Virginia Tech shooting and gun control

[OKLibrarian]

As I've mentioned, I w*rk at a college campus. I wouldn't say people are running around in terror, but it's been a strangely subdued atmosphere this morning, with both the students and faculty. I dislike guns, but I'm also a pragmatist. Leaving aside the question of whether we could or should pass gun control laws, I suspect they'd be about as effective as prohibition was, simply because of the sheer number of weapons floating around this country. Would guns in the hands of students/faculty made a substantial difference in what happened? I honestly don't know--I wasn't there, and I don't know whether there were any people of the right training and temperment that could have dealt with the situation had they been armed. I do know that I've been contemplating getting a handgun for the past year or so, and this is another tick in the "pro" column.

 

[LeatherneckPA]

It's stunning how common it is in this age to blame the weapon rather than even voice the question: How could a human being be able to do this?

EXACTLY!! What ever happened to the concept of personal responsibility for one's actions? Punish all of the innocent law-abiding citizens because some whack job goes on a rampage? I guarantee I vote against ANYBODY; Rep, Dem or Lib or tries to take my guns!

 

[MasterBlaster]

It's stunning how common it is in this age to blame the weapon rather than even voice the question: How could a human being be able to do this?

EXACTLY!! What ever happened to the concept of personal responsibility for one's actions? Punish all of the innocent law-abiding citizens because some whack job goes on a rampage? I guarantee I vote against ANYBODY; Rep, Dem or Lib or tries to take my guns!

Today I am starting the National Nuclear Weapons Association (NNWA). The goal of the NNWA organization is to promote and avocate the safe use and handling of nuclear weapons and to promote legislation as such. Nuclear weapons can be used to hunt and for sporting purposes and to defend yourself from intruders.

Anyone who abuses nuclear weapons should be punished ! But don't punish all of the law obiding citizens who have a legal right to nuclear weapons.

Don't punish all of the innocent law-abiding citizens because some whack job goes on a rampage and illegally uses nuclear weapons !

 

[tryan]

... and sign-up time to the NNWA is limited. If you missed the sign-up deadline you'll be prohibited from ever owning nukes by those who have them.

 

[HFWR]

For channel one news, this is HFWR reporting. Nearly 300 million Americans weren't shot yesterday. In a related story, nearly 300 million Americans didn't go on a shooting rampage yesterday.

News at eleven...

 

[LeatherneckPA]

OKLibrarian; as a career law enforcement officer, a member of the NRA, and a competitive pistol shooter I applaud your decision. I would like to make a suggestion. find someone who shoots on a regular basis and try a few out before you go plunk down your money. Find what you like, and what you will be willing to practice with on a regular basis.

I am often asked what weapon to buy for a first timer. My response is almost always to consider a revolver in a .38 Special or larger caliber, with a 2-3" barrel. It has been my experience that the average John Q does not typically practice near enough to handle the occasiona misfire or stovepipe jam possible in ALL semi-auto pistols. Revolvers, OTOH, are practically idiot proof. You really have to work at it to jam one of them.

I recommend the 2-3" barrels because they are concealable and lighter. The finest firearm in the world, and one that you can shoot perfect scoreswith all day, will do you no good at all if it is home in the nightstand or worse locked up in the safe.

And remember, the only form of gun control that works is HITTING YOUR TARGET!!

 

[Nords]

I think the quote is something like "He who gives up liberty for security has gained nothing." Any help here?

"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security." -- Ben Franklin

 

[BigMoneyJim]

An interesting, somber and heroic story within the story is that a professor who was a holocaust survivor blocked the door and took bullets while telling his students to flee. He survived the holocaust but not the VT massacre.

I think the quote is something like "He who gives up liberty for security has gained nothing." Any help here?

Franklin I think said something like "he who gives up liberty for security deserves neither" and maybe gets neither. (oops...cross-posted w/Nords)

I am often asked what weapon to buy for a first timer. My response is almost always to consider a revolver in a .38 Special or larger caliber, with a 2-3" barrel. It has been my experience that the average John Q does not typically practice near enough to handle the occasiona misfire or stovepipe jam possible in ALL semi-auto pistols. Revolvers, OTOH, are practically idiot proof. You really have to work at it to jam one of them.

I recommend the 2-3" barrels because they are concealable and lighter. The finest firearm in the world, and one that you can shoot perfect scoreswith all day, will do you no good at all if it is home in the nightstand or worse locked up in the safe.

