One reportedly dead in Virginia Tech shooting (Update: Now 33)

Watching Fox News channel a few minutes ago the scrolling reporting at the bottom of the sceen was nothing but gun talk. Some people saying tougher gun laws, some people saying tougher gun laws aren't the answer, then a bunch of talk from countries all over the world that blame the US gun laws for providing too much access to guns.[rolleyes]
Now more than ever is the time to step up and put up a shield because we're really gonna be bombarded from the antis.
 
Does it matter? It could have been a flint lock that he found in his Great-grandfathers chest and the antis would still use it against us.

They the antis, have an agenda just as we do. Theirs is to rid the world of weapons (which clearly can not be done), ours is to protect our selves from them (which clearly can be done).

Yep. I remember years ago in Keith Junior High School here where I live a kid stormed into a classroom and stabbed another kid repeatedly and killed him. Of course knives were banned in schools but that didn't stop more stabbings or knife related attacks.
Point is if someone wants to kill people, they're gonna do it.
 
Point is if someone wants to kill people, they're gonna do it.

And it has been proved time and time again. If one could magically take away all the guns in the world, people would stab each other. Take away the knives and they will sling stones. Take away the stones and they will use their bare hands. Cain killed Able long before knives, swords or guns existed.
 
Does it matter? It could have been a flint lock that he found in his Great-grandfathers chest and the antis would still use it against us.

They the antis, have an agenda just as we do. Theirs is to rid the world of weapons (which clearly can not be done), ours is to protect our selves from them (which clearly can be done).

I understand what you are saying but the fact that these were legal guns takes away our defense of "most gun crimes are commited with illegal guns". And when it comes to these libs everything is a knee-jerk reaction and it only takes one incident for them to create laws. I think this is just another straw on the back.
 
I understand what you are saying but the fact that these were legal guns takes away our defense of "most gun crimes are commited with illegal guns". And when it comes to these libs everything is a knee-jerk reaction and it only takes one incident for them to create laws. I think this is just another straw on the back.

Those were illegal guns -- they had obliterated serial numbers.

That young man was a sociopathic criminal through and through. May he burn in hell everlasting.
 
I understand what you are saying but the fact that these were legal guns takes away our defense of "most gun crimes are commited with illegal guns".
Which is precisely why we need to stop defending ourselves and go on the attack. Use Mr Wiles' editorial the same way that Dr. Suzanne Gratia used her horrific experience in Luby's Cafe.

We need to ram home that the sole reason that those poor kids couldn't defend themselves with the same force that they were being attacked with is the misguided crusade being waged by the likes of Sarah Brady, Rosie O'Donnell, Charles Schumer, Diane Feinstein, John Rosenthal and every other gun-banner in Congress and the Senate.

I have a feeling that this event will be a huge pivoting point... the only question is which way things will go.
 
quotes overheard in my office today

"thats what happens when anyone can go out an buy an gun"
"seriously, he had a fully automatic 9 millimeter gun and i heard it could hold 20 bullets"
"i saw on the news that you can shoot a whole clip, reload and shoot another in like 3 seconds..."
"yeah, you can get any type of gun you want...just go online and 2 days later you could have a bazooka in your mailbox..."
"things will never change as long as people can have guns"

wow.
 
"thats what happens when anyone can go out an buy an gun"
"seriously, he had a fully automatic 9 millimeter gun and i heard it could hold 20 bullets"
"i saw on the news that you can shoot a whole clip, reload and shoot another in like 3 seconds..."
"yeah, you can get any type of gun you want...just go online and 2 days later you could have a bazooka in your mailbox..."
"things will never change as long as people can have guns"

wow.

Did you say anything?
 
Those were illegal guns -- they had obliterated serial numbers.

That young man was a sociopathic criminal through and through. May he burn in hell everlasting.

The point is he bought them legally and yes I hope he burns in hell, but on this forum we are preaching to the choir, try explaining our point of view to the masses. The moon-bats will use the fact that he got them legally to put more pressure on us then they could have if they were illegally obtained.

I am in no way on the side of the gun grabbers and I blame only this jerk-off for what happened but like I said try explaining it to the antis and all the others who will follow them.

The Brand Bunch and others will study this to the smallest detail and the fact that he got those guns legally will only hurt us.
 
Which is precisely why we need to stop defending ourselves and go on the attack.

You are right, we must fight. And I suggest that everyone on this fourm put a pen to paper and start writing and pick up the phone and start calling.

Just talking on this fourm is not enough, people must get active or we are going to lose our rights.
 
