Virginia Tech shooting

[Adrian II]

I hope Ice's friend and cousins are safe. I hope tempers have subsided somewhat. Shall we try again?

Two things have come up.
1. Why the strange two-hour delay between shots?
2. Why is this sort of thing happening?

To my fellow Europeans I would like to say: it happens frequently in the U.S. for the same reason why Europe has frequent wars and genocides. Cause we're all special, okay?
So let's have a nice thread for a change.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The one story I heard was that the guy came into the doorm and found his girlfriend with the RA and shot them both, and then game back later and shot all the other people. But the guy in the press conference said he did not believe that the girl in the first shooting was the girlfriend...almost the only info to come from the press conference.

I think it's happening because there are crazy people who do crazy things. Didn't that whiteman guy have a brain tumor and hear voices?

[Marshal Murat]

Asian male who shot a professor and tens of students, then goes to his GF's dorm and shoots her and friends.

[Csargo]

Some people just snap under the pressure.

[Kanamori]

I would say a cultural influence on crazy people tends to make these things happen more in the US...

Here, people are more prone to think that when they're snapping, they have to go shoot people in some giant blazing flame of glory... violence in general just seems to be more prevalant, talked about, and less taboo; people are easily influenced, which is also probably why it happens less elsewhere...

As to the other question, we'll have to wait and see I suppose... I don't know how reliable any of the details I've heard are, yet.

[Adrian II]

Some people just snap under the pressure.I found a nice long fact-sheet on school schootings (http://powerreporting.com/files/shoot.pdf)from the Chicago Sun-Times which includes an anaysis done by the Secret Service. It turns out shooters usually don't 'snap' and they don't have a 'history' either that allows for profiling.

If you ask me, Michael Moore was bang on in that movie. Canadians own about as many guns as Americans, yet make far less use of them because their society is different, infinitely more relaxed. There is a Hobbesian aspect to American society that goes a long way toward explaining these occurrences, I think.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I think Kanamori is on the mark.

What do you think of the campus administrations actions regarding not cancelling school? I think they made the right decision at the time personally.

[Ice]

I hope Ice's friend and cousins are safe. I hope tempers have subsided somewhat. Shall we try again?



Thank you very much, Adrian. That is very much appreciated. My friend is safe, I just talked to him. He's just really shaken up.

I talked to my father and he said he called his cousin and she said her daughters were both safe. Thank God.

[Hosakawa Tito]

The school should have been on lock-down till they could either find the shooter or verify he was gone from the campus. I think they were too complacent, and their lack of vigilance and situational awareness may have cost the lives of those in that class room. Since when is any shooting such a ho-hum business as usual affair?

[Del Arroyo]

It's been my hypothesis for some time that things like this happen because the drastic decay of "community" within the US. If an individual falls by the wayside, they are allowed to stay there. In the land of freedom and individualism, people are allowed to live with no social connections-- even if those connections are the thing they need the most.

But really, who knows? This latest :daisy: will undoubtedly shed some light...

[Beirut]

Very sad thing. Such a waste.

I can't understand why the school was not locked down.

[rory_20_uk]

Why do these people never invest in silencers? Surely then they could execute far more people.

~:smoking:

[Marshal Murat]

Tisk tisk....


The school thought they had caught the killer after his first attack, but then he killed again, and thus the school was locked down.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The school should have been on lock-down till they could either find the shooter or verify he was gone from the campus. I think they were too complacent, and their lack of vigilance and situational awareness may have cost the lives of those in that class room. Since when is any shooting such a ho-hum business as usual affair?

Well, it's not like the president has a red button on his desk which magically makes the campus safe. With 30,000 people it's the size of a small city and you can't shut down a small city for every murder. Hindsight is perfect of course, but I don't think there's ever been a killing spree with a 2 hour gap like that. At the time of the killing most of the commuters would be on their way there, and no one checks there email before hand. The first killing was in a dormitory anyway, how would canceling class help? Most campus's don't have the manpower to shut down quickly.

[GeneralHankerchief]

Why do these people never invest in silencers? Surely then they could execute far more people.

~:smoking:

Don't even joke about that.

[edyzmedieval]

Why do these people never invest in silencers? Surely then they could execute far more people.

~:smoking:

Old Rory and his jokes. ~;)

Me and my dad found it shocking. I mean, shoot 3-4, but more than 30? You're kidding. This is totally sick! :thumbsdown: :skull:

[rory_20_uk]

If he's got his right to bear arms, I'm damn well having mine to free speech.

So... what? We all go "terrible", "monstrous", "how could this ever happen??!?" and then basically nothing happens bar possibly a small plaque.

Ban guns on campus? Nah.

Killing 30 people is not much worse than killing 3. After you've got over the shock of murdering one person it becomes far more routine as one's conception of "normal" shifts.

~:smoking:

[Kralizec]

This sucks. My condoleances to the family and friends of the victims, and I hope Ice doesn't need them.

[edyzmedieval]

If he's got his right to bear arms, I'm damn well having mine to free speech.

So... what? We all go "terrible", "monstrous", "how could this ever happen??!?" and then basically nothing happens bar possibly a small plaque.

Ban guns on campus? Nah.

Killing 30 people is not much worse than killing 3. After you've got over the shock of murdering one person it becomes far more routine as one's conception of "normal" shifts.

~:smoking:

I fear to ask, how many people have died on your doctor shift?

[GeneralHankerchief]

If he's got his right to bear arms, I'm damn well having mine to free speech.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1293030&postcount=1


Killing 30 people is not much worse than killing 3. After you've got over the shock of murdering one person it becomes far more routine as one's conception of "normal" shifts.

If only 3 people had been killed then I doubt that this would be discussed heavily right now. The reason why it is such a large thing is that it crushes the record for deaths in a school shooting.

The repercussions of this will be much more than just some plaque. The last big school shooting in the US, Columbine, has become so ingrained in our culture that we think nothing of having metal detectors installed in high schools.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Adrian II:

You finished with an interesting point. The potential impact of a more Hobbesian character (I assume from your post that you are referencing the Hobbesian state of nature and not the social compact in response to it) to our culture on such events would be pretty clear.

Counter Question:

Why do you view my culture as more Hobbesian? Please note, there is not a defensive tone to that question, it's just a straight query. What other cultures are more so or less so and why?

[rory_20_uk]

I know there's no Free Speech here. And it's a better place because of that.

If something positive and long lasting does come out of this then good. I'm fed up with in every walk of like empty platitudes for a few days / weeks then everything returns to how it was before.

~:smoking:

[Hosakawa Tito]

Every institution should have a Red Book, an emergencies procedures plan, that covers a wide array of emergency situations, that the administration can use to guide them. The biggest problem in this situation seems to be communicating the emergency to those that need to know. You can bet after all the lawsuits that will ensue, that this lack of preparedness will be addressed. Unfortunately, the first thing that will get fixed is the blame.
Such a terrible, senseless tragedy. And some feel the need to make tasteless jokes and political statements....

[Bijo]

Why do these people never invest in silencers? Surely then they could execute far more people.

~:smoking:
That is logical. Using silencers combined with a good amount of careful stealth.... they could even get away with their murdering if they're good :|


Regarding that shooting PDF:
The PDF article is annoying to read: it doesn't get to the point quickly and repeats things all the time. After reading about two pages I just skimmed through it. It doesn't really provide any solid answers, then again it's said basically they don't have 'em.

Also peculiar is the fact that the Secret Service has been investigating these cases with great interest. Why the heck the SS-- eh, I mean... Secret Service? Is this not something for the p'lice force?
There has been no progress we could say in avoiding these cases from happening, as they continue to happen, and the Secret Service is investigating it thoroughly? Sounds fishy and sucpicious.

But one thing caught my eye often there: those kids who plan shootings tell their peers and these peers don't take any action, nor are all of these kids listened to by elders. Peculiar, and in a certain way expectable.
Kids can be cruel human creatures and who knows what goes on in their minds regarding these killings, and how they all influence the whole shebang.

But my basic thought about this whole thing is this: " Pffff.... humans. *sigh* "

[TevashSzat]

The big controversy over this will be that 2 people were initially killed in a dorm building, but the school didn't stop classes and there was nothing like a lockdown since the killer was supposed to have been off campus. It was only a majority of the killings occurred 2 hours later when the person started shooting in the engineering building.

I don't care if the killer has gotten away, 2 students have died on school property in a dorm housing 900 people, I would at least stop classes for the day which might have prevented the later massacre

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Ban guns on campus? Nah.


Guns are banned on campus.

[Kanamori]

Rory, it would be my guess that weapons are banned on all US campuses, or at least almost all of them... I know they are on mine.

[Bijo]

Heh, I just realized the thread title looks a bit "wrong" as do the reply titles: a happy-looking SMILIE in front of 'Virgina Tech shooting'.

[Ice]

Guns are banned on campus.

Not just guns, but knives, mace, tasers, etc. Any type of weapon is banned on campus, atleast here.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Also peculiar is the fact that the Secret Service has been investigating these cases with great interest. Why the heck the SS-- eh, I mean... Secret Service? Is this not something for the p'lice force?
There has been no progress we could say in avoiding these cases from happening, as they continue to happen, and the Secret Service is investigating it thoroughly? Sounds fishy and sucpicious.

The Secret Service, at least the protective detail, spends a lot of time studying whack-job shooters. They are tasked with preventing such killings in the case of our key political executives. They keep working to develop profiles, insights -- anything that will let them learn how they can maybe stop such an attack on their charges.

Incidents like Squeaky Fromme must cost those folks a lot of sleep.

[Crazed Rabbit]

A few notes:

GUNS ARE BANNED ON CAMPUS (and on mine, everything down to airsoft guns are too).
As with most college campuses, having a gun on campus will get you expelled.

Slightly over a year ago, a bill in the Virginia legislature that would have let people who have a license to carry a concealed pistol (meaning a fingerprinting and FBI background check at the minimum) carry their weapon on university grounds got shot down. http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658

Virginia Tech had this to say:

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."

Too bad feeling safe doesn't transfer to being safe in reality.

The ninnies who insisted on disarming the students, thinking idiotically that with a stroke of a pen, they magically prevent bad people from carrying guns for nefarious purposes, share some of the blame for setting up this situation.

If they had not disarmed all the victims, this might have gone very differently.

CR

[Scurvy]

The big controversy over this will be that 2 people were initially killed in a dorm building, but the school didn't stop classes and there was nothing like a lockdown since the killer was supposed to have been off campus. It was only a majority of the killings occurred 2 hours later when the person started shooting in the engineering building.

I don't care if the killer has gotten away, 2 students have died on school property in a dorm housing 900 people, I would at least stop classes for the day which might have prevented the later massacre

would it be possible to stop classes that quickly? 900 people are a lot to communicate too, and it seemed at the time as though the incident was over, i can't think of an incident where their have been 2 seperate shootings --> any action tkane like closing the school could also have negative consequecnes, it would cause much uneeded panic, especially as these things tend to get exagerated etc..

basically, it's easy to criticise with the benefit of hindsight...




If something positive and long lasting does come out of this then good. I'm fed up with in every walk of like empty platitudes for a few days / weeks then everything returns to how it was before.

:yes: --> sadly it will soon be forgotten...



GUNS ARE BANNED ON CAMPUS (and on mine, everything down to airsoft guns are too).
As with most college campuses, having a gun on campus will get you expelled.


Is this generally adhered too? (rules are too often broken)



If they had not disarmed all the victims, this might have gone very differently.


lets just have 200 people with guns instead of 2, thats really going to solve the problem of shootings....

[Crazed Rabbit]

Is this generally adhered too? (rules are too often broken)

Yes. Rules were you get kicked out of college (have fun applying to the next one!) are generally listened to.


lets just have 200 people with guns instead of 2, thats really going to solve the problem of shootings....

You assume the false logical premise that gun ownership or prevalence increases the level of violence.
Good people do not become crazy psychos when they pick up a gun, picking up a piece of metal doesn't alter the chemicals in their brains and make them lash out.

And yes, having the students at VT armed would have helped - they could have fought back. Instead, the shooter had thousands of unarmed potential targets, and could freely attack them without fear of retaliation.

EDIT: Michelle Malkin has an email from a student at VT on her blog ( http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007319.htm ):

Dear Michelle,

I was in Norris Hall today when the shootings took place. I thought I'd give you my account in case you wanted more information.

It was just a regular day in class; the door was open and we heard a pop-pop-popping noise. Sounded like some kind of construction but it was getting disruptive so we went to close the door, and one of the girls stepped out in the hallway to see what it was. She saw the gun and ran back inside the room and slammed the door shut and we all got down on the floor.

We heard pretty much continuous shooting for the next minute or so, and I said, "Shouldn't we barricade the door," because we were sitting ducks with no way out inside that room if he opened the door. A couple more people floated the idea that "We need to barricade the door, NOW." But I was too scared to even move, much less move the teacher's desk.

Finally one of the guys in the front of the classroom was brave enough to get up and move the desk in front of the door to prevent outside entry. About twenty seconds later, the shooter rattled the doorknob trying to get in. When he couldn't get in he fired two shots through the door (single solid piece of wood) and left. We heard him go in to 206 (the room across the hall) and shoot the people in that room. If we hadn't put the barricade up when we did, I and all my classmates would be dead.

When the police arrived five minutes later we heard them call for him to surrender his weapon and some more, irregular shots. Another five minutes later the police knocked and yelled "Police!" and we yelled "How do we know?" and when a second voice confirmed that it was in fact police, we opened the door. An officer came in and told us to line up single file, take nothing with us (I grabbed my coat) and run out the door single file while another officer escorted us.

We entered the hallway. Blood, bullet casings, and empty pistol clips were everywhere; this was definitely the most horrifying sight of my entire life. We ran past quickly. A door to the stairwell had been opened and there was a massive trail of blood; we found out later that a class had tried to escape only to find that the monster had chained the doors shut before starting his rampage. They were all killed.

We all ran to a nearby building and stayed there until we could be processed, and that was the end of it. Thank you all for your concerns and prayers, but please mostly pray for those who were seriously injured or hurt today.

Also, let me say that the response from the campus, local, and state police was exemplary. Within five minutes of the first shots, police were gathering outside. In another ten minutes, the threat had been neutralized and the building was secure. My heartfelt gratitude goes out to the brave men and women who kept us safe today.

--Jacob Simmons
junior, Computer Engineering, Virginia Tech

Good God. Sounds like the police response when the second shootings started was good.

Crazed Rabbit

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Is this generally adhered too? (rules are too often broken)

Having taught for 7 different colleges over the course of 20 years, I can say that the answer is, for the most part, yes.

Numerous small pocket knives/nail clippers are carried and nobody ran around prohibiting people from having decorative letter openers, so the ban wasn't absolute, but I was aware of only one gun on campus (and that was carried unloaded with a trigger lock in place by an off-duty police officer who'd forgotten to put it in her lock-box in the trunk of her car).


Rabbit:

I'm not sure that weapons in the hands of students would have helped (though the ones with the discipline to get the concealed permits are often the most responsible owners). Shooting is one thing, shooting accurately under high-stress situations is another, and all the guns in the world are pretty valueless unless the shooter can hit a target under those conditions.

Of course, my solution would be to make gun ownership and training mandatory, so our USA gun-haters wouldn't like my solution. :devilish:

EDIT: just read your latest post. The quick-thinking chap in the front of the room should have about 20 other sets of parents chipping in for his education for the next year or two til he graduates. Lacking a gun, he did everything right during a crisis.

Okay, yeah, maybe if that one had been armed, the shots going back out through the door might have ended it earlier.

[KukriKhan]

Let's all maintain some sense of decorum on behalf of the dead and bereaved.

Today is not the time to dissect pro- and anti-gun arguments. Let's wait a day or two, until more details emerge, and families have had time to bury their dead.

[Csargo]

I found a nice long fact-sheet on school schootings (http://powerreporting.com/files/shoot.pdf)from the Chicago Sun-Times which includes an anaysis done by the Secret Service. It turns out shooters usually don't 'snap' and they don't have a 'history' either that allows for profiling.

If you ask me, Michael Moore was bang on in that movie. Canadians own about as many guns as Americans, yet make far less use of them because their society is different, infinitely more relaxed. There is a Hobbesian aspect to American society that goes a long way toward explaining these occurrences, I think.

:shame: I always have problems expressing my views, which is why I rarely visit this place. I ment that usually something happens which pushes the person to plan something like this. People usually don't just randomly shoot up places for the hell of it there's always a reason behind it whether we find out about it afterwards or they take it to the grave.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Indeed, Ichigo.

A interview with one of the victims:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=67f_1176750363&o=1

Apparently, he just walked in to that classroom, shot 10-15 people, then left. Students barred the doors, which was good, because he tried to get in again, shooting through the door, but couldn't get in.

CR

[The Spartan (Returns)]

God bless them. 20+ wounded i believe?

[Gregoshi]

What a sad day. It was horrible seeing the death count go up during the afternoon. With so many dead, it is hard to believe this was just some Joe Blow who picked up a couple of guns and started shooting. I'm sure tomorrow will reveal who the killer was, but the "why" may take a little longer.

[Csargo]

Indeed, Ichigo.

I don't know if your agreeing with my post or not. :dizzy2: Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I'm agreeing, Ichigo.


With so many dead, it is hard to believe this was just some Joe Blow who picked up a couple of guns and started shooting.

That's what I thought, too. Heck, I thought 22 was high.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I'm agreeing, Ichigo.



That's what I thought, too. Heck, I thought 22 was high.

CR

It sounds like he planned it and knew what he was doing.

I'm doubtful it would have been different if guns had been allowed on campus. Who would carry their gun to class? Guy had body armor anyway.

[KukriKhan]

In keeping with our usual Backroom protocol, as details come in (like body armor, weapon used, etc), please provide links, so our fellow readers know we're not making things up or merely spreading rumors.

We're a smart bunch of fellows here; let's help each other, and our readers, gain some perspective. Covering the coverage, and drilling down to salient issues, is what we do best here. Let's show our stuff.

