Va. Tech Shooting

[spm 1]

The number of homocides in the US compared to other countries has to do with sociological and demographical components that "other countries" just don't have.The isolated madman will always exist. Whether he uses a gun to shoot people, or a boxcutter to crash a plane into a building- I think we can all agree that this is just an unfortunate component of life. However, the number of homicides in the US (firearm or not) are directly correlated to certain issues that are native to the United States.In short, you cannot compare the USA to "other countries" since we are entirely unique in both our successes and failures alike (which is a large part of the reason so many other countries hate the US so much).The solutions to the unique problems that beset this country should not be done based on the actions of other countries who are entirely different in their most basic construct.

My point is that if a student (if he was a student in this case) doesn't have access to a gun, then he if less likely to cause as many (if any) deaths. The fact that he/she can get hold of a gun with very little trouble can only add to a n already serious problem.

[myenemy 0]

The number of homocides in the US compared to other countries has to do with sociological and demographical components that "other countries" just don't have.The isolated madman will always exist. Whether he uses a gun to shoot people, or a boxcutter to crash a plane into a building- I think we can all agree that this is just an unfortunate component of life. However, the number of homicides in the US (firearm or not) are directly correlated to certain issues that are native to the United States.In short, you cannot compare the USA to "other countries" since we are entirely unique in both our successes and failures alike (which is a large part of the reason so many other countries hate the US so much).The solutions to the unique problems that beset this country should not be done based on the actions of other countries who are entirely different in their most basic construct.We are a fundamentally different civilization than Europe.The personal computer, automobile, airplane, telephone, electricity, lightbulb- basically everything you see around you that defines modernity- all of it was invented here. This is an example of our massive successes compared to other countries. One of our failures is that we are an unduly violent society, however, passing emotionally driven laws that will have absolutely no impact (save for upon the law abiding) is not the solution and only serves to pacify the idiots amongst us who operate on "feelings" rather than logic.

[spm 1]

The number of homocides in the US compared to other countries has to do with sociological and demographical components that "other countries" just don't have.The isolated madman will always exist. Whether he uses a gun to shoot people, or a boxcutter to crash a plane into a building- I think we can all agree that this is just an unfortunate component of life. However, the number of homicides in the US (firearm or not) are directly correlated to certain issues that are native to the United States.In short, you cannot compare the USA to "other countries" since we are entirely unique in both our successes and failures alike (which is a large part of the reason so many other countries hate the US so much).The solutions to the unique problems that beset this country should not be done based on the actions of other countries who are entirely different in their most basic construct.We are a fundamentally different civilization than Europe.The personal computer, automobile, airplane, telephone, electricity, lightbulb- basically everything you see around you that defines modernity- all of it was invented here. This is an example of our massive successes compared to other countries. One of our failures is that we are an unduly violent society, however, passing emotionally driven laws that will have absolutely no impact (save for upon the law abiding) is not the solution and only serves to pacify the idiots amongst us who operate on "feelings" rather than logic.

I think you should also have a look a where things were invented. Telephone and Electricity were invented by Scots if I remember. The jet engine was invented by an English man called Whittle.

[rgold79 0]

UPDATE: Just read in the Times that the shooter died of an apparently self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. The report also appeared to confirm the story that some shootings took place execution-style against a wall. Honestly just makes me feel sick.

[Jadaki 0]

My point is that if a student (if he was a student in this case) doesn't have access to a gun, then he if less likely to cause as many (if any) deaths. The fact that he/she can get hold of a gun with very little trouble can only add to a n already serious problem.

What makes you think if guns were illegal that he would have a hard time getting one?

[LadyGrey 6]

Of course gun crime is going to rise. Illegal guns coming into the country will always happen. The fact is they are not available to the general public which prevents people who have a really bad day going around shooting people. The vast majority of illegal guns that are over here are owned by gangs. They are not the people who would walk into a school and do what has just happened once again in the US.

So gun crime is acceptable as long as it's not spontaneous? Great argument. Let's all feel secure in the UK knowing that the majority of guns are safely in the hands of violent gangs. Nevermind drive by shootings, hold ups, armed robberies and all the other crimes gangs often commit using guns. That's all ok because they do those when they're having a good day.

[hblask 1]

Of course gun crime is going to rise. Illegal guns coming into the country will always happen. The fact is they are not available to the general public which prevents people who have a really bad day going around shooting people. The vast majority of illegal guns that are over here are owned by gangs. They are not the people who would walk into a school and do what has just happened once again in the US.

