BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Peace
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 11:10 AM

"btw - Only those who are motivated by fear and lack a sense of power, seek gun ownership."

Some people depend on the gun to procure food. (That is, to hunt animals like elk, caribou, deer, moose.) Others need it to control coyote at calf time. Others use guns for target practice, exclusively.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: katlaughing
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 10:20 AM

Only those who are motivated by fear and lack a sense of power, seek gun ownership.

That's a pretty broad generalisation. I would not characterise Rapaire, Big Mick and, others whom I know to have guns, in that way, including my dad when he was alive. And, you know I do not stand with them on this issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 05:35 AM

Right on the button again, d.
However, in some people's eyes, that probably makes you a bigot, just like me. Glad to be in your club. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: dianavan
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 02:54 AM

guest gun o - Empowerment is not an attitude, its a fact.

btw - Only those who are motivated by fear and lack a sense of power, seek gun ownership.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:50 PM

What I find, not frightening, but a bit depressing, is that giant intellects like yours, o Gun    Owner, are allowed to vote. It's too bad there isn't just a bit of intellectual rigor required--though it appears it may well be beyond your powers.

To pick just one obvious example, despite your latest absurd statement, it is not the people who are impressed with the current regime's "war on terror" who are in favor of gun control.

Rather such people, who are quaking in their boots, supporting Bush, and seeing threats in every person who doesn't look exactly like them--that is, anybody who isn't obviously of West European descent----are-- surprise, surprise---also the ones--like you, dear Gun Owner--who want to be armed to the teeth.

The people who are in favor of gun control are also the ones who are actually willing to live in a world where not everybody looks exactly like them.


You might try entertaining the idea sometime.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 11:25 PM

The 2nd amendment says well-regulated before it says right to bear arms, remember. If you aren't satisfying the initial clause(s) you do NOT actually yet have the right to bear arms.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:47 PM

I find it frightening that law-abiding citizens DON'T have guns. The U.S. Constitution has tools for its maintenance built in (2nd Amendment), but modern Americans have been brainwashed into believing such thinking is outdated. Truly amazing. Is it the constant terrorism the government throws at you under the guise of "news" that has turned you into a quivering mass of jelly that wants to be "taken care of?"

Especially puzzling are the attitudes of so many "feminists." It seems you women would be made of sterner stuff, with your "empowered" attitudes. You throw off the yoke of male domination so that you can, what?...totally acquiesce to government domination? Your government admits to raping with acid at Abu Grahib, but you want to ban all guns so that same government can "protect" you and your single-parent child? What has HAPPENED to your thinking? You should immediately buy a handgun, take a course in shooting, and then take your kid out to the range and show him or her how to shoot. Lock the gun away at home in a quick access safe and you'll have a tool that may save you and your kid's life someday, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Mrrzy
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:08 PM

Cars kill. Strawberries kill. Peanuts kill. Shrimp kills. Bees kill. Guns kill. Falls off roofs kill. Anesthesia kills. Cancer kills. The chemotherapy used to treat cancer kills. Psychotropic medications kill. Not taking psychotropic medications kills. Insulin kills. Not taking insulin kills. Clogged arteries to the heart kill. By-pass surgery kills. Prejudice kills. Ignorance kills. Drawing conclusions cast in stone with insufficent inforamtion or understanding kills. - Ah, but with which one can you walk into a room and kill or wound 50 people?
What show did Charlton Heston say Guns don't kill people - bullets kill people. Guns just help bullets move really, really fast!

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 06:31 PM

Intellectual giant gun owner--

"Who's to secure the peace in a defenseless area?"

You're absolutely right--I can't think of a better group to "secure the peace" than a bunch of trigger-happy vigilantes. This fits right in with the brilliance of your other ideas, as well as your wonderfully incisive grasp of history.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Peace
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 10:18 AM

Guns, guns, guns. Piss on 'em. I can make three kinds of gas--excluding farts; dozens of trips and deadfalls; a few explosives; devices to drive shrapnel into people who get unlucky; use simple things to gouge eyes, puncture skulls , kidneys, livers; doctor projectiles so they cause poisoning to the recipient's blood. Hell, the nice thing about guns is that they give the carrier a false sense of superiority. We have too many people who worship at the altar of guns. Worship at the altar of brains.

