BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: robomatic
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 02:01 PM

On the subject of firearms regulations, today's New York Times has an article as to existing federal law which if adequately supported by Virginia STATE law, would have made it impossible for the perpetrator of this week's outrage from legally purchasing a weapon:

US Rules Made Shooter Ineligible

I've known several 'silent loners' in the day. One guy who was a pretty quiet guy even in a crowded room, verbally abusive when approached, a co-worker who described how, after his car was burglarized, he waited on the roof of his trailer home with a weapon the next night in case the thief returned, another who described in detail how much he hated his family (or anyone in his life who got close to him). Have yet to find this kind of thing in a woman.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 01:44 PM

Mr Gun owner...Could you tell me what part your lovely weapons played in the emancipation of the blacks, or the freedom of those native Americans??

Were the lynch parties "well regulated militias"?....as they were often led by "law officers".

Were the rifles of the US cavalry there to ensure freedom and "democracy" for the indigenous people?.....or to exterminate them.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 01:13 PM

The Brits have been disarmed and brainwashed. And they never fought the royals for their independence, as Americans did, so they will never understand that you have to be armed to keep your government in check. Gun ownership in the U.S. is not about hunting rodents, it is about putting fear in the people who would enslave us. 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?

The attempt to deprive Americans of their constitutional right to defend themselves has already begun. Several resolutions and bills have been introduced into the U.S. congress as a result of the Blacksburg shootings (this while they tell us not to discuss the incident out of "respect"). The most insane proposal I've come across is the one by Dennis Kucinich. Don't have the # in front of me, but it would create a new bank-breaking Department of Peace and Non-Violence. Democrats now control congress and just voted to continue the Iraq war, so the hypocrisy of talking about peace and non-violence is obvious. Kucinich also has a new bureaucracy in mind which would screen all Americans for "mental illness." The American Psychiatric Association has increased its list of mental illnesses to include things like "pain after an injury," so if Kucinich has his way, all Americans will be forced to take SSRI drugs. Chemical lobotomies. Nazi eugenics.

And the militia in my area, by the way, is whatever the sheriff says it is. The only law enforcement person I'm answerable to when I'm at home (aside from one with a signed and specific warrant) is the county sheriff. He can order me to help with law enforcement, if he deems it necessary. That's part of life in a free society. You don't make trouble, but you help end it when the duly-appointed authority asks for your help. We all understand our obligations in this regard, so that makes us well-regulated. It doesn't get much simpler than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: katlaughing
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 10:44 AM

Here's what Colorado's Senator is doing to try to help our schools be safer. It has helped in Colorado, I hope it gets implemented nationwide: Safe2Tell.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: frogprince
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 10:23 AM

"Well, sometimes we'd travel right down the Green River
To the abandoned old prison down by Adrie Hill
Where the air smelled like snakes and we'd shoot with our pistols
But empty pop bottles was all we would kill."

That's from Paradise, by John Prine. I grew up in Minnesota, in that kind of rural "gun culture", save that none of the kids I hung out with had a pistol. The guns weren't that much of our lives, and had nothing to do with a disregard for human life. I still have my .22 rifle, which I haven't fired in 30 years.
In our area of Michigan, we are commonly over-run with more deer than the area can sustain, unless all the farmers simply plant their crops and leave them there for the herds to prosper on. I don't hunt for at least two reasons; I have no taste for the kill, and if I tried to respond to the sudden appearance of game, my responses would be a clumsy jumble and I would be a hazard.
I've also worked for awhile with a (white)city kid who came to work with a pile of photos of his friends and himself playing with the arsenal that made them big men in their own minds. You don't even have to have mental illness to create a nightmare when you have that culture and an abundance of guns, and it makes precious little difference who originally purchased a given gun legally.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:35 AM

"I don't especially disapprove of hunting for food if that's the only method available to obtain meat."