I actually had a range rental revolver jam on me. Surprised me, but I guess it was heavily used and not well maintained. For the range I found I much preferred a heavier long barrel revolver...much less kick. But not good for conceal and carry. (BTW I don't actually own a gun...I have kids (niece and nephew) in and out and can't think of a safe enough way to keep one at home.)

 

[bright eyed]

A one person Chinese army has some people talking about giving up our right to bear arms. I would have thought a larger invasion would have been required. No force is required to strip an American of his rights. Just scare him a little and he'll be throwing away his rights in exchange for "safety". Seems familiar. The world is watching and learning.

Ironically, one armed American could have stopped the carnage before 32 innocent Americans were slaughtered by a foreigner.

Oh geez, now let's get ignorant here.

someone said he might be asian - there are over 30 asian countries and more than double that the number of ethnic groups within China - so cut out the bull generalizations puh-leeeeez....

as of today we know he is korean - check google if you need to see a map of where that country is.

and for your information there are millions of AMERICANS who are of asian descent....

 

[OKLibrarian]

Idiot-proof is a good thing, in my case. I hear about shooting 101-type events around here every few months that are geared towards women/newbies, I may go to the next one that works with my schedule and give it a whirl. I have several friends who shoot/hunt, and I may talk to one of them as well about getting an informal primer. I haven't made up my mind by any means, mostly because it's a big responsibility to be a gun owner, but I guess I'm starting to get so frustrated about the scads of morons running around with weaponry that perhaps it's time for a few more sensible people to pack heat as well.

As others said above, the problem is that there are seriously screwed up people running around with guns. Short of mandatory psychotherapy for every person on the planet, I don't see that changing. Humans have been "doing this", or versions of this, since the dawn of civilization (go read the Iliad, the book of I Samuel, or pretty much anything about the roman empire if you think we're much more violent than any other culture/time in history). We just have different tools with which to act out our collective death wish. I would love to live in the perfect socialist paradise of group hugs, social equality and frolicking purple bunnyrabbits. Until that day comes, my job is to help this world become a little kinder and a little more just, and to protect those in my care from people who intend them harm. If that means it's time for this flaming liberal to contemplate buying a gun, then...*sigh*

Sometimes the world just sucks, you know?

 

[Zoocat]

It is interesting to me that students interviewed on TV were saying how shocked they were because "this is not a dangerous campus." I think the definition of what is "dangerous" really needs to be redefined. Anyone can take the off ramp and come into your "safe" community and kidnap your kid, or shoot pedestrians on the street. Or in this case, a troubled young person can get a resident visa and come to the US for college, putting a whole campus at risk. Who knows how many time bombs there are on college campuses right now?

It's easy to say that he's a whackjob, a "lone assasin." But that explanation has been used for decades. There's always a historical and/or social context for such events.

What's "dangerous" is a society that entertains its boys and young men with violent TV, movies, Internet, games, and violent pornography day in and day out. What's also "dangerous" is the social acceptance of this "entertainment." The easy access to weapons is just icing on the cake.

Our society really needs to wake up and take responsibility for creating the atmosphere in which these unstable individuals go postal because it's occuring way too often these days.

 

[FinanceDude]

Hard to know what the chaos was like in those classrooms............

However, I think one's first reaction would be to put as much "stuff" between the shooter and I as possible, if the way to escape was blocked. I'm thinking noone had the time to conceive a "take-out"plan, because they were not kidnapped, they were murdered in cold blood...........

It's easy to armchair quarterback stuff when we weren't in the room.........

However, the kids that barred the doow when the shooter came back are most definitely heroes..............

 

[FinallyRetired]

Interesting responses. Whatever we think about the gun control issue, this is an incomprehensible tragedy and my heart and prayers go out to the parents, friends, and anyone whose life was touched by this tragedy -- maybe that's all of us.

For those who say they won't give up their gun, gun control is not about taking anyone's gun away -- well, maybe some who shouldn't be carrying one to begin with -- but it's not about taking guns away from responsible individuals. What I would like to see is a similar licensing process for guns that we have for driver's licenses, with the addition of psychological conditions. We should make sure the person is trained, can pass a basic exam on the care and use of a weapon, is free of past felonies, and doesn't have certain psychological issues. Not being a psychiatrist I don't know what those should be, but I'd think someone should not be under treatment for depression or other conditions that might raise a flag. I don't see this as any different as requiring good vision for a driver's license, it just extends it to conditions that are more appropriate for owning a gun.