1) Vote the fuckers out and change the ;laws
2) See #1

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 09:30 AM

The reason for the 2nd amendment is to protect from abusive government. With the adoption of the John Warner defense spending act of 2007, the presidend assumed power over all state and national guard units in the U.S. So the 2nd amendment (an armed citizenry) is now more necessary than ever. If our local guards can be removed, relocated, etc., who's to secure the peace in a defenseless area? And the Federalist papers (discussions by the founding fathers about why they were doing what they did) make it clear the 2nd amendment supports the first. You can't maintain your right of expression (right to free speech, religion, to assemble) unless you can protect that right against people who would like to take it away. And government is the only organization large enough to take the right away, so it has to be held in check. With the fear of weapons.

As far as shrimp, etc. killing people, those things aren't being FORCED on school kids. The toxic drugs are.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Janie
Date: 24 Apr 07 - 12:03 AM

Cars kill. Strawberries kill. Peanuts kill. Shrimp kills. Bees kill. Guns kill. Falls off roofs kill. Anesthesia kills. Cancer kills. The chemotherapy used to treat cancer kills. Psychotropic medications kill. Not taking psychotropic medications kills. Insulin kills. Not taking insulin kills. Clogged arteries to the heart kill. By-pass surgery kills. Prejudice kills. Ignorance kills. Drawing conclusions cast in stone with insufficent inforamtion or understanding kills.

Blanket condemnation of psychotropic meds. in general, or SSRI's in particular is as foolish as blanket endorsement.


If by 'system' you refer the public mental health system, I don't know that it failed. there is not information availble to draw a conclusion.

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: katlaughing
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 11:11 PM

I find it scary that someone as paranoid as "guest, gun owner" actually has guns.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 10:58 PM

BB--

As I said, you've overstated your case. (20 Apr 8:56 AM). It doesn't help you.

It is not possible for ordinary citizens to own fully automatic weapons? I have a friend at work--a true gun buff--who knows well somebody who has more than one fully automatic weapon.

Automatic weapons are prohibited under present law? Wrong.

As you yourself pointed out, the supply has now been frozen--but some are in private hands--and not just in museums. That is not prohibition.



Re:   Bill of Rights:   I and others have pointed out that there was a reason for the 2nd Amendment--at the time of the Bill of Rights. That reason is now gone--since the functions of the "Militia"-- (which at the time would likely have been any able-bodied male over 16)-- have now been taken over by the National Guard.

You have provided no evidence to the contrary.

Your absurd pairing of "right to bear arms" with freedoms of speech and religion is, sorry to say, blatant scaremongering--and is not likely to play well on Mudcat--Mudcatters in general are brighter than that.


If you hope for credibility, you'd best be a bit more careful in your allegations. So far, your record, on issues large and small, is not the best.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 08:53 PM

Stalin, Hitler and Mao solved the problem of citizens doing harm with firearms. They outlawed guns. Of course, what followed wasn't too pretty. Disarmament is the first step toward genocide.

Yes, Janie, the indicators were undoubtedly there, and "the system" failed and all that, but don't worry because the federal government will come to our rescue. Mandatory mental health screening of all Americans, forced drugging, prison-style school facilities and all that. You sound like an expert in this field, so please tell me why the American Psychiatric Association recently expanded it's list of "disorders" so enormously. To the casual observer it seems the move was made in order to cast a wider net over kids now being "screened" under the New Freedom Iniative. That was the law written by the drug lobby representing manufacturers of SSRI and SNRI drugs. A list of "disorders" is at the link below, folks. Poke around the links there and evaluate yourself honestly, see if you don't qualify for drugging under one of the categories:

http://allpsych.com/disorders/disorders_alpha.html

Off the bat I'd say all of America needs to be drugged for getting hysterical over a school shooting after we've let our govt kill 1000000 Iraqi civilians over the past 3 years. Isn't that a tad dissociative?

