I don't mean they whack job that bought the gun, I mean the laws that prevent law abding people (faculty, staff, and students) from carrying concealed weapons. If one other person had a legal gun, would 31 people be dead today?Did gun control play a factor in the V-Tech tragedy?
Ya, more guns is clearly the answer. Americans...
You know they're saying nothing like this has happened in S. Korea before and it's likely true. Not from lack of trying though. My brother in laws highschool (my wife is S. Korean) hired gangsters to beat up the teachers there once years ago. S. Koren schools are like Nazi camps. Thing is if they'd had guns, it would have happened many times already. Just get rid of your friggin guns already. How many times does it have to be proven?Did gun control play a factor in the V-Tech tragedy?
if more people had been carrying guns the only thing certain is more people would have gotten shot cause they wouldn't have the necessary training to use them safely.
its really hard to say, when they do a background search on you and you have no record they can sell you a gun, noone can predict what a person is gonna do when anger takes control of them, many ppl who you think would never do this you cant say that because if they never went thru a bad trauma or let anger get them or society you dont know what they will do. When ppl are hurt and think they cant go to anyone for help and they want to end thier life usually they attack the area that caused it. its sad and its wrong but what can you do
maybe the fact that everyone can get a gun is a factor
Somewhat yes,but why would a kid have a gun in his room on a campus anyway?Who allowed that to happen?Sounds to me like campus security needs to be tightened on every campus everywhere to prevent such tradgedies from happening...
Yes, I do believe you are correct to a certain degree. If EVERY student and or teacher had a gun then yes there would be far less people dead.
Then how many more whackjobs would there be carrying guns?
There are no adequate gun control laws in Virginia and it is one stupid idea to load every person with a gun. Better to take the guns out of the hands of people than arm them.
No other country in the world is so enamored with guns like you Americans. Until this so called glorification of the gun is removed from the minds of Americans, this kind of tragedy will continue. VTech now opens the door more more copy cat killings as has happened before.
I think every law-abiding citizen should be able to carry a sidearm - concealed or otherwise. If Ryan Clark had been packing heat he could have stopped Cho in the dorm. Everybody should at least familiarize themselves with firearms. You never know when knowledge of firearms will come in handy.
I think it certainly would have changed the outcome for some people. If they were allowed to carry on campus, someone would have been able to take the shooter down. I used to be so against it until I went to my self defense class at college. In that situation, the only thing that will help you is a gun. I think laws should be changed for law abiding citizens to be able to carry legally. Most people who commit these types of crimes are not carrying legally anyway. So, allowing others to carry isn't going to increase the number of deaths, if anything it may decrease it.
I would have cut him down, if the chance had been there.
If we were all packin' heat, a lot more people would be murdered. In fact, I had a couple of ';dead people'; piss me off on the highway just this morning.
No, we're fools for thinking that taking the guns out of peoples hands will rid our society of hatred and killing. His mental problem was deep and if he didn't have access to a gun, he would have used something else.
maybe
i think that they should have guns and other forms of defense with them no matter where they go. if they dont feel safe after what happened, then they need to bring it up. the coward started a shootout b/c his girlfriend broke up with him and i heard that she was his first victim. he shot her at point blank range.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Why do Americans not want better gun controls? Isn't the tragedy at Virginia tech a wake up call?
Because the extent of which a society must rely upon laws more than human virtue show the level to which that society has failed and fallen from being a just and true society.
The tools of a carpenter can make a shelter or a gallows; A weapon can be used to defend life or rob it. What distinguishes their use is the wielder of these tools, and what distinguishes the wielder is the level of which their personal virtues and perceived connections have been developed.Why do Americans not want better gun controls? Isn't the tragedy at Virginia tech a wake up call?
The points made in the question and the best answer are well taken, but there are other matters affecting this issue. Society's quality/';state of mind'; play a major role in this too. I'm limited to 300 characters, so I guess we'll have to wait until my book comes out.
Why do Americans not want better gun controls? Isn't the tragedy at Virginia tech a wake up call?
';A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'; The founding fathers were THEMSELVES citizens fighting AGAINST their native nation's militia. If they had to do it once, they might have to again.
I don't know what the answer is to prevent tragedies like this. But taking guns away from average citizens is not going to keep criminals from getting them.
first, tell me how gun control can stop a determined psycho killer like this?
These massacres don't happen in neighborhoods where some people carry guns. Why? They know they would be stopped.
Sweet...
The day the other Waco shot several people in a Utah mall (Trolley Square), an off duty Ogden City police officer, saved the lives of only God knows how many more victims by shooting The reason I'm explaining this is because I live in Utah and the next day by business reasons I had to enter Camp Williams (Army base) and because I had my weapon with me, they didn't let me in. That make me think, that maybe was better to leave my gun at home. Then I continue watching the news and saw the families of those who did lost their lives, and recognized that to carry a weapon is not a benefit to me, but to all the community. People are against the weapons for the same reason I am afraid to swim at the beach... Because Universal Studio did a hell of a good job with the movie Jaws.
When you are standing at the bank, K-mart, etc. You are surrounded by people with guns. They are just law abiding citizen... Now only the Wacos do something like it happened yesterday, and the only thing you'll get if you get it your way, is a lot more aggressions against the law abiding citizens by criminals wannabe that do not have the guts now, but knowing that there is no one to defend the victim, will perform.
Why do you think the victims where so many yesterday? Because the VT prohibit fire arms on campus... (Just like the U of U in Utah...) Ironic isn't it. No weapons on campus for the responsible citizens but the Waco had two.
By the way, the NRA do not have a lot of money... They do have a lot of members who have a little bit of money each, and spend them lobbying so we can keep our guns to defend people like Chrys who are not courageous enough to defend them self nor let others defend them. I'm wonder how are they still alive!!!
I also wonder if there where any pro gun control person at VT yesterday, and if they happened to had the thought of ';How do I defend myself?';
In Puerto Rico is very hard to get a permit or even to buy a weapon. But the criminals have arsenals... Don't let politicians to convince you otherwise. There is no reason for the nation fathers to write the amendment II for military purposes... Militants always had, and will carry guns... There is no need for a law for something that is Dee, Dee, Dee!
If I where there, I wouldn't have hesitate to shoot the Waco, that way... maybe your son, daughter, husband or wife, may be still alive with you... Think! People against guns don't have to buy one... but those who like them can not just defend them self but you as well.
God bless you all and the families of the victims from Utah, Virginia, and the US of A!!!
Why does this ridiculous question always come up when there is a wacko out killing someone? There has never been a documented shooting where a gun killed someone. The gun was just the vehicle used. Should we ban cars every time an idiot drives over someone? How about banning knives. They kill alot of people don't they? NO THEY DON';T. Its the crazies. Banning guns just takes them away from the law abiding people, like me.
Laws are on the books,however, I think enforcement of these laws is more the problem. I will concur with those who answered previously, if you are determined to cause harm, you will find a way, laws or not.
I think the media could do a more responsible thing by lessening the coverage of these kinds of events. The coverage now given to these events introduces this kind of irrational behavior to those out there who are a little shaky already.
Our forefathers knew something, as they gave us this right and our country. If guns were banned other weapons would be used. Such as knifes as i the UK, stabbing happen more there than in the USA.
Sorry but if i was attacked by a huge guy with a knife, i would not be able to defend myself. with a gun it levels the field and everyone is equal.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
We have many thousands of gun laws now. If a criminal or a crazy person wants to get a gun, no law is going to stop him.
I'm really getting tired of answering questions like this.
Fact: Parents should be responsible for their kids up to 18 yrs of age.
Fact: Taking guns from law abiding citizens only results in leaving guns in the hands of criminals.
Fact: To leave oneself defenseless is stupid.
Fact: Take away guns, then you'll have to take away, bombs, baseball bats, clubs, golf clubs, canes, umbrellas, fireplace pokers/stokers, large sculptures, cars, trucks, vans, planes, trains, boats, ships, large glass bottles, sharp sticks, rocks, knives, poisons, gas, ropes, wires, guitar, piano, violin, viola, bass fiddle, banjo, sitar, zither, and harpsichord strings, anthrax, small pox, aids, lethal drugs, various metal, wooden, and hard plastic objects, hands, feet, and karate...
