Virginia Tech Shooting

Simon H · Post by **Simon H** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:07 am

May not be the right place to put this, but I just wanted to extend my thoughts and sympathies to all those caught up in the Virginia Tech Uni shootings of yesterday.

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:26 am

Simon

As a very sad southern boy I appreciate your thoughts.

cheers
Reb

Tom Houlihan · Post by **Tom Houlihan** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:52 am

Reb wrote:As a very sad southern boy I appreciate your thoughts.

Trust me, Reb, sadness has nothing to do with geography on this one.

What really saddens me, though, as a cop, a citizen, and as a Dad, is that as I listened to the press conferences yesterday, I couldn't help but think that while the second act of the tragedy might not have been prevented, the severity could well have been lessened. I honestly think the schooled screwed up. That, to me, makes it worse.

Simon H · Post by **Simon H** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:58 am

I'm sure that things are too raw and recent to aportion any blame on individuals, but as you imply Tom communications have been poor after the initial incident. However I can also see how such confusion can occur on such a large complex site as this.

It is a tragedy for sure.

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 6:39 am

Worst of all - the school had recently banned the carrying of weapons buy legally licensed individuals and declared it gun free.

They even issued a press release telling parents they could be assured of a much safer environment.

So there was no chance of defending themselves. Just lined up for the slaughter.

Add to that the many police and secuirty specialists who always tell us not to resist a bad guy. Really works well, eh?

Based on my own experience - you ALWAYS resist. Fists, teeth, books, credit cards; there is always something to do. In the end, you can at least die well. I reckon we have really taken something important away from our young people - teaching all this touchie feelie nonsense and actually getting them to believe that the world is a nice place.

It is actually a place full of ravening wolves and we are ourselves, like it or not, the first line of defense.

My wife was a wreck last night - she had recently stayed in that area and had dinner with folks from one of our churches there. A very nice place and some swine with an attiditude was able to wreak that kind of havoc.

cheers
Reb

Rajin Cajun · Post by **Rajin Cajun** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 8:20 am

Sadly yesterday I blew it off as just a few people being killed nothing more. When I heard the death toll it made me numb such wholescale slaughter was beyond my comprehension. It was truly disgusting I'm also disturbed at the University's lack of initiative to warn students about it. I guess what really sickens me is someone wasn't armed to end that bullshit right quick and keep the casualties minimal.

Oh well I can already heard the Democrats calling for stricter gun laws now while using a human tragedy as a reason to squash rights.

Marc Binazzi · Post by **Marc Binazzi** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:22 am

I guess it would be pretty easy for a non-American to make sarcastic comments about that umpteenth campus shooting and I imagine Michael Moore will soon make a "Bowling for Columbine II: the sequel" but apart from stricter gun laws, what else could be done? Bullet-proof jackets laws perhaps?

I mean, I have been in the US a number of times, and I am amazed at the variety of law-enforcement you have there: Sheriff, State Troopers, local police, FBI, Tobacco & Firearms, etc, etc, isn't that enough to feel safe? Sorry but exercising a right just because it is in the Constitution sounds plain ridiculous to me.

At least please do something about obesity in law-enforcement agencies: that 300-lbs elephant in a police uniform I saw on TV painstakingly trying to run towards the shooting is the most pathetic and grotesque image I have ever seen for years.

haen2 · Post by **haen2** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:59 am

More laws and more prohibitions will not make any difference.
As a foreign national (Korean), this person should not have been able to get his hands on an automatic weapon to begin with.
If persons like that would know that there would be TRAINED and ARMED individuals in the school who would shoot back, the shootings would stop.
However I can already hear the howling of the 'touchy-feely'gun control fanatics, for more reulations and confiscation.

Keep in mind though that in Australia violent crimes and armed robberies went up by a staggering 47 percent, after their infamous gun confiscation laws.

Oh well.

IHN

Reb · Post by **Reb** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 11:34 am

Marc

Sadly, the alphabet police agencies do a lot of posing in their swat costumes but never seem to go in and risk their lives. After columbine the top cop said his priority was "minimizing police casualties." I almost barfed.

Particularly since I know plenty of cops and attended the academy myself years ago. The physical courage is there - the moral courage may not be - bucking a superior or the system is a career killer. But you'd think at least one guy would say "the hell with it - I'm going in." Guess not. (in there defense there are IA drills to be followed and such and cowboying can cause problems I suppose. But I'd say "go in!"

Most of the many new agencies belong to the Fed Gov and exist to protect them, not us. There is a difference too, between a police officer and a "peace officer." the latter represent the community - now a days the former ride around in cars and rarely know anybody personally except criminals which gives them a jaundiced view of mankind.

