• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

20 People Shot Dead on Virginia Tech Campus

It literally reminds me of back in the day when some individuals here were using '9/11', practically as it was happening, as an opportunity to discuss American foreign policy and the possibility that we may have 'had it coming'.

Cut it out, no one said we "had it coming." What we said was, if you stir up a hornet's nest, you'll probably get stung. We made ourselves a target by interfering in their affairs. That's NOT the same thing.

It's not that the discussion can't take place, it's the timing. It's the available information. It's the willingness to make assumptions which conveniently support your political beliefs when we know nothing.

At that point, they had already said who was the likely culprit and why.

Again it reminds me of some other, common, 9/11 conversations and looked like it was coming awfully close to blaming the victim.

Again, no one's blaming any victims, although you're obviously desperate to try to paint people as doing so.
 
Please note, I corrected the typo, it is Cho Seung-Hui.

from Wikipedia-
Cho Seung-Hui (c. 1984[1] – 16 April 2007) has been identified as the shooter in the Virginia Tech massacre by law enforcement authorities.[2][3]

According to Virginia Tech, Cho was an undergraduate student in his senior year as an English major. He was a South Korean student and a resident alien in the United States, and had a permanent address listed in Centreville, Virginia.[1]

ABC reports Cho left a "disturbing note" before killing two people in a dorm room, returning to his own room to re-arm and entering a classroom building on the other side of campus to continue his rampage.[3] Cho's identity has been confirmed with a positive fingerprint match on the guns used in the rampage and with immigration materials.[3]
 
Link to "Racism and Hate" sites is blocked from where I work. What's his rationale - the students were gay?

from their site:

WBC will preach at the funerals of the Virginia Tech students killed on campus during a shooting rampage April 16, 2007. You describe this as monumental horror, but you know nothing of horror -- yet. Your bloody tyrant Bush says he is 'horrified' by it all. You know nothing of horror -- yet. Your true horror is coming. "They shall also gird themselves with sackloth, and horror shall cover them; and shame shall be upon all faces, and baldness upon all their heads" (Eze. 7:18).

Why did this happen, you ask? It's simple. Your military chose to shoot at the servants of God today, and all they got for their effort was terror. Then, the LORD your God sent a crazed madman to shoot at your children. Was God asleep while this took place? Was He on vacation? Of course not. He willed this to happen to punish you for assailing His servants.
 
Please name ANY purpose of carrying a gun on school grounds, other than being a theoretical defense against school shooting and being a risk for accidents and passion crimes.

I was on a local rifle team while in college. Kept the firearm (a .22 target rifle) stored in my dorm room. Several other kids on campus had firearms- primarily for hunting or recreational shooting. Never an accident or a passion crime then or since.

When I was in the Air Force I was on the base rifle team and used the range at the nearby University of Illinois to practice. The only time I was ever nervous about strolling around the campus with a-cased-long gun was after the AF, in its wisdom, decreed that members carrying firearms off the base had to be armed with a .38 revolver in case someone tried to steal the carried firearm. This was the height of campus anti-war protests, and I was not at all comfortable walking around on campus-in civilian clothes- with a .38 strapped to my hip!
 
God's such a slacker. In the old days, he got every family's firstborn. Now, he just sends in an independent contractor for 30? Omnipotence ain't what it used to be, I guess.
 
Yes, this is all about preconcieved political agenda, not facts.


But The Vampire's statement that you quoted was made in the context of his/her comments about students rushing the gunman being harder targets to hit.

It wasn't about firearms changing the outcome.
 
So the number of hand guns people would have to be wearing for the one person to be able to take this guy out (like everyone with a gun would even win the gunfight) would probably mean an extra 30 deaths at least over time by accidents and other people using the gun in a rage.

Care to support this with statistics?
 
Two pence worth

My 2 pence worth as someone who has mixed feelings about weapons and gun ownership.

I’m originally from Costa Rica, a country with non-existent gun-control enforcement. In short, everyone’s packing. And guess what? We are now ahead of the United States in gun murders per capita:

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita

I can speak from personal experience as the victim of an armed robbery at home. I was 17 years old, and I was about to drive our car out of the garage so that my mum could take me and my siblings to school. then, two masked men came out of the bushes and pointed their guns at me. They wanted the money and wanted to know who was in the house. I was surprisingly calm, but then my mother came into the garage and saw me, and she freaked out and started shouting. The robbers didn’t care, but assumed that it was all OK. We had a gun in the house; my brother got it, and waited for them to bring us in. They did and he shot one of them (not fatally).

This goes to all of you who have criticised the victims. Unless you have actually been in a gunfight, you cannot understand the feeling of disorientation and shock that fills you. It was a chaotic situation that could have gone either way. My mother was in shock, she could not move, she could not act; I have never seen such thing! Anyway, something snapped inside of me and I grabbed her and ran. No, I never thought about “rushing” someone with a gun, what a stupid idea! I just ran. My brother held the line until we were past and then we all got into a room and barricaded ourselves while calling the police.

What’s the moral of the story? That I was extremely lucky. When my brother shot the robbers I was on their sights, the fact that they panicked was the only thing that saved me, but it would have been very easy for it to go wrong. I am grateful that we had the gun, but if I had died, would my family have felt the same way?

Anyway, whenever I am in Costa Rica, I prefer to have a gun (just in case is always my motto). However, I now live in the UK, where there is a ban on gun ownership, and I have never, ever, even once, missed my gun. Why? Because I have never seen a gun and I do not feel threatened by them in any way.