Fact: States that have fewer gun restrictive laws also have less crime.
Fact: Washington DC has the most gun control laws of all 50 States, and also has the highest crime rates and murders of all 50 States.
Fact: Liberalism is mental disorder that's going to get us all killed:(
If your not American butt out...
It's too late for gun control. If psychotic people want to get their hands on a fire arm, they can. I am sure that guy didn't think.....';uh, shoot, I can't go get a gun, so I guess I won't go blow as many people away as possible'; Gun control...WAY TOO LATE!
well it should be a wake up call!! we need to do something!!
NRA lifetime member
CCW permit owner
Not all Americans do NOT want better gun control. The majority of us are horrified by this tragedy.
No. Gun laws are only observed by the law abiding.
This incident was very sudden and tragic, I feel terrible. It's a shame that this had to happen but I agree with rossem.
If no one had a gun then the person who is best with a knife would kill a lot of people.
No, it's not a ';wake-up call.'; This is a tragedy, granted--but also a freak occurance. Normal people don't base their lives--or policy--on such.
And NORMAL people feel compassion fror the victims and their family--they don't see it as just a way to promote their political agenda. The ones who do are pretty sorry excuses for human beings.
If someone wants to rob a bank, or kill
someone, they will somehow manage
to get their hands on a gun.
We have a vein of sickness in our society.
Eventually, better education and technology
will make things better.
Passing more ordinances won't.
because the NRA has alot of money and pays a lot of people... also many americans use the reasoning of the second amendment... the truth is that the second amendment was ment so that milita forces were aloud to have weapons, it was never ment that everyone should have a gun but that when a state raised a milita, that there would be no problems with them having gunns... if america knew the real reason maybe they would be more likely to push for gun control laws...
but the truth is that unless no one is allowed to have a gun school shootings will continue, because people can allways find their ways around laws
It's not just about gun control. If a person is looking to do something like this they will find a way - get a gun, get one illegally, build a bomb, release something into the air during the middle of class. If somebody is sick enough to want to kill alot of people for no reason, gun control is not going to stop them.
If there was a nationwide ban on firearms (which all guns are restricted on the VT campus. How come this happened despite the strict gun controls?) in place before this event, two things would have changed...
1) Instead of breaking 20 some laws, Cho Seung-Hui would have broke 21 laws.
2) Millions of law-abiding citizens would have to decide between becoming criminals or continue abiding the law and go against their natural instinct to preserve the self.
You, the government, the UN, or anybody for that matter is in no position to judge and dictate the value of my life. The value of my life is directly proportional to the means afforded to me in defense of its continuation.
Too late. Guns are and will always be available. No amount of paper laws will stop a killer. How about adding better knife control, rock control, car control, better bomb control, airline control, fist control, poison control, etc, etc. How many ways are there to kill?
The tools of a carpenter can make a shelter or a gallows; A weapon can be used to defend life or rob it. What distinguishes their use is the wielder of these tools, and what distinguishes the wielder is the level of which their personal virtues and perceived connections have been developed.Why do Americans not want better gun controls? Isn't the tragedy at Virginia tech a wake up call?
The points made in the question and the best answer are well taken, but there are other matters affecting this issue. Society's quality/';state of mind'; play a major role in this too. I'm limited to 300 characters, so I guess we'll have to wait until my book comes out.
Report Abuse
Why do Americans not want better gun controls? Isn't the tragedy at Virginia tech a wake up call?
';A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'; The founding fathers were THEMSELVES citizens fighting AGAINST their native nation's militia. If they had to do it once, they might have to again.
Report Abuse
I don't know what the answer is to prevent tragedies like this. But taking guns away from average citizens is not going to keep criminals from getting them.
first, tell me how gun control can stop a determined psycho killer like this?
These massacres don't happen in neighborhoods where some people carry guns. Why? They know they would be stopped.
Sweet...
The day the other Waco shot several people in a Utah mall (Trolley Square), an off duty Ogden City police officer, saved the lives of only God knows how many more victims by shooting The reason I'm explaining this is because I live in Utah and the next day by business reasons I had to enter Camp Williams (Army base) and because I had my weapon with me, they didn't let me in. That make me think, that maybe was better to leave my gun at home. Then I continue watching the news and saw the families of those who did lost their lives, and recognized that to carry a weapon is not a benefit to me, but to all the community. People are against the weapons for the same reason I am afraid to swim at the beach... Because Universal Studio did a hell of a good job with the movie Jaws.
When you are standing at the bank, K-mart, etc. You are surrounded by people with guns. They are just law abiding citizen... Now only the Wacos do something like it happened yesterday, and the only thing you'll get if you get it your way, is a lot more aggressions against the law abiding citizens by criminals wannabe that do not have the guts now, but knowing that there is no one to defend the victim, will perform.
Why do you think the victims where so many yesterday? Because the VT prohibit fire arms on campus... (Just like the U of U in Utah...) Ironic isn't it. No weapons on campus for the responsible citizens but the Waco had two.
By the way, the NRA do not have a lot of money... They do have a lot of members who have a little bit of money each, and spend them lobbying so we can keep our guns to defend people like Chrys who are not courageous enough to defend them self nor let others defend them. I'm wonder how are they still alive!!!
I also wonder if there where any pro gun control person at VT yesterday, and if they happened to had the thought of ';How do I defend myself?';
In Puerto Rico is very hard to get a permit or even to buy a weapon. But the criminals have arsenals... Don't let politicians to convince you otherwise. There is no reason for the nation fathers to write the amendment II for military purposes... Militants always had, and will carry guns... There is no need for a law for something that is Dee, Dee, Dee!
If I where there, I wouldn't have hesitate to shoot the Waco, that way... maybe your son, daughter, husband or wife, may be still alive with you... Think! People against guns don't have to buy one... but those who like them can not just defend them self but you as well.
God bless you all and the families of the victims from Utah, Virginia, and the US of A!!!
Why does this ridiculous question always come up when there is a wacko out killing someone? There has never been a documented shooting where a gun killed someone. The gun was just the vehicle used. Should we ban cars every time an idiot drives over someone? How about banning knives. They kill alot of people don't they? NO THEY DON';T. Its the crazies. Banning guns just takes them away from the law abiding people, like me.
Laws are on the books,however, I think enforcement of these laws is more the problem. I will concur with those who answered previously, if you are determined to cause harm, you will find a way, laws or not.
I think the media could do a more responsible thing by lessening the coverage of these kinds of events. The coverage now given to these events introduces this kind of irrational behavior to those out there who are a little shaky already.
Our forefathers knew something, as they gave us this right and our country. If guns were banned other weapons would be used. Such as knifes as i the UK, stabbing happen more there than in the USA.
Sorry but if i was attacked by a huge guy with a knife, i would not be able to defend myself. with a gun it levels the field and everyone is equal.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.
We have many thousands of gun laws now. If a criminal or a crazy person wants to get a gun, no law is going to stop him.
I'm really getting tired of answering questions like this.
Fact: Parents should be responsible for their kids up to 18 yrs of age.
Fact: Taking guns from law abiding citizens only results in leaving guns in the hands of criminals.
Fact: To leave oneself defenseless is stupid.
Fact: Take away guns, then you'll have to take away, bombs, baseball bats, clubs, golf clubs, canes, umbrellas, fireplace pokers/stokers, large sculptures, cars, trucks, vans, planes, trains, boats, ships, large glass bottles, sharp sticks, rocks, knives, poisons, gas, ropes, wires, guitar, piano, violin, viola, bass fiddle, banjo, sitar, zither, and harpsichord strings, anthrax, small pox, aids, lethal drugs, various metal, wooden, and hard plastic objects, hands, feet, and karate...
Fact: States that have fewer gun restrictive laws also have less crime.
Fact: Washington DC has the most gun control laws of all 50 States, and also has the highest crime rates and murders of all 50 States.
Fact: Liberalism is mental disorder that's going to get us all killed:(
If your not American butt out...