[Crazed Rabbit]

It sounds like he planned it and knew what he was doing.

I'm doubtful it would have been different if guns had been allowed on campus. Who would carry their gun to class? Guy had body armor anyway.

I know some guys who'd carry guns to class.

Would it had made a difference? I can't say it would've for sure - but it would've been a chance to stop this before so many were killed, even if it was a small chance.
VT stopped permit holders from carrying, supposedly thinking they can somehow prevent stuff like this, but this proves that such a rule won't do crap against people who are going to harm others.

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

In keeping with our usual Backroom protocol, as details come in (like body armor, weapon used, etc), please provide links, so our fellow readers know we're not making things up or merely spreading rumors.

We're a smart bunch of fellows here; let's help each other, and our readers, gain some perspective. Covering the coverage, and drilling down to salient issues, is what we do best here. Let's show our stuff.

http://cbs11tv.com/education/local_story_106164729.html

Shooter described as "heavily armed and wearing a vest". People say different things about his weapons. Either two 9 mm's, a 9 mm and a .22... or a 9mm and a 22 mm (snicker).

[Adrian II]

@ Ichigo. The Chicago-Sun Times report certainly vindicates your view that shooters are often bullied, tormented types. The fact that their anger and despair build up over a period of time is said to be a good thing, it means that sometimes a proactive policy will filter them out.

@ Seamus Your point about Hobbes is noted. I have an unpredictable schedule today and I'm off to catch a train right now, but I will get back to you. :bow:

[Fragony]

I would say a cultural influence on crazy people tends to make these things happen more in the US...


Maybe things are a bit simpler then that, USA has somewhat more space where these things may occur, I mean it's bigger then all countries in Europe combined. How long has it been since Columbine? Let's not act as if there is a trend of some sort.

[Csargo]

@ Ichigo. The Chicago-Sun Times report certainly vindicates your view that shooters are often bullied, tormented types. The fact that their anger and despair build up over a period of time is said to be a good thing, it means that sometimes a proactive policy will filter them out.

@ Seamus Your point about Hobbes is noted. I have an unpredictable schedule today and I'm off to catch a train right now, but I will get back to you. :bow:

Aye, sorry I didn't make my views clearer in the first place.:sweatdrop:

[naut]

Very sad indeed.

Fox news is full of bollocks, not much new there though. They believe the following: "he came from a Socialist country and was offended by Western decadence so decided to kill 32 people" and "being an immigrant makes you more susceptible to psychological disorders and violence"; utter garbage.

[Csargo]

Very sad indeed.

Fox news is full of bollocks, not much new there though. They believe the following: "he came from a Socialist country and was offended by Western decadence so decided to kill 32 people" and "being an immigrant makes you more susceptible to psychological disorders and violence"; utter garbage.

It actually said that? :wall:

[Del Arroyo]

If suiciders start becoming a common problem, perhaps we should start killing their families as retaliation. Not their *whole* families, mind you, just their parents, (ex)-wives and any offspring. Perhaps adult siblings, too. That would make them think twice before going berserk.

[Sheep]

This wasn't a terrorist attack man.

[Andres]

My condolences to the family and friends of the victims.

And my condolences to the family and friends of the shooter as well. It's hard to lose a relative/good friend, must be even harder to learn your son/brother/best friend did something that horrible before dying...

Can't say much more than that right now.

[naut]

It actually said that? :wall:
Yep, I kid you not.

[Ignoramus]

It is very sad that things like this happen.

Sadly, we will never be able to prevent it. Since modern guns have been invented, it's very difficult to stop a madman armed with one.

[Tribesman]

Measures must be taken to prevent further tragedies of this nature .
Stop school shootings , ban schools .

[PanzerJaeger]

It actually said that? :wall:

No. ~:rolleyes:

[edyzmedieval]

ban schools .

We have a deal Tribe. :grin:

[sapi]

EDIT: After reading the backstory to this thread, I'm not getting involved in the debate.

My condolences to the friends and family of those affected.

[Major Robert Dump]

Frags claims the shooter was an immigrant are no longer unsubstantiated.

[Sheep]

Frags claims the shooter was an immigrant are no longer unsubstantiated.

Awesome, now this will lead into the immigration debate as well as gun control.

*slaps forehead*

[Scurvy]

Awesome, now this will lead into the immigration debate as well as gun control.


--> not really, even if it did involve an immigrant, it makes very little difference :2thumbsup:

[Sheep]

--> not really, even if it did involve an immigrant, it makes very little difference :2thumbsup:

Yeah, in reality, that's true. Sadly most of our media talking heads are quite detached from reality.

[Sir Moody]

its a horrible situation and i seriously hope some good comes out of it and things improve so that it never can happen again


The ninnies who insisted on disarming the students, thinking idiotically that with a stroke of a pen, they magically prevent bad people from carrying guns for nefarious purposes, share some of the blame for setting up this situation.


attitudes like this really scare me i have to say - heres how i think your situation would go down

The Shooter walks down the hall shooting at his victims - a "hero" draws his gun and returns fire - someone further down the hall hears shots and see's the "hero" firing and so draws his gun and shoots the "hero" - the original shooter who was prepared and was wearing a Vest (as he was) would most likely survive and keep going - eventually you would get into the situation where students were shooting students for no other reason than they could hear shooting and were in a state of panic making the situation far worse

the solution isnt to arm everyone but is to arm NO-ONE including the original shooter - if guns are freely available then anyone could be carrying - its probably too late for this tho as the US has had freely available firearms for so long removing them now would be impossible


as to the cause i agree with an earlier poster its a fundamental break down of community that is causing this - we are having the same problem in the UK and it has a corresponding rise in violence

[KafirChobee]

Gun control should be the issue ... immigration is a bogus.

The control of weapons in this country is nil, today as compared with 1999. One can buy any chemicals to build any device of proper inclusion against those they deam inferior, unpatriotic, against their own high values of humanlife (even as they murder them), or for any futuristic imagination that justifies their purchase of WMDs. It is a fact.

Congress, the old one under the Reblicanists, rolled back all the laws they previously imposed (after the attempt on Reagan's life) to protect America - and it shows. Crime has increased upto 30% in some areas (citys') and more prisons have been built than colleges or schools in general. Why? Because anyone, even a felon has access to a wmd under todays laws of "gun uncontrol".

Diverting attention from the need to impose a strict and enforcable rule for the control of weaponry in this country is insain under the present atmosphere of fear projected by the Bushys'.

Still, what the hey - one reaps what they sow. Or, gets what they deserve.
:balloon2:

[Uesugi Kenshin]

Maybe things are a bit simpler then that, USA has somewhat more space where these things may occur, I mean it's bigger then all countries in Europe combined. How long has it been since Columbine? Let's not act as if there is a trend of some sort.

If you want to make that argument you should base it on population and not area. The US is inhabited by 300 million people (plus some illegal immigrants, but Europe has some too so we won't count them)and iirc Europe has roughly 700 million inhabitants. That being said I have heard of a couple of school shootings in Germany since I first got here (last September) so it's definately not as American a phenomenon as people may think. They may be at times far worse in the US, but I can't say that for sure either. Europeans may also hear more about American school shootings as European ones, and I don't think Americans hear much of anything about European ones. But again I have no evidence so it's just a thought.

My condolences to those affected by this tragedy. I can't imagine what it would be like to be at the college at the time it occurred or to have a loved one that went to VT.

[sapi]

This is bad enough without it being blamed on violent video games (http://games.internode.on.net/content.php?mode=news&id=1056)

[Andres]

This is bad enough without it being blamed on violent video games (http://games.internode.on.net/content.php?mode=news&id=1056)

Hmmm... I'm looking forward to Rockstar's newest game: "Kill Dr. Phill"...

:wall:

The bodies of the victims are still warm and the vultures who are in dire need of some media-attention are already popping up...

Sad, very sad :no:

[Adrian II]

This is bad enough without it being blamed on violent video games (http://games.internode.on.net/content.php?mode=news&id=1056)Phil McGraw is not blaming this uniquely on video games. It's a wider criticism of movies and of the glamorization of violence in society as a whole:


The question really is can we spot them. And the problem is we are programming these people as a society. You cannot tell me - common sense tells you that if these kids are playing video games, where they're on a mass killing spree in a video game, it's glamorized on the big screen, it's become part of the fiber of our society. You take that and mix it with a psychopath, a sociopath or someone suffering from mental illness and add in a dose of rage, the suggestibility is too high. And we're going to have to start dealing with that. We're going to have to start addressing those issues and recognizing that the mass murders of tomorrow are the children of today that are being programmed with this massive violence overdose.

[sapi]

@Andres
It really is.

The media should be focusing on finding a solutiont that will stop this happening again, not looking for a scapegoat...

@Adrian
To blame society in that way is to miss the point.

Society is to blame in the sense that it provided the means for the shooter to obtain the gun; taught them to shoot it; and failed to react fast enough when the tragedy unfolded.

[Adrian II]

The bodies of the victims are still warm and the vultures who are in dire need of some media-attention are already popping up...

Sad, very sad :no:People want to hear reflections, explanations, views on the matter. You can't blame them. And you can't call anyone who disagrees with you a vulture. People have strong feelings about an emotional issue like this and they will push their views forecefully, demand action, accountability, responsibility. They may put the blame in other places than you would wish; that in itself doesn't make them vultures.

[Husar]

It sounds like he planned it and knew what he was doing.

I'm doubtful it would have been different if guns had been allowed on campus. Who would carry their gun to class? Guy had body armor anyway.
A lot of shots will annihilate even someone with body armour. You either hit another body part, or simply stun him by repeatedly hitting the vest, which will most likely still hurt him because of the energy involved.
Or you just bring bigger guns, RPGs and grenade launchers to get a higher level of security, he won't even be secure in a tank then.:sweatdrop:


@ Ichigo. The Chicago-Sun Times report certainly vindicates your view that shooters are often bullied, tormented types. The fact that their anger and despair build up over a period of time is said to be a good thing, it means that sometimes a proactive policy will filter them out.
I posted about that in a thread where Odin told us about the school his kids go to, which apparently resembles a fortress/prison.
People who do that are usually finished with life, don't see any perspectives for the future and feel like society has abandoned them or "thrown them out" for a reason they may not even know. And like I said in the other thread, I'm speaking from some sort of experience...(please don't shoot me now, I didn't kill anyone and don't plan to, it's just a bad part of my past:sweatdrop: )


The Shooter walks down the hall shooting at his victims - a "hero" draws his gun and returns fire - someone further down the hall hears shots and see's the "hero" firing and so draws his gun and shoots the "hero" - the original shooter who was prepared and was wearing a Vest (as he was) would most likely survive and keep going - eventually you would get into the situation where students were shooting students for no other reason than they could hear shooting and were in a state of panic making the situation far worsee
What we need are clearly autocannon towers which will automatically shoot at anyone carrying a gun. More realistically an armed campus police might help, but they should not end up being the first victims of a potential killer, because a smart one would ambush them first. Though generally stopping to leave people alone, as has been said before, would likely help a lot. A healthy family and social life plus some morals and values are the best things to make someone not do this. I think a lack of two of these already becomes dangerous.

So we have

family(have someone to talk to etc, get support here and know there is at least someone who loves you)
social life(good friends, not being bullied)
morals(as in don't kill people, some knowledge deep inside about death being a very bad option that doesn't solve anything)

take two away and you have a potential killer.

Just a suggestion, thoughts and input appreciated.

[Adrian II]

You finished with an interesting point. The potential impact of a more Hobbesian character (I assume from your post that you are referencing the Hobbesian state of nature and not the social compact in response to it) to our culture on such events would be pretty clear.In the first instance, I propose that we let Thomas Hobbes himself answer the point:


In the second place, I observe the diseases of a Commonwealth that proceed from the poison of seditious doctrines, whereof one is that every private man is judge of good and evil actions. This is true in the condition of mere nature, where there are no civil laws; and also under civil government in such cases as are not determined by the law. But otherwise, it is manifest that the measure of good and evil actions is the civil law; and the judge the legislator, who is always representative of the Commonwealth. From this false doctrine, men are disposed to debate with themselves and dispute the commands of the Commonwealth, and afterwards to obey or disobey them as in their private judgments they shall think fit; whereby the Commonwealth is distracted and weakened.

Leviathan, Chapther XXIX (http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/texts/hobbes/leviathan-contents.html)

[Bijo]

The Secret Service, at least the protective detail, spends a lot of time studying whack-job shooters. They are tasked with preventing such killings in the case of our key political executives. They keep working to develop profiles, insights -- anything that will let them learn how they can maybe stop such an attack on their charges.

Incidents like Squeaky Fromme must cost those folks a lot of sleep.
Eh-- Seamus, it was me you quoted, not Rory (as you wrote him as quoted above it).

Nevertheless....
The point made in that .PDF was that most of these kids carefully plan these attacks with some motive and purpose in mind, ruthlessly cold and efficiently acted out. It doesn't necessarily have to be about wackos killing people.

But if the Secret Service is tasked with security detail in the case of key political figures, why study these "kids who do shootings at an education facility?" Still sounds suspicious.

And also suspicious in the current case is the fact that there were already people killed, and nothing happened. VERY SUSPICIOUS.

And you know what's also suspicious? When I checked the news it was as if those interviewed -- students -- hardly felt a thing, even though it was on their place, or when they were close to it, etc. They were so calm (and almost logical) about it.

In any case, I'm curious as to what caused the supposed Asian suspect to hit the place. We need the hard facts, and we need them now.

:|

[Sir Moody]

A lot of shots will annihilate even someone with body armour. You either hit another body part, or simply stun him by repeatedly hitting the vest, which will most likely still hurt him because of the energy involved.
Or you just bring bigger guns, RPGs and grenade launchers to get a higher level of security, he won't even be secure in a tank then.

actually not quite true - there was a case of a bank robbery some time ago (mid 90's i think) where the police responded - the gang were armoured in high quality full balsitic suits (the kind bomb disposal guys wear). The police were unable to injure any of the gang members who casually strolled, through a hail of pistol and shotgun rounds, to their car while spraying the police with drum fed ak47's - one even stoped while under fire to reload...

The police were forced to ditch their sidearms and shotguns and raid a local gunstore where they borrowed a load of m16's which were finally able to breach the armour and bring the event to a close - theres a video of the event somewhere ill see if i can dig it up - the incedent only proves against small arms (which is all these kids could carry) a well prepared attacker is next to immune


What we need are clearly autocannon towers which will automatically shoot at anyone carrying a gun. More realistically an armed campus police might help, but they should not end up being the first victims of a potential killer, because a smart one would ambush them first. Though generally stopping to leave people alone, as has been said before, would likely help a lot. A healthy family and social life plus some morals and values are the best things to make someone not do this. I think a lack of two of these already becomes dangerous.


i agree here an armed campus police would have drastically improved the situation and im a little shocked there wasnt one already


Edit

i was unable to find the video in question but i did find another incident where the police had a very hard time taking the suspects down because of heavy body armour - http://www.student.oulu.fi/~hmikkola/shootout.html

[Bijo]

nvm. please delete.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

In any case, I'm curious as to what caused the supposed Asian suspect to hit the place. We need the hard facts, and we need them now.
:|

This is not an episode of CSI. We will not have a firm answer for days -- the legwork alone required necessitates this. It is possible we will never know the motivations behind this attack. I too, would like to know, now, what is behind all this -- but the "now" part of that is impossible and bits and pieces of info -- un-analyzed -- can create more problems than answers.

Note to all:

We create bureacracies so that we may enjoy the stability they generate. This allows us to develop routines, go about our normal days etc. When something comes out of left field, we then yell at these same bureacracies for failing to respond instantaneously with the decisions we think should have been made or the answers we want.

Please, consider this point as you evaluate this, and other, events.

[Dracula(Romanian Vlad Tepes)]

USA needs better laws.I think the access to weapons should be more harder.So many people died there and even good teachers.

[Shahed]

It is sick how the media is on and on about the guy being asian.

Do they ever say WHITE man shoots... ?

They intend to flare race relations. They never say anything about white, just when the criminal is black, hispanic, asian etc... you'd think all the crime in America is perpetuated by foreigners.

[Dracula(Romanian Vlad Tepes)]

It is sick how the media is on and on about the guy being asian.

Do they ever say WHITE man shoots... ?

They intend to flare race relations. They never say anything about white, just when the criminal is black, hispanic, asian etc... you'd think all the crime in America is perpetuated by foreigners.
You are right and they think that USA is the greatest country.:furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3:

[Ser Clegane]

and they think that USA is the greatest country.:furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3:

:stop:

Don't start any flame-baiting here

[nokhor]

Phil McGraw is not blaming this uniquely on video games. It's a wider criticism of movies and of the glamorization of violence in society as a whole:


The question really is can we spot them. And the problem is we are programming these people as a society. You cannot tell me - common sense tells you that if these kids are playing video games, where they're on a mass killing spree in a video game, it's glamorized on the big screen, it's become part of the fiber of our society. You take that and mix it with a psychopath, a sociopath or someone suffering from mental illness and add in a dose of rage, the suggestibility is too high. And we're going to have to start dealing with that. We're going to have to start addressing those issues and recognizing that the mass murders of tomorrow are the children of today that are being programmed with this massive violence overdose.


1. Adrian II, if i understand you correctly glamorized violence + psychopaths = tragedy. therefore we should curtail glamorized violence.

if that is so, then one could also argue that romantic relationships + psychopaths = murder/suicide. therefore we should abolish romantic relationships.


2. or since the night stalker was influenced by ac/dc and the columbine murderers by korn, we should censor music?

3. japan has at least as much glamorized violence as america yet the violent crime stats are much much lower, so i don't think the issue is the glamorized violence but something else.


japan has

[Lemur]

For giving me insight into the dark underbelly of the American psyche, I'll take Hobbes over Dr. Phil, if you don't mind.

I'm waiting for a better picture of what the heck happened; too few facts right now. I was stunned last night, however, to hear the chattering heads talking about how vulnerable universities are to "outsiders" and "strangers." What the hell? From the moment this broke in the news it looked like the work of a student. Especially the fact that the shootings began in a closed-access dorm in the a.m., I mean come on, this massacre fits squarely into the school shooting pattern we've seen before.

