Multiple Deaths In Virginia Tech Shootings
By on Apr 16th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Multiple Deaths In Virginia Tech Shootings
At least 22 people were fatally shot today on the campus of Virginia Tech University, the AP reports, while 28 people are believed to be injured. The suspected gunman is also reportedly dead.
UPDATE: On Deadline has breaking updates.
UPDATE II: The AP is reporting that this incident is the “deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history.”
UPDATE III: According to Fox News, federal sources are reporting at least 32 people dead and 29 injured.
UPDATE IV: The Collegiate Times, a student-run Virginia Tech publication, has running updates.
UPDATE V: The five emails sent to students today at Virginia Tech.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
[Comment deleted by admin]
April 16th, 2007 at 12:39 pmNice work Bush Administration and NRA getting the assualt weapon ban lifted. Sure that had NOTHING to do with this massacre. Oh wait that’s right – only poeple kill people.
Another *distinguised* accomplishment of Republican governance.
My sorry for the people in Blacksburg.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:40 pmJake – you are a vile Human being.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:48 pmThe reason I want jake for president is that we have a great comedian in the white house already, why not another one.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:53 pmSoo, we explode 20-30 preschool children a week in Iraq and it barely merits 10 seconds on the evening news but this gets wall to wall coverage? I guess the next 4 weeks will be the MSM delving into the shooters persona all day all night. This will make a nice smoke screen for the bushies.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:53 pmJake. Don’t be a bigot. Rusty. Stop politicizing this. It’s a tragic event, we should mourn the loss of life, and not place blame on political enemies. Say a prayer for them, I know I will.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:55 pmThe media will play this out and hype the fear. They will even do what Jake is doing – “Was this terrorism? Could it have been? What if terrorists attacked your school?” It’s what they do best. It is a horrible tragedy and a worthy news story. I just hope they are able to remember that this is happening EVERY DAY in Iraq. Every day another two dozen people, or more, just gone, and that is every bit as much a tragedy as this story.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:58 pmVance:
In fact, many of tomorrow’s questions to AG Gonzales will be about this shooting as well . . .
April 16th, 2007 at 12:58 pmStarting tommorrow something should be done about people just walking into schools and colleges. This is rediculous. and I don’t know who to blame but Bush might want to stop sweating our troops and put his mind elsewhere.
April 16th, 2007 at 12:59 pmAnd we don’t need gun control in this country.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:00 pmCan we please pay attention to the details of this tragedy as they emerge, and refrain from making political hay, at least until the final casualty count is in?
Have some respect. Show some dignity.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:01 pm#10
You’re right and I apologize – it’s just when you hear 25 dead, you know what kind of weapons have been used.
What a disgusting massacre.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:02 pmJust watched the White House briefing. The first 3 questions were about Bush’s policy on gun control. As usual, everything’s Bush’s fault.
Just a thought, but how many lives could have been saved had a law abiding student or faculty member had a gun?
April 16th, 2007 at 1:07 pmIt is these types of scenarios that makes me anti-gun… Civilized human beings shouldn’t need them. This tragedy is so sad and is WAY TOO COMMON. With the wealth, knowledge, and infrastructure we have as a country, we need to find a way to prevent senseless tragedies like this — without suspending habeus corpus and without removing civil liberties. There’s got to be a way, right?
April 16th, 2007 at 1:10 pmI don’t see how the President has anything to do with this event. Its another case of “Guy goes on a shooting spree for some unknown reason”. This has nothing to do with gun control because if someone wanted a gun bad enough they could still get one. 22 People dead does not make certain that an assult weapon was used. You can just as easily kill 22 people with a pistol or even a shot-gun.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:12 pmJust a thought, but how many lives could have been saved had a law abiding student or faculty member had a gun?
Comment by Storms — April 16, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Exactly. Because, to paraphrase Bill Maher (I think), when your child is in a dangerous situation like that, the thing you want most is crossfire.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:13 pmDo some research before spouting nonsense like this. 1) How do you know that somebody who had a gun just didn’t want to confront somebody who is obviously crazy and not afraid to use THEIR gun? No police officer will EVER tell you to stand your own and shoot back. They will tell you get away and get away as fast as you can. 2) Statistically the presense of a gun within a household will kill more innocent lives than it will ever save. That’s just a fact. Even the NRA can’t dispute that.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:15 pmGood luck, Storms — I see that TP is deleting my posts now.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:16 pmYou are right, it has NOTHING to do with Bush because he never had a chance to even veto a gun control bill.
But, still, it is true that you can’t cause so much death as easily with, say, a knife.
That’s why all guns should be banned.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:16 pmNo, the thing I want most is for them to be able to defend themselves & others.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:17 pmHey Jake,
Be sure to do some more profiling for us before you leave for the day.
I see that TP has gotten smart and started editing this thread, thank goodness. Yes, some of my posts have been deleted, I don’t mind, they were the posts that had your vile words in them.
It was just more proof that you are a bigoted old fart.
SULOGA!
April 16th, 2007 at 1:18 pmWe have plenty of gun control folks. The fact is that the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights is the only thing that equalizes (even though the guns we are allowed to buy are not exactly military grade) the People and the Government.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:19 pm#16 – I’m not going to get into it, but when you ask someone to do research, it’d be nice to provide some solid evidence yourself. – Saying that no police officer will ever tell me something isn’t exactly research.
Read – More Guns Less Crime. There’s a lot of research in there.
I’m done.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:20 pmJust a thought, but how many lives could have been saved had a law abiding student or faculty member had a gun?
Comment by Storms — April 16, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Uhhh…moron — those of us who actually live in Virginia know that Virginians can actually carry concealed weapons in our Commonwealth. And since VA Tech is in Blacksburg, one of the more rural areas populated with many shoot-first types, you’re showing your arrogance and ignorance again by assuming that nobody there on the scene had a gun — other than the shooter himself.
Find out the facts and do a little thinking before you post your next knee-jerk NRAss-kissing post, numnuts.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:20 pmThe thought of returning to the “cowboy days” when everybody had a gun to defend themselves scares the bejesus out of me… I’d rather look to trained professionals, such as police officers, to protect me.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:22 pmThe name of the gunman was not released. It was not known if he was a student and/or Islamic terrorist. NBC’s Pete Williams said two law enforcement officials told him the gunman killed himself with a 9-mm handgun. He said the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms was trying to track the weapons.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:29 pmAdults can obtain firearms only after jumping through hoops. Criminals only need to steal them or buy them on the black market. The Second Amendment tells us that we are compelled to defend ourselves. If we rely on police then we are fools. If it is worth protecting then fighting to save your life should be the only goal you have during a struggle. I want as many tools available to me as possible to be able to equalize against any force against me.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:34 pmLet’s hold off the finger-pointing until all the facts are in. For now we should focus on lending our support to the students of Va. Tech and the families of the victims. The fact that some are politicizing this so quickly is disgusting.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:37 pmI believe that the following comment regarding the Virginia Tech shootings by White House spokesperson Dana Perino is the fastest politicizing of a tragic event in the Bush administration’s history:
“The president believes that there is a right for people to bear arms, but that all laws must be followed.”