It's too late for gun control. If psychotic people want to get their hands on a fire arm, they can. I am sure that guy didn't think.....';uh, shoot, I can't go get a gun, so I guess I won't go blow as many people away as possible'; Gun control...WAY TOO LATE!
well it should be a wake up call!! we need to do something!!
NRA lifetime member
CCW permit owner
Not all Americans do NOT want better gun control. The majority of us are horrified by this tragedy.
No. Gun laws are only observed by the law abiding.
This incident was very sudden and tragic, I feel terrible. It's a shame that this had to happen but I agree with rossem.
If no one had a gun then the person who is best with a knife would kill a lot of people.
No, it's not a ';wake-up call.'; This is a tragedy, granted--but also a freak occurance. Normal people don't base their lives--or policy--on such.
And NORMAL people feel compassion fror the victims and their family--they don't see it as just a way to promote their political agenda. The ones who do are pretty sorry excuses for human beings.
If someone wants to rob a bank, or kill
someone, they will somehow manage
to get their hands on a gun.
We have a vein of sickness in our society.
Eventually, better education and technology
will make things better.
Passing more ordinances won't.
because the NRA has alot of money and pays a lot of people... also many americans use the reasoning of the second amendment... the truth is that the second amendment was ment so that milita forces were aloud to have weapons, it was never ment that everyone should have a gun but that when a state raised a milita, that there would be no problems with them having gunns... if america knew the real reason maybe they would be more likely to push for gun control laws...
but the truth is that unless no one is allowed to have a gun school shootings will continue, because people can allways find their ways around laws
It's not just about gun control. If a person is looking to do something like this they will find a way - get a gun, get one illegally, build a bomb, release something into the air during the middle of class. If somebody is sick enough to want to kill alot of people for no reason, gun control is not going to stop them.
If there was a nationwide ban on firearms (which all guns are restricted on the VT campus. How come this happened despite the strict gun controls?) in place before this event, two things would have changed...
1) Instead of breaking 20 some laws, Cho Seung-Hui would have broke 21 laws.
2) Millions of law-abiding citizens would have to decide between becoming criminals or continue abiding the law and go against their natural instinct to preserve the self.
You, the government, the UN, or anybody for that matter is in no position to judge and dictate the value of my life. The value of my life is directly proportional to the means afforded to me in defense of its continuation.
Too late. Guns are and will always be available. No amount of paper laws will stop a killer. How about adding better knife control, rock control, car control, better bomb control, airline control, fist control, poison control, etc, etc. How many ways are there to kill?
Give me the circuit for remote controlled using the dtmf chip tech mt8870?
Suggest you look at pages 14 through 18 of this document: http://assets.zarlink.com/AN/msan_108.pd鈥?/a>
If you do not understand what is says there, then you probably don't want to build one....Give me the circuit for remote controlled using the dtmf chip tech mt8870?
Have a look here http://www.discovercircuits.comcovergirl
If you do not understand what is says there, then you probably don't want to build one....Give me the circuit for remote controlled using the dtmf chip tech mt8870?
Have a look here http://www.discovercircuits.com
Questions about becoming a spacecraft control operator or a space shuttle orbiter tech?
okay so i need to know:
1.)what degrees i would need to earn?
2.) what school should i attend? (i was thinking Embry Riddle)
3.) what are some of the Job responsibilities?
4.) any specializations i would need? Describe.
5.) i need all the sources.
I've been trying to find info on this ALL day. and Im going to keep trying but if anyone could help me out that would be SOOOOOOO nice.
=]]
thank you!Questions about becoming a spacecraft control operator or a space shuttle orbiter tech?
Best way of finding out would be to contact NASA. Probably go to MIT, DEVRY, or EMBRY RIDDLE.Questions about becoming a spacecraft control operator or a space shuttle orbiter tech?
Is this your homework or are you serious???
You are asking about two completely different disciplines. In either case i would expect a good first class honours degree in Aeronautical Engineering, Aeronautics, Aerospace Engineering, Astronautical Engineering, Astronautics, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Mathematics (Pure or Applied), Applied Mechanics, Engineering Mechanics, Mechanical Engineering, Nuclear Engineering Physics, Physics, Applied Physics, Engineering Physics, Space Science, or other appropriate physical science or engineering field.
Check the link below for a summary.
I was thinking about becomming an astronaut...
These are about 80% Right I Think
-No Diabetes
-No Asthma
-No Bones Broken EVER
-IQ=High
-Military service prefferenced
1.)what degrees i would need to earn?
2.) what school should i attend? (i was thinking Embry Riddle)
3.) what are some of the Job responsibilities?
4.) any specializations i would need? Describe.
5.) i need all the sources.
I've been trying to find info on this ALL day. and Im going to keep trying but if anyone could help me out that would be SOOOOOOO nice.
=]]
thank you!Questions about becoming a spacecraft control operator or a space shuttle orbiter tech?
Best way of finding out would be to contact NASA. Probably go to MIT, DEVRY, or EMBRY RIDDLE.Questions about becoming a spacecraft control operator or a space shuttle orbiter tech?
Is this your homework or are you serious???
You are asking about two completely different disciplines. In either case i would expect a good first class honours degree in Aeronautical Engineering, Aeronautics, Aerospace Engineering, Astronautical Engineering, Astronautics, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Mathematics (Pure or Applied), Applied Mechanics, Engineering Mechanics, Mechanical Engineering, Nuclear Engineering Physics, Physics, Applied Physics, Engineering Physics, Space Science, or other appropriate physical science or engineering field.
Check the link below for a summary.
I was thinking about becomming an astronaut...
These are about 80% Right I Think
-No Diabetes
-No Asthma
-No Bones Broken EVER
-IQ=High
-Military service prefferenced
GUN CONTROL guns, virginia tech, 2nd amendment?
PLEASE explain WHY we must have gun shops for the general public. WHY? I am looking for a REAL GOOD REASON. Protection?, come on! The 2nd amendment right to bear arms is ludicrous TODAY, maybe 200+ years ago but NOT today. Only law enforcement and certified security personnel need guns. Surely with gun control crazies would not conveniently buy guns, some would, many would be rejected or puzzled by the purchase process or street dealing.
target shooting? hunting? give em up like one has to give up a sport because of injury. I ruined my knee, had to give up basketball, baseball... but took up bike riding. life has disappointments. sure many crazies would find other ways but some would NOT. HOW freakin important is your obsolete civil war mentality and god damn need to shoot TARGETS!!! former NY'er I've been victim to 2 violent crimes, and I was on Bernie Goetz's side from the git. We do NOT need GUNS to protect ourselves from the govt. They stick it up our butts in ways guns cant.GUN CONTROL guns, virginia tech, 2nd amendment?
What I don't understand is why the assault weapons ban was allowed to lapse. Had it still been in effect a month ago, this kid Cho could not have purchased any more than a ten-round clip, as I understand the facts to be. Of course, any bullets at all in this kid's hands was a nightmare scenario, but since there was no longer an assault weapons ban, he killed some three times as many people as he would have otherwise.
I dig the Constitution and am trying to be at peace with the Second Amendment. What I want someone to explain is WHAT is a ';well regulated militia'; and whether the comma after ';arms'; might actually mean something other than what the NRA thinks it does.GUN CONTROL guns, virginia tech, 2nd amendment?
Let's be practical about this. Guns, when used illegally, hurt and kill. When law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry them, it becomes a lot harder to massacre dozens of people.
';When law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry them, it becomes a lot harder to massacre dozens of people.';
Yes, but I go to school to learn and I live in this country to live in freedom, not the fear of being attacked by some psycho.
I just had to submit my opinion. I too believe that there should be some control on guns, but I don't know the right level. As long as more americans want and buy guns to keep the shops in business. This is not a simple black %26amp; white issue as you would like it to be.
You are so naive.
Oh, I am ALL for getting guns out of the hands of people like Cho. But, even if we ban them COMPLETELY, so that no one can go buy a handgun, shotgun, rifle, assault weapon....nothing......do you REALLY think that will stop things like this from happening? Not at all. When you have someone who is determined to take their rage out on the world, they will find the means to do it. So, go ahead and close down EVERY gun shop in the world. So no one can legally buy a gun. What is THAT going to do?