[Lemur]

Killer identified. (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3048108&page=1) Haven't seen this posted yet, so I thought it worth adding.

[DemonArchangel]

I still don't get why the poor bastard snapped.

Yea, he was Asian. I think the media's been harping on it, because the crime rate among Asians is generally so low.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Measures must be taken to prevent further tragedies of this nature .
Stop school shootings , ban schools .


:daisy:


Banning Guns won't help. In Japan in 2001, a man stab 8 kids WITH A KNIFE

if you going to be like the :daisy: Brits, ban knives then.

[Vuk]

Need I point out that if some of those other students or the professors had been carrying firearms, that wacko would have hit the floor before he could anything.

If you have thousands of normal people in an area, and one or two wackos who would like to kill people, and the no one is armed, then the wackos will just illegally get guns (which is made a lot easier by gun control as it hugely boost black market sales of guns) and blast away 30+ of the normal people.
If they are all armed, either the wackos would never dare to try anything, or they would be cut down doing so. Wackos can always get guns to harm people with, and they always will be able to. The question is: do we want to respect normal peoples 2nd Amendment Constitutional Right and allow them to defend themselved? Tell you what, if I had a gun and I was in one of those classes, that guy wouldn't have taken another step after he opened the door!

lol, I think I'll just go away and not check this for a day now, see what rabid leftist taunts (or hey! maybe even some intellegent conversation) have popped up ;).

[Vuk]

It is sick how the media is on and on about the guy being asian.

Do they ever say WHITE man shoots... ?

They intend to flare race relations. They never say anything about white, just when the criminal is black, hispanic, asian etc... you'd think all the crime in America is perpetuated by foreigners.

Actually yes. They always say when it is a white criminal. They USUALLY (this is an exception) do not say when it is another race, as they are afraid of being racist. Before you ask, no. I do not have any statistics on that, but simply speak from my own experience (which is probably more extensive then anyone's here).
I believe that they are stressing that he is asian because there was a lot of concerns (due to bomb threats made earlier and a link to a turkish man) that he was a muslim terrorist. I think that they think that (:laugh4: ) letting people know he is asian will easy the public.

That is my theory at least.


Vuk

[Adrian II]

1. Adrian II, if i understand you correctly glamorized violence + psychopaths = tragedy. therefore we should curtail glamorized violence.Hello hello, I was just quoting Phil McGraw there. I quoted him in full because someone else had quoted him haphazardly, suggesting that McGraw was blaming this shooting uniquely on video games.
Which he wasn't. :2thumbsup:

[drone]

Killer identified. (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3048108&page=1) Haven't seen this posted yet, so I thought it worth adding.
From my neck of the woods (Centreville, Fairfax County). His family probably lives ~10 miles from me.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041700563.html?hpid=topnews

[Goofball]

Frags claims the shooter was an immigrant are no longer unsubstantiated.

:bullseye:

I'm glad we got to the bottom of that. I think now that we can safely say:

Guns don't kill people.

Immigrants kill people.

I'm calling the NRA right now to order my new bumper sticker.

[Crazed Rabbit]

One can buy any chemicals to build any device of proper inclusion against those they deam inferior, unpatriotic, against their own high values of humanlife (even as they murder them), or for any futuristic imagination that justifies their purchase of WMDs. It is a fact.

No, it's BS. Hobbyist rocket builders are having a harder time getting material for their small rockets because of increased regulations on explosives.


Crime has increased upto 30% in some areas (citys') and more prisons have been built than colleges or schools in general. Why? Because anyone, even a felon has access to a wmd under todays laws of "gun uncontrol".

Um....sources for those alleged 'facts'? Yea, thought not. Felons have not been able to buy guns for decades, and the GOP did not repeal any gun laws, particularly any that made it 'easier' for felons to get guns.

Sir Moody - if you're trying to argue against my position please use facts, not some hypothetical scenario. I grow tired of gun control advocates making up these hypothetical situations that have no basis in reality. It's silly to think that somehow a student is going to be able to not see the attacking gunman, and will instead attack someone who drew their gun AFTER the shooting had started.

And I think this campus - like most in the US - already has armed police.

I saw a list in Der Speigel (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,477686,00.html) of Euro press articles commenting on this, and tought I'd respond to clear some things up for our European friends:


British daily The Independent writes:

Despite the opposition of every police force in the land [not true at all], Congress in 2004 allowed to lapse a 10-year federal ban on semi-automatic assault weapons, a particular favorite of violent criminals [again, not true at all. The weapons banned by this bill accounted for perhaps 1% of all firearms crime. Also, this bill would not have effected this shooting in any way].



The Times of London writes:

The National Rifle Association's (NRA) response is predictable too [a statement of condolence not mentioning gun politics at all, unlike the brady bunch?]. They will point out that events such as this are not carried out by a rifle-wielding member of a weekend militia. There is no doubt that access to rapid-action shotguns makes these events even more destructive but as we have seen with suicide bombers [um...I'll chalk this one up to bad info. But we've had these scary 'rapid action shotguns' for 100+ years, and few sprees use them]


German daily Bild writes:

"Now we will probably begin discussing the overly lax gun laws in the United States. There, buying a machine gun is often easier than getting a driver's license [WTF? Do they do no research? This is completely false].

Etc, and many other assorted stupid things blaming the NRA, guns, American society.

CR

[Ser Clegane]

[WTF? Do they do no research? This is completely false].
To answer your question: No they do not do any research and if so they often do it very sloppily or just choose to ignore the results of the research (if the results are not dramatic enough).

It is not unusual that BILD (often knowingly) reports false "facts" (now that is an oxymoron ~;)) (NB there is actually a whole website dedicated to pointing out all the junk that BILD reports - quite funny, too bad that it is only available in German).

BILD is a tabloid newspaper that usually goes for the shock effect - please do not consider it to be exemplary for the German press (although there are unfortunately too many people who use it as an actual source for news, so I am sorry to tell you that a number of Germans will actually form their opinions based on what this "newspaper" writes)

End of rant ~:)

[Goofball]

Etc, and many other assorted stupid things blaming the NRA, guns, American society.

CR

Wellllll.....

The blame for incidents like this pretty much has to fall on some combination including one or more of those factors, n'est-ce pas?

[drone]

British daily The Independent writes:

Despite the opposition of every police force in the land [not true at all], Congress in 2004 allowed to lapse a 10-year federal ban on semi-automatic assault weapons, a particular favorite of violent criminals [again, not true at all. The weapons banned by this bill accounted for perhaps 1% of all firearms crime. Also, this bill would not have effected this shooting in any way].
Just to clarify: the ban also included magazines holding more than 10 bullets. We don't know the details here, but most 9mm pistols are designed for 15+. Probably wouldn't have helped much here though (and you could always buy pre-ban mags).

The laws in this country are fine, the enforcement is the problem.

[nokhor]

Hello hello, I was just quoting Phil McGraw there. I quoted him in full because someone else had quoted him haphazardly, suggesting that McGraw was blaming this shooting uniquely on video games.
Which he wasn't. :2thumbsup:

sorry, i apologize. i just discovered the cuteness that is dana perino. i heretofore, forthwith and henceforth delcare today dana perino day and will respond to nothing else unless dana perino can somehow be tied to it.

[Crazed Rabbit]

That's good to hear, Ser Clegane.


The blame for incidents like this pretty much has to fall on some combination including one or more of those factors, n'est-ce pas?

I tend to blame the shooter; he who is responsible for this, he who pulled the triggers.

Now, I think society could help by looking for desperate individuals and trying to help them.

But the greatest (in number of dead) attack upon a school in the US involved, firearm wise, only one rifle bullet. Also, consider that back in the 1950s kids could bring their guns to school for rifle team or hunting after school - there were many more guns in schools, and it wasn't until the gun free zone was passed (early 1990s I believe) that school shootings really took off.

Crazed Rabbit

[Sir Moody]

Sir Moody - if you're trying to argue against my position please use facts, not some hypothetical scenario. I grow tired of gun control advocates making up these hypothetical situations that have no basis in reality. It's silly to think that somehow a student is going to be able to not see the attacking gunman, and will instead attack someone who drew their gun AFTER the shooting had started.


if i had the time to go dig up some facts im sure icould - i dont i was stating my opinion on the matter crazed and im sorry gun nuts really scare me - the only people i want to have a tool purpsofully designed to kill with no other purpose is those whos job it is to protect me ie soldiers and the police and no amount of stat tweaking or carefully balenced "studies" is going to change my opinion

[Scurvy]

Sir Moody - if you're trying to argue against my position please use facts, not some hypothetical scenario. I grow tired of gun control advocates making up these hypothetical situations that have no basis in reality.

Pro-gun people are just as guilty of this....




It's silly to think that somehow a student is going to be able to not see the attacking gunman, and will instead attack someone who drew their gun AFTER the shooting had started.


really? --> there are many plausible scenario's (that one isn't). smoke, noise, panic, especially if the student was disorientated or unused to using a gun, --> when talking of such scenario's there are many variables etc.

I agree that scenario's don;t really achieve much when talking of guns, but its equally uncertain either way, ie. a student having a gun may have been able to stop the shooting, but equally a student having a gun could have made it worse... is a bit pointless... :2thumbsup:



the only people i want to have a tool purpsofully designed to kill with no other purpose is those whos job it is to protect me ie soldiers and the police

I'm not sure i trust the police with guns....

[Crazed Rabbit]

Sir Moody, I think you'd realize all us 'gun nuts' in the USA are very nice people. We just enjoy shooting firearms. We're not crazy, we're not unbalanced.

I would hope you don't form an opinion on people you've never met based on sensationalist articles in your press.

And if firearms have only one purpose - to kill people - then almost all of them are defective. But such a tool is what you want if you're being attacked with deadly force, isn't it?

EDIT: Note that the previous 'record' for a school shooting, way back in 1966, was kept lower than it might have been by ordinary citizens shooting back at the killer with their rifles.

CR

[Adrian II]

3. japan has at least as much glamorized violence as america yet the violent crime stats are much much lower, so i don't think the issue is the glamorized violence but something else.Japan has different problems; violence among school kids there is autodestructive rather than directed against others, but it is a huge issue.

[Scurvy]

Japan has different problems; violence among school kids there is autodestructive rather than directed against others, but it is a huge issue.

:yes: --> its very much a problem in japan

[Adrian II]

And now, for some more perspective, here is a view from the World Socialist Web Site written after the Columbine shooting.

Meanwhile in the days following the April 20 shootings at Columbine High School a wave of real and imagined violence has swept though school districts throughout the US. Reports of "copy-cat" threats came from every state in the nation, except Vermont. Overwhelmed by worried parents and perplexed by the scale of the threats, school administrators evacuated affected buildings and stepped up security and police patrols. Authorities arrested or suspended students for casual threats or for using words deemed "terroristic," banned trench coats like those worn by the young killers in Colorado, and investigated students' Internet web sites. Officials said they were particularly on alert last Friday, April 30, because it was the anniversary of Hitler's suicide in 1945.

"It's a kind of hysteria. It has a mind of its own, a face of its own. It has taken on its own personality. I've never experienced it as a professional" for 40 years, said Dale Glynn, principal of Everett High School in Lansing, Michigan, where Monday a student hurled homemade chemical bombs on a 52-acre campus.

A New Hampshire high school received a threat just hours before the vice president's wife Tippor Gore was scheduled to arrive for a discussion about the Columbine shootings. In the nation's capital thousands of high school students were evacuated last week after an unidentified caller said a bomb had been placed in one of Washington's public high schools. An 11-year-old elementary student in a Washington suburb was arrested after classmates told a teacher he had been spreading rumors about bombs.

In Brooklyn, New York, five 13-year-old eighth graders were arrested last Wednesday and charged with conspiracy to blow up McKinley Junior High School in Bay Ridge. The boys were overheard by a fellow student discussing a bomb plot and were found to be in possession of a bomb-making manual. In Fairport, New York, near Rochester, police confiscated gunpowder, propane and bomb-making books at the home of a 12-year-old sixth grader that they said was plotting to blow up his middle school.

In Hillsborough, New Jersey, the district's schools were ordered closed Friday, after students received e-mail threats, reportedly sent by an 11-year-old student, which said: "If we think what happened in Colorado was bad, wait until you see what happens in Hillsborough Middle School on Friday." Near Philadelphia, a 16-year-old was reportedly turned in by his mother after he threatened her with a reference to the Littleton tragedy. Law enforcement officials later discovered a homemade videotape showing the teenager building what appeared to be a bomb.

In Longwood, Florida, a 13-year-old student at Rock Lake Middle School was arrested Tuesday after reportedly threatening to place a bomb at the school and kill eighth graders who picked on him. A note on a crudely drawn map included the phrase "revenge will be sweet," the Orlando Sentinel reported.

Pennsylvania officials reported at least 60 bomb scares or other threats at schools; dozens of schools were evacuated in the Detroit area; and at a private school in suburban Oak Lawn, outside of Chicago, a 15-year-old was arrested after telling two girls he was going to kill the principal and a student and plant bombs at the school. An ax, knives, a rifle, shotguns and 150 rounds of ammunition were reportedly found in his home.

In California, three teenage students were arrested after police raided their homes and found bomb-making ingredients, a hand grenade and a map of their high school. In Wimberley, Texas four eighth-grade students from Danforth Junior High School were charged for allegedly plotting to blow up the school. And in Enid, Oklahoma a pipe bomb was found in a school bathroom.

Commenting on the wave of copy-cat actions and threats sweeping the nation's schools, Marice Elias, a Rutgers University psychologist who specializes in children, said, this behavior could be "a signal of how disconnected and disaffected kids feel from schools. I think kids are angry at schools ... because they feel schools have no place for them and no concern for them. The only ones who are valued are very smart or very athletic. If you're not at the top of the game, you don't matter."

One-third of teenagers who responded to a recent CNN/Time poll said they thought an incident similar to the Columbine shootings would be likely to occur in their own schools. One in five students said they knew someone their age who has talked about committing a serious act of violence at their school, such as shooting a student or setting off a bomb.

The widespread character of these incidents underscores the fact that the alienation and social tensions that have been expressed through the eruption of violence in Colorado and other states is reaching an epidemic level. While US politicians, from President Clinton on down, and the news media have focused on guns, parental responsibility and violence in movies and video games, they are only dealing with the symptoms of a much larger problem. None have addressed the underlying social and political sickness in America which contributes to such tragedies.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Gah...some more news: (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070417/ap_on_re_us/virginia_tech_shooting_150)

BLACKSBURG, Va. - The gunman suspected of carrying out the Virginia Tech massacre that left 33 people dead was identified Tuesday as a English major whose creative writing was so disturbing that he was referred to the school's counseling service.

Also, this bit brought a tear to my eye (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime_file/2007/04/17/2007-04-17_courageous_final_act_of_professor.html):

Virginia Tech University Prof. Liviu Librescu, described as a family man who once did research for NASA, sacrificed his life to save his students in the shooting rampage yesterday.
...
Then the gunfire started coming closer. Librescu, 77, fearlessly braced himself against the door, holding it shut against the gunman in the hall, while students darted to the windows of the second-floor classroom to escape the slaughter, survivors said.

Mallalieu and most of his classmates hung out of the windows and dropped about 10 feet to bushes and grass below - but Librescu stayed behind to hold off the crazed gunman.

Apparently, that teacher was a holocaust survivor (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OIFQKG0&show_article=1).

Oh dear God, what man hath wrought upon ourselves.

CR

[Tribesman]

Um....sources for those alleged 'facts'? Yea, thought not. Felons have not been able to buy guns for decades, and the GOP did not repeal any gun laws, particularly any that made it 'easier' for felons to get guns.

Ah ...facts ....interesting , so this errrrrr..... "fact" about felons not being able to buy guns , that would be the fact that registered licenced firearms dealers have to do a backround thingy on their customers sort of fact . So rabbit as you are an enthusiastic firearms fan could you enlighten me as to where a criminal could purchase a firearm without having to comply with the backround check ?
Come to think of it where did those two Columbine nuts buy their guns ?

[rory_20_uk]

In case future definitions of Heroism are required, that teacher is by any standards a hero. He gave his life so others might live by concious action.

~:smoking:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Felons could - not legally - buy from people other than licensed dealers without background checks. But that's the same as it's always been, nothing has changed as Mr. Chobee suggested.

CR

[Pannonian]

Apparently, that teacher was a holocaust survivor (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8OIFQKG0&show_article=1).

Oh dear God, what man hath wrought upon ourselves.

CR
What Hitler couldn't do, this Korean guy could. The shooter's family had better make a damn good show of remorse, else I hope the press delves deep into their family life in revenge. If you're not going to say sorry and show that you're sorry, let the press do all they can to show how you've produced this monster of a son.

[Adrian II]

If you're not going to say sorry and show that you're sorry, let the press do all they can to show how you've produced this monster of a son.So the family produced this monster? How exactly?

[Tribesman]

Felons could - not legally - buy from people other than licensed dealers without background checks. But that's the same as it's always been, nothing has changed as Mr. Chobee suggested.

Yep so legally they cannot go along to an arms fair and buy a weapon from an unlicenced dealer who will not do a backround check , neither can they legally buy a weapon through a classified ad from an individual who is not a licensed dealer and doesn't do a backround check .
Its a good thing criminals are very law abiding otherwise it would be ridiculously easy for them to buy guns .

[rory_20_uk]

First off, I thought that many Americans pretend to be Christian. Possibly the power of forgiveness?

Then As Adrian rightly mentions: possibly the family might not be aware of what their on was going to do, and you are jumping to conclusions faster than a Tabloid newspaper?

There's a good chance the family have nothing to say sorry for. Oh, and they've also lost a son who has probably done something that they find as horrific as everyone else.

What has Hitler got to do with anything?

Best keep the poisonous rants to yourself, eh?