Finally - there is this horrible, disgusting war on drugs. Police in most large metropolitan areas are swimming in combat gear thanks to Fed Gov and want a chance to use it. That gear comes with a price - fight the drug war harder. Now that they are able to confiscate property without a conviction (!) the war on our rights is likely to be lost. I wonder sometimes if some of those guys even view us as worth protecting.

I say of the drug war as I say of the supposed war on terror - if they really meant it - the border would be secure. The drug war is definitely leading us to fascism.

This is all running out of control and everything bad is getting bigger while young people are subjected to a constant blathering by post modernist idiots - so they have no values to fall back on and can't separate good from evil. No young person in my day ('50s, '60s) would have dreampt of shooting people but we were out hunting and shooting as early as (in my case) ten years old.

If gun control worked it would have shown itself to work by now. We need something much bigger than that - a return to decency. No roadmap to that and nothing a pandering politician can do. Its up to us and we are failing.

cheers
Reb

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 12:33 pm

but apart from stricter gun laws, what else could be done? Bullet-proof jackets laws perhaps?

allowing, legal, law-abiding citizens to carry on campus would/could have prevented the mass slaughter. ever think that crazies are attracted to school settings becuase they are "gun-free zones". no chance of getting shot back at. and criminals don't exactly care whther guns are illegal or not. they would still obtain and use them,. thats why they are called "criminals".

I mean, I have been in the US a number of times, and I am amazed at the variety of law-enforcement you have there: Sheriff, State Troopers, local police, FBI, Tobacco & Firearms, etc, etc, isn't that enough to feel safe? Sorry but exercising a right just because it is in the Constitution sounds plain ridiculous to me.

police can only react to crimes in a case like this. just pick up the pieces. only armed, law abiding citizens can self-protect before it gets out of hand.

Piet Duits · Post by **Piet Duits** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:32 pm

Sorry, I disagree.
Maybe it's my "European" attitude speaking up, but NO citizen should carry a weapon.
Only police or soldiers should be allowed to carry a weapon.
And then only shoot under strict laws and rules. (read: not as cowboys)

I know it's a difficult case, I admit that even in a relative safe country as mine it's very (too) easy to get a gun, or even a grenade launcher. That's rediculous, but undeniable.
Still, the percentage of people actually having a gun is very low. The percentage of people knowing how to handle a gun is perhaps even lower.

From what I understand, it's very easy to buy a gun. Do you get a training in how to handle the gun? How to store your newly bought gun? And the ammo?
Law abiding citizen: what's that? If you drive to fast and get a ticket, are you then still considered a law abiding citizen?
Who knows if such a law abiding citizen don't pull out his gun when someone parks in the space the law abiding citizen (who actually have a bad day) wants to park his car in?

The right to bear arms.
When was that written?
You see, I see it like this. I was brought up as a catholic. So, I should follow the bible.
The bible was written many centuries ago. Back then they didn't have all the things we have today. Then they thought the world was flat, now we know it's not.
All the things written in the Holy Bible are written and rewritten by people. People. People living in their own time. With all the things around them which were "normal" then. In a completely different time, different surroundings, different new inventions, but still with the same type of people. People who flirt with the wife of one other. People who got cought with their hands in the cooky jar. Jealous people. You name it.

If you want to follow the bible* by the letter (* bible can be exchanged with Declaration of Independence, Koran, Thora, Tessin, Star Trek for Dummies, etc. etc.), you will become a Dinosaur. And as we all know, the Dinosaurs are extinct.
Or even worse, they become an extremist.

Following the US Bill of Rights, which at that time was a well dared and proud document, in todays enviroment is not entirely good.
Take: the 2nd amendment the right to keep and bear arms.
Who's only getting better with this? Those who sells the guns. Does it make your home safer? You have a gun. Your child knows you have a gun. You see a burglar is getting in. You have never fired a gun, but still you have one in your closet. You take out that gun to take out the burglar.
You take someone's life.

Remember the 6th commendment: thou shall not kill.

Piet
safe in his dutch home.

PS: I have worked as a security guard for a year. I was once asked what I should do if I saw an armed burglar stealing things.
I answered that if he saw me, I should ask if he needed help. And then, if he had left, I should call the police.
Why should I risk my life for the belongings of someone else. Things stolen can be replaced. My life, or any others, can not.
That's when I realised I didn't belong in the security. If I had had a gun, would I have fired it? And taking ones life? For what? For the belongings of someone else? Sure, the burglar is wrong, but should that cost his most precious thing: his life? Nope.

TimoWr · Post by **TimoWr** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 1:54 pm

Excellent post Piet!

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:05 pm

Maybe it's my "European" attitude speaking up, but NO citizen should carry a weapon.
Only police or soldiers should be allowed to carry a weapon.

that right. so they can impose any "law" they want without recourse. thats why your country has the reduced role it has in world affairs and why it rolled over in about 1 day to the Germans. that is not how or why the United States was founded.

