of mental illness, and there you have it...Oh sure.
Use a tragedy to further your cause and your personal ideologies. One man goes on a rampage and that makes you want to bring back corporal punishment in schools?
Do you have any clue how much of a mental scar this can have on students? I've never met anyone who's seen any considerable corporal punishment in school, and everyone I know grew up just fine.
Besides, what's to stop someone from illegally and easily procuring a gun and shooting a teacher who beat him up?
Why woeld someone do something like this, I mean if you wanna make some clear to other peolpe, you can do that on other ways.
I think that this person had a problem (or two)
I think this incident reflect a wider trend in society of people being way too individualistic. This guy was a senior in University and he is being described as a "Loner" That should not be the case for someone his age, and I am fairly certain things were not like that 20-30 years ago. Following some of the news coverage that was of course saturated across every possible channel that produces news, and nearly every single eyewitness would say "thank goodness that I was ok, or that could have been me that got shot" not much sympathy being conveyed for the real victims. We just don't' seem to care about other people these days. It all seems to be about coming up with hair brained schemes such as screening machines at airports and government buildings looking for terrorists! Or the recent favorite of making sure everyone fits travel sized bottles into zip lock baggies because god help us if someone concocts a complicated chemical compound from puncturing a 20mm hole in an airplane cabin. We're too busy looking after ourselves instead of seeing if there's a problem with someone around us.
there's another topic like this in general topics, but things like this make you wonder about people. Obviously no one knew this kid who killed these people would do something like this. If people knew that, then this might not have happened in the first place. So if no one knew he'd do this, who else could be out there about to snap and start killing people?
My astronomy teacher was just telling us today that we have to live our lives to the fullest and try to stay happy b/c we don't know how long we have on earth. It could be 50 years or 50 days.
I'm sorry for the loss of life, especially the girl in my school who lost a sister in this. Hopefully we can all get past this and keep them in our memories
| Tiger wrote: |
| Gun control has nothing to do with it! |
Nothing? Is it possible for someone to massacre 30 people with a knife, or with a baseball bat? Sure, you could make a bomb, but that's a lot more pre-thought than walking to a store and picking up a handgun, and much easier to detect.
Why on earth do 'ordinary' people need guns? The only possible reason I can think of is is because of self defence. But then, your problem is crime control (and the fact the people you're defending yourself against also have guns), not a lack of weapons...Well, I don't think it's as much an issue of being mentally disturbed, but more something of helplessness. What do you do when you just can't open a jar of pickles? You give up (for a while, at least). What do you do when you just can't get a better grade from a teacher or a raise from a boss? You give up.
So we can assume something along the lines that Cho wanted to send some sort of message, something people wouldn't hear from him in his position of life. Perhaps he found it impossible to communicate with people in other ways, as many people revert to art or music to express.
The main question that msot news stations were trying to adress was 'why?, questioning his motive.
There's still no evidence of girlfriend issues or any recent incident between the victims and Cho, but what can be assumed is that he thought that by taking human life, including his own, he was expressing an idea, grievance, etc., that he could not find a suitablem means of communicating previously.
I would like to drag Columbine into this. I, personally, feel that Columbine is overrated. School shootings happen all the time, more frequent than one would think.
Our teacher (who I cannot say is a reliable source, but a source nontheless) claims that school shootings or weapons related to school occur on an almost daily basis.
So what makes Columbine so different? Sure, it was a tragedy of huge proportion... but not the word we've seen. I mean, how many people have heard about the Bath School Disaster (in Michigan!)?
The thing that made Columbine so different was that it happened in a white, suburb community. Let's face it, an inner-city predominately African American school shooting would not make news, but if it happens in a predominately Caucasian community - it's the headlines!
Funny how we pretend racism (or at the least, a racial bias) does not exist.
[End Rant]
In relation to the Virgina shootings - this was a newsworthy tragedy. It's a shame any possible warning sings were not spotted.