~:smoking:

[Husar]

Now, I think society could help by looking for desperate individuals and trying to help them.
I think CR deserves a cookie, making this a gun debate is pretty pointless, we have had school shootings here in Europe even though guns are banned here.

The problem is that students are desperate because they have noone to help them ease their problems, rather there are a lot of people who enjoy putting more weight onto their poor souls, not realizing how destructive they really are.
IMO this has to do with a lack of morals. Older people were always taught to treat others with respect etc, but nowadays morals and respect are constantly vanishing among young kids, they don't even respect the weaker teachers anymore, they're sometimes like carnivores who will bully against everybody who is weaker. a school shooting is like the counterstrike of the weaker people. I just hope I will be able to raise my kids with some morals and a strong mind once I have some and if anyone bullies them I am going to open the gates of my personal hell and bring down whatever is inside upon the ones responsible(I don't really have an idea what that means, but I'm not going to tolerate it, also not if my own kids should start bullying others)

Let me repeat, I was thinking of doing something like this myself many years ago...

[Goofball]

What Hitler couldn't do, this Korean guy could. The shooter's family had better make a damn good show of remorse, else I hope the press delves deep into their family life in revenge. If you're not going to say sorry and show that you're sorry, let the press do all they can to show how you've produced this monster of a son.

Better yet, we should shoot the guy's family in retribution.

:thumbsdown:

[KukriKhan]

Page 4 reminder announcement:

Keep it to the topic, not the poster.

Kindly carry on.

[Sir Moody]

Sir Moody, I think you'd realize all us 'gun nuts' in the USA are very nice people. We just enjoy shooting firearms. We're not crazy, we're not unbalanced.

I would hope you don't form an opinion on people you've never met based on sensationalist articles in your press.

And if firearms have only one purpose - to kill people - then almost all of them are defective. But such a tool is what you want if you're being attacked with deadly force, isn't it?

EDIT: Note that the previous 'record' for a school shooting, way back in 1966, was kept lower than it might have been by ordinary citizens shooting back at the killer with their rifles.

CR

did i say all americans were gun nuts? did i even put a country to my opinion? no i did not.

I dont read newspapers and i take any online article with a severe pinch of salt those are MY opinions not some regurgitated rubish taken from someone else

erm crazed do you even read your own posts? "Guns arnt designed to kill things sir - because i said so" guns ARE designed to kill people thats IS their only function - they may not do it in every case but the design is sound

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Professor Carolyn Rude, chairwoman of the university's English department, said she did not personally know the gunman. But she said she spoke with Lucinda Roy, the department's director of creative writing, who had Cho in one of her classes and described him as "troubled."

"There was some concern about him," Rude said. "Sometimes, in creative writing, people reveal things and you never know if it's creative or if they're describing things, if they're imagining things or just how real it might be. But we're all alert to not ignore things like this."

I think the solution is to take things like this more seriously. Even if you miraculously removed all guns from America, someone who goes crazy will still kill people. He may only be able to kill 8 or 9 instead of 32 but that's still a big deal. Explosives would probably be used (as in the worst school killings). Guns are not the issue. We have more school shootings in America because we have more guns, but you can't claim that we have more killers because we have no guns.

Banning something like violent movies just because they affect psychopaths is irrational.


* Enoch Brown school massacre - Franklin County, Pennsylvania, United States; July 26, 1764
* Bath School disaster - Bath, Michigan, United States; May 18, 1927
* Poe Elementary School Attack - Houston, Texas, United States; September 15, 1959


1764? 1927? The 1927 one is the worst killing. I don't think violent movies had anything to do with anything there.

[Pannonian]

First off, I thought that many Americans pretend to be Christian. Possibly the power of forgiveness?

Then As Adrian rightly mentions: possibly the family might not be aware of what their on was going to do, and you are jumping to conclusions faster than a Tabloid newspaper?

There's a good chance the family have nothing to say sorry for. Oh, and they've also lost a son who has probably done something that they find as horrific as everyone else.

What has Hitler got to do with anything?

Best keep the poisonous rants to yourself, eh?

~:smoking:
It was my impression that families (Asian ones anyway) are supposed to be responsible for their issue. If they don't hold themselves responsible for him, then let the press do it for them. If there's a screwy family that led to this ill-produced scion, let the press uncover it. If the problems are deeper rooted as in the massively dysfunctional Japanese society, let the press discuss that as well. But this is one of those cases where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand.


Page 4 reminder announcement:

Keep it to the topic, not the poster.

Kindly carry on.
Sorry about my rather savage post, but the harming of Holocaust survivors is one of the few issues to make me really react - another related one being exploitation of the Holocaust that cheapens its memory.

[drone]

If the problems are deeper rooted as in the massively dysfunctional Japanese society, let the press discuss that as well.
He's a South Korean immigrant, not Japanese.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Yep so legally they cannot go along to an arms fair and buy a weapon from an unlicenced dealer who will not do a backround check , neither can they legally buy a weapon through a classified ad from an individual who is not a licensed dealer and doesn't do a backround check .
Its a good thing criminals are very law abiding otherwise it would be ridiculously easy for them to buy guns .

Congrats, you've highlighted the need for enforcement of our existing laws.


First off, I thought that many Americans pretend to be are Christian.

Fixed.



erm crazed do you even read your own posts? "Guns arnt designed to kill things sir - because i said so" guns ARE designed to kill people thats IS their only function - they may not do it in every case but the design is sound

Indeed I do, though I wonder if you did:

And if firearms have only one purpose - to kill people - then almost all of them are defective. But such a tool is what you want if you're being attacked with deadly force, isn't it?

Are you familiar with trap shotguns, hunting shotguns, hunting rifles, target pistols, .22 rifles, and a plethora of others clearly not designed to kill people?


I think CR deserves a cookie,

Don't mind if I do:
https://img116.imageshack.us/img116/8007/rabbiteatingcookieyr5.jpg

Crazed Rabbit

[Pannonian]

He's a South Korean immigrant, not Japanese.
I was using Japanese society as an example of how the roots may go back further than any individual or family. If the investigations of those various incidents hadn't looked at the family, and at the wider society as a whole, would people be as aware of the depth of the problem?

This guy's family should be looking at themselves and asking how he came to be like this, and the deceased's families deserve to know the answers. The press in its various guises can serve as both carrot and stick with which to find answers to the question "Why?". If the family isn't inclined to go public with the results, IMHO an incident of this kind and severity gives the press the right to look for the answers themselves. And if this is an intrusion into their family's privacy - tough cheese.

[drone]

This guy's family should be looking at themselves and asking how he came to be like this, and the deceased's families deserve to know the answers. The press in its various guises can serve as both carrot and stick with which to find answers to the question "Why?". If the family isn't inclined to go public with the results, IMHO an incident of this kind and severity gives the press the right to look for the answers themselves. And if this is an intrusion into their family's privacy - tough cheese.
I'd bet the press is all over the family already. I'm pretty sure I know where they live, and I'm also sure I'm going to have to fight through the tent city sprouting around the place on the way home. :furious3:

On the gun issue, I saw that he passed a background check done in 2003 for his green card renewal. So he would not have had any problems purchasing a firearm legally.

[Geoffrey S]

Pannonian, get off it. Until there are any facts to back your reasoning about the shooter's family, please keep those opinions to yourself. And no, it is not always possible to notice when someone might lose it; the sister of a friend of mine committed suicide, and absolutely no-one saw it coming, and there sure as heck was nothing wrong with the family.

[Ser Clegane]

Pannonian, please remember that their parents of the shooter also lost their child - probably in a more complete way than other people, as they not only lost the life of their son but also the memory of their son as what is left to them is the fact that their child murdered 30+ people, the more or less open accusation that they as parents are at least to some degree also guilty of what happened and probably also their own feeling that they are at least partly responsible because they should have done something different to prevent this tragedy from happening.

Unless you have a very good reason to believe that these parents are somehow also responsible for what happened, they have IMHO the sme right of privacy as any other parents who lost their children in this shooting. Your "tough cheese" comment seems quite inappropriate here :no:
(NB: this is not a comment in my function as Backroom moderator, but my opinion as an Backroom-patron)

[JimBob]

Pannonian seriously. 34 families lost loved ones. This guy wasn't some robot, he was a person with a history and a family. I'm pretty sure that family loved him. Now they are not only grieving because they lost a family member but because he went out in a horrific way. Then to have people calling for a witch trial?

Maybe the guy was just broken in the head through no fault of the parents except genetics. But if are going to hold them accountable for their genes I assume you've yelled at ever cancer patient's parents as well.

[Pannonian]

Pannonian, get off it. Until there are any facts to back your reasoning about the shooter's family, please keep those opinions to yourself. And no, it is not always possible to notice when someone might lose it; the sister of a friend of mine committed suicide, and absolutely no-one saw it coming, and there sure as heck was nothing wrong with the family.
Are you suggesting that the question shouldn't be asked? I used the example of Japanese society to illustrate my point - if the question "Why?" hadn't been asked of all the various incidents, would people be as aware of the poisonous results of a society dedicated entirely to work? As I said, this is one case where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand. Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up. The answers are then used as part of a wider investigation to minimise the chances of something like this happening again. Is there owt wrong with this?

Re: Ser Clegane. Fair enough.

Re: Jimbob. I subscribe to the social conditioning school rather than genetics. If someone goes berserk, IMHO their life history, including upbringing, usually offers a better explanation than their genes.

[Ser Clegane]

Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up.
Investigations can certainly be done without dragging the parents into the spotlight?
Also, how come that the killer's family becomes a default subject of "vengeance"? I would have thought that we moved a bit beyond "Sippenhaft"

[doc_bean]

It was my impression that families (Asian ones anyway)

WTF ? It's their responsibility because they're Asian ? Different rules apply to Asian families ?

BS, this kid was obviously messed up, who knows why at this point ?

[Scurvy]

I said, this is one case where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand.

vengence on who? the killer killed the people, not his family.

furthermore the press are hardly interested in finding out the truth.. they just want a good story, im sure we'l be finding out that his mother was feeding him the wrong sort of food soon...



Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up

has it occured to you that they might have done nothing wrong?

--> a bit of sympathy and respect is needed for a family who will be grieving like all the others....

the question should be asked, but by the right people at the right time.

[Sir Moody]

Are you familiar with trap shotguns, hunting shotguns, hunting rifles, target pistols, .22 rifles, and a plethora of others clearly not designed to kill people?

wow all of those guns you just listed can kill people even if they wernt designed too and most were still designed to kill (animals if not people but remmeber we are animals and what kills a deer will kill us just as easily)

the only 2 you have there which i cant argue with are the Trap shotgun (a slight varient on the nomal shotgun designed to blow little plates out of the air ) - and the Target pistol (designed for professional shooting aka sport) - these are exceptions to the norm that arose from the tried and tested and most definatly designed to kill guns we see far more oftenly - congratualtions :help:

[ajaxfetish]

Pannonian,

No one has responded to your position by arguing that an investigation shouldn't be made. Clearly the more information we can bring in the better off we'll be. The problem is the harsh vitriol you are exhibiting against individuals who have done nothing wrong that we know of. For one thing, I don't believe vengeance is of any value period. For another, why should vengeance against a criminal be taken against his parents? They did not shoot anyone. There is no evidence to suggest they influenced their son's shooting. Why should they be punished for his crimes?

I appreciate your intense reaction to the killing of a holocaust survivor and recognize that may be responsible for your seemingly irrational response. It seems highly doubtful that this had any bearing on the professor's killing. The killer didn't single him out, and may not have even been aware he was a holocaust survivor. This certainly has nothing to do with the parents. Be kind, and give the poor people the benefit of the doubt. A thorough investigation is important, but condemning people without any such investigation being made is not helpful.

Ajax

[Soulforged]

Phil McGraw is not blaming this uniquely on video games. It's a wider criticism of movies and of the glamorization of violence in society as a whole
It could be. However when I pay attention to the motives behind this killings, they're usually moved by desperation, and although games do tend to portray violence, even without reason (GTA series) they also don't portray any character, as far as I know, as a good man because he kills, many times not even the motives are good motives. However I always thought that games should be strictly restricted by ages.

I can see however, how this occurs more often in the USA at least (sorry I'm not aware of global tragedies). This has happened only one time in my country and never in that scale. I suppose that there's not a single cause for this. First it must be the gun culture existent on the country. Second it has to be a psicological issue of the public mass of adolescent teenagers. I also believe it has something to do with the concept of social justice, in the sense that some people believe that the bad things that are happening to them can be attributed to everyone arround them without discrimination, without criterium, only because they happen to be in their way, perhaps they believe that everyone else is guilty of inaction. Third some believe that dignity is the more important value that humans have and some of them are willing to do anything to defend it, when humiliated they might respond like this. However this is not something exclusive of the USA, I suppose it's not the only country with a gun culture, not the only one with violent games. The adequate cause for this has to be found in another place, another element but I cannot see what's that element. I think an american has to know better...

[KukriKhan]

Now, another reminder:

If you're a regular poster or reader here, you've seen what happens among the great minds here, when event details become slim: we start in on each other's words.

This usually starts happening about page 3 and post #75, or so.

I urge all to resist that natural urge to try to draw conclusions before enough details are available, AND the other natural reaction to frustration (at the lack of detail) to strike out at the handiest target - our fellow posters.

Sorry for the length of this announcement, and its distraction.

Please continue, civilly.

[Pannonian]

Investigations can certainly be done without dragging the parents into the spotlight?
Also, how come that the killer's family becomes a default subject of "vengeance"? I would have thought that we moved a bit beyond "Sippenhaft"
Letting the press ask the questions is civilised society's most constructive form of vengeance. It's unpleasant enough to act as such, and constructive enough to help work towards solving any wider social problems. The killer can't be jailed, the killer can't be rehabilitated, so the usual forms of state punishment no longer apply. In its absence, why not ask the question "Why?".

I've noted that people have ignored my conditional point, that the family had better make a good show of remorse, which I elaborated as asking themselves how he came to be like this, and letting the public know the answers. If they do this, there is no need for the press to press them further - the point of making them ask the difficult questions and helping society avoid incidents like this in the future has been served. The families of the 7/7 bombers did the same, helping the police investigate the histories of their sons, and the result is we now have a better knowledge of their roots and causes. And once the questions had been answered, they were allowed to retreat back into privacy. Is there anything wrong with this?

[Lemur]

Well, it hasn't taken long for various loonbats to grab onto this event and fit it into their agenda. I see the Westboro Baptist Church (http://www.godhatesamerica.com/) plans to picket the funerals. "Jerks" doesn't quite do them justice. Also, Jack Thompson has declared that violent video games are to blame (http://kotaku.com/gaming/feature/feature-dissecting-jacks-lies-252914.php). Note that he came to this conclusion before anyone knew the identity of the shooter.

Not to mention how pro- and anti-gun folks (including some of our own) have leaped in to tell us how this tragedy reinforces their positions.

I guess it's natural to look for meaning in something this nasty. Personally, I'm still adopting a wait and see mode.

[KukriKhan]

The Smoking Gun. com (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html) a copy of the shooter's bizarre 1-act play, for which he was referred to the uni counselling center.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Yesterday, we knew spit.

Today, we know spit + 3%.

Some people acted heroically, others simply tried to survive, one had neither goal in mind.

[Pannonian]

Pannonian,

No one has responded to your position by arguing that an investigation shouldn't be made. Clearly the more information we can bring in the better off we'll be. The problem is the harsh vitriol you are exhibiting against individuals who have done nothing wrong that we know of. For one thing, I don't believe vengeance is of any value period. For another, why should vengeance against a criminal be taken against his parents? They did not shoot anyone. There is no evidence to suggest they influenced their son's shooting. Why should they be punished for his crimes?

In Britain, there was the case of a black kid who was murdered by a gang of white youths. Police incompetence with the hint of corruption led to the destruction or loss of all useable evidence, and the case collapsed. The press took up the case, allowing the family of the deceased to bring a private prosecution against the accused, and forcing the police to clean up their incompetence and/or racism.

Stephen Lawrence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Lawrence)

[doc_bean]

The Smoking Gun. com (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html) a copy of the shooter's bizarre 1-act play, for which he was referred to the uni counselling center.

This is just....terrible ! They let someone who writes like this be an English major ? It reads like it was written by a 6 year old ! A particulary slow one....

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The Smoking Gun. com (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html) a copy of the shooter's bizarre 1-act play, for which he was referred to the uni counselling center.

Jesus Christ. Whoever didn't force him to see a psychiatrist regularly after that should be in big trouble.



What happened yesterday:

When I first heard about the multiple shootings at Virginia Tech yesterday, my first thought was about my friends, and my second thought was "I bet it was Seung Cho."

Cho was in my playwriting class last fall, and nobody seemed to think much of him at first. He would sit by himself whenever possible, and didn't like talking to anyone. I don't think I've ever actually heard his voice before. He was just so quiet and kept to himself. Looking back, he fit the exact stereotype of what one would typically think of as a "school shooter" – a loner, obsessed with violence, and serious personal problems. Some of us in class tried to talk to him to be nice and get him out of his shell, but he refused talking to anyone. It was like he didn't want to be friends with anybody. One friend of mine tried to offer him some Halloween candy that she still had, but he slowly shook his head, refusing it. He just came to class every day and submitted his work on time, as I understand it.

A major part of the playwriting class was peer reviews. We would write one-act plays and submit them to an online repository called Blackboard for everyone in the class to read and comment about in class the next day. Typically, the students give their opinions about the plays and suggest ways to make it better, the professor gives his insights, then asks the author to comment about the play in class.

When we read Cho's plays, it was like something out of a nightmare. The plays had really twisted, macabre violence that used weapons I wouldn't have even thought of. Before Cho got to class that day, we students were talking to each other with serious worry about whether he could be a school shooter. I was even thinking of scenarios of what I would do in case he did come in with a gun, I was that freaked out about him. When the students gave reviews of his play in class, we were very careful with our words in case he decided to snap. Even the professor didn't pressure him to give closing comments.