Not a God blessed thing.
as long as man consents to rule by government, each man (ie: responsible citizen) shall reserve the right to keep and bear arms.
now quit wasting our time.
You're not required to ';Protect'; yourself, or your loved ones if you choose not to. But those of us who feel that it is in our loved ones best interest to protect them from anything that we can, will continue to do so.
Despite what you might think, Law enforcement has no legal responsibility to protect individuals.....Not according to the Supreme court at least.
Enjoy your ignorance, I'll keep my protection....Thanks!
T.S.
We need guns to protect us from idiots like this dude at Tech. Too bad someone wasn't carrying!
Hey you do your thing and we will do ours.... Live and let live.... Which would you like to be Predator or Prey, Victim or Survivor%26gt;%26gt;%26gt;You decide.......You are sadly mistaken in your beliefs........
That is your opinion, and you have every right to it.
But do you honestly think that not having gun shops will stop guns and crimes committed with guns? If someone wants a gun, they are going to get a gun. That is that. At least with the gun shops it puts up some sort of ';regulation';.
The shooter at VA Tech passed the background check. But why should we penalize people for something they haven't done yet, but could? Hell, no man can be left alone with a child, for most child preditors are male, and this would keep children safe from being molested or abused. It is the same thing.
I think that every person has the right to figure out how they want to live and run their lives. It is not up to the government to legislate morality, and it is not up to the government to decide how a person is going to live. Going down that road will bring us much closer to Orwell's ';1984'; and ';Big Brother';.
If he hadn't bought the guns in a gun shop, he would have gotten them on the street. And what if he had made a bomb instead, a'la Timothy McVeigh, or poisoned the cafeteria, or put a chemical agent in the heating sytem?
This school knew he was a nut case some time ago, yet they did nothing. He wrote papers so disturbing that the school won't realease them to the media. He set fires, he made bomb threats. Why was he still at the school? The gun purchases were just the beginning of the end of a downward spiral that could have been stopped months ago.
I think the propeller on your avatar's beanie says everything that needs saying about this question.
I feel the 2nd amendment is always taken out of context when USA citizens are discussing their right to carry guns. If you really read the constitution and look at the history and context of the requirements that the government of the day wanted people to carry weapons its clear that the government of the time was trying to ensure the security and safety of their people. Over the years where these guns have been turned to different uses and the fact that USA being a super power would never really require the people to form a Militia to come to the defense of the nation means that the amendment is no longer relevant to its needs and should have been sort long ago. It like the really ancient laws that Europe had on it book which allowed the beating of women during daylight hour to keep her in line - it is ludicrous in this day and age.
However I feel gun toting Americans will not change their way regardless of how many of there children are killed.
It is so sad, - I expect the millions of tears shed will just be soaked up by the fabric of American life and things will move on.
So, sad.
Thanks for the rant. Too bad closed minds don't come with closed mouths.
http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba324/ba324.html
http://www.ncpa.org/~ncpa/pi/crime/pdcrm鈥?/a>
http://www.wpri.org/Reports/Volume19/Vol鈥?/a>
oh its ridiculous huh. how will you protect your family when a gun toteing robber breaks into your house and you don't have one because the right to own a gun has been taken away from you, and your family ends up dead because only criminals have guns. come up with something else because I won't be giving up my gun to make you and the other anti-gun people happy
Firearms are used by private citizens in the U.S. to legally protect and defend themselves over 2 million times every year. The police can not be everywhere and can not protect everyone.
I am a hard core Liberal and I think gun ownership is a pursue of happiness if someone gets their kicks off shooting a gun in a safe place so be it. I also don`t think you should not eat anything you are not willing kill yourself. I see the Republican talking points are that the Liberals want to take your guns away put I think these days it is the extreme religious right that wants guns ban.
Gun control is not the answer, if some crazy dude is going to snap and kill a bunch of people gun control will not stop him.
Learn about what happened after the Nazis instituted gun control for the people in the 1930's and you might begin to get a clue.
While we're at it lets ban freedom of speech. The only reason people use it is to bash someone else, or the government. Let's also ban the freedom of press, then we won't have to read all them lies in the tabloids. Of course the Fourth Amendment has got to go, that way we could kick in doors at random to see who is violating the law and who isn't. Heck, let's just burn the Constitution and start all over. All of those rights are over 200 years old and are outdated. Don't you agree?
I do not think ALL guns should be banned, however I do believe handguns and automatic weapons SHOULD be banned. Or at least restricted far more than they are today.
Excuse me but, your reasoning is exactly the same that got hitler in power. In the broadest since Citizens need guns to protect them from an oppresive government. in todays enviroment We need guns and other weapons to protect our persons, Because the police and security guards cannot be there 24/7 and because the police is not there to protect you as an individual they are to maintain order and protect thr public at large.(There is also the famous court case, in which a woman who sued the DC police for taking over two hours to respond to her call of an intruder entering her house, was told that the police had no responsibility for the safety of individual citizens. She was beaten and raped; the police arrived just in time to do nothing. ) Bottom line is we need lots of guns and other implements of destruction and the training to use them properly.
The grass is always greener on the other side. Did you know cars kill people?. Did you know disease, food, water, wind, and natural causes kill people?. Did you know people kill people without the use of a weapon?. Why don't we picket Mother Nature?. Why don't we just ban people?.
Years ago a town in Georgia proved the concept that gun ownership reduced crime. The adult citizens of the town were required by law to have a firearm and the ammunition for it. The crime rate dropped to practically nothing. There have been several interviews done with inmates who said that the homes they would be least likely to burglarize, the citizens they were least likely to try to rob, were the ones where they thought they might come up against a gun. So apparently personal protection is a valid reason. Give up target shooting and hunting? If you hadn't hurt your knee and someone suggested that you give up your sports you'd have thought they were crazy. ';You shouldn't do it because I don't want to do it'; is not a valid argument against gun ownership and their use.
';KENNESAW, Ga - Several Kennesaw officials attribute a drop in crime in the city over the past two decades to a law that requires residents to have a gun in the house.
In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition.
The ordinance states the gun law is needed to ';protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants.';
Then-councilman J.O. Stephenson said after the ordinance was passed, everyone ';went crazy.';
';People all over the country said there would be shootings in the street and violence in homes,'; he said. ';Of course, that wasn't the case.';
In fact, according to Stephenson, it caused the crime rate in the city to plunge.
Kennesaw Historical Society president Robert Jones said following the law's passage, the crime rate dropped 89 percent in the city, compared to the modest 10 percent drop statewide.
';It did drop after it was passed,'; he said. ';After it initially dropped, it has stayed at the same low level for the past 16 years.'; ';
If your opposed to the second amendment then don't own guns.
The reason people have firearms ranges from personal protection to to recreation. Whether you like or not peolpe have these rights. I imagie someone who has been the victim of 2 violent crimes would be more sympathetic to the right to bear arms.
Another thing to consider is not everybody lives in a major city where police respond quickly. In rural areas guns are both a tradition and a necessity.
I too used to live in NYC, so I can relate to some of what your saying. However, living in a rural Southwestern area, wild animals are now my biggest threat, and on accasion using a firearm has been necessary.
What people don't seem to understand is, that no matter how many gun laws you pass, you can't legislate what people are going to do with them once they purchase one.
Hunting and fishing is a way of life in my family and we have always had and Will always have guns. The 2nd admendment is there for a reasaon. Let me get this straight, just because you screwed up your knee and had to quit sports, then we should have to give up something too? Your the same liberal that says ';what is your is mine';! Security of our property and families is a must, especially in today's liberal screwed up world, with people like you. Gun control is HITTING your target! People kill people, not guns! Go back to your kool-aide! And I agree with Alan!