I think you need to re-read what you wrote above a couple dozen times and think about it, REALLY think about it.You admit that the laws do nothing to prevent gun use among people intent on breaking the law.You admit that "of course" gun crime is going to rise.It is obvious that it will prevent almost all defensive uses of guns among innocent citizens who wish to obey the law.What situation does this create? Think about it: armed criminals, defenseless citizens, increases in gun crime rates. And all in the name of preventing a theoretical couple dozen annual random deaths due to a crazed impulse shooting binge? Is this really a good tradeoff? What about the lives that would've been saved in this latest incident if, say, 1/4 of the student population had been armed? Do you count that in your analysis? And do you think a crazed gunman will have a difficult time getting a gun, anyway? Maybe, about as difficult as getting marijuana, say?

[spm 1]

So gun crime is acceptable as long as it's not spontaneous? Great argument. Let's all feel secure in the UK knowing that the majority of guns are safely in the hands of violent gangs. Nevermind drive by shootings, hold ups, armed robberies and all the other crimes gangs often commit using guns. That's all ok because they do those when they're having a good day.

Who is saying gun crime is acceptable?.....not me.FACT..... let me say again, FACT.... If guns were illegal you would have less gun crime. I can't believe you are even going to try and argue against this.My point is that MOST people can't get hold of a gun and therefore general life is safer over here. If you reduce the access of guns to people then by definition life is going to be safer. I really can't believe you are trying to argue against this. Gun deaths per 100,000 population (for the year indicated): Homicide Suicide UnintentionalUSA 4.08 (1999) 6.08 (1999) 0.42 (1999)Canada 0.54 (1999) 2.65 (1997) 0.15 (1997)Switzerland 0.50 (1999) 5.78 (1998) -Scotland 0.12 (1999) 0.27 (1999) -England/Wales 0.12 (1999/00) 0.22 (1999) 0.01 (1999)Japan 0.04* (1998) 0.04 (1995) <0.01 (1997)

[LongLiveYorke 38]

What if kids were allowed to openly carry firearms, you think he would have killed 30+ before he got gunned down?

Wait, you think that giving all kids guns to carry around so that they can stop the lone madman would LESSEN the amount of school shootings every year? This idea is laughable at best, and more than frightening at worse.Look, here's the deal:Would less people be killed in incidents like this is nobody except for the police had access to guns? Clearly, the answer is yes. You may argue that one could also do as much destruction with a home made bomb, but I doubt that an indivudual who's pissed off at his girlfriend has the time, patience, or ability to make a home grown bomb. It's so much easier to buy a gun and a whole lot of bullets.The key aspect is reducing the ability for a casual person to, in a fit of rage, get access to a gun and start shooting. Large gangs and organized crime will always be able to smuggle firearms in and out of a country. But an angry teenager or two living in the middle of Virginia or Colorado or wherever would have a much more difficult time finding handguns or assault rifles at a moment's notice to correspond with an instantaneous fit of rage.I would argue that it's pretty clear that if one were able to totally eliminate access to funs by citizens, the amount of school shooting deaths would go down.Whether or not an all out ban actually reduces the access to guns is another topic. I'm not familiar with the statistics that were argued above concerning England, but in order for them to have any meaning, one must examine the types of gun related deaths that were involved. Though I could be wrong, I would find it hard to believe that an all out ban on guns would increase the number of deaths involved with school shootings in a given year. Whether or not this is morally sound is another story all together.

[spm 1]

Wait, you think that giving all kids guns to carry around so that they can stop the lone madman would LESSEN the amount of school shootings every year? This idea is laughable at best, and more than frightening at worse.Look, here's the deal:Would less people be killed in incidents like this is nobody except for the police had access to guns? Clearly, the answer is yes. You may argue that one could also do as much destruction with a home made bomb, but I doubt that an indivudual who's pissed off at his girlfriend has the time, patience, or ability to make a home grown bomb. It's so much easier to buy a gun and a whole lot of bullets.The key aspect is reducing the ability for a casual person to, in a fit of rage, get access to a gun and start shooting. Large gangs and organized crime will always be able to smuggle firearms in and out of a country. But an angry teenager or two living in the middle of Virginia or Colorado or wherever would have a much more difficult time finding handguns or assault rifles at a moment's notice to correspond with an instantaneous fit of rage.I would argue that it's pretty clear that if one were able to totally eliminate access to funs by citizens, the amount of school shooting deaths would go down.Whether or not an all out ban actually reduces the access to guns is another topic. I'm not familiar with the statistics that were argued above concerning England, but in order for them to have any meaning, one must examine the types of gun related deaths that were involved. Though I could be wrong, I would find it hard to believe that an all out ban on guns would increase the number of deaths involved with school shootings in a given year. Whether or not this is morally sound is another story all together.

