30+ ppl killed at Virginia Tech university

[j7wild]

you mean you want me to disable the firing mechanism on my collection?

some of them are worth a great deal of $, especially the C3 ones and if they can't be fired, then they are worthless scrap of metal!!

[Jax]

I don't quit understand the argument of "needing a gun" for self defense, do you guys live in such an unsafe environment that you need a gun to defend yourself and your family? What kind of environment is that? Here in Belgium it's only a very small minority who owns a gun and those people are sports enthousiast who shoot at a shooting range.

[j7wild]

This country was built and conquered on the firearm!!

From the Revolutionary War to the Civil War to the Mexican American War to Conquering the West and Fighting the American Indians, this country would not be here if it weren't for the firearm.

So it's a natural order of things that we need to have firearm plus the Constitution of the United States gives us the right to bear Arms and how can we refuse to follow the basic rules of life that our Founding Fathers laid out 221 years ago?!?

[j7wild]

my father always told me that if you do people wrong, it will come back to bite you later and he is right!!

BLACKSBURG, Va. - Long before he boiled over, Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui was picked on, pushed around and laughed at over his shyness and the strange way he talked when he was a schoolboy in the Washington suburbs, former classmates say.
ADVERTISEMENT

Chris Davids, a Virginia Tech senior who graduated from Westfield High School in Chantilly, Va., with Cho in 2003, recalled that the South Korean immigrant almost never opened his mouth and would ignore attempts to strike up a conversation.

Once, in English class, the teacher had the students read aloud, and when it was Cho's turn, he just looked down in silence, Davids recalled. Finally, after the teacher threatened him with an F for participation, Cho started to read in a strange, deep voice that sounded "like he had something in his mouth," Davids said.

"As soon as he started reading, the whole class started laughing and pointing and saying, `Go back to China,'" Davids said.

Cho shot 32 people to death and committed suicide Monday in the deadliest one-man shooting rampage in modern U.S. history. The high school classmates' accounts add to the psychological portrait that is beginning to take shape, and could shed light on the video rant Cho mailed to NBC in the middle of his rampage at Virginia Tech.

the rest of the story here:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070419/..._tech_shooting

I am not condoning or justifying Mr. Cho's action but people need to keep in mind that in this day and age of easy access to weapons and loose attitude toward violence (as seen on TV shows, in the movies, in video games, the daily bombardment of violence footage in the news media) and a society that is pretty much insensitized by it, if you pick on someone or treat someone wrong - you will never know how they will retaliate.

So the best thing to do is if you find someone doesn't meet your standard and your opinions are rude and discriminatory and offensive; keep them to yourself!!

[Jack Stoney]

The fact that Americans are such a gun loving paradise didn't use to bother me, until I realized this fact. When I'm in a local store, the person behind me in the line can be carrying a gun (of course, a concealed gun) and it's LEGAL. That scares the crap out of me. I have never seen a gun in a domestic posession, only when I was in the army. And that's good. A person in here can't even carry scissors in a bag in the public. Ok by me.

It's pretty clear that USA's gun laws are wrong. There's nothing wrong with the people than in any other place. Still America's kill each other with firearms, by the thousands. The statistics shown by J-P previosly makes the whole point clear.

Sure, every country has issues, here we have large suicide numbers and heart diseases.

And because I don't need to be too friendly..
J7wild, your right-wing Americalism talk is really turning me off, and it makes you sound a bit silly.
You sound like everyone is either with you or against you, and therefore trying to take you freedom away (the firearms in this matter).

P.S I just read that Finland has more firearms per person than America, so it can't be the amount

[redbear]

This was going to be my next argument. Of those of you who do have guns for protection... Have you ever needed to use it? Do you know of anyone else who has? I'm betting the answer is no.
Which means, the likelyhood of you needing it is slim at best.. and the likelyhood of an accident happening is much higher.

I give you full credit for keeping it under lock and key and treating it properly. I really do.
I just really don't buy the protection argument (not just from you.. but from anyone). In my opinion, most collectors think they're cool, and want to own them. That's fine by me, but something should be done to them so that they're never able to fire again. Then you can collect as many as you like.

i would have to disagree with you. just because i have never needed my gun, doesn't mean that i won't have to eventually. i have known a few cops here and there and quite a few of them have said that they have never had to pull a gun on anyone either. but does that mean you would want to be a police man, walking around, without a gun ?? i sure as heck wouldn't want to be. i don't know how much of this is true, so mark this down as heresay, but doesn't england have a ban on guns ?? but i had heard that the gun crime barely went down. becuase all a gun ban does is keep the honest people from having one, criminals will still be able to get guns whether there is a ban or not. in fact, i would be willing to say that a ban on guns would make crimes with guns go up becuase the criminals that can get them, now have free reign and no fear of being shot while robbing someone.

i understand the mentality of 'banning all guns' becuase of the crimes that happen becuase of them. in that same mentallity, you should also ban all automobiles as well as alcohol too becuase of teh number of drunk driving deaths that happen every year. as well as tobacco and pitbulls. that type of reactive mentallity doens't solve the problem. education and awareness does. taking it away doesn't take away the problem. the problem is not the gun, but the person behind it. guns don't kill people, peopel do. yeah, i know .... we have all heard that one before but it is very true. if Cho was as disturbed as i have been led to believe, then the goal would have been accomplished using other methods. maybe bombs, or poison or something else.

