VA shooting

[snafu]

He had two guns.

Have you ever tried to change clips and shoot another gun at the same time?

 

[Komrade Vostok Hazard]

Yep, in fact, i don't think we have a waiting period on guns either, the day i get my $1200 check from the military academy for staying drug free for a year I'm gonna go out and get myself a 30/06 rifle. But low and behold the state that requires 4 weeks between handgun purchases had a guy buy two handguns and go on a killing spree.

The nation with some of the strictest gun laws (Britain) has major gun related crime. The state within the USA with the strictest gun laws (California) has major gun related crime. And the school with the strict gun laws (VA Tech) had the worse mass school shooting in our nations history. But the nation with the over all most lax gun laws (Switzerland) bet you thought i was gonna say America huh? anyway, the swiss have next to nothing in the way of gun related crime. The state in the USA with some of the most lenient gun laws (Alaska) has VERY little gun related crime. And the the most gun-oriented school in America (West point) has in the range of zero gun related crimes. Am i the only one that sees a pattern here?

It's because if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them.

 

[Msixty]

He had two guns.

Have you ever tried to change clips and shoot another gun at the same time?

he most likely put the .22 away then reloaded the 9MM, but like i said before, when the top HALF the gun locks back, that's when you hit the skinny **** with a desk.

 

[Msixty]

It's because if you outlaw guns only outlaws will have them.

I rep you sir! for that excellent statement

 

[neilsthepoet]

Dudes - I recognise that you've probably had years and years of NRA propoganda shoved down your throats since birth, but let's look at this rationally.

More guns would've stopped this shooting spree?

More guns means more gun deaths. That's a simple equation. I'm sure there's a state in the US, or some statistic about an obscure European country where this isn't true, but in 99% of cases, in the real world - more guns means more gun deaths.

Would it have been better to have several people pulling guns to shoot the guy? How many would've died in the crossfire? What if people heard shooting but were confused about who started it? Then you've got "innocent" people shooting each other. Then the police come in and shoot everyone with a gun. You've just made a really bad situation far, far worse.

Then every day on campus when a student has a relationship breakup, a bad exam result, or just a lousy day...quick and easy access to a firearm is going to help the situation??

Sorry...I love guns, I love hunting, completely understand everyone else who does. But over here in Australia I am proud and happy that we've tightened up our gun laws to avoid the sort of carnage that happens year-in, year-out in the US. You have a massive problem there, but appear unable or unwilling to see it.

This is never better expressed than when you have a gun massacre like this one...and people call for more guns!!!

Yeah 2nd Ammendmenters are the brain washed one....!!


Sure!!!!





How's that Muslim thing goin in Australia?






Neils
9:20 pm
04/17/2007

 

[dshogan1]

The thing that is annoying the **** out of me is the political bullshit that is stemming from this. As a start, people are calling for "stricter gun laws" this kid had no prior record, therefor no matter how strict the laws are, he still would have gotten the gun. He had it for a year, a waiting period would not matter. Gun control in this country is already rediculous, if you want a gun you can get it, and the law isnt going to stop you. The only people stricter gun laws are gunna hurt is law abiding hunters that just want to shoot deer.

 

[daddyholland]

Yeas, in fact, he reloaded inside a classroom right in front of the students.
Ok kids, I'll give you all a quick survival tip since you seem to not know ****, when the top half of the gun gets stuck in the rear position, bullet's won't come out of the front anymore, so then you can put that 20 pound math book to work and smash the Asian kids head in. Or, you can cower in a corner while he reloads and let him kill you, that works too, given that you were probably too stupid and weak to be worth anything to society in the first place. Gotta give it up to Darwin, he really had it right with that 'natural selection' thing.

Let's just hope that at your young age, you will never have to confront the reality of your own words. Not everyone can be hero's....If those were people close to you, you would be singing a different tune....and definately with a lot more respect than you are showing here!

 

[hugo]

he most likely put the .22 away then reloaded the 9MM, but like i said before, when the top HALF the gun locks back, that's when you hit the skinny **** with a desk.

The fact is it would take at least three or four like minded individuals, unless you just happened to be within 6 feet when he started shooting. Best thing to do, otherwise, is head to the window.

 

[Msixty]

The fact is it would take at least three or four like minded individuals, unless you just happened to be within 6 feet when he started shooting. Best thing to do, otherwise, is head to the window.

yes, but you are thinking self preservation, I am talking about stopping a mad man that is attempting to kill you and all your friends, it is defiantly a dangerous idea, but given that you have a better chance of getting to him before he reloads compared to the window, and you have a chance of startling him, maybe even enough for him to drop the gun, attacking him is defiantly the more reasonable option, also, if you knock him down, he will seem more human to the other students, therefore some may help you.

essentially, it all boils down to, if you go for the window, you will probably die with a bullet in your back, if you do nothing, you will probably die with a bullet in your head, if you attack him while he is reloading, well, you might have saved your live and the lives of everyone else in the room.