Last edited:
"thats what happens when anyone can go out an buy an gun"
"seriously, he had a fully automatic 9 millimeter gun and i heard it could hold 20 bullets"
"i saw on the news that you can shoot a whole clip, reload and shoot another in like 3 seconds..."
"yeah, you can get any type of gun you want...just go online and 2 days later you could have a bazooka in your mailbox..."
"things will never change as long as people can have guns"

wow.


After the strip club shootings at the Foxy Lady near where I live there were some people where my wife used to work that were saying how shocked they were that the shooter had military weapons, why would anyone want them, they're only for killing, etc. and my wife spoke up and mentioned I collected military rifles and even had an AK47 and how I've never gone on a rampage just because I owned them.
Her friends were shocked but after my wife talked to them for a little bit about shooters collecting and just enjoying shooting them and mentioning how she even shot some of my guns they began to lighten up and realized they had just been buying into what the media was shoving down their throats.
 
There is a bit of hope. Don't give up the fight and keep hammering away. They're weakened:

http://www.casperstartribune.net/articles/2007/04/17/ap/politics/d8oilido0.txt

Reid Warns Against Rush on Gun Control

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. gestures during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Monday, April 16, 2007. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)
By DAVID ESPO

WASHINGTON - After the worst mass shooting in U.S. history, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid cautioned Tuesday against a "rush to judgment" on stricter gun control. A leading House supporter of restrictions on firearms conceded passage of legislation would be difficult.

"I think we ought to be thinking about the families and the victims and not speculate about future legislative battles that might lie ahead," said Reid, a view expressed by other Democratic leaders the day after the shootings that left 33 dead on the campus of Virginia Tech.

Democrats traditionally have been in the forefront of efforts to pass gun control legislation, but there is a widespread perception among political strategists that the issue has been a loser in recent campaigns. It was notably absent from the agenda Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi unveiled earlier this year when the party took control of the House and Senate for the first time in more than a decade.

In the wake of the Virginia Tech shootings, a few Democrats renewed the call for gun control legislation, and more are expected to join them.

"I believe this will reignite the dormant effort to pass commonsense gun regulations in this nation," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a California Democrat who was a leader in the failed drive to renew a ban on certain types of assault weapons that expired in 2004.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., was one of very few lawmakers to defer pushing for gun control in the early hours after the shootings. "There will be time to debate the steps needed to avert such tragedies," he said on Monday, "but today, our thoughts and prayers go to their families."

By coincidence, Kennedy and Rep. Xavier Becerra, D-Calif., are scheduled to attend a demonstration Friday at a firing range used by U.S. Capitol Police to draw attention to microstamping, a procedure by which serial numbers are placed on ammunition casings. The goal is to allow police and other investigators to quickly track ammunition to the gun that fired it.

The two lawmakers support legislation to require microstamping for all guns manufactured after 2009, and aides to both said they planned to go ahead with the demonstration.

Overall, though, said Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., "It is a tough sell" to pass gun control legislation. Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., held a brief meeting on the subject to discuss possible legislation, but there was no apparent eagerness by Reid, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., or her to predict Democrats would lead a drive to toughen existing laws.

One senior Democrat, Rep. Charles Rangel of New York, said gun rights advocates are simply too influential to allow a tightening of gun control laws. "It's a regional thing, it's a cultural thing," Rangel said, arguing that even in areas where 85 percent of the people support more restrictions, the 15 percent minority is far more active and outspoken.

Less than a month ago, Pelosi and other Democratic leaders abruptly pulled legislation to give the District of Columbia voting representation in the House. Republicans were using the issue to try to force a vote on repeal of the capital's handgun ban, and Democrats feared it would pass.

Hoyer told reporters he thought and hoped the shootings at Virginia Tech would make it harder for Republicans to prevail when the voting rights bill returns to the House floor later this week.

He refused to be drawn into a discussion of the longer-term political consequences of the shooting, saying, "All I am saying is there will be a debate. I am not going to enter into the debate today."

Not all lawmakers were as reticent.

Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, one of Congress' most persistent advocates of gun rights, noted that the student who police say was the shooter at Virginia Tech had brought a weapon onto campus in violation of restrictions. He said he doubted a law could be passed that would protect "any of us when somebody who is mentally deranged decides to do this."

President Bush said in an interview with ABC News said he expects a debate on gun policy, but now is not the time.

