Scott Dolan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Who needs an assault weapon to kill somebody? If the guy had his mind set on it as much as he obviously did, he would have found a way to carry out his plan no matter what kind of weapons he would have had to resort to. I didn't realizing killing came about with the advent of the gun. Bottom line is this, gents. You can make guns illegal. Just like we did with drugs. Boy, that worked out swimmingly, didn't it? Besides, how many guns that are used in criminal acts do you actually think were legally obtained? Quote
Chuck Nessa Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Who needs an assault weapon to kill somebody? If the guy had his mind set on it as much as he obviously did, he would have found a way to carry out his plan no matter what kind of weapons he would have had to resort to. I didn't realizing killing came about with the advent of the gun. Bottom line is this, gents. You can make guns illegal. Just like we did with drugs. Boy, that worked out swimmingly, didn't it? Besides, how many guns that are used in criminal acts do you actually think were legally obtained? Boy are you correct! Can't imagine what I was thinking. Steal legal guns, steal illegal guns. No better source for guns of any kind than the USA. Our government even sells them to our friends/don't knows/bad guys/enemies. While basking in the glory of a positive nessa post, stick it where the sun don't shine. Quote
Guy Berger Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) You can do it with any of the above. A skilled operator can fire a lever-action quicker than a semi-auto. Same goes with a revolver. Sounds like a good case for gun control to me. No problem, as long as honest law-abiding citizens can still own (certain types of) firearms. Guy Edited April 17, 2007 by Guy Quote
Dan Gould Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Anyone listening to the audio of gunfire captured by the student's cel phone knows that these weren't automatic weapons. Quote
Noj Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 They just interviewed a girl who was in the classroom which was assaulted on TV. She played dead to escape. The murderer had a handgun. Quote
Soulstation1 Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) news report the killer shot himself in face so police wouldn't be able to id him Edited April 17, 2007 by Soulstation1 Quote
BERIGAN Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Now they say the killer was a Chinese man in the US on a student visa! WTF???? http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/343354...07.articleprint Quote
Scott Dolan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 They just interviewed a girl who was in the classroom which was assaulted on TV. She played dead to escape. The murderer had a handgun. Two handguns with multiple clips. Quote
Johnny E Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 I didn't realizing killing came about with the advent of the gun. You gotta be kiddin' me Scott. That's some jive ass shit right there. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 I didn't realizing killing came about with the advent of the gun. You gotta be kiddin' me Scott. That's some jive ass shit right there. No, what's jive shit is you spouting on about gun control laws not taking into account the average gun owner is responsible about their ownership/hobby/etc., while most of the guns used in criminl activities are illegally obtained. You're also completely ignoring that making something illegal almost never makes it go away. The same would happen with guns. If somebody wants one bad enough, they'll get it. Violent personalities were around long before guns were invented, and will be around long after we're gone. If you can't state anything more tangible than "smells like bullshit" or tell me that my comments are "jive ass" your rebuttals really won't hold much water. You make it seem as though having tighter gun control would prevent things like this from happening. Now that's what I call jive ass. And naive as hell to boot. Quote
Noj Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 What I can never understand, in instances of killers such as this, is how a person loses track of empathizing with other people. To not have any consideration for the pain being inflicted on others by one's actions is the terrifying hallmark of insanity. The ripple effect of just one wrongful death is so powerful, 33 bright lives lost sends an awful wave which spans the coasts. We all sympathize with the families who have lost a loved one, we universally despise the murderer responsible. One can only come to the conclusion that the even more horrifying effects of a war in which thousands are killed must be exponentially worse. Wasn't it Chris Rock who said bullets should cost $1000 each? Quote
Guy Berger Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) You're also completely ignoring that making something illegal almost never makes it go away. The same would happen with guns. ... You make it seem as though having tighter gun control would prevent things like this from happening. Now that's what I call jive ass. And naive as hell to boot. It wouldn't prevent things like this from happening, but it would probably reduce their frequency. (Not a judgment on the moral merit of various gun control laws.) Anyway, I'm done here for the next few days... too early to turn a tragedy into a political football. Guy Edited April 17, 2007 by Guy Quote