What on earth makes any other method of obtaining meat superior to hunting?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:28 AM

Alas, I suffer from more than cockroaches in these parts - we have an active and voracious fox population which takes the lambs given half a chance, and the rabbits breed like, er, rabbits if left unchecked.
I leave the cockroaches to the cats (who clearly have no taste. Ugh!)
I agree that ducks aren't pests (I just like mallard and teal and my local butcher charges a fortune for them) - though Canada geese are (and also pretty tasty, to boot). Deer in the UK need management because they have to fit into man-made territories, and the population's self-management strategy in the face of that involves starvation and a lingering death for the less fit specimens.
I agree, though, that 'trophy hunting' is pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 08:18 AM

Cap'n, I've said elsewhere that I have no problem with anyone who holds an appropriate and registered firearm for pest control (and I include pigeons and rabbits, inter alia, as pests). I live in a pretty rural area, and I'm aware that it's a necessity. I don't agree that ducks are pests, nor deer, although they may well be in the eyes of others, and I may have to accede to the views of those with greater knowledge of their behaviour.

I don't especially disapprove of hunting for food if that's the only method available to obtain meat. What I do disagree with, vehemently, is the kind of 'trophy' hunting that goes on, where the **brave hunter"" (spit!) poses for photographs, grinning like a loon, over the corpse of a beautiful animal he's just shot from long range and in complete safety. This is NOT hunting. It's simply slaughter carried out in order to satisfy a primitive urge and, IMNSHO, to get over being deficient in the wedding-tackle department.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 06:15 AM

BTW Cap'n....AS one who ended the scourge of "TERIBUS" armed with nothing stronger than your intellect, I find it strange that you should require a 12 bore to exterminate the cockroaches, or "keep the wolf from the door" in the culinary dept....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 06:08 AM

I'm prepared to grant absolution to you Cap'n.
Providing you keep up the good work on these pages :0).

Johnny...good to hear from you....hope all is well.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 05:45 AM

Oh dear, I must be disturbed. I keep firearms for dealing with pests and for filling the pot. As a result my stock and vegetable garden go largely unmolested and my freezer has venison, pigeon, rabbit and duck in it.
That said, I have no desire to own a pistol, and neither do I see any need for a semi-auto firearm of any kind unless the owner has a registered disability. And I certainly have no wish to live in a society where just about anyone could get hold of such weapons. The UK gun laws allow me to do what I need to do, and that's fine by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 05:35 AM

Nice one Ake, I find it impossible to believe that anyone in 21st-century-USA **needs** to **hunt** (which isn't hunting at all, just a one-sided slaughterfest driven by blood-lust).

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 05:32 AM

Well said dianavan, you are so, so right.
And Ron D., good points, and well made.
Unfortunately, none are so blind as they who will not see.
I despair at the stupidity of the gun-freaks. Shame they don't all take up crochet. Or, even better, cricket.
S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 05:31 AM

As I've said somewhere above, the "right to bear arms" creates the wrong climate in your society.

It allows a young man who is obviously highly disturbed to gain access to dangerous weapons without too much notice being taken.

In the UK this would have been very unlikely to occur.
Here, most of the psychopaths turn out to be people who have their guns legally...members of "gun clubs" ect.

I very much agree with those on this thread who contend that any private citizen who wishes to own or use a firearm....for any purpose, is is some way "disturbed".

I include all you brave hunters in that...

Now if you were prepared to enter the jungle in pitch darkness,armed with a spear..to pit your wits against the wild beasts...I might be prepared to change my opinion.......Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 21 Apr 07 - 01:16 AM

I believe in stricter control of guns. I don't believe that anyone should be free to own any firearm that is produced. I believe that automatic weapons, plastic non-detectable firearms, and armor-piercing, "cop-killer" rounds should be outlawed. I believe that people who advocate the freedom of access to such items are lunatics, frankly.

Having said this, I don't think Virginia Tech is apropos to a gun control discussion. I don't believe that lax gun laws were the culprit in the case of Cho. The flaw here is in inadequate legal means to confine and disarm an obviously disturbed person, the failure of some individuals to take appropriate action, and the insatiable hunger for gory details and prurient matter by both the media and its customers...us.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 11:58 PM

BB--

Have you ever read the 2nd Amendment?

Here it is in its entirety:

" A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Do you have any idea what the meaning of that is, or the purpose?

What's the first mention? Very good--Militia. Go to the head of the class.

So that's the goal of the right to bear arms. And how many gatherings of the Militia have you attended recently? How many do you think Cho attended?

If you don't believe the right to bear arms has to do with the militia, check Amendment 5. It's about crimes and whether you will be held to answer for a "capital or other infamous crime" "except in cases arising in the land or naval forces or in the Militia".