I would also like to say that I am quite disappointed with the head of Virgina Tech for not closing the campus, cancelling classes, or at least doing something after the two murders in the dorm room. | Soulfire wrote: |
I would like to drag Columbine into this. I, personally, feel that Columbine is overrated. School shootings happen all the time, more frequent than one would think.
Our teacher (who I cannot say is a reliable source, but a source nontheless) claims that school shootings or weapons related to school occur on an almost daily basis. |
I would like to see those statistics. I've tried to find supporting stats but have failed to do so. According to the School Violence Resource Center the odds of a child dying by homicide in school is 1in 1.7 million. (Homicide away from school is 1 in 21,000.) Furthermore, the number of students threatened with or injured by any weapon in school in 2001 amounted to only 9%.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| So what makes Columbine so different? Sure, it was a tragedy of huge proportion... but not the word we've seen. I mean, how many people have heard about the Bath School Disaster (in Michigan!)? |
And how many people were alive in 1927? I suppose if today was in the year 1935, I may very well be familiar with the case. To argue that the reason people are more familiar with the Columbine shooting than the Bath School bombing is because of race bias does not hold water in my opinion. It's just a matter of time. How much do people know today about Al Jolson, Mae West, Calvin Coolidge, Lindbergh crossing the Atlantic, Trotsky, etc.?
One could analyze the news coverage of the period however and use that to argue race bias during the period if the evidence supports it.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| The thing that made Columbine so different was that it happened in a white, suburb community. Let's face it, an inner-city predominately African American school shooting would not make news, but if it happens in a predominately Caucasian community - it's the headlines! |
I must disagree with this also. Mass shootings, like serial killings, historically are not committed by blacks. I only know of one black serial killer and none who have committed mass shootings. If a mass shooting were committed in a predominantly black school, I am sure it would receive the same coverage as any other. At least I would hope.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| I would also like to say that I am quite disappointed with the head of Virgina Tech for not closing the campus, cancelling classes, or at least doing something after the two murders in the dorm room. |
I disagree here as well. From what little I have read and seen, all the evidence in the first shooting pointed to a small, possibly domestic, event. There was no reason to believe that the shooter was planning on committing mass murder. Why would anyone jump to that conclusion? Should the lives of 20,000 some people be turned upside down because of what everyone believed to be a (forgive me for saying) simple murder.
My hometown was a quarter that size. We didn't lock the city down, close all the businesses and tell everyone to lock their doors and stay home whenever a murder occurred.
As for locking down the campus, its 2,600 acres. Its not as if there are gates to lock. I'm not familiar with Virginia Tech, but I am sure it is quite open. Not a simple task.
Respectfully,
MA few things I have to say, first of all I don't think its the worst school shooting it is probably one of the worst college shootings but we're not in a competition here either. It's somewhat true to say that shootings happen all the time, maybe not on such a grand scale as this sort of extreme demonstrates but it happens nonetheless. To the point of gun control I personally agree with the fundamentals of it, but thats probably not the only solution to the problem. It is easy to say "ban gun sales and nobody will buy them" but we all know thats not true because people who are determined enough to do something will find a way. This guy bought the first gun a good month ago, and the second one not too recently so its not like he just picked one up at a corner store there was some thought put into this. Canada has relatively strict gun control laws, and a firearms registry to track all firearms registry, but that doesn't stop people from using stolen weapons to commit crimes the latest incident at Dawson College in Montreal just proves some of the weaknesses in our system as well.
| bongoman wrote: |
| This guy bought the first gun a good month ago, and the second one not too recently so its not like he just picked one up at a corner store there was some thought put into this. Canada has relatively strict gun control laws, and a firearms registry to track all firearms registry, but that doesn't stop people from using stolen weapons to commit crimes the latest incident at Dawson College in Montreal just proves some of the weaknesses in our system as well. |
Firstly I think your right, the guy had mental issues that while they should have been addressed a while ago, it meant he was able to formulate a plan that lead to this devastating outcome for all involved.