At last. Someone with sense.

[hblask 1]

Who is saying gun crime is acceptable?.....not me.FACT..... let me say again, FACT.... If guns were illegal you would have less gun crime. I can't believe you are even going to try and argue against this.

Yet you deny this supposed fact in another post, and the statistics in your country show otherwise.

[spm 1]

Yet you deny this supposed fact in another post, and the statistics in your country show otherwise.

What fact?...just see Yorke,he summed things up perfectly.

[LadyGrey 6]

What fact?

Clearly he is referring the the opinion that you felt the need to emphasise twice using the capitalised word "FACT" in the post he quoted.

[SuitedAces21 2,722]

Just another example of how this world we live in is a fucked up, crazy place. Enjoy life while you can.

[Jadaki 0]

totally eliminate access to funs by citizens, the amount of school shooting deaths would go down.

I dunno, if you eliminate fun people might be more likely to shoot each other.that part was a joke!!!I wasn't arguing that everyone on a campus should have access to be carrying a gun. I was reading on another forum about some people arguing that if properly trained students were allowed to carry legally concealed firearms this could have been minimized. I don't necessarily agree with arming a bunch of college aged students but it was just another side of the debate I had not seen posted yet.

[Theraflu 1,035]

I dunno, if you eliminate fun people might be more likely to shoot each other.that part was a joke!!!I wasn't arguing that everyone on a campus should have access to be carrying a gun. I was reading on another forum about some people arguing that if properly trained students were allowed to carry legally concealed firearms this could have been minimized. I don't necessarily agree with arming a bunch of college aged students but it was just another side of the debate I had not seen posted yet.

Yea..not too sure how many people are going to get behind that.

[Jadaki 0]

Yea..not too sure how many people are going to get behind that.

I imagine the NRA would.

[hblask 1]

OK, normally I agree with you on most things..... not this time...I should add a disclaimer: I don't like guns, am not prone to violence, don't own a gun, and probably never will. Still....

Wait, you think that giving all kids guns to carry around so that they can stop the lone madman would LESSEN the amount of school shootings every year? This idea is laughable at best, and more than frightening at worse.Look, here's the deal:Would less people be killed in incidents like this is nobody except for the police had access to guns? Clearly, the answer is yes. You may argue that one could also do as much destruction with a home made bomb, but I doubt that an indivudual who's pissed off at his girlfriend has the time, patience, or ability to make a home grown bomb. It's so much easier to buy a gun and a whole lot of bullets.

This is the "magical fairy dust of gun control theory", the notion that making guns illegal will somehow reduce access to guns among people who are unconcerned about the law. Homicide is ALREADY illegal, and a way more serious crime than "gun possession", so I don't see how someone intent on committing homicide will be deterred by the lesser penalties of posssession. Especially when suicide is the intended ending to it all.

The key aspect is reducing the ability for a casual person to, in a fit of rage, get access to a gun and start shooting. Large gangs and organized crime will always be able to smuggle firearms in and out of a country. But an angry teenager or two living in the middle of Virginia or Colorado or wherever would have a much more difficult time finding handguns or assault rifles at a moment's notice to correspond with an instantaneous fit of rage.

The only way to get a gun in a fit of rage is illegally. It takes longer to get a gun legally than it does to get it illegally, and is much more difficult.

I would argue that it's pretty clear that if one were able to totally eliminate access to guns by citizens, the amount of school shooting deaths would go down.Whether or not an all out ban actually reduces the access to guns is another topic. I'm not familiar with the statistics that were argued above concerning England, but in order for them to have any meaning, one must examine the types of gun related deaths that were involved. Though I could be wrong, I would find it hard to believe that an all out ban on guns would increase the number of deaths involved with school shootings in a given year. Whether or not this is morally sound is another story all together.

Random shooting of strangers is a tiny blip on the gun crime statistics. It makes no sense to base a policy on the tiny tiny exception rather than the much larger actual problem.And no, bans do not reduce access to guns any more than the Insane War On Drugs reduces access to marijuana.

[scram 1]

I would argue that it's pretty clear that if one were able to totally eliminate access to guns by citizens, the amount of school shooting deaths would go down.