After hearing about the mass shootings, I sent one of my friends a Facebook message asking him if he knew anything about Seung Cho and if he could have been involved. He replied: "dude that's EXACTLY what I was thinking! No, I haven't heard anything, but seriously, that was the first thing I thought when I heard he was Asian."

While I "knew" Cho, I always wished there was something I could do for him, but I couldn't think of anything. As far as notifying authorities, there isn't (to my knowledge) any system set up that lets people say "Hey! This guy has some issues! Maybe you should look into this guy!" If there were, I definitely would have tried to get the kid some help. I think that could have had a good chance of averting yesterday's tragedy more than anything.

While I was hesitant at first to release these plays (because I didn't know if there are laws against it), I had to put myself in the shoes of the average person researching this situation. I'd want to know everything I could about the killer to figure out what could drive a person to do something like this and hopefully prevent it in the future. Also, I hope this might help people start caring about others more no matter how weird they might seem, because if this was some kind of cry for attention, then he should have gotten it a long time ago.

As far as the victims go, as I was heading to bed last night, I heard that my good friend Stack (Ryan Clark) was one of the first confirmed dead. I didn't want to believe that I'd never get to talk to him again, and all I could think about was how much I could tell him how much his friendship meant to me. During my junior year, Ryan, another friend and I used to get breakfast on Tuesdays and Thursdays at Shultz Dining Hall, one of the cafeterias on campus, and it was always the highlight of my day. He could talk forever it seemed and always made us laugh. He was a good friend, not just to me, but to a lot of people, and I'll miss him a lot.

http://newsbloggers.aol.com/2007/04/17/cho-seung-huis-plays/

Also contains play number 2

[Geoffrey S]

Are you suggesting that the question shouldn't be asked? I used the example of Japanese society to illustrate my point - if the question "Why?" hadn't been asked of all the various incidents, would people be as aware of the poisonous results of a society dedicated entirely to work? As I said, this is one case where vengeance and constructive investigation go hand in hand. Vengeance means the killer's family gives up their right to privacy until this is satisfactorily cleared up. The answers are then used as part of a wider investigation to minimise the chances of something like this happening again. Is there owt wrong with this?
No, I never suggested such a thing. "Why?" is a perfectly valid question to ask, considering that right now we now next to nothing about the origins of the tragedy. The post I responded was filled with preconceptions about the shooter's family, who as Ser Clegane rightly pointed also lost their relative in both body and mind, in a situation where you clearly cannot know the facts yet. What I would suggest is to allow some more time before jumping to conclusions.

Edit: Sasaki, good post. The more I hear about this, the more chilling it becomes. A horrible, horrible situation.

[Crazed Rabbit]

A lot of pictures from the campus:
http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/collegiatetimes/4-16-07/index.html

Sasaki, that is troubling.

CR

[Bijo]

CR, were you saying on that page with the picture you are a MOUSE now? :laugh4:



About that article and identification:
Law enforcement officials have provided this official photo of Cho Seung-hui, the man they identify as the killer at Virginia Tech. Cho was a 23-year-old student of Korean descent who lived on campus. Sources tell ABC News he was carrying a backpack with a receipt for the purchase of a 9 mm handgun.
I suspect it wasn't just the *possible* trauma of sexual abuse and stuff like that, there's probably more to it. Hmmm... that picture. But-- WHAT?!?!?! He looks like a young modified Asianized version of my brother! That's it! :smash:

But seriously...
There are many things suspicious about the case and I even suspect those other students have something to do with it. Not saying it's so, just suspecting. They are human after all

:|

[drone]

CNN reports that he used a Walther .22 and a, um, Glock 19. I guess I better make sure mine hasn't gone missing. ~:doh:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

What made him do it? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18152839/site/newsweek/)


“After these episodes, everyone becomes a psychologist, looking back for warning signs,” says Jack Levin, a forensic psychologist at Northeastern University

Over 90 percent of killers are male, and the same holds for mass murderers—“I can’t think of a single case where a woman has done this,” says Schlesinger—partly because men tend to have more access to guns, which are usually the weapons of choice. The killers are usually somewhere between the ages of 25 and 35. They generally do not have previous histories of breaking the law in any serious way, says Levin. And they are not, on the whole, psychopaths, although they are often identified in the media as such. “A psychopath is someone with little conscience, little interpersonal bonding, someone who’s smooth and manipulative," says Schlesinger. "That personality has nothing, zero, to do with mass murder."

Indeed, the personality type most often associated with mass murder is in some ways the opposite of a psychopath. He is far from cool-headed; instead, he is aggrieved, hurt, and above all paranoid. Some mass murderers may be trying to exercise power over a world that they feel has left them powerless. "These people often feel some great injustice has been done to them. They're angry and they want to take it out on the world," says Schlesinger. "Then they develop the idea that committing murder will be the solution to whatever their problem is, and they fixate on it. Eventually they come to feel that there's no other solution."

"You don't just get a D on your report card and then open fire on 30 people," says Levin. "It takes a prolonged series of frustrations. These people are chronically depressed and miserable."

“Almost always [in school shootings], the perpetrator is a student who seeks revenge,” says Levin. As for Cho and whatever had upset him, Levin says, "It was murder by proxy. I think he was trying to kill the college."

And Levin says Cho, who was of Korean descent, may have been influenced by a mass shooting in at Dawson College in Montreal last September. That shooter was also a male, Asian student in his 20s. "The inspiration, if there is one, usually comes from someone who shares important characteristics with the killer," says Levin. "I'd venture a guess that that's what happened here."

Many of the warning signs—a near-daily loss of temper, vandalism, increased alcohol and drug use, overreacting to slight setbacks—are characteristic of depression in general. "These are warning signs that a person is in trouble, not that he's going to kill 30 people," says Levin. "There are hundreds of thousands of people who have led lives of frustration, who blame others for their problems, and who are socially isolated, but guess what? They never kill anyone."

Peter Sheras, a clinical psychologist at the University of Virginia, says one key to recognizing serious warning signs is learning which ones seem likely to play out in real life. "People need to distinguish between transient threats—things that pass in a moment of anger that get cleared up—versus serious threats where there's a likelihood that it's going to be carried out," he says. "You can't completely know, but if the person is depressed or despondent or suicidal, we should take that more seriously."

"By the time they've reached a point where they have a plan to kill somebody, their life is not of value to them anymore," Martin says. "Their goal is to hurt someone or become famous in some way, and they don't, at that point, want to stop themselves from accomplishing that."

"They may think, 'I may never amount to much, but I'm going to die amounting to something. This is my final mark on the world, my final statement,'" says Martin. "It's a fantasy that they will have the ultimate last word, even if they don't live to see it."

This was very interesting. To me it implies that we as a society should take more responsibility regarding those of us who are depressed. Forget guns or violent movies. They would use other weapons if they didn't have guns and the inspiration seems to come from other school shootings.

[KukriKhan]

On the early rush to judgment: this guy (http://killfile.newsvine.com/_news/2007/04/17/668052-the-internet-thinks-its-me-gun-loving-student-wrongly-accused-), who sort of filled the profile of the shooter (23, asian, VT student, gun-enthusiast) got 80,000+ hate messages to his blog. He's innocent.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

On the early rush to judgment: this guy (http://killfile.newsvine.com/_news/2007/04/17/668052-the-internet-thinks-its-me-gun-loving-student-wrongly-accused-), who sort of filled the profile of the shooter (23, asian, VT student, gun-enthusiast) got 80,000+ hate messages to his blog. He's innocent.

heh heh, I saw that. He posted a message soon after the shootings showing he was alive, but then deleted it. Apparently he found the comments amusing.

[Bijo]

What made him do it? (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18152839/site/newsweek/)



This was very interesting. To me it implies that we as a society should take more responsibility regarding those of us who are depressed. Forget guns or violent movies. They would use other weapons if they didn't have guns and the inspiration seems to come from other school shootings.
Society won't take care of that: they are too busy gaining more wealth, having more sex, consuming products, being individualistic, and generally satisfying their ego. What does society care? :|

They don't do jack, and when something untasty like this case occurs, it'll be forgotten soon enough.

[edyzmedieval]

Poor fella, getting 80000+ hate mail when you aren't even the killer.

Anyhow, I feel sad too. A Romanian teacher is now a hero and dead too, because he tried to stop the killer from killing his students by blocking the door. Unfortunately, he got shot. :no:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Society won't take care of that: they are too busy gaining more wealth, having more sex, consuming products, being individualistic, and generally satisfying their ego. What does society care? :|

They don't do jack, and when something untasty like this case occurs, it'll be forgotten soon enough.

Living up to the first part of your custom title I see ~:)

I hope the administration doesn't get in any trouble over this.

[Crazed Rabbit]

CR, were you saying on that page with the picture you are a MOUSE now? :laugh4:

Dude, that's clearly a rabbit. Rushing to judgment, are we?

CR

[Sasaki Kojiro]

hmm anyone know anything about this:

https://img262.imageshack.us/img262/6928/picture209we0.png

[KukriKhan]

I hope the administration doesn't get in any trouble over this.

You mean the uni admin? There is growing rumbling (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3046701&page=1), at least among students, that VT Admin should have cancelled all classes after the first shooting, especially since that perp (the same guy) was still at-large.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

You mean the uni admin? There is growing rumbling (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3046701&page=1), at least among students, that VT Admin should have cancelled all classes after the first shooting, especially since that perp (the same guy) was still at-large.

Yeah. I disagree with that though. It's easy to say so in hindsight but there was a killing in dorm room that appeared to be domestic and the killer fled without shooting anyone else when he could have easily. In the vast, vast majority of murders the person doesn't decide to gun down an extra 30 people a couple hours later. There are dozens of killers on the loose in every city in the us, and if they canceled work for 30,000 people every time the world wouldn't function. It's doubtful this was a spur of the moment decision and he probably could have killed people anyway.

Too many people are acting like VT president said to himself "well, 32 people are going to die but it would be too much trouble to cancel classes so screw them, haha!".

[Xiahou]

Jesus Christ. Whoever didn't force him to see a psychiatrist regularly after that should be in big trouble.I think it's a bit of PC run amok.

Lucinda Roy, a co-director of the creative writing program at Virginia Tech, taught Cho in a poetry class in fall of 2005 and later worked with him one-on-one after she became concerned about his behavior and themes in his writings.

Roy spoke outside her home Tuesday afternoon, saying that there was nothing explicit in Cho's writings, but that threats were there under the surface.

Roy told ABC News that Cho seemed "extraordinarily lonely—the loneliest person I have ever met in my life." She said he wore sunglasses indoors, with a cap pulled low over his eyes. He whispered, took 20 seconds to answer questions, and took cellphone pictures of her in class. Roy said she was concerned for her safety when she met with him.

She said she notified authorities about Cho, but said she was told that there would be too many legal hurdles to intervene. She said she asked him to go to counseling, but he never did.Clearly, something was not quite right with this kid- yet there was nothing anyone could do because of "legal hurdles". In the end, all she could do was suggest that he get counseling- he had no obligation to do so and obviously didn't.

[Soulforged]

Society won't take care of that: they are too busy gaining more wealth, having more sex, consuming products, being individualistic, and generally satisfying their ego. What does society care? :|

They don't do jack, and when something untasty like this case occurs, it'll be forgotten soon enough.
Depressed fellows also don't want any help in principle, so it's very hard to give it anyhow.

On another note he could have done this so nobody forgets about his deeds, so the attention it brings is only more gas to the fire...

[JimBob]

What should young people do with their lives today? Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured.
-Kurt Vonnegut

He may be dead but he's as right as ever.

[CrossLOPER]

The Smoking Gun. com (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html) a copy of the shooter's bizarre 1-act play, for which he was referred to the uni counselling center.
THIS is the "macabre, grotesque, nightmarish scary script that scared people? Anyone who thinks this is anything more than bad writing is a bit frail. It actually kind of looks like a joke. Honestly, I would not have paid much attention to this guy. He so generic.
If they were so worried about some of his more extreme behavioral abnormalities they should have pointed him to a good shrink.

What should young people do with their lives today? Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured.
-Kurt Vonnegut

He may be dead but he's as right as ever.
Some people like to be left alone. Some people like being lonely. No need to touch them.

[Scurvy]

What should young people do with their lives today? Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured.




Some people like to be left alone. Some people like being lonely. No need to touch them.

:yes:

--> to have a community you have to have people who are excluded from that community...

:2thumbsup:

[econ21]

THIS is the "macabre, grotesque, nightmarish scary script that scared people?

Reading with the benefit of hindsight, I certainly find it all those things. It's clearly the work of a disturbed mind - the 13 year old boy's accusations ring alarm bells about the author's state of mind and are grotesque; the "plot" lacks any kind of credibility or logic giving it a nightmarish quality; and the undertone of violence is macabre.


Anyone who thinks this is anything more than bad writing is a bit frail. It actually kind of looks like a joke.

Context matters. If this were submitted by a light-hearted student, then I might think he was trying it on. But with someone who never mixes, spends 20 seconds before answering, wears shades in class etc, I'd take it as evidence that he has serious issues (as apparently his English professor did take it).


If they were so worried about some of his more extreme behavioral abnormalities they should have pointed him to a good shrink.

They did, AFAIK. Doesn't seem he was the kind of chap who would have responded to such "pointing" though.



On a different note, I just read some of the victim's profiles on MSN news - was the saddest thing I've read for quite a while. You look at the photos of the young students, full of life and enthusiasm. It does not get any easier reading about the elderly Holocaust survivor lying down to block the class room door. :shame:

[CrossLOPER]

Reading with the benefit of hindsight, I certainly find it all those things. It's clearly the work of a disturbed mind - the 13 year old boy's accusations ring alarm bells about the author's state of mind and are.....
I'm sorry, but I feel that at this time it is a little hard to tell what is relevant and what isn't relevant to the shooter's condition or if he had one.

Also, the "hindsight is 20/20" business is being a bit overused.

[ajaxfetish]

Also, the "hindsight is 20/20" business is being a bit overused.
I think 'overused' would only apply to the hindsight comment if people didn't continue saying what people should have done but didn't. Until then it's the most accurate and concise response to such assertions.

Ajax

[econ21]

I'm sorry, but I feel that at this time it is a little hard to tell what is relevant and what isn't relevant to the shooter's condition or if he had one.

Also, the "hindsight is 20/20" business is being a bit overused.

Hindsight is all we have - we can't read that play without knowing what that guy later did, any more than we can read Mein Kampf without knowing what it's author later did. I can't be sure how I would have reacted to that play script if I had read it before yesterday, but it does strike me as grossly inappropriate for a university class and the product of a disturbed mind. I can quite understand his classmates and professor thinking the same at the time. But maybe you are right and we are all just more "frail" than you. :shrug:

[CrossLOPER]

Hindsight is all we have - we can't read that play without knowing what that guy later did, any more than we can read Mein Kampf without knowing what it's author later did. I can't be sure how I would have reacted to that play script if I had read it before yesterday, but it does strike me as grossly inappropriate for a university class and the product of a disturbed mind. I can quite understand his classmates and professor thinking the same at the time. But maybe you are right and we are all just more "frail" than you. :shrug:
I know someone who, when they were younger, would write the same type of stuff when they were upset. They scribbled little pictures of people they didn't like and who hurt them falling into fire pits. They would act up and say bad things. They never hurt anyone. They never threatened anyone. They never killed anyone.

Cho's script is a "funfact". Hitler's Mein Kampf is a "funfact". We only pay attention to them because these people actually did something. Go to Live Journal, or MySpace or where ever and you'll see the same thing. Maybe in a little less detail than Mein Kampf, but in any case I'm sure that there's not going to be rivers of blood or all ending darkness descending all over the place because some nonconformist teen calls for it.

Think about it.

[KukriKhan]

So, CrossLOPER suggests that anyone's writing should be ignored as irrelevant, based on the number of non-executed poison-pen pieces published on the internet.

Is it therefore your opinion that any forensic inquiries into guys who have carried out their fantasies is useless as a predictor?

Should society-at-large merely step back, sheep-like, and accept the randomness of violence, without trying to understand its motivation, with an eye to preventing a recurrence?

[Hosakawa Tito]

I think that in this case, the problem is that even though he was identified as troubled, and offered counseling, there is no mechanism to compel or mandate that treatment.

What struck me when reports first came out on the police investigation was the utter lack of success they had finding anyone who could be remotely described as a friend of this person. He seems to have been totally alienated.

[Devastatin Dave]

?

Should society-at-large merely step back, sheep-like, and accept the randomness of violence, without trying to understand its motivation, with an eye to preventing a recurrence?
Yes.
If not, then we need to lock up all the muslims, christians, moaist, anarchists, fiction/history/fantasy authers, speech writers, comlumnists, editors, anyone that has ever written a nasty letter to the editor, and of course about 90 % of Org Backroom dwellers, along with you damned Mods because of the possiblity that violence might occure from what they have written in the past. There is no one, no situation, no act of nature, and no possiblity to predict this kind of ####. Face it, the guy was an :daisy: and :daisy: are unpredictable. So instead of pointing fingers and talking out of the hindsight manual of Removing Personnal Responsibility...
It happened.
Not a :daisy: thing can be done about it or anything to prevent it in the future.
Everyone's time on earth is short and we are all sheep lined up for the slaughter.
Say a prayer for the poor folks that bought it this way but remember you might get it worse.

Now, cheer up, you're alive, live...

I love you guys (especially you Kukri, our little sheep herder) so be safe out there and love one another (except for Lemur, because he's a lower primate incapable of human emotions like love, so i nice tail rub will do).

[Hosakawa Tito]

Well Dave, at least I got to read this one before it gets bleeped out.~:wacko:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I know someone who, when they were younger, would write the same type of stuff when they were upset. They scribbled little pictures of people they didn't like and who hurt them falling into fire pits. They would act up and say bad things. They never hurt anyone. They never threatened anyone. They never killed anyone.

Cho's script is a "funfact". Hitler's Mein Kampf is a "funfact". We only pay attention to them because these people actually did something. Go to Live Journal, or MySpace or where ever and you'll see the same thing. Maybe in a little less detail than Mein Kampf, but in any case I'm sure that there's not going to be rivers of blood or all ending darkness descending all over the place because some nonconformist teen calls for it.