SSRI drugs kill. It's proven. But rather than pull them from the market they're now going to force American adults onto them. The beta test has been done in the schools, and now it's time to move on to the next step. Dennis Kucinich and others will be introducing happy-sounding names to push this poison on us. Such animals need to be removed from office.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: open mike
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 01:32 PM

while searching for some lyrics online
i came across a site that mentioned that
Cho's room-mates said he had been listening
to a song over and over again. The song was
Shine by Collective Soul
Village Voice article

music video on You Tube

here is an interview with the band
interview with collective soul on CNN

wierd..who knew this would become a music thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 01:22 PM

BB, I'm afraid you're not making a lot of sense now!
And slag, are you kidding me? Were there really more than 30,000 deaths from gunshots in the US? Really?
Fuck me, that's mind-boggling!
Mind you, in a few decades you'll have wiped each other out and left the world safe for the rest of us (if you haven;t wiped us lot out first!).

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 01:12 PM

" If you want to cite the The 2nd Amendment, perhaps you could only allow the weapons that were manufactured in those days."

As long as all of you are willing to give up the internet , all forms of transmitted word, and amplified public speaking- THOSE were not envisioned by the founding fathers, either.

Or is consistancy too much to ask?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 12:58 PM

"I believe that automatic weapons, plastic non-detectable firearms, and armor-piercing, "cop-killer" rounds should be outlawed. "

*** ALL *** of which are prohibited bt present law.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 12:54 PM

""So, IF I were to say "I HAVE said that Free Speech advocates have had the laws their way for a long time, and I don't like the results... and it's time to see if stronger, ENFORCED restrictions will help."

will be answered with pretty strong language. It is NOT relevant to the topic, and it is NOT something I would have said, and it is NOT a proper refutation of anything!"

So, if YOUR rights under the Bill of Rights are endangered, THAT would be cause to complain, BUT wqhen the rights of Gun owners under the Bill of Rights are talked about, you will go along if you think it might make you safer.

Well, ** I ** think that under those condiotions, I will have to support laws that restrict YOUR freedoms, since I can certainly come up with reasons that someone would be safer if you could not have free speech, or freedom of religion, or the other rights.


It most certainly IS relevant, since the only reason YOU have those rights is the fact they are in the Bill of Rights: If you weaken the Constitution to get at something YOU consider a danger, you will have NO defense when others weaken it about something you consider to be good.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 12:22 PM

Aaahh, ONLY 11,629 homicides!
It's a lot more than 50.
So, Slag, a killing by a US policeman is a 'legal homicide', but a killing by a UK policeman is, according to 'GUEST: Gun Owner', an 'execution'? Proof positive of the perverse thinking of the US Gun-Heads on here.
Accusations of bigotry and closed-mindedness, attempts to take the high moral ground, are the last refuges of scoundrels who know their argument doesn't stand up to close inspection or the application of a little common sense, but haven't the balls to face it.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Slag
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 02:20 AM

When the likes of StrolinJohnny and Cap'n Ginger let their discourse sink to ad hominem attacks and name calling, they have demonstrated that they are not listening. They see only their side of the issue and any intellectual exchange there might have been has ceased: a perfect illustration of bigotry and closed mindedness. I will address on point of Strollin's as it was left undifferentiated, 30,000 gun deaths a year in the US.

That said the last year for complete statistics was 2002 there were 30,342 firearms related deaths. 4144 were accidental, 17,108 were suicides, 11,629 were homicides, 300 were legal homicides (at the hand of a peace officer or armed citizen, justifiable) and 243 were of an undetermined nature.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Janie
Date: 23 Apr 07 - 12:05 AM

Oh Please! Psychosis in reaction to Prozac withdrawal is very rare, and from what I have read in the lay press, there is every reason to suspect that Cho, in fact, had a major mental illness in the psychotic spectrum. If he indeed was prescribed psychotropic meds., and had actually been medication compliant for a time, then stopped taking the medications, any increase in psychotic features, including increased paranoia and delusions, would be much more likely to be the result of being off the meds., as opposed to withdrawal from the medications.

There is every indication that he was guarded, paranoid, thought disordered, and that he had fixed ideas of reference, if not outright delusions, for at least the past year, and had other prodromal symptoms of a psychotic disorder for years before that. Most of the major psychotic disorders typically manifest themselves in late adolescence or early adulthood. There may or may not be prodromal symptoms, but when there are, those symptoms are subtle and are common to many other conditions. Psychotic processes and symptoms are not always florid. With some one who is guarded and paranoid, but not having outright bizarre hallucinations, they may simply appear odd or 'quirky', or simply very depressed.