 

[Msixty]

Let's just hope that at your young age, you will never have to confront the reality of your own words. Not everyone can be hero's....If those were people close to you, you would be singing a different tune....and definately with a lot more respect than you are showing here!

I will admit that my wording was overly harsh, primarily due to the fact that I was still angry at the gunman and it carried over into my typing, but I do stand by my opinion that the students were very much in the wrong to just sit there and die, and worse, let everyone around them die, it is a very sad state to be in when you just let someone shoot you and all your friends. And for the record, I would be just as harsh if the dead were personal friends of mine, there is no excuse for why they just sat there as the gunman methodically shot them one by one.

 

[thekid65]

Mxs60, I hear what yer saying..but what I think you are missing is the fact that these were 18-19 yr old well-to-do college students....probably with very little street smarts, and if the dude had his 22 (which, BTW, did NOT look like a 22) in his other hand.. I can see where one would be hesitant to approach him to try and disarm him. These were kids, damnit..not adults. And even if they were adults, not too long ago, if you recall.. there was an assload of adults that didnt do anything to disarm a bunch of ****ing towel heads with box cutters.

 

[hugo]

yes, but you are thinking self preservation, I am talking about stopping a mad man that is attempting to kill you and all your friends, it is defiantly a dangerous idea, but given that you have a better chance of getting to him before he reloads compared to the window, and you have a chance of startling him, maybe even enough for him to drop the gun, attacking him is defiantly the more reasonable option, also, if you knock him down, he will seem more human to the other students, therefore some may help you.

essentially, it all boils down to, if you go for the window, you will probably die with a bullet in your back, if you do nothing, you will probably die with a bullet in your head, if you attack him while he is reloading, well, you might have saved your live and the lives of everyone else in the room.

Knowing the average size of college classes I am betting he killed less than 1 out of five students, probably closer to one out of ten, he encountered. Your best odds were to go for the nearest exit.

 

[snafu]

Knowing the average size of college classes I am betting he killed less than 1 out of five students, probably closer to one out of ten, he encountered. Your best odds were to go for the nearest exit.

I think your best odds would've been to pull out your own glock.

And what M60 is talking about is the same thing an ex Marine told me. If someone pulls a gun on you, you don't run and hide. If you have a chance attack! With anything you have. If you have a gun, while you continue to shoot, you walk foward. You make sure your target is hit.

 

[Led_Zep_Sx]

Have you ever tried to change clips and shoot another gun at the same time?

No I haven't, but I'm guessing it'd be like driving with a cell phone. Most people can't do both at the same time. I'm thinking when he's reloading probably several times to injure that many people, you'd have a chance to do something.

The thing that is annoying the **** out of me is the political bullshit that is stemming from this. As a start, people are calling for "stricter gun laws" this kid had no prior record, therefor no matter how strict the laws are, he still would have gotten the gun. He had it for a year, a waiting period would not matter. Gun control in this country is already rediculous, if you want a gun you can get it, and the law isnt going to stop you. The only people stricter gun laws are gunna hurt is law abiding hunters that just want to shoot deer.

Ur absolutely right. It's not going to do any good to make the laws stricter than they are. This was totally premeditated and anyone could do this with no prior record.

yes, but you are thinking self preservation, I am talking about stopping a mad man that is attempting to kill you and all your friends, it is defiantly a dangerous idea, but given that you have a better chance of getting to him before he reloads compared to the window, and you have a chance of startling him, maybe even enough for him to drop the gun, attacking him is defiantly the more reasonable option, also, if you knock him down, he will seem more human to the other students, therefore some may help you.

essentially, it all boils down to, if you go for the window, you will probably die with a bullet in your back, if you do nothing, you will probably die with a bullet in your head, if you attack him while he is reloading, well, you might have saved your live and the lives of everyone else in the room.

If you ask me you could get away, but as some people have mentioned on tv, he locked and chained the doors. So if young adults today wouldn't be thinking me, me, me. They could've thought collectively, and think...hmmm he's distracted after he reloads. You'd think they'd notice that after the 10th reload and throw a f cking chair at him and knock his scrawny ass over. However, I wasn't there so I can't say they actually had the chance, but I think they did, more than once! If they didn't then take a freaking chance!

Mxs60, I hear what yer saying..but what I think you are missing is the fact that these were 18-19 yr old well-to-do college students....probably with very little street smarts, and if the dude had his 22 (which, BTW, did NOT look like a 22) in his other hand.. I can see where one would be hesitant to approach him to try and disarm him. These were kids, damnit..not adults. And even if they were adults, not too long ago, if you recall.. there was an assload of adults that didnt do anything to disarm a bunch of ****ing towel heads with box cutters.