Right. You're also the person who argues that the money people work for "really doesn't belong to them". The colectavist mentality is a gross, gross thing.Let me give you an example. I don't drink. Never really have. All I see alcohol causing is fights, nuisances and accidents. I don't see a real "required purpose" to alcohol, even though I can certainly see numerous detriments the presence of alcohol causes.Yet I don't believe it should be banned.Why?Because I understand that individual choice is a very important component of the American way. I understand that the American way bases our premises on the notion that people are basically good, and we will not debase our entire way of life to address a few. I understand that the number of people who use things recklessly, maliciously or irresponsibly (be they alcohol or firearms) are a few, while the immeasurably huge majority of people do nothing wrong. I don't believe that the worst amongst us should bet the rules that everyone else has to abide by.The concept of "freedom" is completely foreign to some people. Yes, often times, freedom has a price. In the case of the repeal of prohibition, the price was drunk driving, maniacal actions of people who were drunk out of their minds, addiction, etc.The benefit of repealing prohibition was allowing people to make decisions for themselves.I don't care if you "don't see a need" to own a gun. I am not insisting that you go and buy one. But I really think it is disgusting that you think you should tell everyone else what to do based on nothing more than your own childish, idealistic view of the world. My last post in this thread- I'[ll continue on the gun thread.

[Miguel McHarris 0]

I knew the gun argument would come out. The focus needs to be on why they kill not how they kill. Take away guns and they'll use bombs. Take away bombs and they'll use knives. The Unabomber and the 911 hijackers come to mind. If somebody wants to do something destructive, they're going to find a way, no matter what.

[Governator 54]

Giving students guns is

[Teck_72 0]

Seriously just start a new topic.thread for the shootings today, not political debate.

[LadyGrey 6]

Giving students guns is < EV obvioiusly.If the Government would stop wasting millions on chasing down local card rooms, perhaps they could afford a security guard fully equipped in the schools...

Because that's completely relevant to the discussion.

[speedz99 145]

Get a clue, retard."Europe" hasn't banned guns- only you. Switzerland has some of the lowest crime in the world, and has firearms laws that are substantially more lax than the US.Take a look at what has happened to UK "gun crime" statistics since the irrational gun bans after Dunblaine.Your ideas are dumb, but more than that- they're proven to be completely incorrect. The problem with this debate is you have to try and argue logic to counter peoples "feelings" which never works. They can be completely incorrect, but if they "feel" a certain way, they aren't willing to face the truth.These kids died because of a sick madman, period. Whether the gun he used was ultimately legal or not makes no difference. The happiest ending to a situation like this is "Student pulls out gun to start shooting but is immediately cut down by people who have the means to defend themselves" instead of crying over the injustices of this life and blaming it on an inanimate object.Nineteen people killed three thousand Americans using nothing more than box cutters. We need to wake the **** up here.

1. Stop being such a douche. Seriously, your arguments go to shit when you make personal attacks. 2. I partially agree with you...with armed and trained security on campus the death toll may have been lower. Many still would have died though.3. Whether the gun was ultimately legal or not does make a difference. This might not have been a career criminal that would have had a weapon regardless. There is a decent chance that it was an otherwise normal guy that just completely snapped...and was only armed because guns are so accessable to anyone. Maybe if handguns were hard to come by he just kills himself, gets in a fistfight, or even brings a rifle to school...in which case he would be relatively easy to disarm. All I'm saying is you make some good points, but stop being such a prick.

[rgold79 0]

Another Update:Times now says at least 33 people are dead. They have a site up offering constant updates here: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/04/1...-virginia-tech/Here is the most recent post. Hopefully the people who were posting on here waiting on hearing from missing friends have heard good information. Please keep us posted.April 16, 2007 Shooting at Virginia TechBy Mike NizzaTags: breaking news, crimeLatest News Conference | 5:12 PM ET From President Charles Steger and Police Chief W.R. Flinchum of Virginia Tech:At Norris Hall, the death toll was put at 31. Seventeen were wounded. The gunman at Norris Hall was male, and he took his own life. They would confirm no further details. At West Ambler Johnston, the death toll was put at two, one male, one female. They were killed in a dormitory room hours before the second incident. Links between the shootings at the dormitory and the school building are still being investigated. No one was arrested after the incident, and no suspects are sought. Names of the victims will not be released until families have been notified. Victims at Norris Hall were found at several locations around the building. Some doors at Norris Hall were chained from the inside. “State of emergency” is declared by governor.