So obviously the "Militia" is another armed force. However, it stands to reason that if you are not in that armed force, you are not part of the militia. In that case the "right to bear arms" is not your right.

And don't bother with the garbage of all able-bodied men being in the militia. If so, what part have you played in the militia recently?

And it may do you some good to read some history.

If you do, it will become clear that 3 problems were to be addressed by the 2nd Amendment:

1) fear of an overpowerful government
2) fear of a standing army
3) fear of Indian attacks

I think we can agree that the danger of Indian attacks has gone down recently.

The other 2 were directed , as I said earlier, at recent experience (at the time of the Bill of Rights) with the British government. If you disagree, please specify exactly why.

Things have changed, you may have noticed. (Or perhaps you haven't noticed.)

Fear of a standing army? Do you still have that?

Perhaps fear of an overpowerful government? As I said earlier, if you have this fear, it's interesting, since you voted for the current regime. But you and like-minded individuals may not have much luck against the US military. Or perhaps you think differently

And spare us the pious mouthings about the sacrosanct nature of the Constitution.

Times change. Have you heard of the 3/5 compromise?    Do you know what happened to it? Perhaps you think it should still be in force--after all, it's in the Constitution.

How about the 18th Amendment? Is that still in force?

And in the Bill of Rights itself, try the 7th Amendment--"where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved". Is that still in force exactly as written--"twenty dollars"?

The Bill of Rights, like the Constitution, changes to meet new circumstances. When you join the militia, you can apply for your right to bear arms. An argument can easily be made that the "Militia" could be seen as the National Guard--emphatically NOT every male over 16.

And don't bother with "if this right is abrogated, all other rights are in danger". That's patently absurd.

Freedom of speech, religion, etc. are still important--I imagine you agree.

"A well regulated Militia" is no longer so pressing a need, for reasons I have cited. Furthermore, as noted, in general the National Guard fills the role.

Do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 11:47 PM

The 2nd Amendment was intended to prevent a repeat of what had just happened in America--a tyrannical government. Thomas Jefferson was in favor of providing civilians with military-grade arms, to keep government honest. So when the government starts passing laws against guns, it is doing so only to protect itself. And once all challenge to authority is removed, it can do whatever it wants.

I'm for allowing responsible people to own any firearm they desire, which seems to upset some. But then I get upset when I hear people whining because they can no longer suck the brains out of partially birthed babies.

Below is a link to a good article about SSRI drugs and their link to mass-murdering. Old article. A shame this garbage is still on the market. A shame too that people are debating guns instead of the drug companies doing chemical lobotomies on our young.

http://www.steelhorsemag.com/SSRI.htm

By the way, I worked with a man who was taking Anafranil (a SSRI drug), and he beat another man to death after drinking a single beer. He didn't recall the attack later. Beat him to death with a pair of pliers and a can of jalapenos. I kid you not. Then he stabbed him repeatedly with a pair of scissors and a broken hoe handle. So you don't need guns to do the damage.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:43 PM

bruce! I said I advocate changes! How is that claiming "the problem will be solved."?

"The Bill Of Rights is not something that should be ignored"...again...STRAW MAN... I am not ignoring it, I am upset at its ambiguity and its lack or relevance to modern society, and I explained why! You seem to thing that posting the 2nd amendment over & over will MAKE it clear & relevant. I disagree that it should be a given that anyone who is not a convicted felon should be allowed to possess most of the weapons under question. I believe that **IF** there were many fewer guns in private hands, and if those that were, were smaller and not semi-automatic, that there would be FAR fewer firearms used in crimes.

THAT point may be debated & discussed...but I will not sit still for Gerrymandered data and technical points about weapons design to be used to 'prove' something that I didn't say.

for the last time, THIS sort of remark:

"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!

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:35 PM

No - and it won't do much good for the victims of the next publicity-seeking lunatic inspired by the thought of all the attention the media will give his video-taped ravings.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 08:29 PM

Well it didn't do him a lot of good did it?

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

Good stuff, Lonesome. Although, according to NBC sources, there WAS "a hesitation" on their part - they thought about it, discussed it - then showed it.