Psychotropic medicines, and especially antipsychotic drugs, can certainly have significant and sometimes serious side effects. Abrupt cessation of some of these medications can also cause significant and sometimes serious adverse reactions. Like any medical intervention, however, the potential benefits and potential costs must be weighed. For the vast majority of individuals who have psychotic disorders,the benefits of the medications to the individual especially, but also to society, outweigh the costs.

I do not know how well the student health center was equiped to deal with students with major mental illness. However, in the absence of any previous history of violence, the law favors the right of the individual to refuse to engage in treatment.

It is understandable that a tragedy such as this receives a huge amount of publicity and public scrutiny. It is in many ways appropriate. But there is a downside which needs acknowledged. The publicity that the Columbine massacre received made the unthinkable thinkable to a young man as ill as Cho appears to have been.

Janie

Janie

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: TIA
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 11:01 PM

Still waiting for the drug test, but the gun test came up positive.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 10:16 PM

Today's news said that Cho's body was being tested for drugs and that it would take a couple of weeks before the results were known.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 09:43 PM

Deputization on an as needed basis is still a pretty common practice in the U.S. Nothing too grand about it. I was out of the county the last time we had a murderer escape from a local facility, but the sheriff deputized several men for that incident. They didn't go out looking for the escapee armed with sharp sticks, either. You've been conditioned to think someone else will take care of your problems, EJ. That's another button being pushed with the Virginia Tech shooting--helplessness. From what I've read, the school should have been sealed and shut down after the first shootings (at 7:15 a.m.?) Instead, a call to FEMA resulted in a "don't do anything until we get there" response, so that means the federal government ordered locals to stand down. Because of that, an additional 30 died. The feds WANT this kind of incident, so they can take more rights and make us more dependent on them.

I can't find an affirmation that Cho was on Prozac, but several articles say, "...Investigators believe Cho had been taking medication for depression," and some have speculated it was Prozac. Below is a link to a book written by a reporter who had problems after she was placed on Prozac:

"...Most were prescribed psychiatric SSRI drugs for periodic depression, PMS, weight gain, insomnia, acne, smoking, and other minor issues. In return, the drugs have taken thousands of people's lives. One knowledgeable doctor attributed 50,000 needless suicides to Prozac alone...."

http://www.truebooks.com/prozac.html

Below are a couple of links to the same information in different format--pdf and html. The top one is PDF, lower one html. A short list of SSRI-related acts of violence:

http://ssri-uksupport.com/files/homicidesSSRISandADHDmedications.pdf

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:Q-jAoPl9f5kJ:ssri-uksupport.com/files/homicidesSSRISandADHDmedications.pdf+prozac+murders+list&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=us

It's everywhere. Overwhelming evidence these drugs create murderous mental states. So addressing guns is like pruning the branches and not rooting out the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 01:57 PM

"Dianavan, I'll look for stories about Cho and Prozac. The government has put a muzzle on many aspects of this story. The man's family is involved with the government in numerous ways"

You gotta love it...conspiracy theory, paranoia, and unlimited access to firearms rolled into one big happy bundle.

By the way, I own a couple of firearms, but the notion that I'm going to be called on by law enforcement in a back-up role strikes me as a classic "delusion of grandeur".

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 01:45 PM

Dianavan, I'll look for stories about Cho and Prozac. The government has put a muzzle on many aspects of this story. The man's family is involved with the government in numerous ways. I read that one of his parents works as a "contractor for Condoleeza Rice," whatever that means. I did read one definitive statement that he was taking Prozac, though. The biggest problem with those SSRI drugs is in the detox phase. Takes weeks, so if you've been taking them for a while or in large dosages and then quit cold turkey, you become psychotic.

And the school-drugging system is designed to fail. These shootings are a desirable to the people in charge. When one of these incidents happens, the people in charge get more control. There is no incentive to stop these events. There is no incentive to take people off the mind-altering, murdering drugs. They lead to more power being shoveled into the hands of the people who want power over you. The monsters who make the drugs and then lobby for them to be forced on schoolkids, and the monsters who pass the legislation to make the drugging possible, those people need to be removed from any proximity of power.