Think about it.

He wasn't recommended for counseling just because of his writing:


According to a professor who taught Cho in a poetry class in 2005, Cho was "extraordinarily lonely—the loneliest person I have ever met in my life." She said that he whispered, took 20 seconds to answer questions, and took cell phone pictures of her in class.


The point isn't that not everyone like that becomes a mass murderer, but they should all be helped anyway.


VVPeople aren't born crazy. Not usually anyway.VV

[Strike For The South]

I agree with Dave. I dont understand why yall are trying to understand why he did it. He was crazy and crazy people do crazy things. Some keep bottlecaps some join fourms and others massacre innocent people. It is horrible what this kid did and the commenwealths gun laws are retarded. A crazy man did a horrid thing and we need to move on. All this media BS about going inside the mans head is stupid A guy with a few nuts loose killed 32 people. Pay your respects and move on.

[Ice]

I agree with Dave. I dont understand why yall are trying to understand why he did it. He was crazy and crazy people do crazy things. Some keep bottlecaps some join fourms and others massacre innocent people. It is horrible what this kid did and the commenwealths gun laws are retarded. A crazy man did a horrid thing and we need to move on. All this media BS about going inside the mans head is stupid A guy with a few nuts loose killed 32 people. Pay your respects and move on.

I think what people are trying to understand, Strike, is what made the kid go crazy.

[Strike For The South]

I think what people are trying to understand, Strike, is what made the kid go crazy.

Some people are predisposed to violent behavior. Some people are born cazy. You dont jsut walk into a dadgum school kill two people come back and kill thirty more. The kid was insane and that is why he did this. Of course he had problems. News flash everyone has problems. Crazy people just dont react the same.

K
I
S
S

[Lemur]

Actually, this kid fits a lot of the known parameters for a gunman already. Top of the list is loner, followed by alienated, followed by singled out for therapy but refused or failed treatment. The only missing element is the classic "lives at home with his mother."

You always have to watch the quiet ones.

And DevDave, I may be incapable of love, but Crazed Rabbit and I are going to set up one heck of a petting zoo. Then you'll be jealous.

[CrossLOPER]

The point isn't that not everyone like that becomes a mass murderer, but they should all be helped anyway.
I agree with this. However, as DevDave said, it's random. He felt like killing, so he got some guns, learned to use them, and used them.

Simply put, a loner with an violent imagination does not make a mass-murderer.

[Devastatin Dave]

Simply put, a loner with an violent imagination does not make a mass-murderer.
Oh, i forgot about the loners... better lock them up as well.:smash:

[Kanamori]

Yes.
If not, then we need to lock up all the muslims, christians, moaist, anarchists, fiction/history/fantasy authers, speech writers, comlumnists, editors, anyone that has ever written a nasty letter to the editor, and of course about 90 % of Org Backroom dwellers, along with you damned Mods because of the possiblity that violence might occure from what they have written in the past. There is no one, no situation, no act of nature, and no possiblity to predict this kind of ####. Face it, the guy was an :daisy: and :daisy: are unpredictable. So instead of pointing fingers and talking out of the hindsight manual of Removing Personnal Responsibility...
It happened.
Not a :daisy: thing can be done about it or anything to prevent it in the future.
Everyone's time on earth is short and we are all sheep lined up for the slaughter.
Say a prayer for the poor folks that bought it this way but remember you might get it worse.

Now, cheer up, you're alive, live...

I love you guys (especially you Kukri, our little sheep herder) so be safe out there and love one another (except for Lemur, because he's a lower primate incapable of human emotions like love, so i nice tail rub will do).

Why do you dress up everything you say like this?

[Devastatin Dave]

Why do you dress up everything you say like this?
Only for your enjoyment, Kanamori. Care to address what I said or shall I just wait for your usual response about my imbreeding ancestory?

[Kanamori]

There isn't anything to address besides that you think it's a ridiculous point, it's just sarcasm. People could actually learn something rather than just being laughed at. And, I already apologized for the inbreeding comment and was sorry. You can do better than pointing to that.

[Devastatin Dave]

EDIT: Just a teensy bit choleric. BG

[Kanamori]

I don't have any personal issues right now... You really think I'm a deep thinker?

[Csargo]

Yes.

:no:

[Bijo]

No, the guy wasn't insane or "crazy", or "wacko". As already said he was very efficient and methodical in his shooting act. There must be a motive (or motives), logical reasons behind this. We still don't know all the hard facts (assuming that what we get to hear / read is true).

To call the poor bastard crazy is merely simple quick labelling. Very easy, palatable to do, and the claim doesn't necessarily have to be true.

:|

[Major Robert Dump]

So will Virginia Tech still have a competitive shooting team after this?

[lancelot]

I do wonder sometimes how many more times things like this must happen before the wisdom of 'the right to bare arms' gets some serious reconsideration...

Nevertheless- a sad day for Virginia.

[Husar]

The problem aren't always the loners who choose to be alone, but those who are "forced" to be alone because they don't get a long with other people for various reasons.

[Bijo]

The problem aren't always the loners who choose to be alone, but those who are "forced" to be alone because they don't get a long with other people for various reasons.
True.

If these people are somehow forced to be lonely due to these various reasons, it's definitely a social issue. And from that could come mental issues, and from there it's possibly a long way -- or a short one -- into whatever it'll all result.

I think this is the right track we're on here speculating, though we still need those hard complete facts, background, etc.

For example I've heard on the Dutch news -- though very briefly explained -- that the poor bastard was avoided by classmates and such and exact reasons weren't given... but they said he didn't really like the Western student-like kind of "lawlessness" (for lack of a better translation).
But I also heard here about a possible background regarding a story he wrote (which is difficult to precisely, accurately, and logically analyze to this case).
Then I heard on CNN or maybe it was BBC World that his classmates tried to talk to him because he was always lonely. He just came to school and delivered his work, does his studying, and that's it.
And some of those interviewed students seemed too calm and some of them even smiled occasionally I noticed, even though it's not the time and situation to smile.

What can one make up out of that? Only speculative conclusions, but perhaps plausible ones? I suspect this guy was indeed a loner, was suffering badly, was perhaps somewhat of an ideologist, was alienated / attacked by his peers, and IF his written play actually shows any kind of "truth" to his background (which is still unclear, at least to me)... you got yourself a desperate person capable of committing a killing. But if these speculations are true, then what caused him to kill was society, therefore society would be the real "silent" killer.

[CrossLOPER]

No, the guy wasn't insane or "crazy", or "wacko". As already said he was very efficient and methodical in his shooting act. There must be a motive (or motives), logical reasons behind this.
He walked around shooting people in the head point-blank. REAL effiecient and methodical--especially when your targets are helpless.

[Geoffrey S]

I do wonder sometimes how many more times things like this must happen before the wisdom of 'the right to bare arms' gets some serious reconsideration....
Firearms were illegal on the campus.

[Don Corleone]

I'd be willing to surrender my 2nd ammendment rights if I thought it would do anything to end such events. However....

-There's plenty of instances of mass murder in countries where personal firearm ownership is already banned (Scotland anyone?)

-Of all sources, as Michael Moore pointed out, Canada has very similar gun ownership laws and even performing a per capita normalization, the numbers for violent incidents just don't line up.

I'd be curious in following up on why Canadians don't shoot each other with the same frequency that Americans do. I think that maybe here, in this murky realm of limited understanding is where the true answer lies.

Banning guns won't do anything to solve this particular problem. I guarantee our man Cho wasn't worried about ATF violations when he planned all this out. I haven't been around illegal drugs since I graduated from college 15 years ago (sheesh), and yet I'm sure I could score some cocaine (something that has been outlawed for over 50 years) within the next 1/2 hour.

[Ronin]

I'd be willing to surrender my 2nd ammendment rights if I thought it would do anything to end such events. However....

-There's plenty of instances of mass murder in countries where personal firearm ownership is already banned (Scotland anyone?)

-Of all sources, as Michael Moore pointed out, Canada has very similar gun ownership laws and even performing a per capita normalization, the numbers for violent incidents just don't line up.

I'd be curious in following up on why Canadians don't shoot each other with the same frequency that Americans do. I think that maybe here, in this murky realm of limited understanding is where the true answer lies.

Banning guns won't do anything to solve this particular problem. I guarantee our man Cho wasn't worried about ATF violations when he planned all this out. I haven't been around illegal drugs since I graduated from college 15 years ago (sheesh), and yet I'm sure I could score some cocaine (something that has been outlawed for over 50 years) within the next 1/2 hour.

even if you take the road that guns aren´t the problem (as exemplified by the canadian example) and that the problem lies in some aspect of american society....wouldn´t reducing the number of guns at the very least reduce the damage an individual person can produce when such incidents occur?

I suspect that if this kid had gone into his school armed with knives and a sword we wouldn´t be talking about a 30+ bodycount here......guns may not be the source of the problem...but their presence sure amplifies it´s effects.

[Don Corleone]

even if you take the road that guns aren´t the problem (as exemplified by the canadian example) and that the problem lies in some aspect of american society....wouldn´t reducing the number of guns at the very least reduce the damage an individual person can produce when such incidents occur?

I suspect that if this kid had gone into his school armed with knives and a sword we wouldn´t be talking about a 30+ bodycount here......guns may not be the source of the problem...but their presence sure amplifies it´s effects.

Aaah, but who said that outlawing guns would do anything to make them less available? You must have missed my other anedcote, but we have word from the front on that other great war, the War on Drugs. At last tally, we're losing miserably. Yet, most narcotics have been illegal in the USA since the 1930s.

Tell me again how does outlawing guns do anything but leave law-abiding citizens defenseless in a nation where the police freely admit they have no hope of actually protecting you? (The average policeman, if they're honest will tell you there's nothing they can do to protect a person from a criminal, only investegate and arrest the criminal after they're done).

[Bijo]

According to "Remembering A Roommate" on CNN I just saw, these two guys found him to be a strange fellar. He took pictures of girls in awkward situations, and even had an imaginary girlfriend. I hear she called him Spanky or something. It also appeared he was stalking a girl and those guys told her to stay away from him, to ignore him.

As these two guys told this they seemed amused. The interviewer then asked if they were and they replied "No..." as it took a while 'fore they answered, as they appeared as if they were forcing their smiles away. Suspicious I tell you.

In any case, he was found a strange weird fellow, and probably was. Then again they might be lying. Whatever it is, I suspect they're hiding something due to their behaviour. All we got is stories and stories and stuff... but no hard proof, facts, and ice-cold confirmations. Arrrgh, we need information.


Regarding the gun thing:
Whether guns are banned, there will still be knives, baseball bats, headbutts, fists, chokeholds, etc., and... illegal guns. I agree with those who say banning guns won't or hardly help. To change society, address the root cause, and the root cause is....*drum roll* "nature". Have a look at my Bad Peace / Good War thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=83479) and you'll know what I mean.

In this case address society, address behaviour, social conduct, social responsibility, etc., and decrease individualism and create more collectivity.

[rory_20_uk]

Sorting out America's gun problem is a multifactoral and nigh on impossible.

Until all guns are handed in, illegal gun ownership has massive penalties and the "frontier" mentality goes you're stuck with them.

Yes there are other ways of killing people. So why worry if N. Korea has nukes. It's just another weapon.

Yes, the UK has a problem with knives and a growing one with guns. So to reduce crime we could just legalise both of them and call the "cultural items" :dizzy2:

~:smoking:

[Don Corleone]

Well, Rory, I don't understand. The penalties for smuggling cocaine and heroin are pretty massive. You can theoretically wind up serving more time for trafficing in illegal narcotics then you could for murder (even multiple victims). Yet we've never been able to put a dent in the nation's drug problem. Are you advocating capital punishment for weapons trafficing?

As to your examples, just because we're worried about North Korea becoming nuclear armed doesn't mean we willingly disarm ourselves and abandon the Korean peninsula to them. As for the UK knife issue, are you suggesting that knives be banned and everyone in UK move to chopsticks? Do you really think that a determined criminal would avoid using knives?

Placing limitations on the law-abiding defender to make them defenseless seems to me to be a poor strategy for limiting the violence of somebody who shows a complete disregard for the law in other areas.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I think gun culture at large is part of the problem. I would maintain that America would have far fewer of these school shooting tragedies if guns were banned. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns in their mind as a solution to all problems.

Cho, the shooter, doesn't strike me as a hardened criminal. In a society less obsessed with guns, he might have taken his frustration out on these girls he was stalking. Maybe molest one, if he wouldn't have been such a coward. Or maybe just comitted suicide.

America's gun fetishism is why 90 Americans die in firearm related incidents...each day.
All the other deaths that don't make the news have faces, names, and shattered lives and dreams too. 32 monday morning, 200 more since then. The attention this school shooting received was because a third of the daily shootings across America occurred in the same place, within the span of two hours, by a single perpetrator.

[Ronin]

Aaah, but who said that outlawing guns would do anything to make them less available? You must have missed my other anedcote, but we have word from the front on that other great war, the War on Drugs. At last tally, we're losing miserably. Yet, most narcotics have been illegal in the USA since the 1930s.

Tell me again how does outlawing guns do anything but leave law-abiding citizens defenseless in a nation where the police freely admit they have no hope of actually protecting you? (The average policeman, if they're honest will tell you there's nothing they can do to protect a person from a criminal, only investegate and arrest the criminal after they're done).

by your logic in any country were private gun ownership is illegal there should be a vast amount of guns illegally in the hands of the public....in order to mirror the drug situation

well...this is not true....I live in a country were gun ownership is restricted but guns are not easily accessible....they do pop up ocasionally in crime situations in some particular instances (in the last bank robbery I can think of over here a gun was used) but for the ordinary citizen it is extremely unlikely for a gun to be used if they are a victim of your garden variety crime (purse snatch, home invasion..etc) why? simply because the number of guns in circulation is low considering the size of the population

what you are failing to consider when you use you drug analogy is that is not just the fact that something is ilegal that makes the underground market for that item.....it is also the desirability of that item....if a lot of people want something and are willing to pay for it they will get it no matter what regulations there are in place (drugs, alcoohol during proibition in the US) that´s when the black market flourishes.........the demand of the general population for illegal drugs vastly dwarfs the demands for guns in most countries.

as for your second point....if the police can´t protect you then it is the duty of the citizens to demand from the government that the police be given adequate tools in order to protect then.....I understand the need for private gun ownership in remote places like the countryside and such were proper police cover is almost impossible to ensure.....but in the city centers there is no excuse why this can´t be achieved.

Saying "let´s just arm everyone them" only escalates the situation....more guns in the hands of the general population mean more guns in the hands of the criminals too.....for example imagine if a good number or the students at Virginia Tech had been armed? a gun goes of somewhere in the building...then what?

Now you have a building full of people, most of them armed, naturally scared and nervous and afraid of someone that is not identified.....if 2 armed people stumble across eachother in the hallways while trying to get away the **** is bound to hit the fan....after all it´s not like the real bad guy had "killer" written across his forehead.....multiply this a few times and the situation gets worse not better in my opinion.

[rory_20_uk]

That's the root of the problem. Americans don't seem to have a lot of faith in the Police to protect them. Much better everyone has a pistol they rarely use - and certainly don't practice with under stress - to ensure that if something happens on the street everyone will be able to draw a weapon, instinctively know who was the one that shot and hasn't just drawn their own handgun to protect themselves, accurately shot a moving target at a distance and not hurt anyone else.

Concerning N Korea, where did I say abandon the peninsular? Easier to argue against what isn't said, eh?

And yes, drugs. I'm in favour of legalising most if not all of them. People on alcohol are far worse than those on most (I'd draw the line at ones such as PCP), and if morphine addicts want to OD at home I'd OK with that.

~:smoking:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

What exactly do you europeans think "American gun culture" is?

[Husar]

Guys, we have had more than one school shooting here in Germany and guns are outlawed since 1871 or something like that. If you're planning to kill yourself anyway, you won't care about the consequences of illegal gun ownership, even if it's a death sentence...

The problem is that if you feel/are isolated and don't even know why people avoid/harass you, and if they are evil enough, even if you know why they do it, it will drive you crazy after a while. You will feel worse and worse, your self-esteem sinks lower and lower and once you're far down it takes just a bit of a fighter to think "I'm gonna show them I'm not that Untermensch they want me to be!" Followed by the next logical step of getting something that will help you achieve just that - weapons. And then once you are full of hate, you make a plan etc and execute it. I've kind of been through that myself, up to the point of thinking "I gotta show them", but I'm not the kind of guy who easily does such a thing, I'd consider it a phase and am still a bit scared I ever thought about such a thing at all, but other persons obviously do go a step or two further and those shootings are the result.:shame:

Now whenever I hear about that I try to remember what I thought at times and one of the worst things was that people hated me or ignored me and I had no idea why, that really drove me crazy and sometimes when all the world seemed to hate me, well those thoughts came up. Since I'm a guy who often thinks about all sorts of things, I'm not really dangerous, but like I said, others execute such thoughts. I also always had my parents who I could talk to and some friends I couldn't see often, but I do think I have kind of an idea what it's like to be an outsider, and to underline that 'im not exaggerating, one of my teachers noticed that as well. Was a certain phase of highschool(plus a lot of people in the village we moved to, who were a lot more cruel) and got a lot better when people got older.
Just trying to share some thoughts, because I always feel a bit for the killers as well as the victims. People who go and say he was just retarded or crazy are usually the kind of people who evoke that hatred in the first place...

[Ronin]

What exactly do you europeans think "American gun culture" is?


well let me try and take a crack at it...

The first thing that strikes me as strange is how you americans seem to view gun ownership as an extension of you national character...like if you had no guns that would somehow make you "less" american.