April 16th, 2007 at 1:37 pmMy condolences to the victims and their family’s.
Regardless of this administrations stance on “Gun Control”, I think it may be safe to say that existing Gun Laws were broken.
Also, CNN.com has this:
This is horrible, was there more than one gunman??
Again, My condolences to the victims and their family’s.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:38 pmThey have recently passed (what we call) the “shoot first” law. If you think someone is breaking into your house to buglarize it, you now can shoot first before deeming it an actual threat to your life.
So, now we have to be careful to make sure it’s not our kids trying to sneak in after curfew. Can you imagine how many times (it’s not reported, I’ve looked) kids have been shot because parents thought it was a burglar?
Come on! This has got to stop.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:40 pm“Adults can obtain firearms only after jumping through hoops. Criminals only need to steal them or buy them on the black market.”
The liberals don’t seem to care about that little fact. All they want is a ban on guns. All the intelligent arguments in the world won’t convince them otherwise.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:41 pm#40……Did Perino actually say that??? If so then this administration is more souless than I had previously thought.Im biting my tounge so as not to say something criminal right now.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:42 pm#23, Zippy
Actually, Virginia Tech had instituted a policy of an absolute ban on firearms on campus two years ago. Regardless of whatever permits they may have, students and employees are not allowed to possess guns on campus.
The policy was somewhat controversial in Virginia, as these articles from The Roanoke Times show:
http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/49915
http://www.roanoke.com/news/nrv/wb/xp-21770
You might also want to check out Section 2.2 of the Virginia Tech policies:
http://www.policies.vt.edu/5616.pdf
Perhaps you should take your own advice and “Find out the facts and do a little thinking before you post your next … post.”
April 16th, 2007 at 1:49 pmJake
Shut up.
The rest of you;
This is indeed a tragedy, but for all those that want to ban firearms remember these words:
“If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both.”-B. Franklin
April 16th, 2007 at 1:51 pm#45….Why is that soulless? Don’t you think you need a little context before jumping to a conclusion? It’s possible Perino was asked a question about what the President thinks about the 2nd Amendment in light of this incident, in which case, it’s prudent of her to state his position on it.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:51 pmAll this speculation and “what if” scenarios are sickening. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:53 pmGuns were banned on the campus? So the only person with a gun was the criminal? Kind of like what would happen across the country if we ban guns. The only people carrying guns would be the criminals.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:55 pmNo, thank you, hacker bob.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:56 pmBanning guns will do one thing-make it illegal for law biding citizens to carry them. If anybody thinks that banning guns will make it any harder for criminals to get them, they are living in fantasy land. I’m sure that when the dust settles on this case it will show that the gunman did not have a license for it.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:57 pmAdults can obtain firearms only after jumping through hoops.
You only need a clean criminal background. A smart criminal can have as many weapons as you, and probably more. Oh, and the (loose) checks only apply to the first seller in most parts of your country, specially in the cowboy states, you know whose I’m saying. The weapons fairs have a lot of second hand sellers that don’t apply checks. And, thanks to the federal structure of your country, you can buy a ton of firearms in a permisive state, and sell it at less permissive states with little problems. Jumping through hoops? Very little ones, indeed.
Criminals only need to steal them or buy them on the black market.
In fact, many weapon sellers are eager to sell weapons with little questioning. And, maybe, if weapons were not so easily available, thieves would had a hard time to sell any inexistant weapon depot? And, the “black market” is every weapons fair in your country, specially in the southern states. In Texas you have walmart-like stores only of weapons (including automatic and semi-automatic ones). Almost the only you need to show is a cowboy hat and being white.
The Second Amendment tells us that we are compelled to defend ourselves.
Defend yourself keeping accountable the police. Don’t let them shot 50 rounds to a black man, and fund the police departments, to not have shortages. And controlling the number of weapons in the market.
If we rely on police then we are fools.
Rely on forbidding firearms, then.
If it is worth protecting then fighting to save your life should be the only goal you have during a struggle.
Prevent the causes of the “struggles”.
I want as many tools available to me as possible to be able to equalize against any force against me.
Comment by Saywho — April 16, 2007 @ 1:34 pm
A weapon isn’t a screwdriver or a hammer.
April 16th, 2007 at 1:57 pmFirst off, my condolences to everyone involved in this horrible event.
We hear a lot about the gun lobby and people’s right to “defend themselves”. How about this for a right: the right to not have to defend myself.
There’s ultimately no preventing a nutcase who’s determined enough to get a weapon. But what I want protection from is being surrounded by an unknown number of people who may be carrying a lethal device (i.e., a concealed weapon) without me knowing about it, who will be able to immediately put me in a deadly situation if they draw their gun, even in “their own defense”. The ‘crossfire’ remark above is right on. And what about guns accidentally discharging?
I resent that for the sake of paranoid, afraid people who want to carry a gun, my safety has to be put at risk. I do not trust the skill or presence of mind of someone who isn’t trained not just to fire a gun, but to really know how to handle themselves in desperate circumstances. Most gun owners have no skill, knowledge, or experience in that area and are living in fantasy worlds when they imagine themselves as heroic/stoic defenders of liberty, even their own.
So you can stuff your concealed weapons–what about my right to not be surrounded by guns in a civil society?
April 16th, 2007 at 1:59 pmKevin G> You currently don’t have that right in this society, no more than you have the right not to be surrounded by people who may consume alcohol before driving. Why is it the people who support gun rights the paranoid ones? You seem to be just as paranoid that these people, the vast majority of which are upstanding citizens, are going to randomly shoot you.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:03 pmExtreme tragedy. Guns are already banned at Va Tech. Seems like the shooter disregarded the gun ban.
Va Tech in 2006:. A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly.
Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. “I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.”
April 16th, 2007 at 2:11 pmGuns were banned on the campus? So the only person with a gun was the criminal? Kind of like what would happen across the country if we ban guns. The only people carrying guns would be the criminals.
Comment by Brent H — April 16, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
I will say more.
Shotguns were banned in the state? Most probably not if registered as a sporting one.
Was the person only (?) with the weapon a criminal before the shooting? If not, your position is in serious trouble. The actual law permitted this citizen with the right to have the weapons.
