20 People Shot Dead on Virginia Tech Campus

[fuelair]

modified to remove edited responses over actioned post

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

Sitting from your comfy chair it's easy to expect a group of people would act "rationally" and charge a lone assailant, but it's quite another matter if you've seen classmates murdered, a gun has been pointed at you, the attacker is not a stranger, or any and all of the umpteen unknowns. One has to put himself in a situation where he lacks information; where the outcome is uncertain and the circumstances are non-ideal, extremely stressful. It requires a frame of mind, which is impossible given the lack of information. As of this posting (I don't know if it's been reported) we don't know if he had them sitting with their backs against the wall, or what. Anybody can SAY they would naturally save the day, but doing it is another matter entirely. When policemen are engaged in a very high speed chase you'll often hear them screaming into the mic. These are trained officers and the adrenalin still gets to them. In this case we're talking about kids who were probably doing physics until a gun man burst into the room.

Also, I do recall mentioning, though perhaps too indirectly, what is probably the seminal economic text on groups: _The Logic of Collective Action_ by Mancur Olson. It could be argued -- though again we have to speculate until solid facts come in -- that each of the students acted in a manner more or less consistent with individual rational self-interest. The students may have possessed the resolve to join a mob, but it likely takes an individual with very high tolerance for risk to start a mob -- effectively marking oneself as the first target. It's all the more difficult if the group lacks communication and trust.

I posted a reminder earlier in this thread about the civility clause. Please refrain from negatively personalising responses. I have removed some of this post accordingly.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

Actually, the key is not assuming that a mob will form and assuming that anyone insane enough to come in with a gun is going to shoot. At that point, when you are dead or wounded anyway (potential) there is no reason not to do your best to (this is my preference) mutilate or kill the attacker.
If you fail, no one is any worse off, if you succeed the others can come in and tear off his body parts - or whatever.

I should add that in most things I have a low risk tolerance - but I refuse to die in that kind of situation without trying to take the attacker(s) with me. I also have one other "advantage" which I learned in my SCA time (I left because the armor requirements kept getting heavier and that slows) - When fighting I am a berserker, That is not a brag (there are several problems with it) but it is useful for situations of the type we are discussing. Also, I am almost never unarmed. (Actually few people ever are - they just forget or don't realize the number of things that make quite useful weapons.)

 

[Mephisto]

True, but was it really that bad?

I don't have my posts edited very often, so I was a bit surprised this morning to see what had happened.

I have no idea. I came back to this thread after yesterday afternoon to see all the deletions. Reading the individual posts now is like watching the Jerry Springer show - everyone is talking, but all I hear is bleep, bleep, bleep.

The fact that your posts were deleted made me wonder exactly what was going on as I consider you one of the few honestly polite people here.

(edited to add) I'm gonna bleep your bleep if you keep calling my bleep a bleep, bleep. Not really conducive to knowing what everyone's real stance on the debate is.

 

[SirPhilip]

Predictably, this incident is immediately partitioned into the category of "school shooting" so as to create an artificial separation from the rampant US gun problem as a whole. "Gee, we need to stop these School Shootings," people say, as if they're a completely separate phenomenon. What about supermarket shootings? Car park shootings? Shootings within 10m of an evergreen tree?

What about cigarettes and alcohol?

Guns = shootings = death

Certainly not in the U.K, with all that Prozac in the water system..

Thank goodness I live in the UK where most people understand such a basic premise.

Says it all really. People from the U.K frequently rationalize this cultural bias - grow some common sense and realize it's all relative, but more 'sensational' when someone dies as a result of gunfire.

 

[BPSCG]

Well, the one thing I'm sure we can all agree on in this thread is that the MODS are putting in overtime.

True, but was it really that bad?

As one of the fattest targets of abuse on this thread, I have to say "no." Try to argue forcefully, even passionately, but reasonably, and if the other guy remains abusive, stop responding to his posts (I never put people on "ignore," though I do refuse to respond to anything certain people post).