Registering of firearms tho is not a solution to problems like this, as it is only ever useful AFTER a crime has been committed. Sure you can trace the shooter, but how useful is that when someone is dead?
Personally I don' think it would be possible to ban all guns in the US, nor any country for that matter, there are just too many in circulation. Yes, they have a register and they could demand that all those registered be handed over, but doesn't that make life so much easier for those will illegal / stolen weapons to commit these aweful crimes. Surely a criminal that has a gun is more likely to carry one and ultimately use one if he/she knows that the victim is more than likely unarmed.
The UK has tight gun laws but still it has a gun crime problem - this is a global problem with unfortunately no simple solution. If there is a solution at all.
I personally don't think there will ever be a time when this kind of crime is unheard of, and unfortunately the more then happen the less the public will care.This is a common occurrence in USA and is bound to happen in future also if proper reforms in the US school system are not made.
33 Dead...
Must be a really stressed out and frustrated individual who sets out to do something like that huh...
too bad but whats done is done...
YET the gaps of lost lives remain
BUT we cant do nothin bout that now can we (slow cops)
That how messed up our planet is
I have been SO wanting to post this yesterday, but my internet connection was down. *kicks dial-up modem* [and yes, we're THAT pathetic.]
My condolences go out to those who actually knew the victims and their families in VTech. Really, there are no words. This is just... devastating.
I've been following this over at CNN. It's just horrible. It took me a few hours to process the entire thing, and I've been saying prayers since watching the news -- for the victims and their families and friends, as well as the most tragic figure of all, the demented shooter. He should be pitied. (For those of you who believe in God and the afterlife, please don't forget to pray for their souls.)
There's another concern that should be dealt with here, and one that definitely aggravated the situation: After the 7:15 am shooting, the university authorities DID NOT CANCEL CLASSES nor did they inform the
students that a shooting had happened, because they thought it was an
isolated case. It was a fatal, fatal mistake. Two hours later, at 9:15, the
shooter went off to kill more people at Norris Hall.
How much should the school authorities be blamed is another burning question.
Of course, the more obvious question is how much should of the blame
should society take upon itself. Larry King interviewed Dr. Phil McGraw -- who I admire to bits -- and applauded the psychologist's statement that
American culture and the media are feeding this mass murdering frenzy. Film, television, and most especially video games, not only foster a culture of complacency with such displays of violence, but actually glamorizes it, and worse, capitalizes on it.
What's your take on that?
(Another concern is the backlash the Asian -- and not only Korean -- community in America may suffer because of this. I saw in the news how
South Koreans fixed themselves in front of the US Embassy and held a vigil as well -- both to offer condolences to the victims' families, as if to apologize, said the BBC correspondent, for what their "son" did to America. The correspondent rightly intoned there was a heavy sense of responsibility among Koreans now.)
The killer was already gravely mentally ill, and had a brush with the law in 2005. It's just insane, how we never really know who's just unusually quiet or who's the psycho-in-the-making. The shooter's roommates described him as being more quiet than usual prior to this incident. Could it have been prevented had there been people more concerned about him?
And how heroic of that professor who gave up his life for his students'. God bless his soul.Have you guys read this article?
| Quote: |
Va. Tech gunman sent material to NBC
BLACKSBURG, Va. - Midway through his murderous rampage, the Virginia Tech gunman went to the post office and mailed NBC a package containing photos and videos of him brandishing guns and delivering a snarling, profanity-laced tirade about rich "brats" and their "hedonistic needs."
"You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today," 23-year-old Cho Seung-Hui says in a harsh monotone. "But you decided to spill my blood. You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision was yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off."
NBC said the package contained a rambling and often-incoherent, 1,800-word video manifesto on CD, plus 43 photos, 11 of them showing him aiming handguns at the camera.