Any person carrying or having access to a gun is a potential criminal, given the circumstances. How many of the school killers where weird boys using the daddy’s weapons? A lot.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:15 pm#43 Extreme tragedy. Guns are already banned at Va Tech. Seems like the shooter disregarded the gun ban.
Va Tech in 2006:. A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly.
Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. “I’m sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly’s actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus.â€
Comment by muckdog — April 16, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
Shotguns are banned in the state? Or in the USA? Were the weapons easily bought thanks to the permisive laws of the State or the USA?
Yes, yes, yes.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:19 pm> Va Tech in 2006:. A bill that would have given college students and
> employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a
> shot being fired in the General Assembly.
What a fracking crazy country. College students and employees with … guns … on campus? The US once used to be a _civil_ society, right? Right?
April 16th, 2007 at 2:19 pm#46 Oops, I fear the correct answers are “the shotguns aren’t banned in the state, aren’t banned in the USA, and can be acquired thanks to the permisive laws of the USA.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:23 pm“If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both.â€
Liberty =/= owning artillery.
Artillery =/=> security.
Someone wants to randomly shoot you he will, even if you carry.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:24 pmMike D, you’re missing my point. People who want to carry concealed weapons are making the initial choice, based on an imaginary danger which could theoretically happen–an abstract, personal fantasy. That’s where my generalization of “paranoia” comes from–the desire to carry a lethal weapon based on a purely imaginary notion of what could happen. Even if it’s based on something bad that did happen to someone else somewhere else some time in the past, to project that into the future is paranoid.
For me to then be worried about being in the presence of such people hiding guns, who are more than likely not well-equipped to handle an emergency situation, but who have been given the right to carry around death-dealing devices without anyone else knowing about it, is closer to simple pragmatism. Concealed weapons allow the high incidence of gun accidents at home to travel out into the common sphere. It’s simple logic–the risk to the average person in the average, non-crisis situation is increased, not decreased. And it’s most likely the same in most crises, too.
We can’t control or predict when someone goes over the edge and snaps, so fearing that is paranoia. We can control how guns are made available and made present in the public commons, and the known risk that creates, and so a concern over that is a civic issue. Maybe you can blur the issue and call that paranoia too, but my fear doesn’t make we want to carry a gun everywhere I go.
My personal opinion is that most people who carry concealed weapons are selfishly justifying their own fear by wrapping it in the patina of a higher cause, when they’re in fact spending most of their time putting everyone around them at greater risk. Our society largely gives people the right to do that, and I disagree with that.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:28 pmI have a thought:
If the right of bearing a weapon is a sign of freedom, so then it’s full A-OK let any Iraqi have at least one and defend his life, even in an USA checkpoint, itsn’t?
April 16th, 2007 at 2:29 pmwhy wasn’t shooter in usa military over in Iraq ???
they need all the murderers they can get !!!
April 16th, 2007 at 2:31 pmy’all know that the shooter is gonna be a WHITE guy !!
bawahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa
April 16th, 2007 at 2:32 pmComment by Evil Spaniard — April 16, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
Actually, each Iraqi household is authorized to possess one AK-47 or similar weapon per MAM (military age male) residing there. This is to protect them from what the Iraqis refer to as “ali Baba” (thieves).
Last I checked, they were authorized to carry them in public also.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:34 pmAnd we don’t need gun control in this country.
Comment by Kay
Criminals dont care about your gun controls. They will simply ignore them and go kill people.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:36 pmThis is a national tragedy of horrendous proportion and consequence.
This kind of event happens daily in Iraq to Iraqis.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:36 pm#33 Exley, I’m pretty sure VT has rules not he books about underage drinking too.
You know what is lost in all of this is that the NRA and their supporters would have argued vehemently for the shooters right to own those firearms right up until the moment he pulled the trigger, after that he is just another criminal to them, just another individual who will help them raise their argument about “everyone being armed makes us safer”. Well, seeing as they generally come from the right and seeing how the right has been wrong on nearly everything they have said or done over the last few years I’ll pass on giving any of their arguments any credence. What I have always believed, and constitutional scholar generally agree is that ownership is a right. I also believe that there are some people who should never own firearms, and that list includes many people who are “law abiding citizens”
April 16th, 2007 at 2:39 pmConnecting the Dots » Archive » NJ School Mocks Christians with Columbine-Style ‘Mock Hostage Drill’
“April 3, 2007
TRENTON, NJ (CHRISTIAN NEWSWIRE) — Bob Pawson, National Coordinator of the Scriptures in Schools Project, responds to reports that Burlington Township High School in NJ staged a mock school shooting and hostage drama — complete with anti-Christian bigotry. After school was dismissed, scores of Christian students went home and informed their parents of this vile outrage.”
People should pay close attention to the news about these latest shootings. Since we seem to live in a country where lies have become the norm, and patterns of tragedy is designed to attract attention away from the nations’ problems. Separation of church and state doesn’t seem to exist in this country anymore.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:43 pmAgain we see the results of narrow-minded NRA policies. It’s no wonder George H.W. Bush rescinded his NRA “lifetime” membership.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:45 pmAnd who shall we credit the lacking seperation of church and state to, hmmmm?
April 16th, 2007 at 2:48 pmAnti-Christian bigotry is simply blowback from having the neo-con definition of Christianity shoved in our faces by the current corrupt regime.
Again we see the results of narrow-minded NRA policies. It’s no wonder George H.W. Bush rescinded his NRA “lifetime†membership.
Comment by And You Thought REAGAN Was Stupid
If the news is correct it might have been hand guns not an M1 Abrams tank.
Some of you might want to look back at your statements about the U.S. Contitution over the past 5 years. The U.S. Constitution is not to be used only when you want to apply it to your argument of the day. Guns in American citizens hands is just as important as the right to free speech.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:50 pmNow Do You Understand?
by Larry C Johnson
Breaking news! At least 22 Virginia Tech students gunned down. Cable news channels are wild with activity as they pump up the coverage a focus on the latest “crisis”. The media is commenting that this shooting is overwhelming the local medical facilities. Crisis is in the air. Well, at least it ain’t Iraq.
Okay. Big deep breath. This is horrible and this is tragic and this gives us an idea of what it is like to live just one day in Iraq. Consider the following:
April 16th, 2007 at 2:51 pmhttp://noquarter.typepad.com/
.
The media is commenting that this shooting is overwhelming the local medical facilities. Crisis is in the air. Well, at least it ain’t Iraq.
Comment by Katy
Unfortunately, Katy, this is just what the Bushies want. Anything to get the attention off of them for a while so they can go hide back in their caves and screw this country more over Iraq.