If guns were banned, we'd be worse off than we are now, no meat for food, hunters provide food, no protection, so you go ahead and be all against guns and we'll see who comes out on top. I suggest you shut your mouth and don't worry about it!
target shooting? hunting? give em up like one has to give up a sport because of injury. I ruined my knee, had to give up basketball, baseball... but took up bike riding. life has disappointments. sure many crazies would find other ways but some would NOT. HOW freakin important is your obsolete civil war mentality and god damn need to shoot TARGETS!!! former NY'er I've been victim to 2 violent crimes, and I was on Bernie Goetz's side from the git. We do NOT need GUNS to protect ourselves from the govt. They stick it up our butts in ways guns cant.GUN CONTROL guns, virginia tech, 2nd amendment?
What I don't understand is why the assault weapons ban was allowed to lapse. Had it still been in effect a month ago, this kid Cho could not have purchased any more than a ten-round clip, as I understand the facts to be. Of course, any bullets at all in this kid's hands was a nightmare scenario, but since there was no longer an assault weapons ban, he killed some three times as many people as he would have otherwise.
I dig the Constitution and am trying to be at peace with the Second Amendment. What I want someone to explain is WHAT is a ';well regulated militia'; and whether the comma after ';arms'; might actually mean something other than what the NRA thinks it does.GUN CONTROL guns, virginia tech, 2nd amendment?
Let's be practical about this. Guns, when used illegally, hurt and kill. When law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry them, it becomes a lot harder to massacre dozens of people.
Report Abuse
';When law-abiding citizens are allowed to carry them, it becomes a lot harder to massacre dozens of people.';
Yes, but I go to school to learn and I live in this country to live in freedom, not the fear of being attacked by some psycho.
Report Abuse
I just had to submit my opinion. I too believe that there should be some control on guns, but I don't know the right level. As long as more americans want and buy guns to keep the shops in business. This is not a simple black %26amp; white issue as you would like it to be.
Report Abuse
You are so naive.
Oh, I am ALL for getting guns out of the hands of people like Cho. But, even if we ban them COMPLETELY, so that no one can go buy a handgun, shotgun, rifle, assault weapon....nothing......do you REALLY think that will stop things like this from happening? Not at all. When you have someone who is determined to take their rage out on the world, they will find the means to do it. So, go ahead and close down EVERY gun shop in the world. So no one can legally buy a gun. What is THAT going to do?
Not a God blessed thing.
as long as man consents to rule by government, each man (ie: responsible citizen) shall reserve the right to keep and bear arms.
now quit wasting our time.
You're not required to ';Protect'; yourself, or your loved ones if you choose not to. But those of us who feel that it is in our loved ones best interest to protect them from anything that we can, will continue to do so.
Despite what you might think, Law enforcement has no legal responsibility to protect individuals.....Not according to the Supreme court at least.
Enjoy your ignorance, I'll keep my protection....Thanks!
T.S.
We need guns to protect us from idiots like this dude at Tech. Too bad someone wasn't carrying!
Hey you do your thing and we will do ours.... Live and let live.... Which would you like to be Predator or Prey, Victim or Survivor%26gt;%26gt;%26gt;You decide.......You are sadly mistaken in your beliefs........
That is your opinion, and you have every right to it.
But do you honestly think that not having gun shops will stop guns and crimes committed with guns? If someone wants a gun, they are going to get a gun. That is that. At least with the gun shops it puts up some sort of ';regulation';.
The shooter at VA Tech passed the background check. But why should we penalize people for something they haven't done yet, but could? Hell, no man can be left alone with a child, for most child preditors are male, and this would keep children safe from being molested or abused. It is the same thing.
I think that every person has the right to figure out how they want to live and run their lives. It is not up to the government to legislate morality, and it is not up to the government to decide how a person is going to live. Going down that road will bring us much closer to Orwell's ';1984'; and ';Big Brother';.
If he hadn't bought the guns in a gun shop, he would have gotten them on the street. And what if he had made a bomb instead, a'la Timothy McVeigh, or poisoned the cafeteria, or put a chemical agent in the heating sytem?
This school knew he was a nut case some time ago, yet they did nothing. He wrote papers so disturbing that the school won't realease them to the media. He set fires, he made bomb threats. Why was he still at the school? The gun purchases were just the beginning of the end of a downward spiral that could have been stopped months ago.
I think the propeller on your avatar's beanie says everything that needs saying about this question.
I feel the 2nd amendment is always taken out of context when USA citizens are discussing their right to carry guns. If you really read the constitution and look at the history and context of the requirements that the government of the day wanted people to carry weapons its clear that the government of the time was trying to ensure the security and safety of their people. Over the years where these guns have been turned to different uses and the fact that USA being a super power would never really require the people to form a Militia to come to the defense of the nation means that the amendment is no longer relevant to its needs and should have been sort long ago. It like the really ancient laws that Europe had on it book which allowed the beating of women during daylight hour to keep her in line - it is ludicrous in this day and age.
However I feel gun toting Americans will not change their way regardless of how many of there children are killed.
It is so sad, - I expect the millions of tears shed will just be soaked up by the fabric of American life and things will move on.
So, sad.
Thanks for the rant. Too bad closed minds don't come with closed mouths.
http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba324/ba324.html
http://www.ncpa.org/~ncpa/pi/crime/pdcrm鈥?/a>
http://www.wpri.org/Reports/Volume19/Vol鈥?/a>
oh its ridiculous huh. how will you protect your family when a gun toteing robber breaks into your house and you don't have one because the right to own a gun has been taken away from you, and your family ends up dead because only criminals have guns. come up with something else because I won't be giving up my gun to make you and the other anti-gun people happy
Firearms are used by private citizens in the U.S. to legally protect and defend themselves over 2 million times every year. The police can not be everywhere and can not protect everyone.
I am a hard core Liberal and I think gun ownership is a pursue of happiness if someone gets their kicks off shooting a gun in a safe place so be it. I also don`t think you should not eat anything you are not willing kill yourself. I see the Republican talking points are that the Liberals want to take your guns away put I think these days it is the extreme religious right that wants guns ban.
Gun control is not the answer, if some crazy dude is going to snap and kill a bunch of people gun control will not stop him.
Learn about what happened after the Nazis instituted gun control for the people in the 1930's and you might begin to get a clue.
While we're at it lets ban freedom of speech. The only reason people use it is to bash someone else, or the government. Let's also ban the freedom of press, then we won't have to read all them lies in the tabloids. Of course the Fourth Amendment has got to go, that way we could kick in doors at random to see who is violating the law and who isn't. Heck, let's just burn the Constitution and start all over. All of those rights are over 200 years old and are outdated. Don't you agree?
I do not think ALL guns should be banned, however I do believe handguns and automatic weapons SHOULD be banned. Or at least restricted far more than they are today.
Excuse me but, your reasoning is exactly the same that got hitler in power. In the broadest since Citizens need guns to protect them from an oppresive government. in todays enviroment We need guns and other weapons to protect our persons, Because the police and security guards cannot be there 24/7 and because the police is not there to protect you as an individual they are to maintain order and protect thr public at large.(There is also the famous court case, in which a woman who sued the DC police for taking over two hours to respond to her call of an intruder entering her house, was told that the police had no responsibility for the safety of individual citizens. She was beaten and raped; the police arrived just in time to do nothing. ) Bottom line is we need lots of guns and other implements of destruction and the training to use them properly.
The grass is always greener on the other side. Did you know cars kill people?. Did you know disease, food, water, wind, and natural causes kill people?. Did you know people kill people without the use of a weapon?. Why don't we picket Mother Nature?. Why don't we just ban people?.
Years ago a town in Georgia proved the concept that gun ownership reduced crime. The adult citizens of the town were required by law to have a firearm and the ammunition for it. The crime rate dropped to practically nothing. There have been several interviews done with inmates who said that the homes they would be least likely to burglarize, the citizens they were least likely to try to rob, were the ones where they thought they might come up against a gun. So apparently personal protection is a valid reason. Give up target shooting and hunting? If you hadn't hurt your knee and someone suggested that you give up your sports you'd have thought they were crazy. ';You shouldn't do it because I don't want to do it'; is not a valid argument against gun ownership and their use.
';KENNESAW, Ga - Several Kennesaw officials attribute a drop in crime in the city over the past two decades to a law that requires residents to have a gun in the house.