thankfully, banning guns will never happen here. last i heard, there are 10,000 gun laws on the books (don't quote me on that, just what i read awhile ago). yet not one of them stopped this or any other fatality from happening. the question you need to ask is why ?? how can one more work whereas 10k have not yet.

i had read that the city of Philadelphia wanted to enable people to sue Smith and Wesson for damages related to murders becuase of their weapons. outside of being the dumbest thing i have ever heard, that is right up there with it. does this mean i can sue Trojan becuase my condom broke and got my girlfriend preganant which meant i lost my wife and now half of my income ?? just a different spin on the same mentality.

i'm only say this next part as i have not heard from them at all but ....i really believe that the parents are at fault here. i know most won't agree with me but i really do think alot stems from that. outside of the basic survival instincts we all have for being animals (which is what we are), we learn how to interact with people and the basics of right and wrong from ... our parents. a child learns more from the ages of 0-6 than any other time in his/her life, that is a fact. everything else is building upon what they already learned from our parents.

i also know that people are out there that are wired wrong, but that doesn't happen overnight. there are signs and messages sent long before any violence happens. someone clearly dropped the ball on this kid. from his parents, his peers and his teachers. heck, the teachers were saying that becuase of their rules and policies, they couldn't do anythign but 'suggest' he go to conseling eventhough they all knew something was wrong and had even notified campus security about him. that tells me there is a problem in that school that needs to be addressed. unfortunaly, it takes somethign as sad as this before anything ever happens. but maybe this might make the next child who has the potential to do this, not and seek answers elsewhere. (as cho thought this was his answer) ....

(sorry for the length and repeat what others have said earlier - i must have missed an entire page of reading before i posted until afterwards)

[redbear]

The fact that Americans are such a gun loving paradise didn't use to bother me, until I realized this fact. When I'm in a local store, the person behind me in the line can be carrying a gun (of course, a concealed gun) and it's LEGAL.

only in certain places and only if that person has the proper permits to carry a concealed weapon. if you see one, then my bet would be that he/she doesn't have it legally becuase if they did, you wouldn't see it. that person wants you to see it for a reason.

Sure, every country has issues, here we have large suicide numbers and heart diseases.

(removed text for my point here)

P.S I just read that Finland has more firearms per person than America, so it can't be the amount

not that i doubt you, but i would like to see that fact. i find it hard to believe that another country has more guns per person than we do. but if that is the case, what are the statistics of violent crimes with a gun compared to america ??

[Jean-Pierre Bazinet]

i understand the mentality of 'banning all guns' becuase of the crimes that happen becuase of them. in that same mentallity, you should also ban all automobiles as well as alcohol too becuase of teh number of drunk driving deaths that happen every year. as well as tobacco and pitbulls.

I was hoping someone would bring up this ludicrous argument.
Here's the problem with it...

All those other things have a different purpose.

Guns have no other purpose. They are meant to shoot and kill people.

[Jax]

becuase all a gun ban does is keep the honest people from having one, criminals will still be able to get guns whether there is a ban or not. in fact, i would be willing to say that a ban on guns would make crimes with guns go up becuase the criminals that can get them, now have free reign and no fear of being shot while robbing someone.

You make it sound like there would be total anarchy if guns were banned cause then criminals would have absolutely nothing fear, great argument I must say.
Again, this is the same argument that comes up everytime, "I need a gun to protect myself and feel safe from criminals". Well, I don't need a gun to feel safe, my friend or brother don't need a gun to feel safe and neither does my neighbour, dad, mom or whatever person I know of need a gun. Why?? Cause the aren't alot of guns in circulation here because there are strict laws on gun ownership here.
A person who would feel the need to own a gun is either very uncertain or realy lives in a very unsafe environment. You are not the police or the military, they can clearly justify the use of a gun, it's part of their job.

I don't think there will be a ban on gun ownership any time soon, but this certainly won't be the last shooting, mark my words, there will be others...

[redbear]

I was hoping someone would bring up this ludicrous argument.
Here's the problem with it...
All those other things have a different purpose.
Guns have no other purpose. They are meant to shoot and kill people.

hmm...not one of my guns have ever shot and killed anyone. but you are missing the point if that is what you are focusing on. banning whatever the problem happens to be does not solve the problem. that is the typical reactive solution to solving the problem, which never works. prohibition didn't work. marijuana laws don't work either. what makes you think that this will ?? really, what does ??

The right to bear arms means more than its literal words imply: it means a way of life and thinking, involving independence, protection of land, and suspicion of federal—or all government—authority. Virginia is as close to the ground zero of that thinking as there is.

As a result, Sabato said, access to guns is easy—as the shooter in Blacksburg demonstrated. "Hell, I’ve got a clean record, only a few traffic tickets, so I could go out to Clark Brothers"—a famous gun emporium that always does a brisk business.