At one time I used to carry a service 38 revolver in the course of my military duties. I was well trained, had to renew my training once a year, was screened yearly for physical and mental disorders, and had to periodically account for both the gun and the bullets. Outside the military, however, there were zero safeguards. I could go in and buy a handgun even if I had just escaped from a mental institution. Something is not right with that picture. To those who believe the Constitution gives us the right to bear weapons, I again remind them that it's in the context of a well regulated militia. Our forefathers knew very well the dangers of weapons being carried by nut cases.

I don't think any responsible gun owner has anything to fear from gun control. Would that end the kinds of incidents we saw? No, just as licensing drivers does not end car fatalities. But they are a lot less than if we didn't license drivers at all. Gun control would reduce these incidents, and would save lives.

 

[Goonie]

What I would like to see is a similar licensing process for guns that we have for driver's licenses, with the addition of psychological conditions. We should make sure the person is trained, can pass a basic exam on the care and use of a weapon, is free of past felonies, and doesn't have certain psychological issues. Not being a psychiatrist I don't know what those should be, but I'd think someone should not be under treatment for depression or other conditions that might raise a flag. I don't see this as any different as requiring good vision for a driver's license, it just extends it to conditions that are more appropriate for owning a gun.

I just printed out the renewal application for an Illinois FOID (Firearm owners identification) the other day. It requires all pertinent info that you suggest be submitted on the app. It is sent to the Illinois State Police Headquarters in Springfield. When they receive it they run it through the computers to check that all the info is correct as stated on your app. They do a full background check before they will issue a FOID to anyone. The time before last that I applied for renewal, they contacted our local police dept. to have them contact me also. I guess maybe they wanted a face-to-face to see if I wuz nutz! I talked to the chief, then a week or so later got my new FOID.

You also are required to tell them if you suffer from depression, etc., and also if you are taking medication or treatment for it or any other mental problem....if so...NO FOID for you!! And if you perjure yourself, and they find out.....which they most likely will.....FELONY!!!

I seriously doubt that most of the looney tunes that go on shooting rampages or do the so-called random drive-by shooting, or those who break in to other peoples homes, and such as that, have ever applied for or received a valid FOID.

 

[Nords]

What's "dangerous" is a society that entertains its boys and young men with violent TV, movies, Internet, games, and violent pornography day in and day out. What's also "dangerous" is the social acceptance of this "entertainment." The easy access to weapons is just icing on the cake.

OK, first I was confused about the putative correlation between violence & gun control, then about the hypothetical correlation between France's clean air and its nuclear power plants, and now the possible correlation among the above factors.

I've already edited my remarks here once too often. I'm done with this thread.

 

[FinallyRetired]

Goonie, that Illinois law is a great example for the rest of the country. Unfortunately, as you said, the loonies would not apply for the FOID, and they could get guns from other places with lax or no laws. As a test, I just went into Froogle and put in 9mm gun. I clicked on the first vendor that came up so as not to bias the results. and ordered the gun. They have all kinds of statements to make sure the address is correct and the credit card info is correct to make sure there are no mailing errors, but nothing about license, background, anything. By the way, I put in a Virginia address, but it would probably take an Illinois address as well. Maybe they do some screening after you insert your credit card info but I didn't want to go that far.

I think the lesson here is, we need gun control laws but they have to be uniformly applied across the country and they have to be enforced. DC had a gun control law but it was a joke, since guns can easily be brought across from Virginia. In addition, Congress in all their wisdom repealed it -- I would love to trace the money between the gun industry and politicians.

 

[dex]

What's "dangerous" is a society that entertains its boys and young men with violent TV, movies, Internet, games, and violent pornography day in and day out. What's also "dangerous" is the social acceptance of this "entertainment." The easy access to weapons is just icing on the cake.

"boys and young men" What about girls and young women also? Aside from that , there has been no correlation among the the items you mention and violence. Acertions have been made to a correlilation by those who want to outlaw those things.

I do agree in principle that there are many objectionable things in the items you mention but not the conclution.

 

[livnlow]

Oh geez, now let's get ignorant here.

someone said he might be asian - there are over 30 asian countries and more than double that the number of ethnic groups within China - so cut out the bull generalizations puh-leeeeez....