In 1982, the Kennesaw City Council unanimously passed a law requiring heads of households to own at least one firearm with ammunition.
The ordinance states the gun law is needed to ';protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants.';
Then-councilman J.O. Stephenson said after the ordinance was passed, everyone ';went crazy.';
';People all over the country said there would be shootings in the street and violence in homes,'; he said. ';Of course, that wasn't the case.';
In fact, according to Stephenson, it caused the crime rate in the city to plunge.
Kennesaw Historical Society president Robert Jones said following the law's passage, the crime rate dropped 89 percent in the city, compared to the modest 10 percent drop statewide.
';It did drop after it was passed,'; he said. ';After it initially dropped, it has stayed at the same low level for the past 16 years.'; ';
If your opposed to the second amendment then don't own guns.
The reason people have firearms ranges from personal protection to to recreation. Whether you like or not peolpe have these rights. I imagie someone who has been the victim of 2 violent crimes would be more sympathetic to the right to bear arms.
Another thing to consider is not everybody lives in a major city where police respond quickly. In rural areas guns are both a tradition and a necessity.
I too used to live in NYC, so I can relate to some of what your saying. However, living in a rural Southwestern area, wild animals are now my biggest threat, and on accasion using a firearm has been necessary.
What people don't seem to understand is, that no matter how many gun laws you pass, you can't legislate what people are going to do with them once they purchase one.
Hunting and fishing is a way of life in my family and we have always had and Will always have guns. The 2nd admendment is there for a reasaon. Let me get this straight, just because you screwed up your knee and had to quit sports, then we should have to give up something too? Your the same liberal that says ';what is your is mine';! Security of our property and families is a must, especially in today's liberal screwed up world, with people like you. Gun control is HITTING your target! People kill people, not guns! Go back to your kool-aide! And I agree with Alan!
If guns were banned, we'd be worse off than we are now, no meat for food, hunters provide food, no protection, so you go ahead and be all against guns and we'll see who comes out on top. I suggest you shut your mouth and don't worry about it!
Gun Control has it promoted or discouraged the types of events that has happened at Virginia Tech?
I'm starting to think that the young man and those like him at Virginia Tech and Colombine, may have hesitated if they knew that there was a very good chance that some of those he was attempting to kill were carrying guns as well.
At the very least,I would bet if some of those students or professors were carrying it would have reduced the amount of those fatally shot.
Do you think that you would feel more at ease if you knew your childs classroom teacher, principal were trained and armed to defend against an attacker?
At this point those who are intending on using weapons for crimes have them accessable ( legally or illegally) and we can't always rely on police protection.Gun Control has it promoted or discouraged the types of events that has happened at Virginia Tech?
Not certain it has done either. There are some things here that are facts.
No law could have prevented this, gun control or anything.
The police could not have prevented this.
There are two possible things that could have and neither is very pretty.
First, there was ample warning that the guy was seriously unstable, had someone blown the whistle to the appropriate authorities the man may have been placed into custody, that would have at least forestalled if not prevented the murders. The scary point is obivous, if we as a society are constantly blowing the whistle on suspected mental cases, there will be a lot of people being picked up for their eccentricities, even those who would never harm anyone and it plays right into the hands of the heavy hand of socialist re-education.
Second, had an adult with a weapon been around there could have been a chance that they could have either disabled the shooter or scared him off. There is always the danger here for innocent people to be injured, but it is one risk I would prefer if I had been there disarmed.Gun Control has it promoted or discouraged the types of events that has happened at Virginia Tech?
Amen sista! Cowards always chose helpless targets to make their ';point';. They couldn't get out their message of evil and domination if they got shot at before doing the deed. The biggest example is 9/11. Cowards!!
Those are my thoughts exactly! Less gun control, less fear!
The gun control crowd has made us all sitting ducks. I say all law abiding citizens should carry a weapon. It looks like every massacre is worse than the last. If all law abiding citizens had a weapon, maybe the number of murdered would have been less at VT. It is easy to learn how to handle a gun. It is easy to learn how to use a gun. It is a hell of a lot easier to defend yourself from homicidal maniacs with a gun. The group that needs a gun the most is the weakest prey. That would be women. A gun is the great 'equalizer'. The police are simply not able to defend citizens during the 30 seconds when they need it the most.
Only one policy has ever been shown to deter mass murder: concealed-carry laws. In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the inestimable economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect.
And the effect was not insignificant. States that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60 percent and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80 percent.
Apparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can't shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic ';Gun-Free School Zone'; laws.
there wouldn't have been any hesitation, and while we that type of environment would work in a perfect world, it would cause a lot of other problems in real life. if anything the idea of others being armed as well just makes it all the more exciting; the issue isn't whether or not you're going to run up against resistance - it's like suggesting that women won't get raped if a rapist knew that there was a good chance that he could be raped himself. the issue you're flirting with is whether or not more guns, and easier access to guns by the general public can help to create a safer society at the end of the day. the answer is that it would not; being in a possession of a handgun requires emotional maturity that the average person doesn't possess, and you can never get it without being through some situations with a gun first. you can't just carry a gun, or be trained to use a gun, and then be expected to do the right thing when you've never had to use that gun before.
these are kids who are still fascinated and infatuated with guns because it's foreign to them. then they use the gun, and can't deal with what it does and end up killing themselves. you're talking about someone being able to process what just happened after they've killed tens of people without reason; eventually they're going to have to deal with that on some level. the average person isn't going to make it through that.
if those students use the guns every day, if they're living that type of life and in they're in those situations, then yeah that's probable. but you're talking about privileged kids coming into a situation where they've never seen anyone be shot at, never seen anyone hit by a bullet and never had to pull the trigger themselves. some of those kids probably never even hear shots go off before in real life. what good is it going to do them to be armed when they can get nervous and end up hitting some kid behind the shooter or whatever the case may be?
schools need more security; actual cops with the authority to take someone out whatever the case may be - it's quite obvious by now that this isn't the case of someone shooting someone, and you can work out the details of why later. these are kids that are going to shoot a plethora of individuals, then take their own life because they are depressed. we have to change the laws in this country and the way in which we deal with these types of situations. they're still talking about the kids state of mind, what he's been through, how troubled he is. who really gives a *; he's killed thirty people, and he took his own life, so what does any of that matter. you can't prevent this type of thing, but you can minimize the damage that occurs ...
In this case, the criminal killed himself, therefore robbing anyone of seeing justice done. I believe that there are too many people who do these horrible things, believe that it doesn't matter because the legal system will not do anything to punish them. If they had a fear that the consequences of there actions, would be swift and certain, then maybe second thoughts would be there, but our namby pamby society, protects the criminal's rights and to heck with the victims. Do I believe more gun control is the answer? NO. We don/t even enforce the laws we do have. We have too many liberal judges and lawyers, who are afraid to punish criminals for fear of losing money and power. I wonder if the outcome would have been different had a teacher or another student had intervened with a handgun. The one guy who was mistakenly detained after his two friend were shot in the elevator, what if he had had a gun? and protected himself, maybe 30 other people would have been alive. There are many states that have concealed handgun classes. The one I took was very strict about not only gun safety, but with lectures from attorneys about the consequences of using a firearm, protecting yourself or not. I was raised around guns and raised my children, now grown, how to shoot and be aware of your surroundings and where the bullet is going to end up. They couldn't even have a .22 rifle until they took a mandatory hunter safety course. This guy, in whatever state of mind he was in, was going to commit murder by whatever means necessary, he just chose to use a gun. He could have done the same thing with a Ford F-150 pick-up, driving into a crowd, or used materials similar to the Ok City bombing. So, no, gun control would NOT have stopped this guy from killing someone, but maybe more people with concealed carry license and a weapon could have averted this tragedy. Law enforcement can't be there 24/7.
have you ever heard of a disgruntled cop going to the police station and killing 32 people? NO, because most would shoot back
wow. you related stalin or somethin?? this kinda s~~t only happens in america. now ye dont no wat to do!! ha ha ha ha!!!! it so typical of the american ';people';
THELASTID, where have you been keeping your head???? Your reverse psychology sounds like you are a real Flamer! I have been legally carrying a firearm for 22 yrs. as an LEO and an additional 7 years as a P.I.. When FL past the laws that allowed one to legally carry a firearm I also became legal again. I have never committed a crime. My brother who is a world class trap, skeet and upland game hunter for 50+ years. He has never committed a crime. Every member of my gun club in KY numbering near a 1000 men and women equaling thousands of years of gun use and ownership have never committed a crime.