The package arrived at NBC headquarters in New York two days after Cho killed 32 people and committed suicide in the deadliest one-man shooting rampage in modern U.S. history. It bore a Postal Service time stamp showing that it had been mailed at a Blacksburg post office at 9:01 a.m. Monday, about an hour and 45 minutes after Cho first opened fire.
That would help explain one of the biggest mysteries about the massacre: where the gunman was and what he did during that two-hour window between the first burst of gunfire, at a high-rise dorm, and the second fusillade, at a classroom building.
"Your Mercedes wasn't enough, you brats," says Cho, a South Korean immigrant whose parents work at a dry cleaners in suburban Washington. "Your golden necklaces weren't enough, you snobs. Your trust funds wasn't enough. Your vodka and cognac wasn't enough. All your debaucheries weren't enough. Those weren't enough to fulfill your hedonistic needs. You had everything."
[more]
|
Cho even gave a shout-out to Columbine's Eric and Dylan 
:
| Quote: |
He refers to "martyrs like Eric and Dylan" — a reference to the teenage killers in the Columbine High massacre. |
He could have been bullied, then. Some sort of alienation, perhaps? Oppressed? Looked down upon? Discriminated?
If I were bullied, I wouldn't go on a killing spree, though.
/EDIT: Additional quote:
| Quote: |
"You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience," he says, apparently reading from his manifesto. "You thought it was one pathetic boy's life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people."
|
your right darvit even if you get picked on no reason to blow someones brains out I mean come on theres better ways to handle things like this not just pull the trigger and make everything go away doesnt work like that even if thats what the person thinks
This is something that will be open to great public debate... for about another week, then unfortunately something bigger will come on the news and it will be all washed over...
The victims and their families will be remembered in a years time, and once again the whole sorry affair will be looked a, only to be forgotton..
While I am sorry, and I truly am, I think this was an incident that was badly managed from the outset. He had a history of mental illness and still was given the opportunity to refuse additional counseling.
The systems of liberty and justice for all always forgets the liberty of any victim that could be (and in this case, were) affected.
I don't think any changes will be made to gun laws in the US, all I can think is that tighter security will be imposed. But we all know security can be breached and if someone is determined to get a weapon they will.
Well when you go to a school theres things to do during this situations like a lockdown you go to a area and stay there quitly acting like your not there well if anyone has gone to that school is gunna know how it works and is gunna be a slice of cake getin in get the killing done and kill themselves and there wont be much effort into keepen the people in either specialy the was the schools are set up and there programs to get students out
This is not the first and not the last act of violence in America. In "the land of the free" the right to defend yourself [GOOD] is interpreted as the "right to bear arms" [BAD] that is the right to have lethal weapons in order to be able to kill others. If you think Europeans are less secure because they do not have the right to easily procure lethal weapons YOU ARE WRONG! Criminality rate is much lower in Europe.
A solution is development of less-lethal weapons [no automatic fire, fewer bullets, smaller caliber, rubber bullets, etc] or even non-lethal weapons [yes there are such weapons already e.g. energy guns, acoustic weapons which hurt, incapacitate but don't kill] and a ban on lethal weapons (except for soldiers, SWAT teams, etc). Therefore you will be able to defend yourself but you can't easily kill somebody.
There will never be total safety but such acts will be indeed very rare and with fewer innocent victims.
My condoleances to everyone affected by this.
I wonder how many of these it has to be before America changes its laws on Guns and their control.
| smarter wrote: |
This is not the first and not the last act of violence in America. In "the land of the free" the right to defend yourself [GOOD] is interpreted as the "right to bear arms" [BAD] that is the right to have lethal weapons in order to be able to kill others. If you think Europeans are less secure because they do not have the right to easily procure lethal weapons YOU ARE WRONG! Criminality rate is much lower in Europe.