Commentator on CBC this morning said that Cho had "extorted a billion dollars worth of free publicity" from the news media.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 07:50 PM

In the UK we do not have the right to bear arms...........so no-one, unless approved by a strict licencing investigation and approval through application to the Police, can own one......but the criminal element seem to get them quite easily for the 'right cash'. In the US, surely guns are so so plentiful that anyone...and I mean anyone could get one for the 'right cash'... or am I misleading myself?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 06:56 PM

So everyone who knew him thought he was pretty crazy. He'd been a patient in a mental hospital recently, and yet he had no difficulty in walking into a shop and buying the guns he used...

"Only in America" - I certainly hope that's true.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: frogprince
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 06:44 PM

"we should repeal the 1968 gun law, which makes full auto weapons illegal."

If I found out this guy lived near to me, I would be just about as spooked as if Cho did.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: katlaughing
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 05:18 PM

Excellent letter, LeeJ. I was appalled to see clips of it running on the TV Guide channel on cable, when my grandson was in the room. Thankfully I had the tv on mute and quickly changed the channel back to PBS Kids. That kind of stuff should never see the light of day, except for any necessary court proceedings, if any were necessary in such a case. No publication, no viewing, no nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 05:10 PM

I just sent the following email to my Denver NBC affiliate. If you feel as I do, I suggest you also communicate your feelings on this.



To NBC news

I wanted to express my shock and disgust at the reprehensible action of NBC and its president in airing the "press package" created by the Virginia Tech killer. Apparently there was never a hesitation on NBC's part, and no concern that such publicity might be exactly what such sick individuals are lusting for. To disguise this action as a need to know more about the killer's motivation is nothing but a spin on the real motive... Sheer profit.

Congratulations on your further encouragement of such acts, as I see you as complicit in them. I somehow doubt, though, that the President of NBC, were his family killed in a mass slaying, would feel that the murder's press package deserved public promotion.

Ernest Johnson

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 03:32 PM

Is this not saying that the additional laws that you advocate will help the situation? If not, why would we want to have them?

Perhaps the word "solve" is the problem: Care to suggest how I should describe your reason for these already-proven ineffective additional laws?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 03:30 PM

BillD,

YOU stated:

"Now, as a working idea, I think that it might be a good idea to rule that ALL firearms permits are to expire, in say, two years, and that ALL owners must re-apply within that period, with severe penalties for anyone found with unregistered guns after that. And VERY severe penalties for anyone found abusing the gun laws...either in sales or use.

Further, in my opinion, we need ONE set of laws, so that someone from DC cannot drive an hour into Virginia and buy what they wish. We need a FULL review of weapons and ammunition types and technology and revised laws reflecting a saner designation of things like 'semi-automatic', so that kids don't find it easy to get AK-47s....and must PROVE why they need certain types of clips!"

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:40 PM

BillD,

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."

About Imus, YOU would not want to argue with me?

The Bill Of Rights is not something that should be ignored, for when one attacks the rights that one does not use, it endangers the rights that one supports as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:34 PM

"YOU are the one stating that if we pass laws the problem will be solved."

Show me where I said any such thing!!
I HAVE said that gun owners 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. I even posted suggestions.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: open mike
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:07 PM

this thread seems top have become a general
chat about guns, gun control, etc.

related to the Virginia Tech episode,
there was a copy-cat sort of event yesterday
in Yuba City, in northern calif.
Yuba City threat

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:04 PM

BillD,

YOU were the one stating "and, your 1 & 2 are nitpicking, semantic avoidance of my points. The FACT is that gun laws are weak in Virginia and tight in DC.". I was replying to YOU. If the circumstances are different, why would you want the same solution, especially where it has been shown NOT to work?

"...and the prohibitions against various things like conversion kits are happily obeyed by criminals, hmmm?"

YOU are the one stating that if we pass laws the problem will be solved. Since anyone can make a gun with 2 pipes, a 2x4 ( or part of one) and a nail, ( as the US made and dropped to the French Resistance in WWII) the fact that criminals will NOT obey the law is even more reason NOT to have additional unenforcable laws.

Or will the criminals suddenly obey the law if it is serious enough?