Actually no one knows if those adults even managed to take over that aircraft. That's just an assumption. I sure hope they did, and I'd love to believe it too. But what I'm saying is....how could maybe 100+ people that saw this kid on this rampage, couldn't care enough to throw themselves on this kid? You'd think there would be one person out of that many people that would take that opportunity and save a lot of their fellow students. If it were me, personally, I'm thinking, "hey i could sit here and die, or I could go out like a badass from hell and try to beat the sh t out of this guy and save some people.....maybe die in the process, but hey i'll probably die anyways" nobody has this mindset, but me i guess. From the pictures they showed on tv, this kid looks like a little b tch to me and I don't think it would take more than 2-3 girls to get this guy on his ass. I mean, honestly, if you threw a book or a chair at this kid he'd probably keel over! There had to been 2 guys that were somewhat built, athletic or worked out that were hiding behind a book case or desk or whatever that were hiding together at the time, and it didn't cross their mind to think...hey you run at him from that side and i'll run at him from this side. "Hey man, one of us might die, but we'll save countless others and I hope we both somehow make it through this."

 

[hugo]

Nobody had a ****in' gun. The school was a gun free zone. Which means the loony had target practice. Let me explain why the rabbit runs from the coyote. The coyote has superior force. Sam Colt only made man equal if they both had guns. Most fled...most lived. You charge someone with a gun while everyone else is running... you are a dumbass. There is a thin line between courage and stupidity. Yes, if you were within ten feet you might charge otherwise ya better hope he picks another target.

If someone pulls a gun on you you attack. If someone pulls a gun on a classroom of a hundred you better run if ya ain't damn close to the gunman.

Since someone has already referred to Darwin's law let me state there is a reason animals flee (including humans) in the face of superior force and the rat only attacks when cornered. Nature has rewarded the flee instinct .

 

[Led_Zep_Sx]

according to the media the once he was in the room he chained the doors shut.

 

[Led_Zep_Sx]

so unless you're the juggernaut i don't see running as an option

 

[Led_Zep_Sx]

forgot to add...nice job by the media....show his name and face everywhere. it's exactly what he wanted so lets just give it to him right? I don't think his name or face should have been mentioned at all, he's not worth it! Who cares about the victims right...I don't think I've seen their names mentioned more than once and who cares about the 180 innocent people killed in Iraq in one day this week. Hell, I wouldn't doubt it if the media made a deal with this freak's family. Hey, kid kill a bunch of people so we finally have something to talk about, cuz the war in Iraq is getting old. You're a loser anyways so you may as well set your family up for life. Hell idk. Stupid media!

 

[snafu]

I guess it’s a pipe dream in hindsight to say attack don’t run. I think we can all agree that we weren’t there and that there might or might not have been a chance for a hero to step up to the plate. But I’m saying that if Professor Liviu Librescu
had a gun, he could have possibly saved his life and many more, as well as the students he did save. Someone else on that campus should've been armed. Fight fire with fire.

As many others have pointed out, the 2nd Amendment reads,"A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The first part is always ignored by the gun lobby.

FALSE! Gun Lobbiest reconized that they're is two parts. One having the right to a regulated militia AND the right of the people to bear arms. the fukcing comma should've been the word "SO". I mean isn't that what a comma is anyway?

 

[cybacaT]

Neils the Poet

2nd amendment? Have you even read it, or just seen the tshirt?
Back when the 2nd amendment was written, it was compulsory for all able-bodied men aged 18-60 to serve their time in the militia. As such it was a requirement that they be armed - and the FULL TEXT of this amendment makes this clear.
To snip 1 phrase "the right to bear arms" out and ignore the rest is VANDALISM of your constitution. If you are a patriotic American, I'd expect you to be appalled that so many people are desecrating your constitution by mis-quoting it this way just to justify their love of guns.


snafu/M60
If you have strict gun laws in ALL states, then you get a reduction in gun deaths. If you restrict them in 1 state, then of course you'll get higher gun deaths because the crims will arm themselves elsewhere before committing their crimes!!

Your argument is akin to this:
I live on a quiet street, but I fear there may be a criminal visit one day. So to protect my house (imagine this is a state), I arm myself to the teeth and advertise the fact, not only that but I'll have a yard full of pitbulls, and a moat filled with crocs. Now when a crim comes along, you know he's walking straight past my place and taking out the other houses because it's easier and there's less resistance.

Your answer to the other neighbours would be to arm themselves too - problem solved. Oh - not to forget the pitbulls, croc moat etc.
Now, stand back and look at the street we've just created - isn't it just brilliant? A great place to live.

OR...the govt could say we want less violence - not more. Less deaths - not more. They could outlaw the guns, outlaw people having packs of pitbulls or crocs in suburban locations, and the street returns to harmony. For the 99.999% of days where there is no criminal activity we're all peaceful and happy...and on the occassion a crim eventually does wander onto my street, the strict gun laws will mean he's far less likely to be armed, and therefore far less of a threat.

Think this is fantasy land? Look at Australia - unlike Switzerland etc we have a culture that's very similar to the US. A few years back we adopted strict gun laws because we've seen what's happened in the US. Did gun violence increase? No - it decreased. It's a simple equation - less guns means less gun deaths.

30,000 gun deaths each year in the US.

30,000 - and for what? So that some people can hunt?

30,000. That just makes my jaw drop...