April 16th, 2007 at 2:58 pmDeath toll up to 30 or 32. Shooter was NOT using a shotgun, at least not the whole time. Listen to this cell phone recording. Multiple, closely spaced shots fired. Then at the end a very load single shot, probably a police shot gun.
http://news.yahoo.com/fc/US/Virginia_Tech_Shootings
Cell phone captures Va. Tech gunfire AP – A cell phone captures gunfire at Virginia Tech University Monday morning.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:01 pmFrom http://collegemedia.com/
Collegiate Times: Breaking News
Monday, April 16th 2007 2:37PM
April 16th, 2007 at 3:03 pmFox News is reporting that the police have recovered two 9mm handguns.
#65 *loud
April 16th, 2007 at 3:04 pmproud dem – i understand the delight that the bushies take in any news that takes the spotlight away from their own criminal activities,
but there is no reason that this story should not get it’s due coverage…
and those were larry johnson’s words, not mine…
April 16th, 2007 at 3:05 pmi posted that because my reference to it earlier was deleted…
just to be sure…
#66 – Katy,
No problem. Just reiterating the “Ohh, Shiny” distraction logic the republican’ts seem to be using more often than not.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:12 pmThis seems to be a unfortunately frequent occurrence in the USA. My question is, how often does this happen in European schools? If it does happen, what is the occurrence rate? If it does not happen or is much less frequent then what is the difference in the culture?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:12 pmBAN CHAINS TOO!!!
April 16th, 2007 at 3:14 pmOf course, you’re not allowed to have guns on college campuses. If someone there were armed it may have only been 2 or 3 but now it’s 22 people killed because the only people allowed to carry guns are the people who do it illegally.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:19 pmComment by Evil Spaniard — April 16, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
Actually, each Iraqi household is authorized to possess one AK-47 or similar weapon per MAM (military age male) residing there. This is to protect them from what the Iraqis refer to as “ali Baba†(thieves).
Last I checked, they were authorized to carry them in public also.
Comment by hacker bob — April 16, 2007 @ 2:34 pm
Oh, and what happens to the ones that approach an USA military control in the night with its AK-47? They are shoot and charged of speeding when approaching the control?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:21 pmAnd more, hacker bob, are you saying that Iraq is safer than the USA thanks to the greater freedom to have automatic weapons (that AK47 are)?
Or are you saying that 140k soldiers, 200k mercenaries and the unknown batalions of already trained iraqi forces aren’t enough to stop thieves?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:26 pmOh, and what happens to the ones that approach an USA military control in the night with its AK-47? They are shoot and charged of speeding when approaching the control?
Comment by Evil Spaniard — April 16, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
Uhh yeah they get shot if they approach a convoy at night or day with an AK-47. Noone is out past curfew. And if you’re out past curfew with an AK you’re up to no good anyways. And we dont have to charge them with a false crime, it’s enough that they had the AK on them.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:26 pmMaybe we could find out exactly what the hell is going on with this situation before we go off on the gun control argument? Those kids aren’t even cold yet.
Jake, you are an insufferable prick.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:27 pmIt has been reported that the shooter had two 9mm hand guns with multiple clips. Since a clip holds 10 rounds and the hi capacity clips can hold 15-18 (depending on the gun), he only needed 5-6 clips to do major damange. It has also been reported that when he went into the building, he chain locked the door behind him so that everyone was stuck in there with him.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:27 pmJesus, CNN’s website just updated the dead to 31.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:28 pm#68 This seems to be a unfortunately frequent occurrence in the USA. My question is, how often does this happen in European schools? If it does happen, what is the occurrence rate? If it does not happen or is much less frequent then what is the difference in the culture?
Comment by rod rushton — April 16, 2007 @ 3:12 pm
The stricter gun possesion laws in Europe? Maybe the lack of shops selling semi-automatic weapons?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:31 pmStorms:
Read – More Guns Less Crime. There’s a lot of research in there.
No need. I let Mary Rosh keep abreast of this cutting edge (heh-heh) research, and just tell me how good the stuff is.
Cheers,
April 16th, 2007 at 3:36 pmBAN CHAINS TOO!!!!!
April 16th, 2007 at 3:38 pmThe stricter gun possesion laws in Europe? Maybe the lack of shops selling semi-automatic weapons?
Comment by Evil Spaniard
Oy. There’s a clue….
April 16th, 2007 at 3:38 pm#81 – Can we ban you too?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:39 pmShut up, Jake. This isn’t the place for your sickness.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:40 pmOkay a semi-auto handgun. I don’t know what kind and I am speculating, but maybe like this one?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intratec_TEC-DC9
Please note how this weapon was banned in 1994 under the assualt weapons ban. When the ban was struck down in 2001 the weapon was back and available for cheap.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:40 pm#73 Uhh yeah they get shot if they approach a convoy at night or day with an AK-47. Noone is out past curfew. And if you’re out past curfew with an AK you’re up to no good anyways. And we dont have to charge them with a false crime, it’s enough that they had the AK on them.
Comment by TomPaine — April 16, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Yeah, of course, no one has been shot in a USA control by mistake ever.
So clarify this for me: weapon is a sign of freedom, a right, iraqis have the right to have a personal AK47 and use it for self defense, but aren’t allowed to use it really.
So what if they are in the market or in the queue for getting a job and a suicide bomber decides to approach? Why the citizens with the right of having an AK47 for self defense can’t have it in the most dangerous scenarios, as has been proven time and again, to preserve its life shooting the terrorist before it blows itself in a populated area?
Maybe because common people carrying weapons is dangerous and the american military know it?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:41 pmNow, law enforcement officials are saying the gunman carried two weapons, a 9-mm pistol and a 22-caliber handgun, Williams reported. They said gunman chained the doors of the classroom building so his potential victims could not escape and police could not enter.
Richard Kolko in Washington, a spokesman for the FBI in Washington, said there was no immediate evidence to suggest it was a terrorist attack, “but all avenues will be explored.â€
Good.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:42 pmOk, I’m going to stop posting numbers by my response posts. This is twice I’ve gotten the numbers wrong on these posts today.
See, trolls, unlike you guys, I can admit to my mistakes.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:42 pmRusty and Zooey, sitting in a tree . . .