As for your child being protected, life if full of risks. If s/he is in danger at school, then homeschool. What can I say? You can't protect those you love from all evil all the time. And power attracts the kind of people who shouldn't have it, so the answer is not in giving away your right to make choices to powermad psychopaths. They don't care about your kid. They just want more control. And limiting the rights of others in a severe way isn't the answer, because those same restrictions can be applied to you. I think removing SSRI drugs from the market and getting the military-developed video games off the market would be a good place to start in returning society to normal. The military has no right to peddle that garbage, though the ACLU will take up the case to make sure the things remain on the market. The games are brainwashing tools and should be regulated as tightly as radioative waste. Same with SSRIs. But every time one of the drugged-up video freaks shoots up a place, the media directs your attention to the guns involved, not the drugs and video games. Though the video game angle does seem to be getting some coverage in the Cho case. Maybe talking in meetings at your kid's school about the games and drugs would help alert others to the problem and make your corner of the world more safe. Even if all guns were "banned" tomorrow, the shootings would never stop. Heroin's banned, cocaine's banned, but does it do any good? Good luck.

One last comment here on firearms--if the UK police go about unarmed, why did 4 of them execute a young man on the subway a while back? 4 taps to the skull with handguns, each one took a turn, from what I read. Strollin' Johnny tries to present a picture of the bobbie with his stick and nothing more in jolly old England, but they have cops executing citizens on the tube.

As for the War of 1812, it was indeed a long series of miscalculations. I'm glad it ended the way it did, with Canada intact and the U.S. intact and the Brits sent back home.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,Tired of Bandwagon Hitchers
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 01:29 PM

Johnny, even though in your non-violent way you are wishing me fatal harm I still say you are missing the point.

No matter what the rate of gun crime is in the UK the fact is it has RISEN since the handgun ban.
Unlike you I do not pretend to have the answer. Greater minds than mine have not yet solved it.
Yes, I live in the UK so dont feel so superior.
No I am not a flamer, just someone who wants a REAL answer not based on pure bigotry.
Try & debate the point instead of hurling insults, its obvious that you for one should never qualify for gun ownership in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: dianavan
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 12:59 PM

I can see no reason that anyone should be permitted to own handguns or automatic weapons. If you want to cite the The 2nd Amendment, perhaps you could only allow the weapons that were manufactured in those days. As to "providing civilians with military-grade arms", we know that isn't going to happen.

Guest gun owner - I too, dislike SSRI drugs but what proof do you have that Cho was taking drugs? As far as I'm concerned, he should have been heavily medicated and/or institutionalized. Teachers see these 'walking time bombs' all the time. What can you do if the parents won't co-operate?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 09:56 AM

"FWIW I'd vote against doing it again!

pleas inform your native allies."


Okay - but it's going to be awkward; I just got them all fired up with a big speech about the evils the Americans would like to inflict upon them, as opposed to the generous rewards they could expect from the Great White Mother for their loyalty. It was quite a taxing imaginative exercise, really. Now I'll have to explain that it was all a misunderstanding, and the Great White Mother never really intended to give them anything anyway ...

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 08:28 AM

I didn't change course, I simply elucidated on what I'd said earlier.
I don't misrepresent - any numbers I've quoted are from the UK Government website. And other statements I've made are based on 60 years' experience of living in the UK. Do you live here?

Unlike the US, street crime in the UK very seldom involves firearms - very seldom indeed. Neither are our police armed with guns. They are simply not needed because of the low gun-crime rate here (which is what my points have all been about). Few guns = low gun crime rate. Surely even a flamer can understand that?

Now go away and play with your guns - any luck you might shoot your own head off before you hurt someone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,Tired of Band-Wagon Hitchers
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 07:16 AM

Never let facts stand in the way of a good story eh Johnny.

Change course as ya go, nit-pick when its suits, generalise the same.

I haven't jumped on any bandwagon pro or anti. Just pointing out facts that you misrepresent to put over your very bigoted views. Wanting no crime at all is worthwhile but realistic methods of achieving this should be debated not pre-conceived prejudices which have been proved in the past not to work.
The point is that handguns were banned in mainland Britain but has had no effect on street crime. Nor has it anywhere else. I understand there are parts of America where guns are not allowed but still have high crime rates.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 03:11 AM

Guest "Gun-Owner": - in common with a great many of your countrymen, your insularised education and upbringing has ensured that you know nothing of life in the UK. Your comments are based on the kind of scare-mongering crap that the media use in order to sell copy. The UK is generally a pretty peaceful place, considerably more so than the US, and a huge increase in idiots waving guns about will not make it safer - the reverse would happen and we would turn into the kind of society you have over there.