Not to say I don't appreciate others who have taken up the cudgels on my behalf...

And I suppose you can make a good argument that the mods want to keep things civil before they have to close the thread.

Anyway, let us continue. I never heard of an issue that was too dangerous to even talk about.

Okay, exceptions:

• "Does this dress make me look fat?"
• "Do you think she's pretty?"
• "Do you think she's prettier than I am?" (Answer: "Yes, but you're better in bed...")
• "What are you thinking about?" (Answer: "If I wanted you to know, I'd be talking, not thinking...")
• "If I died, would you remarry?" (Answer: "Not until she got a divorce, no...")

 

[Katana]

I have no idea. I came back to this thread after yesterday afternoon to see all the deletions. Reading the individual posts now is like watching the Jerry Springer show - everyone is talking, but all I hear is bleep, bleep, bleep.

The fact that your posts were deleted made me wonder exactly what was going on as I consider you one of the few honestly polite people here.

Awwwww.

Thanks, Mephisto!

(edited to add) I'm gonna bleep your bleep if you keep calling my bleep a bleep, bleep. Not really conducive to knowing what everyone's real stance on the debate is.

But then again, depending on what was actually said, this may be just as informative.

As one of the fattest targets of abuse on this thread, I have to say "no." Try to argue forcefully, even passionately, but reasonably, and if the other guy remains abusive, stop responding to his posts (I never put people on "ignore," though I do refuse to respond to anything certain people post).

Not to say I don't appreciate others who have taken up the cudgels on my behalf...

And I suppose you can make a good argument that the mods want to keep things civil before they have to close the thread.

Anyway, let us continue. I never heard of an issue that was too dangerous to even talk about.

Okay, exceptions:

• "Does this dress make me look fat?"
• "Do you think she's pretty?"
• "Do you think she's prettier than I am?" (Answer: "Yes, but you're better in bed...")
• "What are you thinking about?" (Answer: "If I wanted you to know, I'd be talking, not thinking...")
• "If I died, would you remarry?" (Answer: "Not until she got a divorce, no...")

Excellent.

 

[Meadmaker]

How about this incident from Germany in 1964:

Yeah, '64 was a pretty bad year.

And tragedy would repeat itself in Germany less than four decades later, when a gunman killed several people in a German town in 2003.

 

[Overman]

Whole lotta moddin' going on in this thread!

 

[Overman]

i'm a student. if i were a gambling man, i'd bet i get drunk less often than you do. regardless, this misses the point: drinking generally occurs OFF campus, so your point is not relavent. the percentage of sober students on campus is much greater than the percentage of sober students off campus. i've been in the university for about 10 years now-- yes, i suck. don't point it out. i know i suck. i'm an idiot. ignore it.-- and i've never seen a drunken student show to class. drunked students tend to stay home.

Dude, no way!

Drinking is in no way mainly done off campus, it is done EVERYWHERE at College. You have probably seen may drunken students in class, but just don't know it. I remember people used to bring their drinks right into class! When I was in college drinking was very prevelant, and I can't imagine much has changed in the past 5 years. I'm sure the level changes from school to school, but to act like college kids don't drink in campus is naive. Study harder.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Actually, from several of the posts made since yours -which I clearly agree with - it is apparently more acceptable that 30 some odd people get killed by a shooter at one time without any chance to defend themselves than that either (one of the sillier)A)50 or 60 get killed in the gunfire from the (say doesn't VA require training in safety, actual skill at shooting, defense law, etc. to get a CP) wild crazy attempts to shoot the actual assailant Or B)
over the course of a year 5 or 6 people get harmed/killed in gun accidents - which shouldn't happen - but is certainly lessthan 30 plus people executed helplessly.

But how often does this happen? If it is say 6 or 7 years, then fewer people die in total with the restriction. And as nationaly these things are less than 6 or 7 years, you would not be lowering the death rate by doing such a thing.