It seems to me that someone willing to murder will not obey other laws, and the facts of the effects of past legislation shows me to be correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:01 PM

(Oopsie! I forgot that the "enter" key does several things. Like send the post.) What I meant to say is that just because we may never stop each and every bad event is no reason not to do everything we can to limit those to as few as possible. And we CAN definitely dramatically reduce these events. For one thing, we need to go back to the 80s when mental health suddenly "became" no longer society's problem and undo that boneheaded approach. Good bless Reagan.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 02:01 PM

gun owner says, "Do any of you really think someone like Cho won't get the guns if he wants them?"

Lets face it, ordering a gun by mail and walking across the street to pick it up is alot easier than finding a gun through criminal means.

Lets get back to why guns make it easier to kill than any other weapon. Guns allow you to distance yourself from the act. Almost any other weapon requires action on the part of the killer. When you feel alienated from society, what better way of remaining apart than putting a gun between you and the victim(s). Its the perfect weapon for the mentally unstable.

btw gun lovers - Your right to shoot animals or play target games does not and should not supercede my right to safety. How does your gun ownership protect my defenceless child sitting in a classroom?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,sau
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:56 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:56 PM

from way above:

"Gun laws make it really difficult for honest folks to get guns."

indeed...and NO gun laws make it really easy for honest and dishonest folks to get guns.
Who do you think will get the most?

"Yet crime is higher in DC, with the tight gun laws, and lower in Virginia, with the weak gun laws."

comparing a STATE, largely rural, to a city with all the urban problems? Fascinating use of data.


"Why?? There is presently a perfectly good definition."

No...there certainly is not. The definition needs to specifically exclude several categories.


...and the prohibitions against various things like conversion kits are happily obeyed by criminals, hmmm?

You are tap-dancing among misleading statistics and clever Gerrymandered definitions. I am trying to look at practical realities.
A 'practical reality' to gun fanciers is any situation that will allow them to own whatever they wish.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,saulgoldie
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:56 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:42 PM

"The sad fact is one can never stop random acts by random people who randomly work out a plan to randomly or specifically do damage, kill or whatever."

a premise that is both realistic and pessimistic.
Positive realism will get us there faster, if not in a better mood.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:36 PM

Whatever we think, the world has a lot of 'abnormal' people in it and they will do what they will do and other people...deemed more in touch with reality will analyse and dissect and debate and argue over whatever happens.
The sad fact is one can never stop random acts by random people who randomly work out a plan to randomly or specifically do damage, kill or whatever.
It is O.K to say well somebody is to blame...at the end of the day...the person to blame is the perpetrator......
Yes we must take all possible steps to stop this happening again so is there going to be a total ban on guns in the US....No! So guns are available to ANYONE who wants one...if they can't get one legally then surely they are so plentiful they can be procured by crime or deception or just plain cash.
If you want to stop gun crime....stop guns!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:27 PM

If I have one overview, it is this.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

If that cure in your mind is less guns or more guns, or more litigousness or less, or more therapy or less, more drugs or less, more sex or less sex...what matters is that we are looking for that ounce of prevention. We may be opinionated blind men feeling an elephant and have different answers, but we are looking.

Ann Frank said, "Despite everything, I think people are good at heart".

It is a good world. And we will continue looking for that ounce of prevention.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 01:03 PM

They say the serial killer was a charming affable guy and a deacon in his church.
Yeah , you never can tell.

They say the killer was a loner and never talked to anyone,
Yeah, you never can tell.


Profilers will tell you that killers are most often pshycho-sexual mad men.

I say at the bottom of most of these insane killers is a perversion of sex for one reason or another.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:56 PM

>>OK everyone, we know HOW he did it. He used guns

But WHY DID HE DO IT????????????????????????????????????????

This is not in his defense, but pertains to his situation.

The answer is not in psychosis or the "manifesto" or the serotonin reuptake inhibitors or the violent Korean movie or his pathological shyness due to a brain malformation....no


Love never found him, Love never saved him.<<

He was crazy--period. He was just plain nuts.

>>He probably died a virgin.<<

Yeah so? A lot of people died virgins and didn't commit mass murder.

>>George Carlin said imagine the last guy, The guy who has it worse in some regard than everyone else on earth.