A solution is development of less-lethal weapons [no automatic fire, fewer bullets, smaller caliber, rubber bullets, etc] or even non-lethal weapons [yes there are such weapons already e.g. energy guns, acoustic weapons which hurt, incapacitate but don't kill] and a ban on lethal weapons (except for soldiers, SWAT teams, etc). Therefore you will be able to defend yourself but you can't easily kill somebody.
There will never be total safety but such acts will be indeed very rare and with fewer innocent victims. |
| LimpFish wrote: |
My condoleances to everyone affected by this.
I wonder how many of these it has to be before America changes its laws on Guns and their control. |
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with U.S. citizens being able to defend themselves from other citizens wishing them harm. The reason it is there is so that U.S. citizens can defend themselves from the federal government should it become tyrannical. That is the same reason it also guarantees states the power to maintain militias.
Americans have a natural distrust of all governments, even their own. In our view (at least those of us who support the right to bear arms) taking away that right is one of the first small steps that could pave the way to tyranny.
Like Benjamin Franklin said...
Respectfully,
M[quote="darvit"]Have you guys read this article?
| Quote: |
If I were bullied, I wouldn't go on a killing spree, though.
/EDIT: Additional quote:
| Quote: |
"You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience," he says, apparently reading from his manifesto. "You thought it was one pathetic boy's life you were extinguishing. Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people."
|
|
If I were bullied I wouldnt either, BUT sometimes anger can cause us to do some terrible things. When I get angry I can *sometimes* say the ugliest things possible and after that I regret it for the rest of my life. With me it is sometimes words with this guy It was action. I GUESS THAT IT IS BEST TO NEVER PROVOKE PEOPLE. Keep joking and foolin around BUT know your limits CUS many people cant take jokes (eventough they don't hesitate to make em).
| varon wrote: |
There's another concern that should be dealt with here, and one that definitely aggravated the situation: After the 7:15 am shooting, the university authorities DID NOT CANCEL CLASSES nor did they inform the
students that a shooting had happened, because they thought it was an
isolated case. It was a fatal, fatal mistake. Two hours later, at 9:15, the
shooter went off to kill more people at Norris Hall. |
I BLAME THEM for NEGLIGENCE. We are living at a time where noone should ignore even the smallest terror attact or threath. We have all seen that the terrorists surprise people and end up doing the most unexpected. Hypotetically speaking, if a cat was hung in my street I would have my hoods securityalert set to RED:IMMINENT DANGER. Then most will say "nawh the kitten climbed up in the tree and fell down on the clothinglines" but your never know if eventually 10 people end up "falling from trees unto the clothinglines". We live in a SICK, PERVERTED, IMMORAL and CORRUPT world -- EXPECT THE WORSE, BUT hope FOR THE BEST!!!
| varon wrote: |
Of course, the more obvious question is how much should of the blame
should society take upon itself. Larry King interviewed Dr. Phil McGraw -- who I admire to bits -- and applauded the psychologist's statement that
American culture and the media are feeding this mass murdering frenzy. Film, television, and most especially video games, not only foster a culture of complacency with such displays of violence, but actually glamorizes it, and worse, capitalizes on it.
What's your take on that? |
Your absolutely right, after watching 50 serial killer movies I would experience the slaughter a chicken as a funny spectacle. I would then experience the killing of a human as a chore that is completed without even a twitch or second thoughts--its just slicing a troat right, how bad could that be? NOW, We are truly "FEEDING THE MURDER FRENZY".
BOTTOMLINE IS: IT'S ALL OUR FAULT!!! (We created this society) I think we're just shocked less by things these days, when anything happens the news has saturated coverage of it until were up to our ears in coverage to the point that it looses meaning
| smarter wrote: |
A solution is development of less-lethal weapons [no automatic fire, fewer bullets, smaller caliber, rubber bullets, etc] or even non-lethal weapons [yes there are such weapons already e.g. energy guns, acoustic weapons which hurt, incapacitate but don't kill] and a ban on lethal weapons (except for soldiers, SWAT teams, etc). Therefore you will be able to defend yourself but you can't easily kill somebody.