Guest "Tired of Band-Wagon Hitchers" - if that's so, why did you just hitch to a pro-gun band-wagon? And I said that the UK gun laws have been in existence for "most if not all of the 20th Century, and maybe some of the 19th" - well 87 years since 1920 sounds like "most of the 20th Century" to me (and a bit of the 21st).
I have, in fact, looked up the satistics, and I've quoted some of them here on this thread. I'm not interested in this or that type of gun, I want rid of the whole lot of them, and the people who have to have them to make them feel good about themselves. The simple fact is that gun controls work, the US with weak controls has a hugely disproportionate rate of shootings in comparison with the UK with it's controls. QE-fuckin-D.

Guest "Patty o'dawes" - thanks, that's a very valid point. Thanks for making it.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: robomatic
Date: 22 Apr 07 - 12:46 AM

sorry about that.


FWIW I'd vote against doing it again!

pleas inform your native allies.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 11:18 PM

Says wiki:

"The war started badly for the Americans as their attempts to invade Canada were repeatedly repulsed by General Isaac Brock commanding a small British force, composed largely of local militias and Native American allies."

"Despite years of warlike talk, the United States was unready to prosecute a war, for President Madison assumed that the state militias would easily seize Canada and negotiations would then follow."

"America's leaders had assumed that Canada could be easily overrun. Former President Jefferson optimistically referred to the conquest of Canada as "a matter of marching." Many Americans had migrated to Upper Canada and it was assumed (by both sides) they would favor the American cause. They did not. In Lower Canada, much more populous, support for Britain came from the English élite with strong loyalty to the Empire, and from the French élite who feared American conquest would destroy the old order by introducing Protestantism, anglicization, republican democracy, and commercial capitalism. The French habitants feared the loss to potential American immigrants of a shrinking acreage of good lands.[1]"

"American Brigadier General William Hull invaded Canada on July 12, 1812, from Detroit with an army mainly composed of militiamen. Once on Canadian soil, Hull issued a proclamation ordering all British subjects to surrender, or "the horrors, and calamities of war will stalk before you." He also threatened to kill any British prisoner caught fighting alongside an Indian. The proclamation helped stiffen resistance to the American attacks.

"Despite the threats, Hull's invasion turned into a retreat ... "

"A final attempt in 1812 by American General Henry Dearborn to advance north from Lake Champlain failed when his militia refused to advance beyond American territory. In contrast to the American militia, the Canadian militia performed well. French-Canadians, who found the anti-Catholic stance of most of the United States troublesome, and United Empire Loyalists, who had fought for the Crown during the American Revolutionary War, strongly opposed the American invasion. However, a large segment of Upper Canada's population was recent settlers from the United States who had no obvious loyalties to the Crown. Nevertheless, while there were some who sympathized with the invaders[2], the American forces found strong opposition from men loyal to the Empire."

"Late in 1813, after much argument, the Americans made two thrusts against Montreal. The plan eventually agreed upon was for Major-General Wade Hampton to march north from Lake Champlain ...

" ... On October 25, his 4,000-strong force was defeated at the Chateauguay River by Charles de Salaberry's force of fewer than 500 French-Canadian Voltigeurs and Mohawks."

Etc., etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 10:59 PM

"Americans wouldn't have been able to defend the country in the War of 1812"

Wait a minute - who was defending what?

Sign me,

A Patriotic Canadian

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,patty o'dawes
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 10:41 PM

I feel sad for the old people of Britain who are not allowed to defend themselves.


Reflexes and faculties diminish with age. You are advocating 'old' people would be safer armed? What's the weather like on your planet?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 10:31 PM

My family prefers hunted meat to supermarket meat largely because of the chemical additives. Bovine growth hormones are some of the worst. The link below goes to a story about 2 reporters who were fired when they were investigating the stuff. They were supposed to write a positive story on it, but they didn't, and they were fired. This was a precedent-setting case in the U.S. and explains in part why so many members of the media knowingly lie now when they "report." They have to report what they know to be lies or risk being fired. Fascinating story, if you're not familiar with it:

http://www.foxbghsuit.com/bgh2.htm

Aknahten...race card, race card, race card. The media already tried to play the race card by harping on Cho being Korean. Americans didn't buy it. That game's played out. And the U.S. Civil War was unnecessary. The U.S. was the only major country to ever fight a war to end slavery. England ended the practice a few years before using financial methods, and the same was being discussed in the U.S., but then the European bankers and arms merchants entered the picture. The English monarchy is a blight on humanity. They're so bad they forced the sanest minds of the day to draft the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. If it hadn't been for the right to bear arms, Americans wouldn't have been able to defend the country in the War of 1812. I'm sure you DO hate the thought of Americans owning guns.

