Virginia shooting

[samurai 0]

Virginia Tech is a gun-free zone. So I fail to see how banning weapons could have stopped what happened. It doesn't appear that Cho had any regard for the law. And it does appear that he had intended on killing 32 (or more) people who were abiding by the law.

 

Our gun laws do need to change. We already have access to them, why school zones are not allowed to arm their security guards is beyond me. And why law-abiding citizens weren't allowed to defend themselves is also beyond me.

[dale#1 1]

A talking head just arguing now that "if people could have had guns, this tragedy would have been stopped".

 

Nuts.

[samurai 0]

That wasn't my point at all. Actually, I was hoping to iterate that Cho wouldn't have been stopped regardless. As you made clear.

 

And if you are going to quote me; then quote me.

[bobby12 0]

The idea of allowing ordinary people to have guns is so ridiculous I won't even give it the respect of taking it apart.

 

The question is how long and how many incidents of this kind, will it take for the US to wake up and do something about their gun laws.

[samurai 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by bobby12:
The idea of allowing ordinary people to have guns is so ridiculous I won't even give it the respect of taking it apart.

well said.

[tsondaboy 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by samurai:
Our gun laws do need to change. We already have access to them, why school zones are not allowed to arm their security guards is beyond me.

If we reach the point that we have to arm the school guards in order to ensure the safety of our children, can we still talk about "democracy"?

[samurai 0]

I'm with you Tsondaboy, it's pretty foul. And if you have a solution that takes the weapons from those people intent on crime, then I'm all ears.

 

It's pretty easy to get illegal drugs, eh?

 

After watching Cho's video, imo, it is fairly obvious he was intent on mass murder regardless of the guns he bought 5 months prior. Without guns, I think we can all agree that his planning would have accomplished its task.

 

and democracy is a symantic debate of which I won't enter.

 

edit* this has done a circle. And my views are open to criticism. However, I won't continue the gun-debate anymore.

 

If anybody has any information or ideas that they believe could have prevented this incident, then, as an american, I ask for your honest input. It seems most posters here are not american and I welcome your solutions.

[tsondaboy 0]

Why not? Isn’t the power of arms fundamentally opposite to democracy?

 

edit from me too*

My views are not anti-American.

[samurai 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by tsondaboy:

edit from me too*
My views are not anti-American.

I never considered as much. It was an honest plea that seeks solutions, and not calling those who offer them as anti-american.

[Mantas 3]

Gun culture......What gun culture?

 

[tsondaboy 0]

And the Aussy version, too.

[Mantas 3]

No...This is the Aussie version

 

 

One is a drunk and the other is in jail.

Unlike in the US . Aussies don't elevate them to leaders.

[tsondaboy 0]

Hey, thats not faιr, I dont know these guys.

 

Wikipe me pls.

[daver 0]

 Quote:

Originally posted by Mantas:
Unlike in the US . Aussies don't elevate them to leaders.

that doesn't mean you are capable of choosing quality leaders though now does it?

[Ezorisu 0]

I find it interesting that when this kind of thing happens outside the US, the blame falls on the individual who perpetrated the act; however, when it happens in the USA, some part of the "system" is to blame (culture or lack thereof, gun laws, etc.).

 

Blame the Perp!

[bushpig 0]

Nice ones Daver and Tsondaboy!

 

Not to mention this fella!

 

[JellyBelly 1]

I always enjoy reading the posts Moby (yes the music making Moby) makes on his journals. I don't always agree with what he says, but I sure do here. Here's one on this tradegy he posted:

 

2 days ago a student at virginia tech used automatic weapons to kill 32 people.

it's a terrible, terrible tragedy, and utterly heartbreaking.

the victims were all innocent, and to be arbitrarily killed in such a violent way is tragic beyond words.

to add insult to tragedy the white house immediately politicized the event.

the white house response was to say that the president still believes in the 2nd amendment, the right of people to bear arms.

are you ****ing kidding me??