There will never be total safety but such acts will be indeed very rare and with fewer innocent victims. |
Right so basicly give toys to the people who dont have the authority to bear arms...wow nice thinken come on and even if that did work same way school shooters get there weapons will do the same even if a law like that is passed just go behind law get a family member of friends gun that is leathal | Moonspider wrote: |
The Second Amendment has nothing to do with U.S. citizens being able to defend themselves from other citizens wishing them harm. The reason it is there is so that U.S. citizens can defend themselves from the federal government should it become tyrannical. That is the same reason it also guarantees states the power to maintain militias.
Americans have a natural distrust of all governments, even their own. In our view (at least those of us who support the right to bear arms) taking away that right is one of the first small steps that could pave the way to tyranny.
Like Benjamin Franklin said...
Respectfully,
M |
In deed moonspider, thank you.
Every time a massacre occurs there is a stupid special about the weapons used. This time I watch part of one that was talking up the 9mm like it was an especially deadly weapon.
The thing with this case is, the shooter had every write to own a gun in the US. The only way to TRY keeping guns out of someone’s hands committing a repeat of this act is to disallow guns to everyone or tighten restrictions to some unreasonable point. Remember, he didn’t have a criminal background or HISTORY of mental illness.
This would remove a mechanism from the check-balance system, and like you said – take a step toward tyranny.
This isn’t paranoia, it’s just logical. Any student of history will remind you that society upgrades – then degrades. It is a fact that eventually the citizens of all societies will eventually have to defend them selves.
As for the argument that he couldn’t have killed 32 people with a baseball bat….. Your right. Also, not as many people would die, like less that one every few minute, if we had stricter automobile laws. We should probably focus there first.
Trying to argue that removing guns from law abiding citizens to prevent a repeat of this incident, is just as valid of an argument as requiring citizens to arm themselves to prevent the same incident.
The fact is these incidences will occur in a free society. Car accidents will happen, terror attack will happen, and massacres will happen. Taking a superficial approach, attempting to pan implements used, ignoring the driving force, is just foolish.I am well aware of americans and their opinions on the rights to bear arms, in case the government would turn on them and create a tyranny, but as it is now in the US, it seems to allow every other mentally sick person to carry out their own tyrranic actions instead.
Seems to me that it would be easier, in a democracy, to control the government to not become tyrannic, than to control every single nut case in the whole US to not shoot up his school.
| LimpFish wrote: |
I am well aware of americans and their opinions on the rights to bear arms, in case the government would turn on them and create a tyranny, but as it is now in the US, it seems to allow every other mentally sick person to carry out their own tyrranic actions instead.
Seems to me that it would be easier, in a democracy, to control the government to not become tyrannic, than to control every single nut case in the whole US to not shoot up his school. |
Tyranny often arises out of democracies. (Nazi Germany and the Roman Empire are two of the most notable examples.) History demonstrates that it is not that easy to control. As a nation grows in age and in power, I think it becomes even more difficult.
In a free society you cannot stop 100% of such attacks. If someone wishes to die to carry out an attack of any kind there is little anyone can do to stop it.
This is especially true if the person, as in the VT case, is a loner and there is no conspiracy. All of the evidence is in his head. All other evidence will be discovered only after the deed is done.
So in a free society like the U.S., such things will happen again. There will be more terrorist attacks, whether foreign or domestic.
But I'd rather suffer the occasional disaster than grant the government more power and allow greater restrictions of our freedoms. We do make trade offs, and have been doing so since the dramatic changes Lincoln made during the Civil War. (The antebellum U.S. was an entirely different country, IMHO.) However there is a reason the second amendment is part of the original Bill of Rights. And I refuse to move toward revoking it.