It’s a way of life in Virginia, and much of America. And it isn’t going to change anytime soon.

and that is the truth. it will never happen here or anywhere in america.

[redbear]

taken from Reason magazine

Nearly five centuries of growing civility ended in 1954. Violent crime has been climbing ever since. Last December, London's Evening Standard reported that armed crime, with banned handguns the weapon of choice, was "rocketing." In the two years following the 1997 handgun ban, the use of handguns in crime rose by 40 percent, and the upward trend has continued. From April to November 2001, the number of people robbed at gunpoint in London rose 53 percent.

Gun crime is just part of an increasingly lawless environment. From 1991 to 1995, crimes against the person in England's inner cities increased 91 percent. And in the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled. Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York. England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's, and 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police. In a United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations published in July, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people.

This sea change in English crime followed a sea change in government policies. Gun regulations have been part of a more general disarmament based on the proposition that people don't need to protect themselves because society will protect them. It also will protect their neighbors: Police advise those who witness a crime to "walk on by" and let the professionals handle it.

taken from Worldnet Daily ...

The International Crime Victims Survey, conducted by Leiden University in Holland, found that England and Wales ranked second overall in violent crime among industrialized nations.

Highlights of the study indicated that:

The percentage of the population that suffered "contact crime" in England and Wales was 3.6 percent, compared with 1.9 percent in the United States and 0.4 percent in Japan.

Burglary rates in England and Wales were also among the highest recorded. Australia (3.9 percent) and Denmark (3.1 per cent) had higher rates of burglary with entry than England and Wales (2.8 percent). In the U.S., the rate was 2.6 percent, according to 1995 figures;

"After Australia and England and Wales, the highest prevalence of crime was in Holland (25 percent), Sweden (25 percent) and Canada (24 percent). The United States, despite its high murder rate, was among the middle ranking countries with a 21 percent victimization rate," the London Telegraph said.

England and Wales also led in automobile thefts. More than 2.5 percent of the population had been victimized by car theft, followed by 2.1 percent in Australia and 1.9 percent in France. Again, the U.S. was not listed among the "top 10" nations.

The study found that Australia led in burglary rates, with nearly 4 percent of the population having been victimized by a burglary. Denmark was second with 3.1 percent; the U.S. was listed eighth at about 1.8 percent.
Interestingly, the study found that one of the lowest victimization rates -- just 15 percent overall -- occurred in Northern Ireland, home of the Irish Republican Army and scene of years of terrorist violence.

Analysts in the U.S. were quick to point out that all of the other industrialized nations included in the survey had stringent gun-control laws, but were overall much more violent than the U.S.

taken from Fraser Institute

Restrictive firearm legislation has failed to reduce gun violence in Australia, Canada, or Great Britain. The policy of confiscating guns has been an expensive failure, according to a new paper The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, released today by The Fraser Institute.

“What makes gun control so compelling for many is the belief that violent crime is driven by the availability of guns, and more importantly, that criminal violence in general may be reduced by limiting access to firearms,” says Gary Mauser, author of the paper and professor of business at Simon Fraser University.

This new study examines crime trends in Commonwealth countries that have recently introduced firearm regulations. Mauser notes that the widely ignored key to evaluating firearm regulations is to examine trends in total violent crime, not just firearm crime.

The United States provides a valuable point of comparison for assessing crime rates as that country has witnessed a dramatic drop in criminal violence over the past decade – for example, the homicide rate in the US has fallen 42 percent since 1991. This is particularly significant when compared with the rest of the world – in 18 of the 25 countries surveyed by the British Home Office, violent crime increased during the 1990s.

do i need to go on ?? banning is not the answer. anyone who belives that is living with blinders on. education and awareness.

[j7wild]

we should ban Kitchen Knives too cause people do get stabbed and sometime killed with them...

[Jean-Pierre Bazinet]

we should ban Kitchen Knives too cause people do get stabbed and sometime killed with them...

I was hoping someone would bring up this ludicrous argument.
Here's the problem with it...

All those other things have a different purpose.

Guns have no other purpose. They are meant to shoot and kill people.

Already dealt with this argument.

[Jake]

Please don't misunderstand this issue. No American will disagree that we should have better background checks or safety devices to prevent accidents. We are simply arguing that this is a right that is one of the founding rights of this nation and as such should not be easily dismissed.

As I've shown in my first source VERY FEW crimes are committed with the person's OWN weapon. It's nearly always illegally obtained even if it is from a family member.

The problem is entirely that of unlawful possession and not of legal, registered possession.

Moreover no data shows the detrimental effects of weapons. Who can say how many criminals didn't rob houses out of fear? Guns in the US are only kept at shooting ranges and private residences. Very few people actually have carry permits and those are people who have had a threat on their life or work in extremely dangerous circumstances.

[chernabog_ca]

The sad thing about this whole thing is the guns he used he obtained legally. Apparently Virgina has pretty lax laws when it comes to buying guns.

I don't understand the American obsession with firearms are. Yes I know it's the Second Amendment which was written over 200 years ago at a time where there were militias and the fear of King George coming back for round 2.