Deadly shooting at US university

§outh§tar said:
This is almost as many people dead as "rogue" American and British soldiers have deliberately massacred this year alone.

Let's see you wring your hands over that. :(
Click to expand...

Everybody dies. It's just tragic when it's people from a close allied nation. If only the gunman realised that there are acceptable places to conduct this sort of behaviour.
 
Bells said:
Errmm ok. I would imagine the confusion and everyone drawing their guns and shooting who they thought might have been the shooter would probably result in a higher death toll.
Click to expand...
Guess what, Virginia Tech is legally a "gun free zone". This means that even people with conceal carry permits are not allowed to carry guns there. You might not that these mass shootings almost always take place in areas where law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry guns.

Interestingly, an attempt was recently made to allow conceal carry at Virginia Tech, but it was defeated. Had it passed, this whole thing might have gone differently.
 
Very Intersting point madan, I think that the death toll would have been much less had every one had a gun, and I think that was a ingonrant comment Bells
 
Unfortunately, kneejerk reaction will probably lead to increased restrictions on firearms ownership. For some reason, the facts, statistics and logic evade the "do-gooders" in positions of power... or, if you'll allow a little tinfoil moment, they purposefully ignore the truth in order to disarm the populace and gain additional control over them.
 
madanthonywayne: "You might [note] that these mass shootings almost always take place in areas where law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry guns.

Interestingly, an attempt was recently made to allow conceal carry at Virginia Tech, but it was defeated. Had it passed, this whole thing might have gone differently."

That's creative speculation. There are lots of places in the world where weapons are everywhere, and madmen still commit massacres. It's nothing but a fantasy to imagine that the world can be like a corny TV episode of "Gunsmoke" or "Bonanza", where the bad guy always gets it before committing more than an entertaining amount of mayhem, because every white-hat-wearing manly-man is packing heat. The closest reality today to such a state of affairs is Baghdad, Iraq- where killings even more indiscriminate than Virginia Tech are commonplace. The massacres of that less "news-worthy" species (sub-americans) will of course draw far less attention from CNN, while there is an American drama to repeat footage on, and repeat footage on, and repeat footage on, for the weeks and months ahead.

So as with our response to 9-11, America will continue to react to tragedy badly. There will be howls for our society to be made safer, as if it is not already as safe as an open and world-dominating society can be. There will be a new round of sensationalism, while tomorrow's notoriety-craving sociopaths lick their lips with glee and anticipation.

Te Jen: "There's nothing anyone can do to stop a mentally ill person from carrying out a bloodbath. The only way to decrease the incidence is to convince the media to stop playing the events to the absolute hilt"

Let those who are grieving and healing grieve and heal, just as thousands of others are grieving and healing, having endured experiences just as painful and tragic, in a thousand other human tragedies that were not hyped today. It would be more compassionate and prudent for everyone not personally involved in such tragedies to move on.

If a wider madness (including a political stampede toward authoritarianism) is not to flourish in America, we have got to learn to stop being ghouls, drama-addicts, and weak-minded deniars of life's inherent dangers. We've got to reject the concept of some righteous new national protectors from all evil. America is as safe from evil as is feasible, because the only truly effective national measures of prevention of such tragedies would become an even greater evil.
 
Last edited:
Strangely enough, I have to agree with Dark on this one.

Logically, if you're close to a gunman, you're probably just better off rushing him and trying to disarm, which at least puts him off balance for a few seconds. Turning your back on him and running just makes you a sitting target. Someone on a killing spree isn't about to be averse to shooting you in the back. Neither option is great, but the chances of survival are probably a bit better if you tackle the bastard.

From memory, in the Monash uni shooting, someone tackled and roundhouse kicked the gunman to the ground when he was switching weapons.

Also, I think a former U.S president rushed a dual pistol wielding assassin, and disarmed him. Luckily both pistols misfired...

Of course, you'd need to have a bit of nerve to do the above.
 
Bad news is my favorite news. The good news is that the worst news continues to make the best news. I'm so glad that the news has a proper massacre to work with. Wailing bedouins and Anna Nicole Smith just weren't doing it for me. Is anyone else looking forward to the 20 page special in Newsweek, complete with a map of the shooter's path?

To be completely honest, though, the media hooplah over these events really pisses me off. Not because they're playing it constantly, but because I'm not supposed to enjoy it. And all the people who wring their hands and say "what a tragedy, what a tragedy," while morbidly glued to the television screen. Like the fascination people have with the holocaust. Christ, can't we just masturbate quietly to this stuff instead of having to talk insistently about what a tragedy everything is? Not that it ruins the mood, just seems a little hypocritical.
 
Roman said:
Bad news is my favorite news. The good news is that the worst news continues to make the best news. I'm so glad that the news has a proper massacre to work with. Wailing bedouins and Anna Nicole Smith just weren't doing it for me. Is anyone else looking forward to the 20 page special in Newsweek, complete with a map of the shooter's path?

To be completely honest, though, the media hooplah over these events really pisses me off. Not because they're playing it constantly, but because I'm not supposed to enjoy it. And all the people who wring their hands and say "what a tragedy, what a tragedy," while morbidly glued to the television screen. Like the fascination people have with the holocaust. Christ, can't we just masturbate quietly to this stuff instead of having to talk insistently about what a tragedy everything is? Not that it ruins the mood, just seems a little hypocritical.
Click to expand...

You should than experience being a hero in the hooplah. The ones not deserving it are dead and you are not.
 
I don't believe in heroes. We all reflexively react to extreme crisis in the ways that we have prepared ourselves to react; in critical moments we react in the ways that training, adrenaline and instinct are developed to facilitate. Those who are employed in dangerous professions are attracted to these phenomena. I can appreciate admiration, but the "hero" concept is a product not of crisis-averters, but of hero-worshippers.
 