Imagine the guy who admires a girl from afar and she takes him to court for stalking and then he text messages another girl and she gets a court order to stop or the last girl who got a restraining order..3 strikes and he's out.
Having nowhere else to go except a crazy embarrased internal revenge he goes postal.<<

You're making a case for the guy doing this because he couldn't get a date and that it ridiculous. He couldn't get a date for the same reason he shot a bunch people--he's totally nuts.

>>OK this scenario is somewhat tongue in cheek,<<

Well yeah.

>>but for a really shy person who tries awkwardly 3 times to reach out to a girl, until he has to invent a girlfriend to limit the other guys' ridicule and each time he tried to date, he was taken to court.<<

First off, shyness wasn't his problem. Mental illness was. He couldn't get a date because the girls he contacted were scared of him as was everyone else. Girls don't go to the police because you asked them for a date and they didn't want to. They go to the police because they're scared of you. And from what I see, those girls had every reason to be.

>>That is some kind of luck only the "last guy" could have.
This is not in his defense, but rather, his possible situation.<<

Doesn't sound possible to me. It doesn't make sense to say that it wasn't just because he was lonely (especially when he obviously preferred to be alone) but also because he was unbalanced. You may as well say it was simply because he was unbalanced.

Lonely shy guys don't do this. A severe mental psychosis is the only thing that I think can possibly account for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:50 PM

Actually on HBO there is a program called Real Sex and they show various sex immersion groups all over the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,gun owner
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:46 PM

Rodney King's not the point in the example above. The behavior of the police is the point. If America were disarmed, we'd be protected by--what? Cops who hide behind trees when there is a real crisis, but then beat the defenseless when the opportunity arises. Look at what happened to the "undesirables" in Germany after the citizens were disarmed. There's bound to be video on Youtube of Jews with yellow stars on their coats being beaten by cops and mobs. That happened because the country was first disarmed.

And in America we have a government that admits it raped with acid at Abu Grahib. And it has killed 2/3's of a million Iraqi civilians in the past 3 years. And it has said that here at home you can be picked up and disappeared for "suspected" terrorism, with the definition of terrorism now being the breaking of a federal or state law. Not only should more restrictive gun laws be dismissed out of hand, we should repeal the 1968 gun law, which makes full auto weapons illegal. A government that will cluster bomb women and children with depleted uranium will not hesitate to destroy you and your family. American citizens need to get back on as even a playing field as possible with our rogue government.

I don't watch television, so I don't get the daily dosages of propaganda, but America is apparently now undergoing the media-induced traumatization that took place just after 9/11. After that incident, we were told we had to give up liberty for security. That was absurd on the face of it (giving up liberty leads to tyranny, not security--apples and oranges), and now Americans are apparently being traumatized with a horrific video while they're being told this won't happen again if we give up guns. Giving up guns will only INSURE it will happen again. Do any of you really think someone like Cho won't get the guns if he wants them?

My fear now is that we'll see even more and worse examples of this, soon. End of the school year, the media glorifying Cho, psychotropic drugs being forced on school kids, graduations and "last chances" coming up. If a rash of these shootings DOES occur, remember that the media shapes opinion, and they traumatized the country for a reason.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:45 PM

If it did exist, can you imagine all the melingering horny guys lining up...

"yeah doc I gotta problem, I need it bad".
"Are you a threat to yourself or society?"
"UMmmm, ahh sure , yeah thats the ticket!"

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 12:30 PM

Yeah - that's why I said "realistically speaking" ...

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 11:50 AM

Sex immersion therapy.

It doesn't exist and would be condemned by religions and politicians alike.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: GUEST,meself
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:51 AM

Undoubtedly, Donuel. But surely his difficulties with women were as much a result as a cause of his problems. I don't imagine these women went to the legal authorities simply because he asked them once or twice to go for a coffee. They obviously perceived that he was dangerous, and they were - quite rightly, I would suggest - very scared of him.

Realistically speaking - what is the alternative to a lonely, unbalanced, emotionally and sexually frustrated young man sitting alone in his room playing video-games night after night?

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:49 AM

opps, I guess I crossed the line by humanizing the killer.




love understanding forgiveness?
It was one of Christ's teachings afterall.

Subject: RE: BS: Virginia Tech Shooting, 20 dead?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Apr 07 - 10:30 AM

For all the psycho babble you will ever will hear about this, no talking head will ever say, "he needed to get laid"

but believe me folks, it had something to do with it.