"I think when a guy walks in and shoots 32 people it's going to cause there to be a lot of policy debate," he said. "Now is not the time to do the debate until we're actually certain about what happened. And after we help people get over their grieving. But yeah I think there's going to be a lot of discussion."

One law enforcement official has said that the gunman's backpack contained a receipt for a March purchase of a Glock 9 mm pistol. The gunman held a green card, meaning he was a legal, permanent resident, federal officials said. That meant he was eligible to buy a handgun unless he had been convicted of a felony.

Democrats have grown less supportive of gun control legislation as a party in the past decade.

After the shootings at Columbine High School in Colorado, then-Vice President Al Gore cast a tie-breaking vote in the Senate on legislation to reduce the availability of certain firearms. He and other gun control advocates claimed victory, but many strategists believe the vote hurt him in the 2000 presidential election.

Gun control tends to win favor among suburban voters, but it often stirs opposition in less heavily populated areas

So far this year, there has been little evidence that Democrats feel otherwise after winning control of the House by picking up seats last fall in parts of Indiana, Ohio, Texas, Arizona and elsewhere where hunting is popular.

Associated Press Writers Jim Abrams and Devlin Barrett contributed to this report.
 
Last night I heard someone ranting on the radio that Bush flew to Va one day after the shooting but it took a week for him to get to NO after Katrine.

This is Bush's fault.......no wait, it's Charlton Heston's fault...no wait, it's the schools fault...no wait, it's the guns fault.....no wait, it's lack of laws..... no wait..........it's the NRA's fault....no wait............
 
Last night I heard someone ranting on the radio that Bush flew to Va one day after the shooting but it took a week for him to get to NO after Katrine.

This is Bush's fault.......no wait, it's Charlton Heston's fault...no wait, it's the schools fault...no wait, it's the guns fault.....no wait, it's lack of laws..... no wait..........it's the NRA's fault....no wait............

Everybody but the shooter. Who we will find out was a victim of bullying. Or was teased by a girl. Or the cafeteria was out of his favorite flavor of ice cream. Or some BS. But don't worry, more laws will fix the problem.

Gary
 
They dragged out the usual criminal psychologists on NPR to discuss mass and/or school shootings, and they pretty much said you wouldn't have tagged this fellow, or most such shooters, as ready to crack and kill.

One blathering Princeton psychologist and author on school shootings mentioned a commonality of depression and dissapointments with life, but the other said then 20% of the US would be potential homicidal sociopaths. Most of the emotion-choked, hand-wringing soccer moms who rose to speak at past town meetings, on the topic of school security (in NH), would be disqualified to have firearms, as "unbalanced individuals with emotional control problems" - in fact, that's a good point to make the next time such an individual makes a plea for "keeping all those guns out of our schools".
 
I'm sure that the people that survived looking down the barrel of his gun, enjoyed logging onto the web to look at a picture of him pointing it right at the camera.

I gotta wonder wtf they are thinking putting that up there.

B
 
The only reason the dems wont rush to gun control over this is because the election is too close. they will pander to the desires of the southern states and then, once and if elected, they will trample our rights beyond repair..
 
How in the holy hell did the fact that he was admitted at a nuthouse clinic and had a restraining/protective order filed against him not show up in NICS?

That needs to get fixed.
 
How in the holy hell did the fact that he was admitted at a nuthouse clinic and had a restraining/protective order filed against him not show up in NICS?

That needs to get fixed.

+1

I hope to not hear the "there was a backlog of paperwork" or "clerical error" excuse as to why it didnt show up.
 
The only reason the dems wont rush to gun control over this is because the election is too close. they will pander to the desires of the southern states and then, once and if elected, they will trample our rights beyond repair..

I don't think they will. The election is well over a year and a half away. By then this story will be a distant memory. The lack of clamor for new gun control by all but a few Democrats in safe districts is because of the thrashing they took in 1994. Gun control has become a loser for them. Many of the Democrats elected last year are pro gun owner because they come from gun friendly states. They know that if they turn, they can be out very quickly.

Gary
 
How in the holy hell did the fact that he was admitted at a nuthouse clinic and had a restraining/protective order filed against him not show up in NICS?

That needs to get fixed.

As more information keeps coming out, that's what I've been wondering.
 
Easy . . . he was NOT "involuntary committed" (that's what the NICS law requires for DQ), but given a "voluntary commit" for outpatient treatment.

Despicable character . . . yes!

But you have to watch out or everyone who seeks any kind of treatment (e.g post-partum depression, counseling after getting laid off, etc.) will get tagged by the system and DQ'd if we over-react and change the laws to require every contact with a mental health professional as a NICS DQ!
 