32 people needlessly slaughtered and the white house's response is to suck up to the nra?

now the white house is backtracking and saying that gun control debates should wait until after a period of mourning.

now they're saying this?

the shooting had barely ended and the white house was already politicizing this, and in the most despicable way.

if you're going to politicize a tragic and senseless massacre you might start by looking at the simple fact: guns kill people.

if the shooter had been armed with a stick or a baseball bat you'd be looking at 1 or 2 injured people in the infirmary.

instead there are 32 innocent victims, all because a state like virginia has no restrictions on the purchase of automatic weapons by people over the age of 18.

when will someone finally stand up to the nra and pass some sensible gun control legislation?

how in the world can anyone justify a private citizen needing to have access to automatic weapons and armor piercing bullets?

i'm terribly saddened by the deaths of 32 innocent people at virginia tech. and my sincere hope

is that politicians will develop the courage and will to pass gun control legislation so that future tragedies like this might be averted.

[samurai 0]

I like moby. He has a great way with words. I listen to most (if not all) of his music too. Interestingly enough, he failed to cite which laws need to be changed. In most people's eyes, gun control is black and white.

 

Tsondaboy brought up a good point a few posts back about a mental health check. Cho passed the criminal background check, but would have failed a mental health inquiry as he had been in and out of mental institutions in the past. So, there's one that could use changing. (for a list of the laws currently in place, re-read this thread for the attachment.)

 

Now, on topic.

 

For those who haven't had the il-fortune of witnessing Cho's video, he compared himself to Jesus Christ. He went on a suicide mission that involved killing those guilty of debauchery, vodka drinking, mercedes driving, trust fund owning, and never once mentioned arnold schwarzenager or mel gibson.

 

It is later learned, that the script he read in the video was "very similiar" to the stuff he had been writing on his dorm walls for a year prior this event. It is becoming more and more evident that this has been in the planning for several months. And I wonder what the topic of conversation would be if he had chosen another method (other than using guns) of convincing himself he is worthy of martyrdom and salvation, while the rest of the world was a society of sinners.

 

I'm sorry, but this is soooo much deeper than the gun debate. (although it rightfully should point at those laws that need adjusting.)

[Mantas 3]

Samurai- You cant deny that the US's glorification of guns, gun culture, call it what you will, had no small part what this guy did.

Look at the photos he took of himself, they are not unlike the one I posted above( the bottom one is Ivan Milat, Australia's most notorous serial killer).

 

He obviously tried to glorifiy himself with these photos. Posing with guns. I'm not saying that Arnold or Mel are responsible for any of this, they are just a part of an ideology in the US that glorifys guns,

 

This guy (kid)(student) just strolls into a gun shop and walks out a few minutes later with some hand guns and ammo. This couldn't happen here or many other countries I know

[samurai 0]

The biggest problem I am having with this debate is "ideology in the US that glorifies guns."

 

I just don't see it glorified in the US any more than anywhere else. If it is the ideology in the media you are talking about, well... that media is all over the world. The US just happens to have the largest media outlet than anywhere else. And through that, you get access to more violence. That YOU do indeed watch.

 

There is no gun-swinging in the streets. People don't show up at parties and put their guns on the table. There is no dress-code that has people wearing holsters.

 

If you are getting these ideas from the media yourself and have never been to the states, than you are just as guilty as anyone else in the world who judges the states by their impressions of MTV. (If you have been to the states to form a credited opinion, then please correct me and accept my apologies.)

 

Get over it people. America is, quite frankly, nothing like MTV or FOX. Just because you choose to take note of the "violent" media, does not mean that even the majority of the media is infact violent. Most of the TV I watch at home is comedy. Simpsons, Seinfeld, Friends, discovery channel, national geographic, ESPN etc... Why? because that is the majority of what is produced.

 

And americans are in an uproar right now that this mentally disturbed individual could walk into a store and buy a gun. And I think everybody sees that uproar. GLORIFIED my ass. If americans glorify anything, it's sports. skateboarding, surfing, bmx, anything extreme. Trust me, more kids follow those heroes than any movie stars they see on tv. Kids don't go to school dressed like Keanu Reeves from teh matrix. They wear their favorite sports logo. They lay their skateboard against their desk.