Who knows if such a law abiding citizen don't pull out his gun when someone parks in the space the law abiding citizen (who actually have a bad day) wants to park his car in?

then they go to jail. what if he had used a knife. should all knives be banned? The 911 Hijackers used airplanes to kill 3000 people. Should airplanes be banned? why not?

:

From what I understand, it's very easy to buy a gun. Do you get a training in how to handle the gun? How to store your newly bought gun? And the ammo?
Law abiding citizen: what's that? If you drive to fast and get a ticket, are you then still considered a law abiding citizen?
Who knows if such a law abiding citizen don't pull out his gun when someone parks in the space the law abiding citizen (who actually have a bad day) wants to park his car in?

The right to bear arms.
When was that written?
You see, I see it like this. I was brought up as a catholic. So, I should follow the bible.
The bible was written many centuries ago. Back then they didn't have all the things we have today. Then they thought the world was flat, now we know it's not.
All the things written in the Holy Bible are written and rewritten by people. People. People living in their own time. With all the things around them which were "normal" then. In a completely different time, different surroundings, different new inventions, but still with the same type of people. People who flirt with the wife of one other. People who got cought with their hands in the cooky jar. Jealous people. You name it.

so? you've twisted your own arguement of moral relativism. If people are still the same, then the same rules apply, no? And if in the case of the Bible something has worked for 2000 plus years, which has served as a catalyst for western thought and invention (that means its helped enable you to "have the things we have today") why change it? As far as the Constitution goes, the Founders were smart men. The document has lasted for over 200 years and this country has seen unimaginable wealth and prosperity for millions of citizens and billions more who owe their own freedoms to tthe country that liberated them--all based upon the ideas that document put forth. And now, becuase some morally bankrupt elites think they know better, it should be changed? dont think so. seems to me things started going downhill lfor our country and our western civilization when "enlightened" types started ignoring the moral guidelines set forth by both documents.

Does it make your home safer? You have a gun. Your child knows you have a gun. You see a burgler is getting in. You have never fired a gun, but still you have one in your closet. You take out that gun to take out the burgler.
You take someone's life.

Remember the 6th commendment: thou shall not kill.

Self-defense is not murder. the criminal attempting to take what is not theirs deserves what he gets. He only has himself to blame for causing his own death. Or do you not belie in personal responsibility for one's actions? or punishement? he Bible you want to dismiss for being outdated also states Thou shall not steal.

Yes, it does make my home, and millions more safer. Come in unannounced at 2 am and find out how guns can protect my family faster andmore certain than an alarm or a police response a 1/2 hour later.

And why not focus the arguement on the shooter, not the instrument? He was not American, but an immigrant Korean, here on a visa. The 911 Hijackers were as well. Following your logic, why not ban immigrants who come here to study?

Face it: criminals will still obtain guns no matter how strict gun laws are. The only one who will suffer are the unprotected citizens left to their mercy. More guns = less crime. Proven.

Piet Duits · Post by **Piet Duits** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:14 pm

Timo,
Thanks, I remember we have the same thoughts on this.

Panzermeyer, please try and keep it civil. I tried too, or didn't I?
So, arguments like how my country was invaded in 1 day is not relevant.
Also, the reduction of my countries influence in world affairs... So what? We don't have the desire nor the wish to rule by the sword. We had our 15 minutes of fame, in the 16th century! And then we lost it. When is your country's going to lose it?
Furthermore, what has this to do with the 911 things?

We do not share the same opinion. How nice is democracy. You have your way of thinking, I have mine. We agree in not agreeing.

Fact is, the shooting in Virginia could have been anywhere. Anywhere in the world. We have had our own shootings on schools too. But not as frequent as in the US.
Does it really matter that the shooter is not a US citizen?

Last but not least: taking someone's life by violence is murder. When you shoot someone who's in your house and not being a guest, that's murder to me. Unless he pointed a gun at you or your family, then it's self defence. But not when invading your house.

pzrmeyer2 · Post by **pzrmeyer2** » Tue Apr 17, 2007 2:25 pm

Panzermeyer, please try and keep it civil. I tried too, or didn't I?

I apologize. I did not mean to insult you and feel sorry for doing so. I just dont like it when people want to take away my rights.

We do not share the same opinion. How nice is democracy. You have your way of thinking, I have mine. We agree in not agreeing

I appreciate and agree with you. I just wish more of the "enlightened" types around here who wish to ban all dissenting opinions and eliminate rights would as well.

But not when invading your house.

Anyone who breaks in to my house, and threatens my family, or wishes to take my property will get what I feel they deserve = cold steel. That you would allow someone to violate your inner sanctum and your family makes you morally misguided and an attractive target.