This case is proof either gun control is always doomed to failure or it needs to be tougher. The one thing you can say is the availability of guns made it easy for this nutjob to do what he wanted when he wanted to. Hoooray for the Second Amendment! And for those who will invariably think my posting this indicates Uncle Dave is in favor of gun control, you would be wrong, but not for the reason you’d think.
How sorry are we for the Blacksburg killings?
A news article in the April 18 Wall Street Journal states that one reason the Blacksburg killings are prompting few cries for gun control is that both pistols recovered in the Virginia Tech shootings—a Glock 9 mm and a Walther P22—were purchased legally, according to a gun trace by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
In the past, opponents of gun control have made the precise opposite argument. Appearing on CNBC’s Rivera Live after Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris slaughtered 12 fellow students and one teacher at Columbine High School, Ann Coulter pooh-poohed Geraldo Rivera’s call for beefed-up background checks by saying, “What difference would that have made? They … purchased the guns illegally.”
A psychopathic mass-murderer buys a gun legally. That’s an argument against gun control. A psychopathic mass-murderer buys a gun illegally. That’s an argument against gun control, too. Everything is an argument against gun control.
There are people in this country today who, one day in the future, will be gunned down by psychopaths like Cho Seung-Hui. Future presidents will be assassinated, if the past is any guide, and probably the odd pop star, too. We could spare these lives—some of them, at least—by making it difficult or impossible to acquire a handgun in the United States. But we choose not to. Tough luck, whoever you are.
In searching for a photo, I stumbled on this odd article. Fallout from the murders is ranging far and wide.
Do Iraqis equate President Bush to Cho Seung-Hui?
As President Bush spoke to those gathered at Blacksburgh, Virginia after the loss of 33 lives including the life of Cho Seung-Hui’s, he made these striking remarks, “Yesterday began like any other day. Students woke up, and they grabbed their backpacks and they headed for class. And soon the day took a dark turn, with students and faculty barricading themselves in classrooms and dormitories — confused, terrified, and deeply worried. By the end of the morning, it was the worst day of violence on a college campus in American history — and for many of you here today, it was the worst day of your lives.”
If I could have the president’s ear just for one second, I would say that is the world you created for the Iraqi people. They too have been terrified and yet no one sees them as being victims of terror.
“Is it illegal to give your dog a bazooka”
My dog doesn’t have gps navigation and facial recognition.
#16 – Okay, I can no longer be silent on this one. A good buddy of mine, Jamie Bishop, was the German instructor killed at VT. I miss him dearly, and it brings me to near tears anytime I think back on when he used to live here in NC, working in my department. I emailed him as soon as I heard that something was going on at VT, and I’ve never been more disappointed in my life to have an email I sent go without a response.
That being said, many of you know that I am “pro-gun.” And despite Monday’s tragedy, I still am “pro-gun,” and I always will be. Should there be tougher laws? If they are done properly, then yes. Would “gun control” laws have prevented this?
For Jamie, I wish I could say “yes” to that question, but I can’t. Period. A suicidal, homicidal, psychotic individual will eventually have his day, and no amount of legislation or red tape will stop him.
Period.
[totally off topic]
21, Lauren, (from previous thread) thanks for the tip and the link, M-Audio’s look like great PC devices. 24/192kHz is fine for 15ips to HDCD. You’ll love B&W — especially in 7.2 or THX with dual SW config (one SW for L/R, one SW for front center. Darth Vader sounds evil with a center channel SW.
[on topic]
A suicidal, homicidal, psychotic individual will eventually have his day, and no amount of legislation or red tape will stop him.
Mac Guy, I couldn’t say it any better. Sorry for your loss.
#7 – A reasoned and thoughtful post…. Somebody call james Hill and let him know his account has been hijacked.
33,
(off-topic fan comment)
Bowers and Wilkins speakers rule!