 

I meet so many people in my travels abroad that have all these damn generalizations about americans being these violent people.

 

I never even saw a gun fired in the street until I went to south america, where I also saw a knife-mugging. There are much more violent countries in the world, they just don't have the world's largest media outlet that people then judge their countries by- a fraction of which actually makes it abroad. I had to f'ing laugh when I met people in Chile who said they don't want to visit America because it is too dangerous. I was constantly scared down there.

 

then people in Japan say they would never go to school in the states because of the violence. A country that is like 50 times the size of this country that manages to have more suicides than the states. Principals of highschools hang themselves in their offices! The suicide rate is obsurd and because of THAT, i don't want my kids going to school here.

 

How twisted is that? An American would prefer to send his kids to an american school rather than a japanese school. And I have lived in both countries and have been a part of both school systems. That opinion is honest and not based on any generalizations.

 

(rant off-- change the channel )

[spook 0]

i don't have exact compartive statistics at hand and can't be arsed looking for them, so if someone can prove me wrong, please go ahead and do so. I have taken the following paragraph from this website, and the statistics quoted more or less correlate to what I have heard and read in the past.

 

 

http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/problems.html

 

 

“Firearm deaths per 100,000 people (CDCP, Bureau Of Justice Statistics, 1998): 14.24 in the U.S., 4.31 in Canada, 0.7 in Holland, and only 0.41 in England (where not even police carry guns). Which means that if you live in the U.S., you are 40 times more likely to die of gunshots than if you live in Britain. Murders by handguns (1996): 15 in Japan, 30 in Britain, 211 in Germany, 9,390 in the United States. Which means if you live in the U.S., you are 300 times more likely to be murdered than in you live in Britain.”

 

 

what differentiates these countries? GUN laws.

why do so many americans have trouble accepting that guns are designed to KILL.

Ignore media portrayals of violence, ignore the general mental health of the public - less guns = less gun deaths. What is so difficult about this equation?

 

samurai, this is not meant to be a swipe or an attack directed at you. i just really see this debate as quite clear cut.

[bobby12 0]

I'm sure the US governments argument would be it is not practical to remove all the guns now. And if they did, it would just be the crims that kept the guns making the innocent more likely to be victims.

 

I would like to hear what their actual argument is for their gun laws.

[samurai 0]

edit** double post... will find gun law link again.

 

And you brought up the same point that everybody does. Less guns. Which is something that (in case you haven't read my previous posts citing the gun laws) is something I am actually for.

 

I was defending the delusional glorification BS. And I agree that you can see this debate as clear cut. However... WTF do you do with them? How do you get the guns out of the society? Australian buy back? so... what... the registered guns are accountable for? What about the gazzilion/ majority of non-registered guns? What about all of the illegal guns as well?

 

Guys... bring something fricking new to the table.

 

"You guys need less guns."

 

I already agreed with you. I already cited laws that can be changed to reduce sales, as well as acknowledge the Greek's mental stability accountability law. (Thank you Tsondaboy) However... NOBODY is offering any solutions that take the guns away from the criminals.

 

Am I going insane over here? Is anybody hearing me?

 

Some of these opinions come across like we americans are a bunch of morons who can't do the math.

 

Okay, I have apologize for getting so riled up. This event has really hit home for me. and I would really appreciate solutions instead of people pointing fingers at the obvious.

 

Excuse me, spook.

[samurai 0]

bobby12-

 

Their actual argument will start with the fact that the national government doesn't currently regulate the gun laws. That is up to the state, the officials of which are elected by the locals, who all go through life assuming that the "sh*t" doesn't happen close to home.

 

This is already being brought up by the american people and the congress. I'm certain that the gun laws will soon lose state control. At which point, they'll be able adjust the gun laws to national standard.

 

This reminds me, Virginia gun laws are not up to par with the rest of the country. And they are under serious scrutiny now.

[samurai 0]

Herer is a wikipedia definition of the Brady Bill that includes links to state vs. national gun laws in the U.S. : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brady_Bill

 

I chose wikipedia because it is the least political as well as maintains heaps of other links for education. I think it may be less of a headache to read than any of the .gov sites.