Some argue that it only applies to state militias. I don't think it does. Besides, since the Civil War we really don't have militias. States have "National Guards," but their very name implies that they are more loyal to the United States (the "Nation") than they are to their respective states. (I'm a strong state rights advocate.) Thus they are no longer an effective check and balance, and have not been so since 1865. That part of the second amendment is already nothing more than a paper tiger and can never threaten the federal government.
I only know of one true militia off-hand, and that is in South Carolina.
I seem to have gone off on a tangent. 
Respectfully,
M
Last edited by Moonspider on Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:30 pm; edited 1 time in totalThe issue of gun control is asinine.
It’s been said for ever:
“Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt”
"when catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults"
Gun violence among law abiding citizens is not a problem in the US. Sure, out of the 300,000,000 people – ever now and then one or two go on a little rampage with effective weapons. By this logic we need to outlaw lots of other stuff first.
I for one find sincere comfort knowing my law abiding neighbors are armed.
This argument reminds me of a Simpsons episode, the one with the bear attack.
Switzerland has one of the higest gun ownership rates per capita (I think it's mandated by law that every household should have a gun, because of the national militia system). Great Britain and Canada have similar per capita gun ownership as the US and there are many other countries with similar or higher rates than the US.
So, why is it that Americans shoot each other as a significantly higher rate than these other countries? This is the real question, IMO. What is it about American culture that causes such events as Columbine, VA Tech, et al., not to mention the "normal" shootings that occur? By government reports, the rate of murder has been the same fro 1973 to the present? So is the pattern of single person homicides shifting to mass murders?
No Lesson Learned:
This is taken from Yahoo News:
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The powerful US gun lobby, far from being weakened by last week's tragic college campus shooting, actually has emerged stronger, gun advocates said, stepping up calls Sunday for a better-armed US citizenry to prevent future attacks.
Gun rights advocates said that following last week's massacre, in which 23-year-old Cho Seung-Hui fatally shot 32 victims at Virginia Tech University, gun control forces will be hard pressed to make the case for tighter restrictions.
"This is a huge nail in the coffin of gun control," said Philip Van Cleave, president of the gun rights group Virginia Citizens Defense League.
"They had gun control on campus and it got all those people killed, because nobody could defend themselves," he told AFP.
"You want people to be able to defend themselves -- always," he said.
Van Cleave said the tragedy could give a boost to a years-long effort in Virginia to pass legislation allowing students to carry weapons on campus -- especially since existing laws failed to prevent Cho's murderous rampage.
"Gun control failed. That student under university rules was not to have a gun," Van Cleave said.
"Come legislative season, which is in January, we're going to be fighting to get a bill put in again -- the third year in a row now and hopefully this time it will pass -- that would let students that are over 21 with a permit ... carry concealed self-defense," he said.
The bill, which would also allow any faculty member possessing a concealed carry permit to carry a concealed weapon, has a "greatly enhanced" chance of passage following the Virginia Tech shooting, Van Cleave said.....................................
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070422/ts_alt_afp/uscrimeshootingguns_070422195959 No Lesson Learned????
I think your article, did you forget to quote?, explains the lesson learned is gun control only prevents people from defending them selves and has no effect on those doing the harm.
Cho is a good example. By our current laws he is allowed to have a gun. He never did anything that would warrant a regulation. If any argument is valid, it would be to require psychological screening. Tough one to pass though.
Also by our current laws, he was able to put himself into a situation where he was armed and surrounded by unarmed people (because they follow the law).
Bottom line, gun control advocated need to accept the reality that the only people they can take guns away from are people who follow laws. People who follow laws don’t attribute to gun violence – they are victims of.
| Tiger wrote: |
| Gun control has nothing to do with it! |
| dayveday wrote: |
Nothing? Is it possible for someone to massacre 30 people with a knife, or with a baseball bat?
Why on earth do 'ordinary' people need guns? |
Dayveday, I'm totally on board with you.