How in the holy hell did the fact that he was admitted at a nuthouse clinic and had a restraining/protective order filed against him not show up in NICS?

That needs to get fixed.

-If he was committed in a "voluntary" manner then that doesn't count.
it has to be a state/court/etc. Then on top of that it actually has to make
it into the system. A lot of states don't fully integrate looney bin records
with NICS, for a variety of reasons.

-I didn't know he had any RO's out on him. Course that only works as long
as they're active, so if they don't get renewed or are vacated, all that goes
out the window.

-He didn't get hung on the stalking charges, which if they were a felony
would have put up a flag.

Making improvements to NICS might help, but nobody can tell me with a
straight face that, with even moderate certainty, they would have prevented
any of this. Even if the system did improve he still could dodge the system
entirely by obtaining forged identification anyways, or by obtaining guns on
the black market. I laugh at the notional that people believe that a computer
can stop a deranged killer.


-Mike
 
Easy . . . he was NOT "involuntary committed" (that's what the NICS law requires for DQ), but given a "voluntary commit" for outpatient treatment.

Despicable character . . . yes!

But you have to watch out or everyone who seeks any kind of treatment (e.g post-partum depression, counseling after getting laid off, etc.) will get tagged by the system and DQ'd if we over-react and change the laws to require every contact with a mental health professional as a NICS DQ!

I understand we need to be careful on that and I'm not looking for all treatment records to be opened. From what I've read he was admitted for care by an 'involuntary admission order'. That's what I would have expected to show up as a flag.

As for the two complaints against him. It sounds like they were never pursued as criminal, just an intervention by the campus police. I'm assuming that's why nothing came up in regards to those.
 
How in the holy hell did the fact that he was admitted at a nuthouse clinic and had a restraining/protective order filed against him not show up in NICS?

That needs to get fixed.

Read about this here http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10214838/ and here http://www.gunowners.org/a012307.htm

Issues revolve around privacy - right now NICS is used only for firearms acqusitions and not for other purposes. People accept that a felony conviction is public information and not to be held as private and confidential. Mental health is a judgement with much less definition - treatment for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, experienced by a large proportion of returning military, could disqualify them for life to have guns. Now wouldn't that be ironic - you can have guns to fight for our country but not to defend yourself?

It's one of those "give them and inch and they take a mile" issues. Maybe many would accept involuntary commitment to an inpatient mental hospital, by court order, with a medical judgement of danger to self/others, as a disqualifying event that should be databased. But the hand-wringing, tear-choked soccer moms always end up adding time-outs for bullying behavior in elementary school to the list of disqualifying events. And everything in between.

And getting a system in place to do this? Maybe in another 10yr we'll get the US complaint with 9-11 recommendations for interoperable emergency responder communications. Getting a reporting system together to weed out less than 1 in 10 million sociopaths that crack and gun down masses, and doing it right, seems daunting.

Something sensible needs be done, and certainly can be devised, but this just doesn't happen due to the state of gun politics in the US.

The odds of a CCW holder being present in such a rare and highly localized event as a mass shooting are and will likley remain small, even if CCW is allowed in what are now "gun-free" zones. Most such shootings take place in campuses of 1000s, schools and companies of 100s, but in only one or a few rooms with a few to a few dozen people. With the rarity of mass shootings, CCW rates would have to be large fractions to expect one armed person in a room of 20. Statistics are like that - 1 in 20 might have a CCW but in 10 yearly events with up to 50 in the kill zone, none might have a gun.

This said, extending CCW to such GF-zones and increasing the average CCW rate in the US from the 1% or so level to even 5% would do much more to enhance safety than would yet another faltering, error-prone computer system to prevent legal sales to whackos.

After all, non-LEOs like me carry guns for our own self-defense, not so we can run down the hall toward the sound of shots fired. If we are there when TSHTF, we will do what we have to do. - to the benefit of all around us. RKBA is an individual right, not one granted to deputize us as LEOs.
 
Mike, you are of course correct in that people can obtain guns illegally.

My point is that we need to take a long hard look at ways that can flag people on NICS when they cross a certain threshold of nuttiness. I don't know where that threshold is. But is IS there. At some point, a pattern of violence and/or instability needs to flag someone as unsuitable to own firearms.

One of the central arguments of responsible gun ownership has been to keep them out of the hands of those who have demostrated an unacceptable propensity to violence. I think this guy meets that definition.

Open to debate on this............
 
Back
Top Bottom