Your answer wasn't thot out and over-whelmingly stupid. You shouldn't came to a battle of wits unarmed.
More and more power is reaching more and more hands.
Should everybody be allowed to carry a nuclear weapon, just because somebody else might be using one against them?
If not, then who decides?
Actually, I think the people that do own guns shouldn't and the people that don't own guns should.
That is why people that own guns are more apt to commit crimes with the weapon of power.
Gun control has done nothing to stop or even slow down violent crimes. Look at Japan, guns are outlawed. yet a Governor was just shot and their gun crimes aren't far behind ours. Yes I would feel better if more people were properly trained to use guns and were armed. I believe the criminals would be a little more cautious if they knew there was a good chance people would shoot back.
At the very least,I would bet if some of those students or professors were carrying it would have reduced the amount of those fatally shot.
Do you think that you would feel more at ease if you knew your childs classroom teacher, principal were trained and armed to defend against an attacker?
At this point those who are intending on using weapons for crimes have them accessable ( legally or illegally) and we can't always rely on police protection.Gun Control has it promoted or discouraged the types of events that has happened at Virginia Tech?
Not certain it has done either. There are some things here that are facts.
No law could have prevented this, gun control or anything.
The police could not have prevented this.
There are two possible things that could have and neither is very pretty.
First, there was ample warning that the guy was seriously unstable, had someone blown the whistle to the appropriate authorities the man may have been placed into custody, that would have at least forestalled if not prevented the murders. The scary point is obivous, if we as a society are constantly blowing the whistle on suspected mental cases, there will be a lot of people being picked up for their eccentricities, even those who would never harm anyone and it plays right into the hands of the heavy hand of socialist re-education.
Second, had an adult with a weapon been around there could have been a chance that they could have either disabled the shooter or scared him off. There is always the danger here for innocent people to be injured, but it is one risk I would prefer if I had been there disarmed.Gun Control has it promoted or discouraged the types of events that has happened at Virginia Tech?
Amen sista! Cowards always chose helpless targets to make their ';point';. They couldn't get out their message of evil and domination if they got shot at before doing the deed. The biggest example is 9/11. Cowards!!
Those are my thoughts exactly! Less gun control, less fear!
The gun control crowd has made us all sitting ducks. I say all law abiding citizens should carry a weapon. It looks like every massacre is worse than the last. If all law abiding citizens had a weapon, maybe the number of murdered would have been less at VT. It is easy to learn how to handle a gun. It is easy to learn how to use a gun. It is a hell of a lot easier to defend yourself from homicidal maniacs with a gun. The group that needs a gun the most is the weakest prey. That would be women. A gun is the great 'equalizer'. The police are simply not able to defend citizens during the 30 seconds when they need it the most.
Only one policy has ever been shown to deter mass murder: concealed-carry laws. In a comprehensive study of all public, multiple-shooting incidents in America between 1977 and 1999, the inestimable economists John Lott and Bill Landes found that concealed-carry laws were the only laws that had any beneficial effect.
And the effect was not insignificant. States that allowed citizens to carry concealed handguns reduced multiple-shooting attacks by 60 percent and reduced the death and injury from these attacks by nearly 80 percent.
Apparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can't shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic ';Gun-Free School Zone'; laws.
there wouldn't have been any hesitation, and while we that type of environment would work in a perfect world, it would cause a lot of other problems in real life. if anything the idea of others being armed as well just makes it all the more exciting; the issue isn't whether or not you're going to run up against resistance - it's like suggesting that women won't get raped if a rapist knew that there was a good chance that he could be raped himself. the issue you're flirting with is whether or not more guns, and easier access to guns by the general public can help to create a safer society at the end of the day. the answer is that it would not; being in a possession of a handgun requires emotional maturity that the average person doesn't possess, and you can never get it without being through some situations with a gun first. you can't just carry a gun, or be trained to use a gun, and then be expected to do the right thing when you've never had to use that gun before.
these are kids who are still fascinated and infatuated with guns because it's foreign to them. then they use the gun, and can't deal with what it does and end up killing themselves. you're talking about someone being able to process what just happened after they've killed tens of people without reason; eventually they're going to have to deal with that on some level. the average person isn't going to make it through that.
if those students use the guns every day, if they're living that type of life and in they're in those situations, then yeah that's probable. but you're talking about privileged kids coming into a situation where they've never seen anyone be shot at, never seen anyone hit by a bullet and never had to pull the trigger themselves. some of those kids probably never even hear shots go off before in real life. what good is it going to do them to be armed when they can get nervous and end up hitting some kid behind the shooter or whatever the case may be?
schools need more security; actual cops with the authority to take someone out whatever the case may be - it's quite obvious by now that this isn't the case of someone shooting someone, and you can work out the details of why later. these are kids that are going to shoot a plethora of individuals, then take their own life because they are depressed. we have to change the laws in this country and the way in which we deal with these types of situations. they're still talking about the kids state of mind, what he's been through, how troubled he is. who really gives a *; he's killed thirty people, and he took his own life, so what does any of that matter. you can't prevent this type of thing, but you can minimize the damage that occurs ...
In this case, the criminal killed himself, therefore robbing anyone of seeing justice done. I believe that there are too many people who do these horrible things, believe that it doesn't matter because the legal system will not do anything to punish them. If they had a fear that the consequences of there actions, would be swift and certain, then maybe second thoughts would be there, but our namby pamby society, protects the criminal's rights and to heck with the victims. Do I believe more gun control is the answer? NO. We don/t even enforce the laws we do have. We have too many liberal judges and lawyers, who are afraid to punish criminals for fear of losing money and power. I wonder if the outcome would have been different had a teacher or another student had intervened with a handgun. The one guy who was mistakenly detained after his two friend were shot in the elevator, what if he had had a gun? and protected himself, maybe 30 other people would have been alive. There are many states that have concealed handgun classes. The one I took was very strict about not only gun safety, but with lectures from attorneys about the consequences of using a firearm, protecting yourself or not. I was raised around guns and raised my children, now grown, how to shoot and be aware of your surroundings and where the bullet is going to end up. They couldn't even have a .22 rifle until they took a mandatory hunter safety course. This guy, in whatever state of mind he was in, was going to commit murder by whatever means necessary, he just chose to use a gun. He could have done the same thing with a Ford F-150 pick-up, driving into a crowd, or used materials similar to the Ok City bombing. So, no, gun control would NOT have stopped this guy from killing someone, but maybe more people with concealed carry license and a weapon could have averted this tragedy. Law enforcement can't be there 24/7.
have you ever heard of a disgruntled cop going to the police station and killing 32 people? NO, because most would shoot back
wow. you related stalin or somethin?? this kinda s~~t only happens in america. now ye dont no wat to do!! ha ha ha ha!!!! it so typical of the american ';people';
THELASTID, where have you been keeping your head???? Your reverse psychology sounds like you are a real Flamer! I have been legally carrying a firearm for 22 yrs. as an LEO and an additional 7 years as a P.I.. When FL past the laws that allowed one to legally carry a firearm I also became legal again. I have never committed a crime. My brother who is a world class trap, skeet and upland game hunter for 50+ years. He has never committed a crime. Every member of my gun club in KY numbering near a 1000 men and women equaling thousands of years of gun use and ownership have never committed a crime.
Your answer wasn't thot out and over-whelmingly stupid. You shouldn't came to a battle of wits unarmed.
More and more power is reaching more and more hands.
Should everybody be allowed to carry a nuclear weapon, just because somebody else might be using one against them?
If not, then who decides?
Actually, I think the people that do own guns shouldn't and the people that don't own guns should.
That is why people that own guns are more apt to commit crimes with the weapon of power.