I'm sorry, but the fact of the matter is that there are always going to be people with psychological problems living amongst us-- it's absolutely abhorrent, not to mention irresponsible, that the US government has such lax gun control...
Allowing people virtually unlimited access to high powered weapons will pretty much guarantee that massacres will continue.
Do you want them to stop? Do you really?! Puh-leez.... If you did, you would do something to reduce the risk.
It seems like every time there is a massacre in the US, it gets a load of press, and everyone talks about how devastating it is, but no one actually does anything to prevent it from happening again.
Why is it bleedingly obvious to everyone else in the world that the US needs stricter gun laws, yet the US is blind to such a rational and sensible approach to dealing with this problem?
In a sense, the US health system is also to blame. It's crap. Pure and simple. I'm sure there are thousands of other trigger-happy people out there with mental disorders, just about to crack-- if you're going to give them guns, at least have government-funded, widespread mental health support centres, for god's sake! At least then, these people would feel as though there were options other than violence, and they might just choose to get help. | lyddi8 wrote: |
| Tiger wrote: | | Gun control has nothing to do with it! |
| dayveday wrote: | Nothing? Is it possible for someone to massacre 30 people with a knife, or with a baseball bat?
Why on earth do 'ordinary' people need guns? |
Dayveday, I'm totally on board with you.
I'm sorry, but the fact of the matter is that there are always going to be people with psychological problems living amongst us-- it's absolutely abhorrent, not to mention irresponsible, that the US government has such lax gun control...
Allowing people virtually unlimited access to high powered weapons will pretty much guarantee that massacres will continue.
Do you want them to stop? Do you really?! Puh-leez.... If you did, you would do something to reduce the risk.
It seems like every time there is a massacre in the US, it gets a load of press, and everyone talks about how devastating it is, but no one actually does anything to prevent it from happening again.
Why is it bleedingly obvious to everyone else in the world that the US needs stricter gun laws, yet the US is blind to such a rational and sensible approach to dealing with this problem?
|
Once again, as I said earlier: "The Second Amendment has nothing to do with U.S. citizens being able to defend themselves from other citizens wishing them harm. The reason it is there is so that U.S. citizens can defend themselves from the federal government should it become tyrannical. That is the same reason it also guarantees states the power to maintain militias."
The only way to prevent such crimes with the use of firearms is to utterly ban all firearms from the public, hence getting rid of the second amendment. Someone would have to propose an amendment to the constitution to repeal the second amendment, which the states would have to approve. It will never happen.
We can judge from history how well constitutionally banning something works in the United States. Prohibition anyone? All you would do is create a huge illegal set of smuggling and black market gun sales operations.
Respectfully,
MYou’ve said is again Moonspider. Indeed – banning guns WILL NOT remove them from the people gun-control advocates wish it would.
lyddi8, are guns banned in Australia? Anyway, yes. There will me more massacres in the US. There will also be terror attacks. There will be car accidents too, they kill a few of our 300,000,000 citizens every day.
We also have a thing called liberty. We choose to be free even though it’s more dangerous. Our citizens would rather risk the random psycho than try to ban all weapons he may use.
Additionally, we go to school here – and learn logic. Take illegal drugs (no literally). They ARE banned. So, only criminals take them. And, like Moon pointed out, it has created a huge black market. Banning guns would do the same.
In actuality, loosening gun laws could make law enforcement easier. You can’t track illegal gun and when someone can’t get a legal (traceable) weapon they get an illegal (not traceable). I’m not advocating this, it’s just a point that gun control isn’t the answer.
With regard to mental health, yes, things can be improved. I would say our health system sux though. It is certainly inefficient and in major need of maintenance – but still everyone comes here when they are really sick. I wouldn’t want to be anywhere else with my illness anyway.
The news report mentions a note from the killer, which includes the phrase 'you caused me to do this'.
Does anybody have a link to a copy of it, or is it being kept secret?