April 16th, 2007 at 3:43 pmHi, Mistress Z! :)
Hope your flu is under control :D
April 16th, 2007 at 3:44 pmSKY NEWS: Witnesses said he was heavily armed and entered the college looking for his girlfriend… He reportedly lined up students and opened fire at them. He was said to be an Asian, in his mid-20s…
April 16th, 2007 at 3:46 pmFor the record, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) was a provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a ten-year ban signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The ban expired on September 13, 2004, as part of the law’s sunset provision, and not because Bush was President.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:49 pmSKY NEWS: Witnesses said he was heavily armed and entered the college looking for his girlfriend… He reportedly lined up students and opened fire at them. He was said to be an Asian, in his mid-20s…
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:46 pm
Still hoping it’s a terrorist? You’re a sick little boy.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:50 pmRusty and Zooey, sitting in a tree . . .
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:43 pm
Spoken like a mentally disturbed, poorly socialized, and improperly parented 12 year old boy. You’re a little lunatic Jake*ss.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:51 pm#84 if he hhad only handguns annd a shotgun he had to be one hellof a shot, bbecause it is very difficult to hit anything with a hangn unless it is stationary or very very close (inside 20 feet or so)
April 16th, 2007 at 3:55 pmCan we somehow blame Virgil Goode?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:56 pmFor the record, Asian terrorist groups have attacks subways and used chemical / biological weapons. Need I remind everyone (NOT on the “Ignore List”) of 12/7 as well?
April 16th, 2007 at 3:57 pmHi, Mistress Z! :)
Hope your flu is under control :D
Comment by Evil Spaniard
Oh my god, don’t say the “flu” word. Just a cold, and it’s getting better. Thanks, Senor Evil.
April 16th, 2007 at 3:59 pmRusty and Zooey, sitting in a tree . . .
Comment by Jake
What the f*ck are you talking about? Get a life, you idiot.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pm#90 For the record, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) was a provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a ten-year ban signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The ban expired on September 13, 2004, as part of the law’s sunset provision, and not because Bush was President.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
Oh, I realize that you missed the debate discussing this. Bush conveniently skipped renewing the act, having the opportunity to. Curious, isn’t?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pmthe Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) was a provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a ten-year ban signed into law by President Bill Clinton. The ban [was allowed to be] expired on September 13, 2004, as part of the law’s sunset provision [] because Bush was President.
yea, that’s better… accuracy is paramount…
but this is may be more of a mental health issue, than a gun rights issue…
April 16th, 2007 at 4:01 pmFor the record, Asian terrorist groups have attacks subways and used chemical / biological weapons. Need I remind everyone (NOT on the “Ignore Listâ€) of 12/7 as well?
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
For the record, Asia has 3 bilion people living there, if not more. You’re linking the gas attacks done in the Tokio underground to the Taliban in Afghanistan to the baathists in Iraq to the boy with asian aspect in your country? Talk about tinfoil paranoid theorists
April 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pmFor the record, President George W. Bush had promised to sign a renewal of the ban if Congress passed it — that Feinstein amendment was voted down 8-90. This rider was widely hailed by Democrats as the only viable chance for a renewal of the AWB before its expiration. Again, not GWB’s fault. The President is also NOT Asian, and it was verified that he stayed in D.C. all morning today.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:04 pmZooey – ingore the trolls. they are just here to piss you off, they have no ideas, no contributions, nothing to offer. sadly, they don’t care how stupid their comments are, how much they embarrass themselves, or how little their comments matter. don’t waste your time on them.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:08 pmThe President is also NOT Asian, and it was verified that he stayed in D.C. all morning today.
Comment by Jake
Hubba wha? And has to do with the price of coffee in Starbucks, why?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:09 pmFor the record, President George W. Bush had promised to sign a renewal of the ban if Congress passed it — that Feinstein amendment was voted down 8-90. This rider was widely hailed by Democrats as the only viable chance for a renewal of the AWB before its expiration. Again, not GWB’s fault.
So in one hand, Bush is ‘The Deciderer’, but in the other hand is puppet of the Congress? How convenient.
The President is also NOT Asian, and it was verified that he stayed in D.C. all morning today.
Comment by Jake — April 16, 2007 @ 4:04 pm
You’re sure of both your instances? Saudi arabs are Asian, and probably he could have used the ‘plastic turkey’ trick. No one would have been able to discern.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:12 pmZooey – ingore the trolls. they are just here to piss you off, they have no ideas, no contributions, nothing to offer. sadly, they don’t care how stupid their comments are, how much they embarrass themselves, or how little their comments matter. don’t waste your time on them.
Comment by Rusty
Thanks, Rusty. I know all about that idiot. :)
I don’t usually respond to him at all, but he has to pull his assh*le routine on threads like this, and I lose my temper. Thankfully, I’m on his Ignore List. **eyes rolling**
April 16th, 2007 at 4:15 pmTo all of you that think carrying guns is a good thing,
how much time will it pass after you all have tanks so you can feel much safer?
Having guns has never ever been a solution to crime. It is a solution to weapon companies, of course.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:16 pmgotta love homeland security!!!!
is he considered a ‘domestic’ terrorist?
f. u bush
April 16th, 2007 at 4:40 pmThe problem with owning guns,
April 16th, 2007 at 4:40 pmis the inevitable use of them.
Having guns has never ever been a solution to crime. It is a solution to weapon companies, of course.
Comment by Juan C — April 16, 2007 @ 4:16 pm
It’s also a solution to eliminate hordes of facsist Christians when they really start to take over because I guarentee they will be heavily armed.
April 16th, 2007 at 4:51 pmBlame Bush? LOL! What a bunch of idiots! How about blaming the poor SOB that pulled the trigger?
April 16th, 2007 at 4:54 pm> It’s also a solution to eliminate hordes of facsist Christians when they
> really start to take over because I guarentee they will be heavily armed.
Zombies!!
April 16th, 2007 at 5:12 pmSome of you might want to look back at your statements about the U.S. Contitution over the past 5 years. Comment by ggibson
GG: You might want to look back at your comments about the Second Amendment earlier today, and how I Supreme Court precedent stating that the Second Amendment provides no individual right to bear arms, versus your cite to a Texas District Court.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:15 pman interesting take:
Cell Phones, Blogs Enable Live Reporting Of Virginia Tech Shooting
Students and faculty communicated with each other during the crisis through use of social networking sites like Facebook, as well as text messaging and e-mail.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:16 pm[...]
http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=199001329
.
Of course, you’re not allowed to have guns on college campuses. If someone there were armed it may have only been 2 or 3 but now it’s 22 people killed . . . Comment by TomPaine.
More likely, there would have been more shootings over the past few years and more than 22 people killed in them. Why make it easier for people to kill others?
April 16th, 2007 at 5:18 pmCCN’s website now reporting 33 dead, including the gunman.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:32 pmThe scary thing is that now some sick f*ck is going to want to “out do” this guy.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:33 pm“Nice work Bush Administration and NRA getting the assualt weapon ban lifted. Sure that had NOTHING to do with this massacre. Oh wait that’s right – only poeple kill people.”