#26
“Aw, c’mon, Angel. I don’t know any of the victims’ relatives or friends and neither do you. Any condolences expressed here are pointless, since the victims’ people are not here reading these posts.”
I’m not talking about feeling sorry for them, I’m talking about those who get close to the relatives/friends of the victims and then start ranting abouthow things would have been different if he/she had a gun.
#16 & #23 Lauren the Ghoti – EXCELLENT ANALYSIS.
Nothing I can add to that, but I wish it wasn’t in vain for me to hope that some moderate gun-control advocates might pause and briefly re-think their position in light of this.
#7. Agreed. The background check system needs to be improved to the point that this guy’s commitment would have prevented him from getting a gun. I am always reminded of the gun episode of The Simpsons, where Homer’s background check labels him ‘Potentially Dangerous’ …
which limits him to 4 handguns or less.
I think beefing up the background checks and a ban on the high-capacity pistol clips would be worthwhile, as mentioned in the article. (If you need 10 shots for any legitimate purpose, you need to go back to the range)
but any kind of comprehensive gun-control measure would just create another black market and a reason to lock more people up.
If you are against the government restricting freedom in the name of preventing terrorism, then by definition you should be AGAINST gun control, as it is restricting freedom in the hopes of preventing criminals from using guns.
Both anti-terrorism laws recently enacted and gun control punish the people, not the criminals, and both pre-suppose guilt.
In short, they are both anti-American.
#39,
glad you have all possible self defense situations figured out. Should the police be limitedf to 10 round magazines also?
Sorry, that was for #38, not #39
#41. You mean like this self-defense scenario?
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,267025,00.html
Yes, if you need to fire 10 shots without reloading, you need to go back to the range. And it should be limited for cops, too. No more 40-50 shots fired at unarmed suspects.
32,
If they used mental health records in the background check, this guy would not have been able to buy a gun.
I am a gun ownership advocate, but I believe that guns should have at least as many controls on them as cars. To those who say that registration and licensing (and don’t forget competency testing) and competency testing will only tell the government who owns guns, ask the people in New Orleans if the government was using a list when they confiscated guns there after Katrina.
This is what happens when doctor/patient confidentiality laws collide with gun purchase background check laws. The two laws have opposite objective and are at odds with each other. One is to protect an individual’s privacy and the other throws privacy to the wind in order to protect the general public.
Obviously, these laws, when applied correctly, work against each other. You should choose which one you prefer. Do you prefer confidentiality of medical records or do you want to keep the dangerously ill from legally purchasing firearms. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Personally, I think that this is a no-brainer. If a doctor deems a person to be mentally ill and a danger to those around them, this MUST be reported to authorities and it MUST be included in background check databases.
My heart goes out to those who lost loved ones. Our spaghetti laws failed them.
#42,
so when 20 Chechnians storm the school, the cops are SOL.
Based on his poses and think this guy may of played too much counterstrike in his dorm room.
There are more people killed each day by alcohol than guns. Why don’t we pass an amendment against booze ?
#46,
not sure if you are talking to me, but I have never played counterstrike, and havn’t seen a dorm room in 25 years.
I am also aware that according to the DOJ, the “average” gunfight lasts under 4 seconds, and 2.3 shots total are fired.
I shoot competatively every month, and know that you dont get to define what the bad guys will do.
I find it very arrogent of the poster to assume that there could not be a situation requiring more that 10 shots without reloading. It would be an unusual exceptional situation, but its not fair of him to handicap what a cop, or any law abiding person should be able to do.
Also, do you think that one shot will stop an attacker? Do you think they will fly accross the room like on tv?
Do you know that the energy of a 9mm bullet is the same as dropping a 10 pound weight 3/4 of a inch? The bad guy is not going to stop, unless his central nervous system is disrupted (ie head / spinal shot) or he looses enough blood to drop.
To much counterstrike here? No, too much TV there.
lauren said “Apparently you think the typical permit holder is spooked by handling their gun, or clumsy, or reckless. This isn’t so, and the virtual nonexistence of mishaps and permit abuse prove it.”
