04-16-2007, 06:21 PM

Since we're obviously going to talk about it, let us let the original threat contain what it is for, discussion of the event and its victims, not a discussion of gun laws and possession rights. I recommend that any debates take place here.

EDIT: Also, to whoever gave negative points to all that discussed gun control, you could have perhaps made a recommendation, a new thread, something constructive...I don't know.

04-16-2007, 06:35 PM

Disregard the neg rep... My guess is it's from the same person that left me neg rep as well... No name left... so who cares. I figure if they can't leave their name, it carries no weight.

04-16-2007, 06:40 PM

Very well.

04-16-2007, 06:54 PM

I just made my post, gave a +rep to walmartconnect. I'm pro gun, but didn't care to mix politics w/ grief in the other thread. Virtual rep to RIDE for starting the original thread, as I can't give him anymore for now.

I probably won't add to this thread. I don't argue politics very well and don't suffer those who don't have sufficient self-reliance and self-respect to protect themselves, their families, or their friends. I may seem easy going in real life, but do anything to harm me, my family, my friends, or my country, and you will see the wolverine in me. Promise.

04-16-2007, 06:58 PM

I don't really understand where the logic disconnect is. A guy picks up a gun (or multiple guns) and goes on a rampage at a place where guns are already not allowed. How can this possibly result in a call for more gun control? This guy wasn't going to say "gee, guns are illegal; I guess I better not go on a rampage." Murder is illegal too, you know. More laws is not the answer.

While students and professors carrying concealed firearms would have largely prevented this tragedy, you do have to consider whether more guns on campus would cause more problems than it would prevent. Personally, I think allowing responsible and trained individuals to carry firearms would have a far more positive than negative impact. As was proven today, there is no such thing as a gun-free location if someone decides they want to carry one.

04-16-2007, 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by pvtsenba

I don't really understand where the logic disconnect is. A guy picks up a gun (or multiple guns) and goes on a rampage at a place where guns are already not allowed. How can this possibly result in a call for more gun control? This guy wasn't going to say "gee, guns are illegal; I guess I better not go on a rampage." Murder is illegal too, you know. More laws is not the answer.

While students and professors carrying concealed firearms would have largely prevented this tragedy, you do have to consider whether more guns on campus would cause more problems than it would prevent. Personally, I think allowing responsible and trained individuals to carry firearms would have a far more positive than negative impact. As was proven today, there is no such thing as a gun-free location if someone decides they want to carry one.

Well said...

For some reason a lot of people think "Gun Free Zone" means it's a safe place... The truth is that criminals read these signs as "No law abiding citizen will shoot you if you commit a crime here... YOU the criminal will be the only person with a gun."

04-16-2007, 07:06 PM

Thanks for the new thread.
I just don't see how people canNOT comprehend that taking away guns from law-abiding citizens equals ONLY criminals (and law enforcement) having guns?! This turns average citizens into sitting ducks and gives criminals security/confidence that said average citizens are unable to stop them.
Crime Statistic Article

I take too long previewing my posts!

04-16-2007, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by RIDE

"No law abiding citizen will shoot you if you commit a crime here... YOU the criminal will be the only person with a gun."

I recommend that everyone talk to their local legislators and ask that they change the signage to state this as it is far more accurate than "Gun free zone!"

04-16-2007, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by pvtsenba

Personally, I think allowing responsible and trained individuals to carry firearms would have a far more positive than negative impact.

Someone will always point out the one responsible person out of a million that goes gun crazy and tell you that is why no one can own a gun. I would recommend that you point out all of the drivers issued state drivers licenses that go on to commit vehicular manslaughter due to negligent driving practices.

With the proper training and background check, why shouldn't someone be authorized to go almost anywhere with a handgun?

04-16-2007, 07:25 PM

*Edit* I retract my statement. I realized I was speaking mostly out of anger and grief. It's been a really emotional day.

04-16-2007, 07:30 PM

I think that if everybody had a gun, criminals would not be going on armed robberies, rampages, and random murders and shootings. They would think "hey theres a person over there, and he'll shoot back" instead of "That person is a witness and will call the cops, so i'll have to kill him too"

04-16-2007, 07:35 PM

I think we could have lived without this thread.

04-16-2007, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by baggss

I think we could have lived without this thread.

I agree.

04-16-2007, 07:48 PM

Originally Posted by baggss

I think we could have lived without this thread.

No offense walmartconnect, but baggss is right.

04-16-2007, 07:49 PM

I've been "debating" this elsewhere on other sites, and at this moment I think it's unfair to have ago at either the US's or Virginia State Gun Laws not because I'm pro-guns but because we don't know any of the key facts.

-How he acquired a Gun? (Legal or Illegal)
-Where was he able to gain so much Ammo and Weaponry without raising suspicion from either Friends or Family?
-But most importantly what drove a man to do this kind of behaviour?

This are things that need be asked over the next few days and weeks. However calling him a Coward I think is a step too far, I don't know why he done or his motivation and I could never justify it either but I would suspect he was suffering from a Mental Illness and obviously wasn't fit for mainstream society but then you have to question again.

Was this behaviour shown up before and if so why was nothing done about. Following up what someone from the UK said about comparing the US and the Rest of the World is a bit small minded. You could argue that maybe he wouldn't of been able to kill so many but to argue that he wouldn't of done something similar or tried to is small minded.

We have exprienced this kind of stuff in the UK before, not on such a scale as this but it has and unfortunately does happen. What we really need to do is do research into what causes this type of behaviour and find signs or patterns in other individuals to be able to spot it sooner.

----

To people that say this is a bad idea (ie. This Thread), I think it's just dealing with the fact that people will want to discuss the causes of the events, how to stop these kind of things in future and whats drives people to do this kind of thing. It shows no disrespect to either the families or friends of victims, if anything it just highlights how important people see this and that they want to prevant it from happening again. So no more innocent life's are lost.