Too bad for your argument the shooter didn’t use so-called “assault weapons”. Neither did the PA school shooter or the Columbine kids.
“And we don’t need gun control in this country”
Nice try. We already have it. Just like we have drug control…and we know how well that works.
“Exactly. Because, to paraphrase Bill Maher (I think), when your child is in a dangerous situation like that, the thing you want most is crossfire”
That’s idiotic. What, you wouldn’t want the police to shoot the bad guy on a rampage? Why wouldn’t their fire be “cross fire?” Duh.
Shooters like this purposefully target places they think they won’t face armed resistance.
“Statistically the presense of a gun within a household will kill more innocent lives than it will ever save. That’s just a fact. Even the NRA can’t dispute that.”
Wrong. That’s been debunked so many times I laugh when I see nonsense like that. Even the most conservative estimates of defensive gun use suggest it happens many times more often than homicide.
A pool at your house is 100 times more likely to harm you than a gun. Why not ban pools?
” I’d rather look to trained professionals, such as police officers, to protect me.”
They can’t be everywhere. Why should I be defenseless when they’re not around?
“To all of you that think carrying guns is a good thing,
how much time will it pass after you all have tanks so you can feel much safer?”
Who wants to carry a tank around? Not me. But my gun does make me feel safer because I’m not helpless in a situation like this.
“Having guns has never ever been a solution to crime. It is a solution to weapon companies, of course.”
Tell that to the hundreds of thousands of people (including myself) who have faced down violent criminals and protected their own lives with firearms.
If guns don’t serve a purpose when facing violent crooks and maniacs…why do cops have them?
I could spend all day debunking the anti gun myths and mendacity here…but the basics are this:
1) Banning guns isn’t going to stop this from happening–any more than banning crack prevents drug addiction.
2) The idea CCW permit holders are going to create the OK Corral on every corner is risible nonsense. 40+ states allow CCW, and not one of them has seen an increase in violence because of it.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:39 pmComment by progunprogressive.com
Exactly what makes you “progressive?”
April 16th, 2007 at 5:47 pmWhat makes you think I’m not a progressive?
You could try going to the website and clicking on the link that says “about”… http://www.progunprogressive.com/?p=3
My progressive credentials are solid. I favor choice, gay marriage, environmental protection, universal health insurance, drug, decriminalization, an end to the war in Iraq, and social justice in general.
Why the presumption that that progressivism necessitates adherence to to a failed policy like prohibitionism? I’m a social liberal that favors choice…including getting to choose to protect your own life.
April 16th, 2007 at 6:06 pm“Criminals dont care about your gun controls. They will simply ignore them and go kill people.”
However, if we don’t have gun control, it is more likely average joes will become criminals out of a passion of the moment kind of thing. It’s very possible this very incident was that kind of thing.
I’m not saying ban all guns. However, allowing pretty much ANYONE to get a weapon is a foolish thing. Not to mention we allow people to get weapons that are designed to kill PEOPLE.
There’s no need to have an assault rifle/machinegun. Those guns should be banned…period. I guess I have to tolerate handguns because many people use them for self defense. However, noone should be allowed to carry a handgun on them wherever they go unless they are law enforcement or of some type of security firm. Handguns for the public oughta be kept in the home for self defense…not legally be carried out in public.
Also, a nice punishment would be mandatory death penalty for attempted murder/murder with a firearm. Of course, that does not include self defense/accident. Just making note of that cause some people are just stupid like that and might raise a question about that.
Of course…we can’t overlook that this was a horrible event and EVERYONE should be respectful of the victims and their families. My thoughts/prayers go out to them.
April 16th, 2007 at 6:49 pmwow@119
I’m not gonna go crazy about pro choice, gay marriage, environment protection, end of war in Iraq, social justice
HOWEVER
Drug decriminalization? That would probably just make things worse and would likely CREATE more drug users!
It’s bad enough we aren’t tough enough on drugs…but to let em off the hook completely?
April 16th, 2007 at 6:54 pmWhy the presumption that that progressivism necessitates adherence to to a failed policy like prohibitionism? I’m a social liberal that favors choice…including getting to choose to protect your own life.
Comment by progunprogressive.com
Why do you assume I’m anti-gun?
April 16th, 2007 at 6:55 pmPosted by Zippy the other Pinhead
“Uhhh…moron — those of us who actually live in Virginia know that Virginians can actually carry concealed weapons in our Commonwealth. And since VA Tech is in Blacksburg, one of the more rural areas populated with many shoot-first types, you’re showing your arrogance and ignorance again by assuming that nobody there on the scene had a gun — other than the shooter himself.
Find out the facts and do a little thinking before you post your next knee-jerk NRAss-kissing post, numnuts”
Perhaps it’s you who should do some research dumbass.
Guns are prohibited on the Virginia Tech Campus. A bill to allow concealed carry on college campuses died in committee in Virginia this session.It’s very unlikely that anyone there had a gun because they were disarmed by the Virginia Tech Administration. A spokesman for the school expressed his pleasure that the bill was defeated by saying that people on college campuses would feel safer without concealed carry.I wonder how safe they feel now.
Do your homework before you spout off!!
April 16th, 2007 at 7:00 pm“I’d rather look to trained professionals, such as police officers, to protect me.”
Yeah right. How did that work out today?
Who can forget the pictures of Columbine where the cops waited outside as people were being massacred?Even today I saw video of cops hunkered down as shots rang out. The police are not here to protect you. They want to go home at the end of their shift just like you. This is not meant to bash cops, I’m just saying that they’re probably not going to be there to protect you and when they do arrive on the scene they’re going to protect themselves first. It’s not like TV where they heroically bust in to save the day.
Get out of your fantasy world.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:07 pmI have not interceded in this incident because I feel that it is a tragedy too horrific for words. My heart bleeds for each and every family who has lost a loved one. Humor is not in the least bit appropiate in this thread or forum.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:11 pmHowever, if we don’t have gun control, it is more likely average joes will become criminals out of a passion of the moment kind of thing. It’s very possible this very incident was that kind of thing.
The possession of a particular object is not what creates crimes of passion. The guy in question today might have built a bomb in the absence of a knife or gun or sword.
The gun control laws you favor meant that everyone else was disarmed when the nut went on his rampage. That made it worse, not better.
Not to mention we allow people to get weapons that are designed to kill PEOPLE
What guns aren’t designed to kill people? When they make magic stun guns like Star Trek that I can afford…I’ll carry one.
The problem with your argument is that guns are designed to propel lead at high speed–that’s it. What they hit is up to the person handling them.