There is another reasonable situation that an armed citizen can cause more harm. The armed citizen panics because a gun is pointed at him. Most training does not involve a gun being pointed at the trainee while they are practice shooting.
Gun controls do not work and training only gets you so far. Violence with guns is still violence no matter who is carrying the guns.
Did anyone have a cellphone on them at the campus? There are more cellphones than guns. I find it interesting that no one called the authorities about a person carrying a weapon on campus.
#50,
Canada and the US are comparable, when contrasted against others like Jamaca (32), Columbia (61) and South Africa (49)
#51,
who wouldn’t be scared looking down the barrel of a gun. I dont think even cops train with bullets coming towards them.
Also, reports have the students all laying on the ground and playing dead. Didn’t we learn anything as a society from 9-11?
#52
You sound like a school boy who come home with a C on the report card and says… it’s not bad, because Bob and Frank had both D’s. And no, Canada and the US are not comparable.
28 – 29 – Lauren and littlefish –
I’m with you on this. Time was, I thought gun control would be a good idea. But you know, I don’t really want people like Dubya and Torture Boy to be in charge of whether I can go armed. And the argument that most people don’t even if they can is also compelling. Finally, I was convinced when my son, up in Washington state, had to pull a gun on some Seattle gangbangers who were making threats. He’s a trained Marine and knew how to stay calm and use a firearm correctly, and I am glad Washington State allows firearms.
When you think it through, the Bill of Rights should simply not be messed with. All the arguments from the right (limiting free speech and right to assemble) and left (limit firearms and sometimes limit speech) are simply bogus.
Off topic: Lauren, thanks for the tip on Denon and the warning about Meridian. Denon it is, then, and I’ll use my heart medicine savings for putting around Baja California on my 12-year-old BMW boxer. New and expensive ain’t everything.
#43. “The bad guy is not going to stop, unless his central nervous system is disrupted (ie head / spinal shot) or he looses enough blood to drop.”
sorry, but I am familiar enough with real-world shootings (and criminals) to know that most guys (good or bad) will stop if you put one round into them. As gun- advocates frequently note, the knowledge that a would-be victim is armed is usually enough to deter a criminal. If someone trained in combat shooting were to actually display a firearm in a competent fashion, a criminal would scamper.
#46. When the Chechens take over a school, the SWAT team can come in with their assault rifles. A beat cop has no use for a voluminous magazines. Most never fire their gun at a suspect AT ALL much less cap off 10 shots. Oh, but the baddies will have 10-shot magazines! yeah, but they are also not trained. someone who is actually trained to fire a gun is more dangerous (to his target) with 3 shots than some gang-banger with an extended-magazine 9mm. the latter is real dangerous to passers-by, that’s for sure.
I don’t think anybody has mentioned that there are already milions of guns in circulation so trying to control guns is really a moot point. Horses and barn doors come to mind.
The comments did become more balanced since my reading of them this afternoon. Kudos to Jagermeister for posting the actual stats for homicides in Canada. I hope that most people knew the claim was false when they read it. At least half of the gun nuts verbal arsenal is simply lying.
Hildebrandt, you are almost as much of a piece of work as Lauren the Bigot. Nothing you’ve said has been accurate.
There are a couple of heroic people in the Virginia Tech saga. Not the police. Not the administration. Not the mental health experts. They are two poets. English teachers Nikki Giovanni and Lucinda Roy understood the threat Cho posed and did their damndest to try to curtail his behavior. Unfortunately, they were met with bureacratic inertia. But, at least they tried, perhaps saving the lives of some students two years ago.
#58,
what have I said that was inaccurate?
#53,
Only in overall rate are they comparable. That said, going from Detroit to Windsor is a different world. I feel much much safer in Canada. As a lot, the Canadians are the nicest people I have ever met, from my 5 or so trips there. Sure, US rates are 2x the Canada rates, but compared the rates of countries which are 10x the US, they are pretty close. More like an A and B compared to an F, not a C compared to a D.