I also do not quite get why unarmed means that they can't do anything to defend themselves, and must meakly line up to be shot, but armed they will resist?

Why does a gun change someones behavior so much? Is it true then that guns turn Pussies into Real Men? that seems like an extreem position.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Facts are, if you have students carrying out campus, properly trained of course, with concealed weapons, something like this could be prevented.

Please show your evidence for these facts.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Okay, here's logic and reason:

If students or faculty had been allowed to have guns, would this have happened anyway? Perhaps, perhaps not. We will never know for sure. But one thing we can say: it certainly wouldn't have been any worse, and there is at least the chance that lives could have been saved.

Did gun control prevent this tragedy? Absolutely not.

It's really as simple as that. We've got a chance of some lives saved, versus all the lives lost. I don't see how any person of logic and reason can choose the latter over the former.

And how do you count tradgeties that are prevented? If it prevented 5 such trageties are the laws working then?

This is why I have gotten fed up with all guncontrol debates. No one uses real arguements just apeals to emotion to back their preconcieved notions. So few such debates have any meaningful effect or debate.

 

[pgwenthold]

1) At each of the three major universities I graduated from, EACH police department spent over 70% of their patrolling man hours on PARKING ENFORCEMENT.

And with darn good reason. Because 99% of the time on a college campus, nothing else is happening!

Moreover, on most campuses, parking is extremely tight, and therefore they want to ensure that people parking in spots are authorized.

I guarantee that far more column inches are taken up in your average campus newspaper on PARKING issues than they are on other types of campus crime. And it's not just "I got a parking ticket" topics, it is "I have a permit and can't get a place to park."

 

[Marquis de Carabas]

Here's a horrible, unrelated thought: Someone is working on the made-for-TV movie right now.

...and designing the commemorative patches for the sports teams to wear next season.

 

[Katana]

It's confirmed. One of the guns carried by the shooter was used at both scenes.

 

[robinson]

CNN reports the "gunmen" was Cho Seung-Hui, 23, Va Tech student.

 

[shanek]

If you're going to tell me what my point is then why did you bother to ask you moron? The point is everyone who advocates conceal carry talks ex post facto as if they would have had a gun they could have shot the gunman and killed them, but here was a guy with a gun and a concealed carry license and it didn't quite work out that way.

I don't know of anyone who says they could do that 100% of the time, so cut out the strawmen. But there is a chance of it that wouldn't be there without the gun.

Let me put it to you another way, how many shootings in concealed carry states have come to a hasty end because of an armed civilian being in the proximity of the shooter?

According to various studies, anywhere between 700,000 and 2,500,000 a year.

 

[shanek]

People have already figured out the how, it's just that their agenda is not yours.

And how is that? And don't say "gun control," because that was in place here and it failed.

 

[ponderingturtle]

well, no.

had any of the students in any of the class rooms been able and willing to carry, and responsibly handle a firearm, but been thwarted by legislature, then there's a decent chance that the incident could have ended much more quickly.

accidents do happen, but deaths by accidental shoootings are statistically not very likely, especially, i would assume, among the demographic that laws currently prevent from carrying on campus-- those that are trained to properly handle firearms.

if we want to reduce accidental deaths at universities, we better start filling those damned pools with concrete. (i have no idea if anyone has ever died in a pool at any campus, but in general, they are responsible for a greater percentage of accidental deaths than are accidental shootings... as i recall!)

Isn't this the guns make real men out of pussies?

 

[BPSCG]

CNN reports the "gunmen" was Cho Deung-Hui, 23, Va Tech student.

Washington Post says he's from up here in NoVa, and, perhaps significantly, that his parents live here also. I'd heard on the radio this am that if it turned out he'd been here on a student visa, like several of the September 11 hijackers... Glad we won't have to deal with that, anyway.

 

[Overman]

Fred Phelps and his band of retards are gonna protest the funerals...

link