There’s no need to have an assault rifle/machinegun
No need for a big screen TV or a cruise ship or an SUV either. It’s about rights, not needs. You have a right to a rifle.
Assault weapons are by definition fully automatic, as are machine guns. Fully auto weapons are not generally available to the public under the National Firearms Act of 1934. The gun control you want here has been on the books for almost 8 decades.
However, noone should be allowed to carry a handgun on them wherever they go unless they are law enforcement or of some type of security firm.
You mean the poorly trained sad sack idiot working for Wackenhut should get to carry but I can’t? Baloney.
Cops can be bad people too, you know. Amadou Diallo’s family and Abner Louima might have some words for you.
There are 40+ states that allow private citizens to carry, and none of them has found CCW permit holders to be a problem. In fact, studies have shown that CCW permit holders are more law abiding than the general public.
Let’s not get off on a tangent on the drug thing…but drugs could be legalized tomorrow and I wouldn’t touch them. Much like making guns illegal doesn’t keep crooks from getting them…making drugs illegal doesn’t keep people from using them if they want them. Even if decriminalization made a few more addicts…let’s take the 2Bil dollars the DEA spends every year and spend it on real addiction treatment and prevention instead of pissing it down a well the way we do today.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:15 pmWhile my ‘non-denominational’ status limits the effectiveness of any praying I might do, I’m sure I speak for a lot of us here when I say that this is deeply saddening and frightening and our hearts go out to the victims, friends and families.
From my perspective on the left side of the continuum, I generally cringe when I see otherwise electable progressives tout gun legislation because I simply don’t think that the argument is winnable in this country. Horrible incidents such as this do highlight that the well-regulated militia does not exist, and it would seem reasonable for rational gun owners to distance themselves from the extreme fringe that opposes any and all means of gun control. Having been held up myself, my instinct was not to shoot first, but rather why do these punks have guns? Acquired legally or not, I’m sure that it was too easy, contrary to the previous ‘jumping through hoops’ nonsense offered previously. Law abiding gun owners that oppose every proposed restriction on firearm acquisitions do themselves a disservice by casting doubt on their own motivations.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:17 pm“Adults can obtain firearms only after jumping through hoops. Criminals only need to steal them or buy them on the black market.â€
That’s true but what is funny is that after law abiding citizens buy guns to protect themselves, criminals break into their homes and steal the guns. Endgame: criminals have the guns. I don’t see how it helps anyone to have a gun in their home.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:34 pm“Oh, I realize that you missed the debate discussing this. Bush conveniently skipped renewing the act, having the opportunity to. Curious, isn’t it?”
What’s curious is your lack of factual knowledge. Bush had nothing to d with the assault weapons ban expiring. He said he would sign a renewal if a renewal were passed. He can’t sign a law that doesn’t make it to his desk.
Get your facts straight.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:37 pmJake is what you scrap off your shoe after walking around in a dog walk area.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:56 pmJake is what you scrape off your shoe after walking in a dog walk area.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:58 pmComment by Uncle Ho — April 16, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
April 16th, 2007 at 8:03 pmI’ll say it again!
Humor is not in the least bit appropiate in this thread or forum.
Walt, I was NOT being humorous, just stating a fact.
Martin Luther King Jr. once said that the United States is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world. 40 years later, nothing has changed. I see NO humor in that. We are truly a sick society.
April 16th, 2007 at 8:23 pmApparently, the shooter was a chinese national here on a student visa.
April 16th, 2007 at 8:34 pmI don’t see how it helps anyone to have a gun in their home.
Then don’t choose to have one. The definition of freedom itself is me getting to make a choice for me that you wouldn’t make for you.
For my money, I’d rather be armed when facing violent attack than disarmed.
April 16th, 2007 at 8:37 pmComment by Uncle Ho — April 16, 2007 @ 8:23 pm
I will put it in a different light. While I spar with Jake in different threads, this one should exist only to honor those whose lives were so disrupted or ended by a single mad man. Their kin, will have to live with this tragedy for an entire lifetime. While Jake or someone impersonating him made a very crass statement in post #1, I believe that we must support the survivors of this horrific tragedy.
April 16th, 2007 at 8:45 pmWe haven’t been attacked on U.S. soil since 9/11…
…WORST presidency ever…
…worst mass murder in U.S. history (Iraq)…
worst attack of American citizens (9/11)…
…worst campus attack in U.S. history…
…Bushiva, L’il Dick and ALL of their supporters are CURSED!
April 16th, 2007 at 8:56 pmWhat makes a person snap and lose it? Killing innocent people solves NOTHING!
April 16th, 2007 at 10:08 pmTo all of you out there who are blaming this on the Bush Administration: you need to take a step away from yourselves. Stop trying to tell us how you hate Bush so much and actually talk about the real problem. THIS IS NOT BUSH’S FAULT, IT’S THE SHOOTER’S FAULT!!! The shooter is the one who murdered all of those innocent people. People have lost their family and friends in this shooting. How would you feel if one of those people was related to you? I don’t think that you would want people blaming the Bush Administration for this. You would want people to pray for the loved ones that you lost. You would want people to pray for you and all of the other families and friends of the victims so that you could all get through this.
So to all those who were involoved in some way with this shooting, I am very sorry that all of this happened. I don’t know about the people posting on here, but I will be praying for both the victims and their families and friends tonight. May God bless them all.
April 16th, 2007 at 10:08 pmComment by Sarah — April 16, 2007 @ 10:08 pm
Sarah,
April 16th, 2007 at 10:25 pmExactly my sentiments. I would have difficulty expressing it any better.
Comment by Sarah #139
George W. Bush has BANKRUPTED this country…
…in the name of “SECURITY”…
…funny how this gunman managed to not only kill people in a college dormitory…
…he’s THEN able to walk unchallenged and unmolested by ANY campus SECURITY…
…to another part of the campus and murder 30 MORE people…
…in Bush’s POST 9/11 America…
…you know the one Sarah…
… where “We haven’t been attacked on American soil in five years since 9/11″…
…implying this has been the case because BUSH has kept us SAFE?”
…HOW in the hell in Bush’s post 9/11 SUPER MAXIMUM SECURITY America…
…where our phone calls, mail, and library books are being monitored…
…does a Chinese/ Asian foreign national (reported to be the shooter)…
…get access to such DEADLY weapons,let alone rampage on a MAJOR college campus without being challenged by armed security at least?
…After ALL of the money we’re SUPPOSEDLY spending in Iraq, Afghanistan AND America to “KEEP US FREE and SAFE”…
…You’re DAMNED skippy I’m blaming Bush!