So I come from both sides f the debate: I prefer complete gun ban and to live in a society with fewer guns. But if I live in a society with plenty of guns, I prefer to have one for self-defence, but I’m aware that such society will have higher violent crime rates and higher murder rates as a result. I still suffer from nightmares, and I would never wish what I went through on anyone.
 
Last edited:
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.
Erfurt 2002

Emsdetten 2006
List of incidents in Germany from 1998 to 2003. Not all school related.

Refernces many incidents in Germany. 1913, 1964 (Cologne, previously menitoned,) 1983, and all of the incidents from 1998 to 2006 (includes Emsdetten and Erfurt.)
Using 1998 to separate between "video games available" and "video games not available" strieks me as weird, as there were certainly violent video games avaialble before that year.


I'm picking out German sources becuase I live in Germany. I don't know any other language well enough to go searching for information on other countries. Well, english, obviously, but then we've got plenty of references for incidents in the US already.
 
WBC will preach at the funerals of the Virginia Tech students killed on campus during a shooting rampage April 16, 2007. You describe this as monumental horror, but you know nothing of horror -- yet. Your bloody tyrant Bush says he is 'horrified' by it all. You know nothing of horror -- yet. Your true horror is coming. "They shall also gird themselves with sackloth, and horror shall cover them; and shame shall be upon all faces, and baldness upon all their heads" (Eze. 7:18).
Why did this happen, you ask? It's simple. Your military chose to shoot at the servants of God today, and all they got for their effort was terror. Then, the LORD your God sent a crazed madman to shoot at your children. Was God asleep while this took place? Was He on vacation? Of course not. He willed this to happen to punish you for assailing His servants.
Jeeze. Okay, so why didn't God smite Bush, or the military who "chose to shoot at the servants of God today"?

How many of these dead students voted for Bush? How many of them were old enough to vote for anyone for president in 2004?

Phelps's God sounds like a pretty cranky guy. Makes the God of Moses sound like the Sugar Plum Fairy. You wonder why He doesn't just decide, "Oh, the hell with it; I'm just gonna drown 'em again, and this time leave no survivors." You'd think he'd have foreseen that he'd have to go back to the job again back when he was sparing Noah and his family.

I hope Phelps's people come to the funerals ready to get punched in the collective face. If anyone needs a good smack upside the head with a blunt object, it's them. This is about as Bible-Belt a part of Virginia as there is, but I think if the Phelpses show up there, they'll not see much in the way of Jesus's "turn the other cheek" advice.
 
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.

False.

Did gun control prevent this tragedy? Absolutely not.

Did laws against bank robbery prevent the local robbery of a bank a few weeks ago? Absolutely not. Were you trying to make a point? Or was that more of your "logic and reason"?
 
Something I have often wondered when incidents like this happen: What if one of the faculty or students had an illegal firearm on them. Maniac enters classroom and starts slaughtering people. Said faculty member or student retrieves illegal firearm and kills maniac. How would this be handled?

I know this is all speculation, but how would the anti-gun crowd, the pro-gun crowd and the media react. Would this person be prosecuted or hailed as a hero or both?

Again, Virginia allows you to carry a concealed weapon, if you have a permit. If you don't have such a permit, you must carry a weapon out in the open, if you're going to carry one at all. You don't need a concealed-carry permit to carry a gun; you only need one to hide it.


West Virginia has the same laws. While obtaining my permit, the instructor said that although it is legal to carry a weapon in the open, you would probably be arrested for disturbing the peace.
 
Something I have often wondered when incidents like this happen: What if one of the faculty or students had an illegal firearm on them. Maniac enters classroom and starts slaughtering people. Said faculty member or student retrieves illegal firearm and kills maniac. How would this be handled?

I know this is all speculation, but how would the anti-gun crowd, the pro-gun crowd and the media react. Would this person be prosecuted or hailed as a hero or both?

Again, Virginia allows you to carry a concealed weapon, if you have a permit. If you don't have such a permit, you must carry a weapon out in the open, if you're going to carry one at all. You don't need a concealed-carry permit to carry a gun; you only need one to hide it.


West Virginia has the same laws. While obtaining my permit, the instructor said that although it is legal to carry a weapon in the open, you would probably be arrested for disturbing the peace.
My reaction:
Trial for murder or manslaughter. Fines and or jail time for the illegal weapon.
I would expect (with the stated facts) an acquittal on the murder or manslaughter charge.

I expect the trial because a human being is dead, killed by another. Any killing should be brought to court to determine if the killer acted appropriately. The person who stopped the crazy in the example above has done the right thing, but that decision should be back-stopped by the court system. If you don't bring it to trial, you leave an open door for people to stage situations in which they could kill someone and call it self defense.
 
Fred Phelps said:
Your true horror is coming. "They shall also gird themselves with sackloth, and horror shall cover them; and shame shall be upon all faces, and baldness upon all their heads" (Eze. 7:18).

Apparently I have made god angry. :(
 
Just offering my two cents...

I understand the reasons behind why Americans have the gun laws they do, and appreciate how the situation is unlikely to change any time soon. It's not my country, and if Americans want to carry guns, so be it.

However, it seems to me, any society where a significant chunk of the population feel they need to carry around weapons to protect themselves from other members of society is not, by any understanding of the word, "civilised".

-Gumboot
 

Back
Top Bottom