Liviu Librescu was a hero at Virginia Tech, there were lots of heros no doubt, but the eyewitness reports hitting the news today sound like our basic mindset is still 9-10, not 9-12.
#55
A study in The Journal of Trauma (36:4 pp516-524) looked at all injury admissions to a Seattle hospital over a six year period. The mortality rate for gunshot wounds was 22%
According to the DOJ, gunshot victims often are not aware that they have been shot immediatly. An absolutely fatal shot, will not neccesarily make someone cease being a threat.
http://www.firearmstactical.com/briefs7.htm
This somewhat famous case has two fataly wounded bad guys killing two FBI agents, and wounding 5 before succoming to their injuries.
#57
The fact of the matter is that the rules set down by VT kept guns out of the hands of the rest of student’s hands. Those rules successfully prevented the students from protecting themselves. There was a time when carrying guns on VT was permitted. Yet, it is only now, when most people are restricted from carrying that a guy can kill almost three dozen unarmed people. The gun laws and VT rules worked perfectly in disarming the students while a criminal ignored those laws. Yes, Cho is a criminal the moment he decided to use the weapons he purchased to harm others.
> The arming of other students would not have stopped the rampage
Somehow, we went hundreds of years with people daily carrying sidearms without killing half the population. Only a simpleton would think that just because people are armed that they would then go on killing sprees. Trying living in Tucson for a while. There it is perfectly legal to carry a sidearm (although it cannot be concealed if I’m not mistaken.) Yet, we do not hear about massive killing sprees there. Get your head out of your tookus and realize that when two trained, armed individuals get into a dispute both realize the consequence of pulling their firearm (just brandishing it is cause for losing your right to carry) much less firing it.
If training is worry, the we should strive it improve the training requirements for carrying rather than restrict carrying itself.
> They are by people who own or have access
> to guns shooting themselves, family,
> friends or acquaintances.
Bullshit. Proof?
> One seldom sees references to the claim that millions of
> crimes are being prevented by gun owners per year by
> experts who study these issues because there is virtually
> no proof that is true.
More bullshit. Forget suicide for a minute. If what you are saying is true, then we should see very high violent crime rates in cities with liberal carrying laws and that is simply not the case.
Is it ok for the police to carry sidearms? If so, then the only thing stopping us from allowing everyone to carry is training.
#49 – To much counterstrike here? No, too much TV there.
Comment by Les Hildenbrandt — 4/19/2007 @ 5:05 pm
Umm dude? Look at the picture of the shooter. That is who Anon was talking about.
#53 – And no, Canada and the US are not comparable.
Comment by Jägermeister — 4/19/2007 @ 6:16 pm
Forgive me for being pedantic, but as the US and Canada were compared, that pretty much proves they are comparable 🙂 But you are right… To suggest they are similar is absurd.
Podesta – While I agree generally with your points, I fail to see why calling Lauren a bigot helps you make your case. He’s only a bully when defending that ridiculous toy computer, The Mac, but outside of that I agree with him about as often as I disagree – but I have never personally read something that he wrote that would make me think he was a bigot. And even if he were, in this debate (which is frankly a pretty tired one) how does pointing that out help bring civility to this topic?
#57
you said:
•The arming of other students would not have stopped the rampage. Instead, there would have been more shooting, more injuries and more deaths.
So you are saying that another student, a good guy student, could not have possibly stopped the killer, but would have automaticly instead killed more inocents. How do you come up with this idea?
you also said:
The Virginia Tech tragedy is not proof that only criminals with guns are to be feared. If anything, it proves that non-criminals with guns are to be feared.
So we are all potential criminals? Quick – put us all in jail incase we might commit a crime in the future. Or ban fertilizer, gasoline and anything else which could be used as a weapon.