…and FYI…
…I can blame Bush AND pray for the victims at the same time…
…YES Sarah, I not only despise Bush…
…I despise people who support/defend him…
…and it has EVERYTHING to do with my outrage at what happened at VA Tech today…
April 16th, 2007 at 10:42 pmbig pappa… html lesson… putting b tags bolds items. LOL!
April 16th, 2007 at 10:49 pmbig papa you are delusional. this was a horrible, horrible tragedy. i’m not prepared to blame anyone just yet – but if you want to criticize the vt cops, fine. but bush? cmon…
April 17th, 2007 at 12:24 amhttp://rampagesarefun.blogspot.com/
Can you believe somebody actually thinks this is a game?
April 17th, 2007 at 12:44 amWhat’s the world coming to?
To the pro-gun people saying that “there are already controls on weapons and haven’t worked”, simply say, the gun controls at the USA are very loose, at best. If it’s true that the attacker had at least two hand guns and a fistful of clips, it only shows that handgun possesion is too loose. Hand guns have no hunting purpose, so they are plain offensive devices.
To the pro-gun people that say that the law abids citizens to wear weapons for self protection, just to remind them that Virginia is ALREADY an state who permits carry concealed weapons, so anyone can buy a hand gun just outside the campus and do a rampage. In the other hand, being in a concealed gun abiding state hasn’t saved the students. So much for the self-protection argument.
April 17th, 2007 at 8:46 amGood thing only law abiding citizens can purchase guns. Oh wait…this guy was a law abiding citizen until he deciding to murder 30 innocent people. I guess every law abiding citizen can become a criminal with one squeeze of a trigger.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:17 amamerica is rapidly becoming the curse of the world, you create havoc in countries all over the world.
April 17th, 2007 at 6:11 pmyou are globally ignorant only 3% of you have a passportn
nd you have an idiot for a president, if george bush is the best you can come up with out of 260 million people , you have more problems than you realise
As a private security professional since 1982 I can speak to a simple fact: criminals will always be able to obtain firearms, no matter how strict the laws enacted. In Japan there has been a virtual total ban on privately owned firearms; yet the criminal element in that country is armed to the teeth. When Australia enacted a total ban of private firearms ownership, their murder rate skyrocketed to the point that several countries placed the land down-under on the caution list for international travel.
In the VT incident, the shooter had already violated numerous existing laws regarding the carrying of firearms. If the gun laws allowed students to be legally armed, the outcome would have been much different; there would have been fewer innocent victims. To obtain a Virginia concealed weapons carry permit, the applicant must attend concealed carry classes mandating the passing of a written test (covers safety issues, and legal parameters for lawful carry and use of a firearm) and a practical exam (live fire, on a range, supervised by a state licensed instructor).
The historical facts prove the erroneous nature of the “wild west” claims. In the American west of the late nineteenth century, violent crimes against individuals were relatively low. In most towns, even the infamous Dodge City, a woman could walk the boardwalks (sidewalks) alone, at night, and not be in fear of attack. This was due to the statistical fact that, despite the theatrical depictions of the period, women were often armed. Add to this the reality of the death penalty for crimes such as rape? It is quite apparent why the average, law abiding citizen living in the “wild west” was safer than most citizens living in urban areas today.
If you wish to argue against these points, try not to trot out tired rhetoric; use documentable facts. The above facts can be verified by reading any of a number of historical documents, including newspapers of the period.
“Dare greatly”
April 17th, 2007 at 8:32 pmOne additional comment — in reviewing the comments by the rabid anti-gun zealots, I have come to an inescapable conclusion; you are ignorant idiots, with no knowledge of history, the english language, or the consitituion of the United States. If you must comment on something, could you please complete the fifth grade before you launch your tirade.
At least learn enough english so you at can pretend to be a U.S. citizen. If you don’t live here… SHUT UP!
“Guns don’t kill people… ignorant political hacks kill people with their insipid rants and gross lack of intelligence.”
Semper Fi
April 17th, 2007 at 8:39 pmSorry I found this web site. Most of you don’t seem to respect life, you don’t respect the constitution, you don’t respect the office of the President of the United States. Whoever is in Office. And you don’t know what you are talking about, evidenced by the many errors you made in the various posts. Maybe you are all journalist students? I would be outraged if I was the parent of one of the victims, to see this crap. You have freedom of speech, like Imus. What is good for Imus, is good for most of you. Take a hike and get a life. Preferably in some other country.
April 17th, 2007 at 9:27 pmbig papa you are delusional.
Comment by joe #144
Whew! Thanks joe…
…glad to know these past six years were all…
…a figment of my demented imagination…
April 17th, 2007 at 10:30 pmDistance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 17th, 2008 at 10:53 pmToby
Please contact me.
March 29th, 2008 at 4:04 amInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 1st, 2008 at 8:45 pmJack
Thanks, this is good stuff. You are spot on.
April 3rd, 2008 at 7:55 amJack
I?ll admit it. i have been to your blog SIX times since your last post looking for a new post?.
April 3rd, 2008 at 1:39 pmPee Public Pee Public Pissing
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 5th, 2008 at 2:55 pmApplicant Credit Check
Business Credit Agency
April 6th, 2008 at 8:12 amMy Cracks and Serials
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 6th, 2008 at 8:23 amGay Sex Gay Teen Gay Men Having Sex
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 7th, 2008 at 8:05 amPayday Advance
Advance cash are found to be important or applicable verdict to financial status proponet on your pc.
April 7th, 2008 at 2:21 pmJessie
Ok, I’m not in complete agreement with this, but I see your point. Thanks for sharing.
April 8th, 2008 at 4:26 ammoney clip knife
The resulting blade has a thinner edge, so it may have better cutting
April 14th, 2008 at 5:38 amPreteen Preteen Lolitas Innocent Preteens
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 14th, 2008 at 7:00 amAll about Digimon Adventure Online Game. Digimon Adventure Fans Blog….
…Digimon is a small virtual pet. You can download and play an online RPG in the Digimon universe. It looks and feels like 2D graphic RPG adventure. You can train and level up your Digimon, make hundreds of quests, and travel through a huge universe a…
March 5th, 2009 at 6:53 pmShag Hairstyles and Haircuts…
shag hairstyle basically gotits name from the word “shaggy” since …once the hair is cutand layered it gives off a shaggy look. The shag hairstyle has always been apopular hairstyle, and there are plenty ofshag hairstyles to choose from…
April 6th, 2009 at 10:22 amArbonne skin care products overview…
Arbonne International is one of the prestigious companies in the world when it comes to skin care. Its skin care product line is one of the best in the world that many women. The products of Arbonne International skin care products are developed in Sw…
May 1st, 2009 at 3:53 am