I guess you missed the news story yesterday that the murderer was a Chinese man on here on a student visa. I was misinformed by a news story, and you were uninformed. That makes you ignorant also. Your ignorance however, was based solely on what you incorrectly assumed me to be.

as of today we know he is korean - check google if you need to see a map of where that country is.

and for your information there are millions of AMERICANS who are of asian descent....

Nice. See above. I don't refer to all Asians as Chinese. I responded to what the news was reporting as fact. I made no comments based on assumptions. You however, assumed that I was a racist bigot. You do not know me.

 

[yelnad]

Actually, he was a South Korean green card holder who was in the US since 1992 legally. He was eligible to apply for citizenship, but never did.

 

[perinova]

It is interesting to me that students interviewed on TV were saying how shocked they were because "this is not a dangerous campus." I think the definition of what is "dangerous" really needs to be redefined. Anyone can take the off ramp and come into your "safe" community and kidnap your kid, or shoot pedestrians on the street. Or in this case, a troubled young person can get a resident visa and come to the US for college, putting a whole campus at risk. Who knows how many time bombs there are on college campuses right now?

It's easy to say that he's a whackjob, a "lone assasin." But that explanation has been used for decades. There's always a historical and/or social context for such events.

What's "dangerous" is a society that entertains its boys and young men with violent TV, movies, Internet, games, and violent pornography day in and day out. What's also "dangerous" is the social acceptance of this "entertainment." The easy access to weapons is just icing on the cake.

Our society really needs to wake up and take responsibility for creating the atmosphere in which these unstable individuals go postal because it's occuring way too often these days.

I quite agree. Except you might want to include females too...
Also I think it is probably a lot more complicated than the "entertainment factor".

The "atmosphere" (as you mentioend it) is bearable suitable for -say- 99.9% of the society but one might consider the effect it has on the remaining .1% and the devastating consequences on the whole society.

The popsicle index may be a good measure of the health of our society; although I have never seen a comparative measurement of it.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0301/S00117.htm

 

[BigMoneyJim]

I was surprised to find out VT isn't the worst school mass murder in the U.S. In 1927 a farmer got ticked off at increased property taxes to pay for a new elementary school, so over the course of a year he loaded dynamite and pyrotol under the school. Then he beat his wife to death, tied his farm animals so they couldn't escape the subsequent fire and blew up his farm buildings while the elementary school blew up shortly after by timer. He loaded his pickup with dynamite and scrap metal (for shrapnel), drove to the school site and detonated the pickup killing himself and several bystanders including some kids who survived the school explosion. 45 fatalities, many of which were young school kids.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_Disaster

 

[youbet]

They do a full background check before they will issue a FOID to anyone.

Sadly, that's not true. Although the cursory check they do do is better than nothing.

 

[Alex]

The City of Chicago has a hand gun ban. Has for several (many) years. Yet just about everyday IN the City of Chicago, people are being murdered by a**holes with hand guns. The only people in Chicago that the ban has affected are the law-abiding citizens that were requested/required to turn in their hand guns. The criminal element still have and use hand guns.

Instead of banning guns, ban criminals!

Gun control is a steady hand, a sharp eye, and a gentle squeeze. 8)

amen.

 

[Goonie]

I would love to trace the money between the gun industry and politicians.

I can help you a little bit in your quest. Part of the money that goes to lobbyists, comes from my donations to the NRA. They lobby congress on my behalf (and on the behalf of all American citizens), for my right to be able to control my own guns. And I know I'll probably catch some flack from some folks for my statements, views, and opinions......However, I really don't give a rat's *ss, as others have a right to there views and opinions, also. And as long as we maintain our 2nd amendment's rights, we will also maintain our 1st amendment's rights.

That's my view and opinion, and I'll stick to it until my death, at which time someone else may have my guns.....but not until that time!

And as Nords stated:

I've already edited my remarks here once too often. I'm done with this thread.

I, too, am done here!

 

[bright eyed]

I guess you missed the news story yesterday that the murderer was a Chinese man on here on a student visa. I was misinformed by a news story, and you were uninformed. That makes you ignorant also. Your ignorance however, was based solely on what you incorrectly assumed me to be.
Nice. See above. I don't refer to all Asians as Chinese. I responded to what the news was reporting as fact. I made no comments based on assumptions. You however, assumed that I was a racist bigot. You do not know me.

oh, my bad - it was the news story that misinformed you that caused you to make your xenophobic statement...woops. :