Add to this the abnormal attachment there is to the constitution, I am in no way saying that this was not an extremely
important document, but in most countries, mine included we came to the conclusion that pieces of legislature that are 200 plus years old belong in a museum, to serve as inspiration of the ideals you should follow when you write modern, up to date and non-anacronistic legislation, not running the day to day life in your country.......come on people...say it along with me "the british aren´t gonna try to invade us"...got it? let it sink in...good.. after you realize that tell me..... doesn´t the 2nd amendment look silly now?


the third factor I don´t understand is the (in some cases extreme) distrust and aversion to their own government that I see in some americans....I mean....even countries that lived under dictatorships don´t display this kind of atitude towards their governments......I mean...33 years ago my country was a dictatorship....that does not mean I feel I need a gun do defend myself from the current one.....I really don´t see where this comes from in americans.....this extends to the police and other oficial government duties....people and believe in them and feel they must fend for themselfs (therefore feeling they need to be armed).....I understand why this mindset might have been necessary during the setlement fase of American...but now?...I don´t see a reason...:book:


I think these are the main things.....of course there is a certain glorification of guns in american entertainment...specially in the movies...if you look at the arquetipes of american heroes....John Wayne....Dirty Harry....it´s always a man and his gun that get´s the job done.....but I think this is more a reflex and result of the things I cited above than the oposite.

[Pannonian]

I'd be willing to surrender my 2nd ammendment rights if I thought it would do anything to end such events. However....

-There's plenty of instances of mass murder in countries where personal firearm ownership is already banned (Scotland anyone?)

Handguns were still legal at the time of Dunblane. That incident was why that particular ban came in.

In Britain, hardened criminals have fairly ready access to illegally acquired guns, but crimes where guns are involved also carry heavy penalties. So they restrict their contact with everyday folk to drug-dealing, smuggling, fraud, forgery, etc. Stuff that doesn't involve violence, yet has potential for profit. Stuff that, even if they were caught and sentenced for, would still be profitable compared to armed robbery. Most crimes involving these gun toting gangsters are committed on each other in patch wars, and the general public doesn't care too much about those unless innocents are caught in the crossfire.

[Crazed Rabbit]

I think gun culture at large is part of the problem. I would maintain that America would have far fewer of these school shooting tragedies if guns were banned. If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns in their mind as a solution to all problems.

So you think only hardened criminals will think of guns, that somehow banning them will remove them from the minds of petty criminals? Even if that happens, all the criminals would have guns - you wouldn't stop crime, you'd increase it.


Americans don't seem to have a lot of faith in the Police to protect them.

Maybe it's the Supreme Court case that ruled police have no duty to protect the individual citizen. Or maybe it's the fact that even if you call police the second someone breaks in, you'd be dead by the time they got to your house.


Much better everyone has a pistol they rarely use - and certainly don't practice with under stress

Maybe that's how gun owners act in Britain, but here people practice.


but in the city centers there is no excuse why this can´t be achieved.

Yeah, we just need to throw our rights out the window and welcome a police state!


wouldn´t reducing the number of guns at the very least reduce the damage an individual person can produce when such incidents occur?

Or they might spend a fraction of what this guy spent on one gun for a great deal of gasoline.

America isn't 'obsessed' with guns - we have a practical view towards them that is lost on people raised in fear of them all their lives.
This seems to be a facet of the false assumption that banning guns will actually prevent criminals from acquiring them.


America's gun fetishism is why 90 Americans die in firearm related incidents...each day.

That's wrong. Less than 42 people per day are killed by someone using a firearm, as compared with 118 who die each day from automobile accidents.


Saying "let´s just arm everyone them" only escalates the situation

I'm sick of this bull. When a guy is wantonly killing students, there is no 'escalation' when you fire back. It seems to be from the philosophy that you should let the bad guy kill you, since fighting back is using 'violence' and 'escalating' the situation.


Now you have a building full of people, blah blah blah

Wow. Another absurd hypothesis used to justify a gun control position.

All those who think that banning guns would do anything to decrease violence should read the following article. And then reread it.

http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel120501.shtml


More importantly, giving up firearms means the populace throws itself at the mercy of its government. Considering that governments killed tens of millions of people last century, that's probably not a wise thing to do if you value your freedom.

Crazed Rabbit

[Louis VI the Fat]

What exactly do you europeans think "American gun culture" is?The same as 'drug culture', or' book culture', or gangsta culture'. Cultural norms, fixations, expectations on something.
But let me try to explain it in a more original way. Through my eyes, America's gun culture is as bizarre as gun culture in Pakistan is to American eyes:

Gun culture in Pakistan refers to the long-standing tradition of owning and carrying guns among Pathan men in the Northwest Frontier Province.[1] The gun culture is linked to the "twin pillars of Pathan tribal society,"[1] melmastia—hospitality and badal—revenge.

The North West Frontier Province (NWFP) is the smallest province of Pakistan with rugged and hilly terrain. Pashtun tribal feuds are common and guns are used both for protection and self-defense. In the rural society Swat, the gun culture arose in part out of the traditional antagonism between a man and his tarbur (father's brother's son).

Old customs and cultural norms also promote the gun culture. In NWFP, where the strong and tough Pashtuns reside, carrying a gun or a Klashinkov is a sign of honour and respect. A gun is also considered to be the jewel of a man in N.W.F.P., thus the social necessity emerging as an intimidating component of provincial culture.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Blame the guns -- and a culture that celebrates firepower.

Blame the murdering madness on a country that has seen Columbine, Kip Kinkel and bullets at the Tacoma Mall, but lacks the common sense to clamp down on weapons of mass carnage.


Blame the gun lobby on the other Capitol Hill. Gun advocates like to say guns don't literally kill, and they're right.

People do.

Problem is, people keep killing people with guns. The National Rifle Association wraps itself in the Second Amendment and bullies anyone who disagrees.

The uncomfortable truth is, the right to bear arms has become a right for lunatics to get tools of lethal efficiency and shoot up people.

Huff is the latest example of what happens when high-powered weapons end up in the wrong gun user's hands.Yes, Huff (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/jamieson/264593_robert28.html), not Cho. The previous was written after the Seattle massacre, seven deaths, two weeks ago. And there will be a new massacre in America before we've even done with this thread. And another one, and yet another one...

Meanwhile, the rest of the industrialised world (http://fe13.news.re3.yahoo.com/s/nm/usa_crime_shooting_world_dc) continues to look at America in bewilderment, decrying the grim inevitability of these massacres.

Australia, by many standards greatly comparible to America, finally took the step towards gun restriction after a massacre similar to VT claimed 35 lives eleven years ago:

SYDNEY, Australia - Australia's prime minister on Tuesday said the Virginia Tech shootings showed that America's "gun culture" was a negative force in society, praising his country's efforts to enact tough gun laws after a similar massacre 11 years ago.

John Howard staked his political leadership on pushing through the strict gun ownership laws after Martin John Bryant, armed with a bagful of automatic weapons, went on a killing spree in the tourist resort of Port Arthur in southern Tasmania state on April 28, 1996. Thirty-five people died.

The conservative Howard, a strong ally of President Bush, said the Virginia Tech shootings were the kind of tragedy he hoped would never be seen again in Australia.

"You can never guarantee these things won't happen again in our country," Howard told reporters. We had a terrible incident at Port Arthur, but it is the case that 11 years ago we took action to limit the availability of guns and we showed a national resolve that the gun culture that is such a negative in the United States would never become a negative in our country," he said.

[Don Corleone]

Concerning N Korea, where did I say abandon the peninsular? Easier to argue against what isn't said, eh?

I was attempting to connect an example you cited to the logical stance from which you are arguing. Your answer to dealing with gun violence is that rather than focusing on the criminal element, we should focus on the law abiding element and remove everyone's access to firearms: punish those that are obeying the law by slapping more laws on them and rewarding those who ignore laws by making their job easier. I was trying to extrapolate that philosophy to the Korean situation, which you did raise an example.

Ronin, as for demand, firearms are legal in most states in the United States. Yet, even with a legally allowed product, there is a flourishing black market for it. Yet you seem to think that outlawing firearms will mean a rapid decline in demand? There's only one other product that I'm aware of that has a flourishing white and black market: tobacco. Thus far, attempts to legally restrict access to this product don't offer me much hope for us being successful with ending firearms usage by simply outlawing it.

Like I said, if I thought for one moment outlawing personal firearm ownership could even hope to reduce the severity or frequency of occassions of gun violence, I would tear up my NRA membership card and start working with the rest of the Brady crowd. But all studies performed within the United States point the other way, that gun ownership and violent crime, even those violent crimes committed with a firearm, tend to track in opposite ways. Boise, Idaho is a much, much safer city than Boston, Massacushetts, and it's not by accident.

[Don Corleone]

Again, I think the answer lies to the North. I think we need to take a good, long hard and most imporantly HONEST look at ourselves in the mirror. What is so different about Americans and Canadians that even with a higher gun ownership rate, Canadians don't suffer anything near the same issues with violence that we do. I dont' know if it's something in the water, our summers get too hot, or we honestly, genuinely don't care enough about each other to not shoot each other. But I'm a big believer in hard data. The hard data says we're a bunch of killers and the Canadians aren't, and that means it has nothing to do with the guns themselves.

[Xiahou]

Maybe that's how gun owners act in Britain, but here people practice.Indeed. I'm so tired of the "can't use a gun under stress" argument that's been used several times in this thread alone. Most permit holders who regularly carry spend more time at the range than many armed police officers. I remember an online survey at a prominent CC website where thousands of respondents, almost 90%, said they practice shooting at least once every 3 months- 70+% said at least once a month.

And under stress? I don't know what magic training people think the police get, but it's largely the same- they go down to the range and shoot at targets. Personally, I'd trust the marksmanship of your average concealed carrier over that of the average police officer. Certainly, there are plenty of instances of police using "pray and spray" shooting to bring down a suspect where dozens of shots are fired- many missing.

[rory_20_uk]

Great article... Seems to assume that everyone in the world has an innate desire to have a firearm. The thirst for guns is so great that people will steal from anywhere, and failing that create them... The article again shows that Americans have no faith in the law enforcement agencies to do their jobs.

So why does even America have any laws at all if this is really the case? Everyone can have automatic weaponry. Home made explosives are easy enough, so just legalise Claymores in case someone steps on your lawn.

And America has made drugs illegal. Again talk about double standards. To make guns illegal is patently stupid as of course everyone needs them - and would make them even if they didn't exist. Yet Drugs Are Evil And Have To Be Banned.
It's a pathology that your country has, and apparently the problem and cure is both linked with firearms.

More people get killed in driving accidents... so any activity with a lower yearly death rate is OK then :dizzy2:

I guess it's all down to the price your prepared to pay. Apparently the occasional slaughter of the odd schoolroom is relatively OK - and definitely happens less frequently than kids are run over so that's all right then.

~:smoking:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Add to this the abnormal attachment there is to the constitution, I am in no way saying that this was not an extremely
blah blah
ith me "the british aren´t gonna try to invade us"...got it? let it sink in...good.. after you realize that tell me..... doesn´t the 2nd amendment look silly now?
You don't seem to get that the constitution is the legal basis for our country, and still is. Try reading it sometime.

And guess what - the 2nd wasn't just to prevent another British invasion. Try reading some of the history behind it. Look at how many people were killed by their own governments last century. Don't you look kind of silly now? :yes:


the third factor I don´t understand is the (in some cases extreme) distrust and aversion to their own government that I see in some americans....
blah blah
.....I understand why this mindset might have been necessary during the setlement fase of American...but now?...I don´t see a reason...

Maybe because we are a tougher people who pride ourselves on surviving without being nannied. Maybe because we do not cower in fear from the necessary fight, nor do we look to others to defend our families.


Yes, Huff, not Cho. The previous was written after the Seattle massacre, seven deaths, two weeks ago. And there will be a new massacre in America before we've even done with this thread. And another one, and yet another one...

Not seeing the forest for the trees? Despite these few high profile incidents, the crime rate is dropping in America.

Now, repeat after me - banning guns will not stop crime. Read the article I linked above.


Meanwhile, the rest of the industrialised world continues to look at America in bewilderment, decrying the grim inevitability of these massacres.

Oh, you mean like Britain and France, where the crime rate rises and cars are burned all the time?


Australia, by many standards greatly comparible to America, finally took the step towards gun restriction after a massacre similar to VT claimed 35 lives eleven years ago:

And the homicide rate rose by 300% in one province. Oops!

EDIT: Rory, why don't you try using less strawman arguments and other logical fallacies, hmm?

CR

[Don Corleone]

Okay, Rory. I've clearly got you upset. As for railing against arguments the other side didn't make, hello pot, this is kettle. You're black.

I never said
1) That US drug policy made any sort of sense. I used it as an example of how effective banning a desired product can be.

2) I never said that massacres at schools were a price I'm willing to pay for my 2nd ammendment rights. Quite the contrary, I said I'd surrender them tomorrow if I had any inkling that such a ban would be even remotely effective.

Rather than work to convince me that a ban would indeed be effective, you start frothing at the mouth and make claims about things I never said. Perhaps I should cease my side of this discussion, as any disagreement appears to work you into an irrational state.

I apologize for having upset you so. :bow:

[doc_bean]

Maybe because we are a tougher people who pride ourselves on surviving without being nannied. Maybe because we do not cower in fear from the necessary fight, nor do we look to others to defend our families.



Really ? Americans look pretty scared over here. Carrying your guns out of fear that maybe you'll get attacked, here we accept that that's a possiblity and move on. Who's tough and who's scared ?

EDIT: this isn't meant quite as offensive as it might seem, but i've heard a lot of people who think about the same, also relating to other aspects of life. I guess it's a difference of perspective.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Ah come on, don't get this thread closed too.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Ah come on, don't get this thread closed too.

[rory_20_uk]

Giving up rights that you then proceed to say can't be given up isn't really much of a sacrifice. You really think that there is no chance that giving up guns wouldn't remotely reduce the odds of school massacres? I pity your country. :no:

Americans killing each other doesn't upset me in the slightest. I'm not a fan of the accent and there's nothing Americans do that others can't. Kill yourselves however you want :thumbsup:

In America I doubt a ban would be affective. I'm sure I said somewhere about guns being an American solution as well as a problem, and about the "frontier spirit"... Oh, it was this thread...

Some people treat recurrent alcoholics thinking that somehow they'll change them eventually. Others realise that they are so addicted to it they'll never give up their own brand of death. Most doctors eventually reach the second camp.

~:smoking:

[CrossLOPER]

I'm not a fan of the accent...
OH NO THEY'RE CORRUPTING THE KING'S ENGLISH THEY ARE SUBHUMAN.

[rory_20_uk]

Queen's English...

~:smoking:

[Don Corleone]

No guns were used on September 11th, 2001 in any of the hijackings. None were used in 1995 at Oklahoma City. Heck, Charles Manson and his gang didn't use guns. I guess the answer is in addition to guns, we need to ban boxcutters, lawn fertilizer and kitchen knives?

[Crazed Rabbit]

Really ? Americans look pretty scared over here. Carrying your guns out of fear that maybe you'll get attacked, here we accept that that's a possiblity and move on. Who's tough and who's scared ?

So, having an airbag in your car is because you're 'scared' and not because you simply want to prepare for what might happen?

You know, it seems to me that all these anti-gunners have to acknowledge, deep in their minds, that a good person with training could have stopped this. But they don't want to have to deal with that truth, so they pour out all sorts of accusations and innuendos against people who might carry guns for protection. These usually make no sense and our based off ignorant assumptions by people who don't use or carry firearms.

CR

[Goofball]

No guns were used on September 11th, 2001 in any of the hijackings. None were used in 1995 at Oklahoma City. Heck, Charles Manson and his gang didn't use guns. I guess the answer is in addition to guns, we need to ban boxcutters, lawn fertilizer and kitchen knives?

Can you use a gun to open boxes, fertilize your lawn, or chop celery?

[Andres]

Just a question, without expressing any ordeal whatsoever, it's merely out of curiosity:

How to buy a gun in the USA? Do you need to have a certain age? Do you have to show any ID? Do you have to take tests (psychological tests, physical tests)? Is there a waiting period, I mean, you go in, express your intention to buy a gun, choose the gun and then you have to wait for a certain period, so that the shopkeeper can get you checked (does the guy has a "violent past", criminal record, is he under some kind of treatment etc etc...) or do you go in, show the ID, buy the gun and go out within 15 minutes?

So basically, my question is: how easy is it to get a gun in the USA, legally? Are there procedures and if so, are they complicated and what do they involve? Is there a big difference between the several states? Please, enlighten this ignorant European.

[Don Corleone]

Can you use a gun to open boxes, fertilize your lawn, or chop celery?

No, but you don't really NEED to open boxes, fertilize your lawn or chop celery, you just want to. Why should your selfish desires mean that I have to life in an unsafe world? Just get the government to do those things for you.

[doc_bean]

So, having an airbag in your car is because you're 'scared' and not because you simply want to prepare for what might happen?

I don't know anyone who'll list 'has an airbag' as a criterium for picking a car.



You know, it seems to me that all these anti-gunners have to acknowledge, deep in their minds, that a good person with training could have stopped this.

I'll acknowledge it if it makes you happy :2thumbsup:

Now, will you acknowledge that if the shooter didn't have a gun (legal or illegal) he would have probably killed a lot less people ?

[Crazed Rabbit]

How to buy a gun in the USA? Do you need to have a certain age? Do you have to show any ID? Do you have to take tests (psychological tests, physical tests)? Is there a waiting period, I mean, you go in, express your intention to buy a gun, choose the gun and then you have to wait for a certain period, so that the shopkeeper can get you checked (does the guy has a "violent past", criminal record, is he under some kind of treatment etc etc...) or do you go in, show the ID, buy the gun and go out within 15 minutes?

So basically, my question is: how easy is it to get a gun in the USA, legally? Are there procedures and if so, are they complicated and what do they involve? Is there a big difference between the several states? Please, enlighten this ignorant European.

Having just bought a gun myself, I think I can help.

There are basically two classes of firearms : machine guns (those that can shoot full auto, along with some shotguns that cause certain legislators to wet their panties) and others. Others are broken up into long guns (rifles and shotguns) and pistols. Rifles may be similar to their full-auto counterparts, but they can only fire semi-automatic.