So I'm thinking when the videos come out, we superimpose the HUD for grand theft auto over it. I bet he only makes it to three stars.
 
te jen said:
There's nothing anyone can do to stop a mentally ill person from carrying out a bloodbath. The only way to decrease the incidence is to convince the media to stop playing the events to the absolute hilt (yeah, right, never happen) so that other people on the edge don't get the idea. It would also be nice if someone who knew this young man had some kind of clue about what could happen and let somebody know about it.

Given the easy availability of automatic weapons and ammo, this sort of thing will continue to happen. Time was a guy might show up with a 38 special and maybe manage to kill one or two people before somebody stomped his guts out while he was reloading. Now you can set yourself up Matrix-style and keep killing until you either run out of victims or the cops stop you.

Sick people + highpowered weapons + open society = repeated mass murders
Click to expand...


What stops a person form carrying multiple revovlers, dumbass.

No, banning weapons is not the answer at all. When you make weaponry illegal all you do is make so all the gun out there are in criminal hands. If we truly lived in a society of easy access weaponry the Headline today would be. "Heavily Armed Lunatic gunned down by Intended Victims" the Death toll would be low single digits.
 
madanthonywayne said:
Guess what, Virginia Tech is legally a "gun free zone". This means that even people with conceal carry permits are not allowed to carry guns there. You might not that these mass shootings almost always take place in areas where law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry guns.

Interestingly, an attempt was recently made to allow conceal carry at Virginia Tech, but it was defeated. Had it passed, this whole thing might have gone differently.
Click to expand...
Not quite. It was the teachers fault. The shooter was upset because the teacher gave him a 99 instead of a 100. Then he shot up the place.
 
reply to twscott

^the problem is if everyone carried weapons, there would be more deaths.

Simply because of the moment of passion and availability of the weapon. It's extremely easy to load a weapon and pull the trigger and if you have it on your person day in and day out, especially with most people
it would be disastrous.

It's quite different when you have to plan a crime, not that its total prevention but it certainly plays a role.
 
SoLiDUS said:
Unfortunately, kneejerk reaction will probably lead to increased restrictions on firearms ownership. For some reason, the facts, statistics and logic evade the "do-gooders" in positions of power... or, if you'll allow a little tinfoil moment, they purposefully ignore the truth in order to disarm the populace and gain additional control over them.
Click to expand...

and by "do-gooders" i assume you mean bush and his cronies?!?!HAHAHAHAHA.

gun laws in america wont change.too many retards with votes./
 
madanthonywayne said:
Guess what, Virginia Tech is legally a "gun free zone". This means that even people with conceal carry permits are not allowed to carry guns there. You might not that these mass shootings almost always take place in areas where law abiding citizens are not allowed to carry guns.

Interestingly, an attempt was recently made to allow conceal carry at Virginia Tech, but it was defeated. Had it passed, this whole thing might have gone differently.
Click to expand...

One thing that should be noted is that these shootings always seem to mostly take place in the US. Sure they occur elsewhere around the world from time to time, but most of the time, it always seems to happen in the US. Why is that?

Anywho..

dagr8n8 said:
Very Intersting point madan, I think that the death toll would have been much less had every one had a gun, and I think that was a ingonrant comment Bells
Click to expand...
Yes, very interesting point indeed.

However you can never know this with any form of certainty. You are only basing your beliefs on what should occur if everyone was allowed to carry a concealed weapon or if everyone was armed. Now imagine the situation as the shootings was taking place. In the panic, can you be 100% certain that everyone would be able to shoot the correct person? Remember that people were diving all over the place to attempt to escape that classroom. He had automatic weapons. Can you be 100% certain that things would have gone better if everyone was armed? Or could you also have a situation where some want to be heroes would start going to look for him with their guns drawn, not knowing who exactly it was they were looking for?

The death toll would most definately be lower had the school been in lockdown at the instance of the first shooting and if everyone had been warned of what happened immediately afterwards, instead of a couple of hours later by email, amazingly enough, as the shooter was killing 30 more people in that classroom across campus. Maybe if the school was in lockdown, with the police searching the grounds, the shooter would not have been able to shoot up a room full of people. I don't know.. you tell me. What would have been better? Everyone be armed and running around scared out of their wits knowing that someone on campus was the shooter and they are meant to be able to defend themselves (remember these are all virtually kids who are armed and possibly having to kill a madman with automatic weapons.. are these kids properly trained to do this?)? Or having everyone in lockdown with police actively searching for the shooter? I would prefer to take the lockdown.. call me strange.:rolleyes:

In regards to the concealed weapons argument. At what age should people be allowed to arm themselves with a concealed weapon? Some of these kids might have been around 17 to 18 or so (imagine first year college students). Would you trust a bunch of 17 year olds with loaded weapons? What about the training these kids would have to have to carry said weapons? When should that start? Possibly a subject in high school? Because at the moment, you are both advocating arming children and allowing them to carry a concealed weapon.
 
broadandbeaver said:
What possible difference would it make?!?!?!

He was a n Asian Christian. Does that make it better?
Click to expand...

It seems many of us posting are unaware of the latent nature of most Asians.. they are by DNA a very cold, calculating and cruel people, but most of them can contain it when they have to. But just under the surface lies Mongol blood, some of the most barbarous people to have ever drawn air.
 
Bells, I think you have a good point about forming a "witch" hunt, but in a class room situation I would presume that it would lie down more like this

Shotter walks in shoots one maby three people then some one thru the scrambling shots him and there is a slight possability that he could get shot but I would assume not more than one more person would get shot after that.


gerrr my 02 cents
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top