And as far as home invasions being petty offenses (in Storllin' Johnny's first point #4 above), that perspective is hard to accept. Maybe Brits don't mind having old people beaten in their homes, but in the U.S. people are killed for home invasions. Assault numbers are about equal for the U.S. and the U.K., but I suspect if homeowners in Britain had true weapons, the deaths from home invasions would be substantial. I feel sad for the old people of Britain who are not allowed to defend themselves.

I'll move over to one of the gun threads with this stuff. My input here should be on the drugs that lead to these shootings and the calculated response by disingenuous politicians.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 09:15 PM

May we remember his name long after we've forgotten that of his killer.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:18 PM

Thanks for that link, JoeF. It led me to a condolence page for his family: http://www.chabad.edu/templates/articlecco.html?AID=504498.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Joe_F
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:07 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liviu_Librescu

Moved in on trouble. Rest in peace.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,just tired of the gun lobby
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:03 PM

"Home Office Figures Show Violent Crime to be Falling Overall but Firearms Still Haunt the UK Crime Scene
January 2002
The gun lobby has made much of the recent crime statistics for England and Wales claiming that violent crime, especially firearm related crime, is on the increase. They argue that this 'proves' that the handgun ban introduced in 1997 is not working and should be repealed. In the month before Christmas 2001, four TV documentaries concerned with firearms and crime were broadcast in Britain. GCN members and supporters took part in these when invited and the debates these programmes generated prove beyond any doubt that the case for retaining our existing gun controls needs to be strongly reasserted against the gun lobby's claim that the legislation was unfair and unworkable.
Any debate about the crime statistics and what they reveal is fraught with problems but the following facts attempt to clarify the picture. In fact, overall violent crime appears to be falling and firearms were used in only a tiny minority of offences. Contrary to the impression given in some media reports and eagerly seized upon by the gun lobby, the streets of Britain are not 'awash' with illegal guns, notwithstanding the serious criminal problems in some cities"

the whole report here - not quite the picture that Guest 7.43 would have us believe but not one for complacency either!

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,Tired of band-wagon hitchers
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 07:43 PM

Strollin' Johnny - As these laws have prevailed in the UK for most, if not all, of the 20th Century, and possibly some time during the 19th, I don't have that answer, nor do I see any relevance in the question. The world has changed rather more than somewhat over that period.

Wrong again stroller.
First UK gun laws were passed in the 1920's following a discussion in parliament concerning the Russian Revolution. There was fear that this could happen in Britain & thus guns had to be registered.

Also, since the banning of handguns (not just semi-autos & revolvers) crimes involving handguns have risen. This from home office figures! Look them up if you are interested in the truth but I doubt if you will bother!

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 05:02 PM

Oh, yes, creating a Dept. of Peace and trying to end Ruling by Fear will really break the bank. Why, I'll bet it could run past that cheapie Iraq War even:

(my emphasis) From 2006 - The Congressional Research Service has just released a new report on the past and possible future costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Pending Congress' action on the new emergency supplemental, which should complete fiscal year 2006 expenses, the costs will be up to $439 billion by the end of this year. But that's just the tip of the iceberg; details follow. The full report is available at www.cdi.org/smrp.

If Congress approves the $71 billion emergency supplemental to pay for the ongoing cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the new total for the war expenses will be $439 billion, according to a new report released on April 24 by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). For the war in Iraq, $320 billion will have been spent; $89 billion for Afghanistan, and $26 billion will have gone toward enhanced security, including combat air patrols, in and over the United Sates.