In most states to buy a long gun you must be 18+ and need only go to a store that sells them (this store is licensed by the Feds and can get closed down for sloppy business practices). You can look and feel various guns. After choosing one, you inform the owner, and they bring out paperwork for you to sign. You fill out various boxes with your names, age, driver's license, physical characteristics, and state that you have not broken any law that would prevent you from owning a gun, that you live in the US legally, that you aren't a fugitive from justice, haven't been committed to a mental institution, etc.

The owner takes this info and does a quick background check with the FBI (takes less than five minutes). If you pass, you can buy the gun and carry it out with you. If not, the owner might delay you until the cops arrive.

For pistols, you have to be 21 to buy one from a store, and some states have waiting periods (usually less than a week).

If I wanted to spend the money, I could go and buy a semi auto AR-15 and have it today.

This holds true for most states.

In some, however, you are restricted from many guns, or you have to have a 'Firearms Owner ID card' or you have to get a temporary permit from the state to buy certain guns. These states (New Jersey, California, Illinois, Massachusetts, etc.) are in the minority. Some have really stupid laws - New Jersey bans tube fed .22 rifles (which the state court said are 'dangerous offensive weapons' because they hold 15 .22 bullets and not 9).

Buying machine guns requires a whole lot of money (thousands per gun) and time (half a year plus to get licensed) and paperwork.

EDIT:

Now, will you acknowledge that if the shooter didn't have a gun (legal or illegal) he would have probably killed a lot less people ?
If he had no other weapon, yes. But he could have gotten several containers of gasoline and possibly killed even more. Given his mental state, I don't think not being able to get a gun would have stopped him from trying to hurt people.

Also, here's a link to a story about the 1966 Austin massacre - were people were saved by citizens shooting back at the attacker:
http://www.memoryarchive.org/en/University_of_Texas_Tower_Shooting,_1966,_Buck_Wroten

Crazed Rabbit

[Don Corleone]

Now, will you acknowledge that if the shooter didn't have a gun (legal or illegal) he would have probably killed a lot less people ?

Timothy McVeigh killed more people, a lot more, with no gun. Nothing but lawn fertilizer and a rented truck. Should we ban those as well?

[Andres]

Thank you CR :bow:

[Lemur]

Now, will you acknowledge that if the shooter didn't have a gun (legal or illegal) he would have probably killed a lot less people ?
Hi doc, of course you're correct, he would have had to resort to bombs or low-tech weapons. Whether he would have killed more or fewer people is unknowable.

It's not a realistic question in the U.S.A., though. We've had the right to bear arms for hundreds of years, and taking them out of circulation would not be practical. Whether you like it or not, we have to go forward accepting that guns are a part of our culture. Even if some politician wanted to commit political suicide by ramming through a total ban on firearms, there are so many extant that such a ban would be meaningless. All you would do is make a lot of hunters very, very grumpy.

For what it's worth, the shooter had already been put into psychiatric care (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070418/D8OJ2UOG0.html), and was known to be a danger. Hindsight is lovely, isn't it?

[Goofball]

No, but you don't really NEED to open boxes, fertilize your lawn or chop celery, you just want to. Why should your selfish desires mean that I have to life in an unsafe world? Just get the government to do those things for you.

Poor argument, Don.

My point was that there are many things in life that offer danger as well as utility.

My view is that handguns (I'm pretty much okay with long guns, as long as they don't fire 600 rounds per minute) do not offer sufficient utility to offset the danger they present by simply being available to the average joe. In essence, I don't believe there is a net benefit to society for handguns to be owned privately. Whereas with lawn fertilizer, boxcutters, and kitchen knives (to use your examples), I believe there is a net benefit.

I understand that you and CR disagree with me on that. Your opinion is that there is a net benefit to society in private handgun ownership. And that's what the whole gun control argument really comes down to. Unfortunately for both sides, there really is no way to accurately quantify that net benefit or deficit to prove either point of view.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Exactly. That guy at the olympics wounded 100+ people with a pipe bomb. If Cho didn't have a gun and wanted to kill people he could have made 4 or 5 and chucked them into the cafeteria.

Most of the gun deaths in the US are suicides and a lot of the others and from gang wars as a result of the war on drugs.

[Ironside]

You know, it seems to me that all these anti-gunners have to acknowledge, deep in their minds, that a good person with training could have stopped this. But they don't want to have to deal with that truth, so they pour out all sorts of accusations and innuendos against people who might carry guns for protection. These usually make no sense and our based off ignorant assumptions by people who don't use or carry firearms.

CR

To be honest, the difference is probably linked to the gun culture. You live in a society were guns are (percived?) to be needed, while we are not.
This tragedy would probably been stopped earlier, at the cost of generally more gun incidents on campuses around the US, with guns being legal on campus.


The hard data says we're a bunch of killers and the Canadians aren't, and that means it has nothing to do with the guns themselves.
But possibly with the percivence of the guns. I'm not sure how common it is, but guns seems to be much, much more commonly seen as the last defence between me and the evils in the world in the US, than in the rest of the western world.
Granted it's not a causation, but a side-effect of the causation.


I'm more interested in why the "lone and depressed student revenging on the world by going down in guns and blazing glory on campus"-syndrome is much more common in the US compared to the rest of the world. While easy access to guns makes it easier and bloodier, it's not the cause of it.

I know a German case outside the US, but that's it.

[doc_bean]

Timothy McVeigh killed more people, a lot more, with no gun. Nothing but lawn fertilizer and a rented truck. Should we ban those as well?

I was just trying to make the point that guns make killing easy, sure you do a lot of damage otherwise, but guns are convient for killing. Would he have bothered making a bomb ? There's a reason less people are killed by bombs than by guns (outside the middle east at least)

EDIT: I'd like to add that I'm radically anti-gun, but I think the pro-gun side is tends to be a little too extreme and sometimes seems to defy simply logic. I also don't think gun culture is necessarily related to the availability of guns, others have mentioned Canada, but in Europe too it is/used to be pretty easy to get a gun, much easier than most people realize at least. Maybe not automatics (seriously, for hunting ? for self defense ? who needs those ?) but at least hunting rifles.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Rory, Americans killing each other does upset me and quite a bit too. Don't let your frustration about gun toting maniacs unaccustomed to the loftiness of received pronunciation get the better of you.

Besides, Americans don't need your cynicism, they need your love (http://www.marryanamerican.ca/). ~;p



You know, it seems to me that all these anti-gunners have to acknowledge, deep in their minds, that a good person with training could have stopped this. Thanks for that link. And yes, I do believe that if more guns would've been carried by students on monday there would've been less deaths at VT. I'm fairly sure of it indeed.

But. One in 10000 americans gets killed by firearms each year. At Virginia Tech, 'population' 30000, this would mean 3 deaths per year. So the benefits of there having been guns on monday would've been offset already within a decade. And that is where this 'self-defense' pro-gun argument goes wrong. All things considered, guns cost innocent lives, even if they save some at some instances. It's the net benefit to society debate again, but we won't agree on the numbers.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Eh, not really as convenient as a container of gasoline you chuck into a crowded room.

CR

[Don Corleone]

Poor argument, Don.

My point was that there are many things in life that offer danger as well as utility.

My view is that handguns (I'm pretty much okay with long guns, as long as they don't fire 600 rounds per minute) do not offer sufficient utility to offset the danger they present by simply being available to the average joe. In essence, I don't believe there is a net benefit to society for handguns to be owned privately. Whereas with lawn fertilizer, boxcutters, and kitchen knives (to use your examples), I believe there is a net benefit.

I understand that you and CR disagree with me on that. Your opinion is that there is a net benefit to society in private handgun ownership. And that's what the whole gun control argument really comes down to. Unfortunately for both sides, there really is no way to accurately quantify that net benefit or deficit to prove either point of view.

Well, close, but CR and I would argue that there is a benefit to the individual to have the right to bear arms. In so far as said individual has done nothing to forfeit that right, the society has no right to strip them of it.

It all stems from the "Does society answer to the individual" or "vice-versa" view of society. As somebody who holds the former to be valid, I frequently get told "well, you don't 'need' to protect yourself". Well, sure. I don't need my own house, but I'm not ready to turn that over to society yet either. Society doesn't gain any value from my right to ownership of personal property. But that doesn't automatically grant society the authority to strip individuals the right to own private property.

My point wasn't as poor as you seem to think. If our rights are based on our ability to either 1) prove an irreplacable need for said item or act or 2) our ability to argue the positive benefit for society that our 'right' holds, a lot of 'rights' you hold dear are going to go right out the window.

And again, I'm actually not trying to make 2nd Ammendment arguments today. This isn't about my right to own a gun today. I'm taking a pragmatist view and saying prove to me that taking them away will make me any safer? It's my belief that given the way America currently is, it will make me much less safer, overall.

[Goofball]

Eh, not really as convenient as a container of gasoline you chuck into a crowded room.

CR

Can you conceal a container of gasoline large enough to immolate 30 people in your underwear?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Well, close, but CR and I would argue that there is a benefit to the individual to have the right to bear arms. In so far as said individual has done nothing to forfeit that right, the society has no right to strip them of it. This is rather interesting. I never looked at it this way. Are you arguing that there is a net benefit to society in banning guns, yet there is a personal benefit to allowing them? And that your individual rights should not be infringed upon in this respect, regardless of any net benefit to society?

And even if you're not, let's for the sake of argument assume that there is a net benefit to society in banning guns, yet there is a personal benefit to allowing them. Would yours, or anybody else's position change?
There's some interesting Game Theory in this.

[Pannonian]

And again, I'm actually not trying to make 2nd Ammendment arguments today. This isn't about my right to own a gun today. I'm taking a pragmatist view and saying prove to me that taking them away will make me any safer? It's my belief that given the way America currently is, it will make me much less safer, overall.
Just to support your point. The 2nd amendment is unnecessary and even undesirable in Britain, we prefer the state to organise things so we don't have to worry about everyday safety. However, America is not Britain. Even if the 2nd amendment is ditched altogether, the social conditions may not translate into the general security which our gun laws allow us. The "gun nuts" may actually be right in American conditions, just as the "wimps" may be right in our conditions.

[doc_bean]

Well, close, but CR and I would argue that there is a benefit to the individual to have the right to bear arms. In so far as said individual has done nothing to forfeit that right, the society has no right to strip them of it.


Well, by that reasoning everyone has the right to bear nuclear arms.


The rest of your argument was pretty sound.

[Don Corleone]

This is rather interesting. I never looked at it this way. Are you arguing that there is a net benefit to society in banning guns, yet there is a personal benefit to allowing them? And that your individual rights should not be infringed upon in this respect, regardless of any net benefit to society?

And even if you're not, let's for the sake of argument assume that there is a net benefit to society in banning guns, yet there is a personal benefit to allowing them. Would yours, or anybody else's position change?
There's some interesting Game Theory in this.

Well, not to play too clever by half, it all depends on what defintion of society you use. If we mean us, the collective population, then no. Society actually has an interest in favoring it's law abiding citizens, and allowing them to protect themselves from it's deviants. But if you define society as the government or other ruling party, then yes, absolutely. In order to rule it's people more effectively, the government derives two benefits from a disarmed populus: 1) the people are totally dependent on the government for their very lives 2) there is no hope of rebellion, as the government is armed while the larger body politic is not.

The Tutsis had a very vested interest in seeing the Hutuus disarmed. Does that mean the individual Hutuu was selfish for not complying with the rules the Tutsis enacted?

But yes, to answer your basic question, in so far as my individual rights do not impede the rights of any other individual, unless society can prove categorically that they need to restrict my rights, they have no authority to do so. It is this school of legal thought that my nation's laws were supposedly founded on, but we're really only paid lip service to it, and not even very well recently.

[Scurvy]

I'm more interested in why the "lone and depressed student revenging on the world by going down in guns and blazing glory on campus"-syndrome is much more common in the US compared to the rest of the world.

it has precedent, lone and depressed student see's this on tv and thinks, look at all the news coverage and attention that kid gets, i want it too... it gets more coverage in the US than anywhere else, because it happened in the US

America has got a more pro-gun culture than elsewhere, and that means that they are more liely to know how to shoot a gun, and feel less "uncomfortable" using them.

American society perhaps contributes to this by alienating individuals, but that is'nt unique to the US...


--> i dont think the legalisation of guns is really relevant to this anyway, if someone really wants to do such a thing, then they would have little trouble getting the guns illegally...

:2thumbsup:

[Marshal Murat]

I think that it is better to have a record of gun purchases, then ban guns and then have one pop up, and you didn't know it was there.

You could carry alot of things in your pockets (or jeans).
The man could have locked the dorm doors with chains, tossed in some gasoline in the bottom floor, then flicked in a match. That would immolate at least a hundred+ if it was early morning (1-4)

[Sasaki Kojiro]

What do you guys think about stricter requirements for owning a gun, say psychological testing that would have disqualified Cho?

[Goofball]

Well, close, but CR and I would argue that there is a benefit to the individual to have the right to bear arms. In so far as said individual has done nothing to forfeit that right, the society has no right to strip them of it.

I don't even think there is a net benefit to the individual to own handguns.


It all stems from the "Does society answer to the individual" or "vice-versa" view of society. As somebody who holds the former to be valid, I frequently get told "well, you don't 'need' to protect yourself". Well, sure. I don't need my own house, but I'm not ready to turn that over to society yet either.

I'm not saying you don't have a need to own handguns. I'm just saying that your need to own a handgun is outweighed by your kid's need not to get accidentally shot by you when she is sneaking in after curfew. I know there are very long odds on the latter taking place, but there are also long odds on you ever having to use your handgun to defend yourself.


Society doesn't gain any value from my right to ownership of personal property. But that doesn't automatically grant society the authority to strip individuals the right to own private property.

But society does gain benefit from your right to own private property, not the smallest of which being your motivation to be a productive member of society in order to be able to buy all of that private property.


My point wasn't as poor as you seem to think. If our rights are based on our ability to either 1) prove an irreplacable need for said item or act or 2) our ability to argue the positive benefit for society that our 'right' holds, a lot of 'rights' you hold dear are going to go right out the window.

You've got me backwards. I'm not saying rights have to be justified in terms of their net benefit to society in order for them to be valid. Quite the opposite. I'm saying that if society wants to take away "rights" based on it's collective evaluation of the benefits of those rights, then it has to make a damned good case for it. That's how just about every elected legislative body in the world works. And I don't think that there is anything wrong with you and CR arguing in favor of gun ownership being a right that society shouldn't take away, even though I happen to disagree with you. If nobody ever argued, we'd have no rights left.

But in the end, it always comes down to what the majority of society thinks, based on the arguments of both sides.

[doc_bean]

What do you guys think about stricter requirements for owning a gun, say psychological testing that would have disqualified Cho?

What criteria are you suggesting ?

Too much of a slippery slope thing that allows the government to decide who gets the guns, imo worse than a complete gun ban, or the current situation were virtually everyone can get a gun.


2) there is no hope of rebellion, as the government is armed while the larger body politic is not.

There have been successful rebellions where not a shot was fired and unsuccessful ones where lots of people got killed.

But even so, the idea that one day the people will rise against their government if goes too far is an illusion, because where do you draw the line ? The Patriot Act attacked basic liberties, the imminent domain ruling took away your right to property, the war on drugs and the prosecution of property did pretty much the same a few decades earlier. Vietnam had people drafted into the army, etc.
I'm not saying these things warranted rebellion, but when does it warrant it ? And will all the people agree, or will only a fringe group try to rise up ? Have fun with the the ATF and the FBI then...

[Devastatin Dave]

Hmmmm, yes, lets make more gun laws so the criminals can ignore them as well. That's worked well for the War on Drugs hasn't it.:juggle2:

[Adrian II]

Teh boring gun debate again!



The real question is: what makes one society more violent (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita)than another?

[Scurvy]

[QUOTE=Adrian II
The real question is: what makes one society more violent than another?[/QUOTE]

the average standard of living is a fairly good pointer...

the worse off people are, the more likely they are to revert to crime...

America isnt more violent, it just has more people, and so is always going to have more vilence than smaller countries...


:2thumbsup:

[Sasaki Kojiro]

But even so, the idea that one day the people will rise against their government if goes too far is an illusion, because where do you draw the line ? The Patriot Act attacked basic liberties, the imminent domain ruling took away your right to property, the war on drugs and the prosecution of property did pretty much the same a few decades earlier. Vietnam had people drafted into the army, etc.
I'm not saying these things warranted rebellion, but when does it warrant it ? And will all the people agree, or will only a fringe group try to rise up ? Have fun with the the ATF and the FBI then...

Prudence would dictate that governments should not be changed for light and transient causes.

[Adrian II]

the average standard of living is a fairly good pointer...

the worse off people are, the more likely they are to revert to crime.


:2thumbsup:Then why does the UK have more murders than Tunesia?
America isnt more violent, it just has more people, and so is always going to have more vilence than smaller countries...Is the U.S. smaller than Jamaica or the Seychelles? :mellow:

[Don Corleone]

Teh boring gun debate again!



The real question is: what makes one society more violent (http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita)than another?

Thank you, Adrian. I've been trying to come to this place all day.

Goof, I understand your point. While I don't agree with you, it is well argued.

Doc Bean, the more you talk, the more I want to go throw some government property in Boston Harbor... ;-) I agree with your assertions here more than you could possibly realize.

Sasaki, I would agree with you, but I'm sure there's thousands of guys with the same psychological profile as Cho that DON'T harm others.

All that being said, I'm off to read Adrian's article.

[Bijo]

Heh heh heh, Adrian. Adrian the Rational :P


Anyway, I too think that gun debates are boring, but boring or not what's more important is that it's futile for the reasons mentioned already. We must not address guns, but address the wielders of guns, but more importantly overall address *SOCIETY*. Can you debaters who like talking about guns so much notice the word SOCIETY? I'll bold it for you.... pff, I'll even put it down BIG for you: SOCIETY. Take care of that, and you've taken care of.... pff, guns.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Are Americans more violent than europeans? Or do we just have more criminals?