Gun control has done nothing to stop or even slow down violent crimes. Look at Japan, guns are outlawed. yet a Governor was just shot and their gun crimes aren't far behind ours. Yes I would feel better if more people were properly trained to use guns and were armed. I believe the criminals would be a little more cautious if they knew there was a good chance people would shoot back.
Did gun control play a factor in the V-Tech tragedy?
I don't mean they whack job that bought the gun, I mean the laws that prevent law abding people (faculty, staff, and students) from carrying concealed weapons. If one other person had a legal gun, would 31 people be dead today?Did gun control play a factor in the V-Tech tragedy?
Whether there was a stricter or more lenient approach to gun control events like these are still going to happen and although they are great tragedies unless it was impossible to get hold of guns and bullets, never going to happen, these events still have a possibility to occur.
I agree, if other people had been carrying weapons the death toll wouldn't have been 31. I would have estimated it closer to 50 or 60.
In a panicked environment with lots of people running round even the most highly train marksman can't guaranty 100% that they would hit the correct person carrying a gun. Most accounts state that people froze or tried to hide, carrying a gun wouldn't have solved this problem.
Then consider gangs of armed students walking round trying to find the killer, probably causing gun fight when they met other groups.
Guns are not the main problem with violent crime, Canada has equal access to gun but less violet crime per capita. UK which has a complete ban on guns has 80 times less violent crime per capita than the USA, but is still higher than Switzerland which has a very liberal approach to guns, more so than the USA. Society is the really blame for most violent crimes.Did gun control play a factor in the V-Tech tragedy?
Gun control would not have been a factor in the V. Tech. tragedy because guns are not ';allowed'; on any school campus in this country. That sets up a scenario where a hostile gun person would be the only person armed but that is not going to change. Could you imagine, ';Put your guns %26amp; books on your desks %26amp; get ready to go.'; What would have saved 30 innocent lives that day would have been for the campus to have been ';locked down'; when the first shots were fired. A ';rumor'; that a person on campus has a gun should cause a campus to go into lock down. The fact that no lock down order was given was dirrectly responsible for the deaths two hours later. Whoever failed to give that order should be charged with negligent homocide %26amp; the school should be litigated into oblivion.
No, it would be 32, and no the control was not a factor, since there is no gun control in this country. Also, they are ';Law Abiding'; Citizens exactly because of that, they abide by the Law not to have concealed weapons, the ';whack job'; that did this , couldn't care less about the Laws, even if there was a gun control. Let me make a disclaimer here, is not that I'm for guns, but given the facts, all these mass murderers are driven by mental and physical circumstances. Weapons are just some of the means to perform their actions. Remember the Unibomber? Timothy McVay? 9/11? Would had made any difference if the 3000 dead had guns with them?
Laws do not adequately protect people.
Laws are actually the root of the problem.
For the law is ';both good and evil'; ends evil.
Check out evil ';concupiscence'; in the Holy Bible.
Romans 7: ';another law'; makes you feel ';wretched';.
I think that adequately describes how the parents feel.
Connect these biblical dots to solve the mystery:
Our Father, deliver us from ';evil';: Matthew 6:13
We are delivered from the ';law';: Romans 7:6
Allegory clue: law is evil, as well as good.
Law is corruptible, and it's more often corrupt.
Have you never heard of police being on the take.
Have you never heard of the wrongfully convicted.
Perhaps you missed the TAKE HEED 101 Class.
Wake up and Smell the Odor.
Law and Odor: Pew: the smell of Death.
Law is ';the ministration of death';: 2Corinthians 3:7.
POINT: ';Grace'; is neither of two ';law';s in Mt22:36-40.
Grace neither tempts(laws) nor can be tempted(lawed).
Therefore and thereby Grace cannot lie(law) nor die(law).
Evidently Mt 22 and Rom 8 Law Law does both: lie %26amp; die.
The GRACE of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.
I do not believe it should have been so easy for him to get a gun. Obviously his intentions were not to defend himself but it seems like to me there should be some kind of instructionaly requirements and maybe anger control evaluation before issuing a gun. Anyway, I did hear at one broadcast that there was a few attempts made to stop the guy by individuals who were unarmed which really bothers me now that I think of it. Considering if they were armed they would have been much more successful.
This is the 21st century not the wild, wild west. (And even way back then not everyone packed a pistol!)
We need fewer people with guns not more.
Whether there was a stricter or more lenient approach to gun control events like these are still going to happen and although they are great tragedies unless it was impossible to get hold of guns and bullets, never going to happen, these events still have a possibility to occur.
I agree, if other people had been carrying weapons the death toll wouldn't have been 31. I would have estimated it closer to 50 or 60.
In a panicked environment with lots of people running round even the most highly train marksman can't guaranty 100% that they would hit the correct person carrying a gun. Most accounts state that people froze or tried to hide, carrying a gun wouldn't have solved this problem.
Then consider gangs of armed students walking round trying to find the killer, probably causing gun fight when they met other groups.
Guns are not the main problem with violent crime, Canada has equal access to gun but less violet crime per capita. UK which has a complete ban on guns has 80 times less violent crime per capita than the USA, but is still higher than Switzerland which has a very liberal approach to guns, more so than the USA. Society is the really blame for most violent crimes.Did gun control play a factor in the V-Tech tragedy?
Gun control would not have been a factor in the V. Tech. tragedy because guns are not ';allowed'; on any school campus in this country. That sets up a scenario where a hostile gun person would be the only person armed but that is not going to change. Could you imagine, ';Put your guns %26amp; books on your desks %26amp; get ready to go.'; What would have saved 30 innocent lives that day would have been for the campus to have been ';locked down'; when the first shots were fired. A ';rumor'; that a person on campus has a gun should cause a campus to go into lock down. The fact that no lock down order was given was dirrectly responsible for the deaths two hours later. Whoever failed to give that order should be charged with negligent homocide %26amp; the school should be litigated into oblivion.
No, it would be 32, and no the control was not a factor, since there is no gun control in this country. Also, they are ';Law Abiding'; Citizens exactly because of that, they abide by the Law not to have concealed weapons, the ';whack job'; that did this , couldn't care less about the Laws, even if there was a gun control. Let me make a disclaimer here, is not that I'm for guns, but given the facts, all these mass murderers are driven by mental and physical circumstances. Weapons are just some of the means to perform their actions. Remember the Unibomber? Timothy McVay? 9/11? Would had made any difference if the 3000 dead had guns with them?
Laws do not adequately protect people.
Laws are actually the root of the problem.
For the law is ';both good and evil'; ends evil.
Check out evil ';concupiscence'; in the Holy Bible.
Romans 7: ';another law'; makes you feel ';wretched';.
I think that adequately describes how the parents feel.
Connect these biblical dots to solve the mystery:
Our Father, deliver us from ';evil';: Matthew 6:13
We are delivered from the ';law';: Romans 7:6
Allegory clue: law is evil, as well as good.
Law is corruptible, and it's more often corrupt.
Have you never heard of police being on the take.
Have you never heard of the wrongfully convicted.
Perhaps you missed the TAKE HEED 101 Class.
Wake up and Smell the Odor.
Law and Odor: Pew: the smell of Death.
Law is ';the ministration of death';: 2Corinthians 3:7.
POINT: ';Grace'; is neither of two ';law';s in Mt22:36-40.
Grace neither tempts(laws) nor can be tempted(lawed).
Therefore and thereby Grace cannot lie(law) nor die(law).
Evidently Mt 22 and Rom 8 Law Law does both: lie %26amp; die.
The GRACE of our Lord Jesus Christ with you all. Amen.
I do not believe it should have been so easy for him to get a gun. Obviously his intentions were not to defend himself but it seems like to me there should be some kind of instructionaly requirements and maybe anger control evaluation before issuing a gun. Anyway, I did hear at one broadcast that there was a few attempts made to stop the guy by individuals who were unarmed which really bothers me now that I think of it. Considering if they were armed they would have been much more successful.
This is the 21st century not the wild, wild west. (And even way back then not everyone packed a pistol!)
We need fewer people with guns not more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)