The Department of Defense (DOD) estimates its "burn rate" of monthly expenses at $6.4 billion in Iraq and $1.3 billion in Afghanistan. CRS points out that DOD did not include the cost of replacing worn out equipment and upgrades to facilities in theater. Adding those and a few other costs calculates to a monthly "burn rate" of $8.1 billion in Iraq; $1.6 billion in Afghanistan, and a total burn rate of $9.9 billion per month.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: gnu
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 03:48 PM

Gun owner said... "... so they will never understand that you have to be armed to keep your government in check."

People didn't get this even after Hitler's gun laws in the 30's. Now, how did that work out for the average Joe?

Why would they suddenly wake up now? Most are too stunned to understand that that the reason the USA is so free is that the common people have the ability to vote.... by ballot or otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 03:04 PM

"What was murder rate in UK prior to restrictive gun laws?"

As these laws have prevailed in the UK for most, if not all, of the 20th Century, and possibly some time during the 19th, I don't have that answer, nor do I see any relevance in the question. The world has changed rather more than somewhat over that period.

It's right now we need to consider, and the facts are pretty conclusive.

And you may well be right that the US is inherently more violent than the UK, but allowing everyone to run around armed to the teeth absolutely will not make it less so.

I'm astonished that, at a time when the mantra is being preached that smacking a child is bad because teaches and instils violence in him/her, it's regarded by many Americans as their 'right' to possess the means to inflict the ultimate violence. What kind of message does that give out? There are some seriously confused people over there in La-La-Land (as we Brits affectionately refer to the Land of The Free) :-) :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 02:46 PM

What was murder rate in UK prior to restrictive gun laws? Could it be the US is inherently more violent, irrespective of gun laws? And the US has gun laws, as I noted above, they are simply not applied.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 02:38 PM

Kinell, gun-owner, I don't know what hick redneck supermarket tab you read to get your views on the UK, but they're kinda quaint!
I'm very glad you're on the other side of the Atlantic - the thought of a bunch of trigger-happy fuckwits like yourself running around playing cowboys and indians with real guns is...well, we might start to approach the gun crime stats of your beloved USA.
Anyway, carry on - you're doing a great job for the anti-Americans. Any European reading the sort of drivel you're posting will only be reinforced in his or her belief that there are parts of the US where civilisation would be a good thing.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 02:32 PM

Don't waste your time Ake, he's as bonkers as Choo.

"And there are plenty of gun crimes in Britain. And plenty of violent crimes not involving the use of guns. Hasn't "home invasion" skyrocketed since guns were outlawed? And aren't they now talking about banning knives?"

Gun owner - Some facts for your poor tired brain cell to absorb:-

1) We have between 50-80 homicides by shooting in an avaerage year in the UK, population 60m. The US has around 30,000 shooting homicides a year, in a population of 300m. 80 divided by 60 multiplied by 300 gives a figure of 400. 30,000 divided by 400 = 75. The US 'homicide by shooting' rate per head of population is 75 times that of the UK - Surely even you can see a correlation there with the comparatively lax gun controls in the US? If you can't, maybe you need to enrol back at High School (I'm assuming you've left already).

2) Guns haven't been 'outlawed' in the UK. Our laws provide, as they always have, for registered ownership of certain types of firearm by citizens who are able to prove justification for having them. However, the rules for registration are considerably more rigorous than in the US, and 'needing to feel safe' or 'self-protection' aren't considered good reasons for holding a gun licence. By 'outlawed' I'd guess you mean the prohibition of certain weapon types following the Dunblane massacre. Unlike the lily-livered US government, our political leaders had the balls to identify and deal with the issue of automatic and semi-automatic weapons in private ownership.

4) It has never been suggested here that the prohibition following Dunblane had any effect on burglary statistics (which is what I imagine you mean by the rather hysterical expression 'home invasion'). It could be true that burglary/housebreaking statistics may have increased a little (as they may well have in many other highly-urbanised areas like the UK) but, as hardly anyone here posseses, or has ever possessed a gun, the cause can have little or nothing to do with the ban. In fact, it's generally recognised that these petty offences are, in the main, driven by the increase in drug-abuse here.

4) Certain types of knife (e.g. flick-knives, or switch-blades as you might call them) have been banned for a great many years. There is a discussion at the moment regarding a possible ban on other knives which exceed a certain blade length, or have certain types of blade. In many people's opinion (including mine) that's a very good thing, and at least we have the will and the guts to face the problem.