ghost of miles Posted April 17, 2007 Author Report Posted April 17, 2007 So if the "jilted lover" narrative, or angle, turns out to be partly behind this case... you know, I'm so sick of my gender doing crap like this. 99 out of 100 times it's a man who goes on a g.d. shooting rampage. Can't we teach ourselves to be strong without encouraging the psychopathic-aggressive insanity that leads to things like this? Quote
bertrand Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 It looks now like the two shootings may have been unrelated. More to come... Bertrand. Quote
Edward Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 (edited) You're also completely ignoring that making something illegal almost never makes it go away. The same would happen with guns. ... You make it seem as though having tighter gun control would prevent things like this from happening. Now that's what I call jive ass. And naive as hell to boot. It wouldn't prevent things like this from happening, but it would probably reduce their frequency. (Not a judgment on the moral merit of various gun control laws.) Anyway, I'm done here for the next few days... too early to turn a tragedy into a political football. Guy I completely agree. Scott, surely you see the flaws in your original argument: If the guy had his mind set on it as much as he obviously did, he would have found out a way to carry out his plan no matter what kind of weapons he would have had to resort to. Do you really think that he could have killed over 30 people so easily without resorting to firearms? Yes, I suppose that he could have constructed a bomb or committed arson, but I think that would have taken a lot more effort and planning. Maybe, then, he would have just killed himself alone and let everyone else be. Moreover, by this train of reasoning, could you not also argue that we should not restrict shoulder-launched SAM's because if someone is really intent on bringing down a plane they will find a way to do it? The whole point of gun control is to make it more difficult for some people to acquire firearms (as well as forbid civilian ownership of certain weapons altogether). On another note, the distinction drawn between "assault" style and other weapons is meaningless. The important things to consider are the range of the weapon and its ability to penetrate (body armor, bulletproof glass, etc.). The family of a peace officer who is killed at long range by a bolt-action rifle (I have a friend in the OC Sheriff's Department who knew someone who was murdered in such a manner by someone with a "regular" hunting rifle) certainly is not consoled by the ban on assault-style weapons. Yes, I know that handguns, not rifles, were used to commit this atrocity. Also, for the record, I do believe that the ownership of certain types of firearms (for self-protection purposes) is provided by the Constitution. At any rate, I have said too much already - as Guy noted, it is far too soon for all of this. Edited April 17, 2007 by Edward Quote
White Lightning Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Horrible, horrible news. My condolences to the families Please don't be stupid and argue about the type of gun. They are dead! Talk to the mothers and fathers and wives and sisters and brothers and cousins and...................................... I agree. Politicizing this event is pointless and rather tasteless. If people want to make this massacre a part of their political agenda, I'd advise them to at least wait until the dead are buried. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Yes, I suppose that he could have constructed a bomb or committed arson, but I think that would have taken a lot more effort and planning. So my argument isn't flawed at all. It may not have been as easy, but I think it's pretty obvious when somebody has reached this mental state there are few obstacles. Would you not agree? Quote
(BB) Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Horrible, horrible news. My condolences to the families Please don't be stupid and argue about the type of gun. They are dead! Talk to the mothers and fathers and wives and sisters and brothers and cousins and...................................... I agree. Politicizing this event is pointless and rather tasteless. If people want to make this massacre a part of their political agenda, I'd advise them to at least wait until the dead are buried. I too agree with these points. A sad day for anyone touched by this. Quote
Scott Dolan Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Anyway, I'm done here for the next few days... too early to turn a tragedy into a political football. At any rate, I have said too much already - as Guy noted, it is far too soon for all of this. Politicizing this event is pointless and rather tasteless. Agreed. But, to put a cleaner point on my argument, I have never, and will never, own a gun. I don't believe in them. I have no political agenda when it comes to this. I was simply trying to equalize some of the points made earlier in this thread. If I have offended, I apologize. Quote
Big Al Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 What a nightmare for those poor parents. My heart and prayers go out to these folks. This is just heartbreaking. Quote
GA Russell Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Race may have been a factor. I have no idea if the Chinese are more or less racist than anybody else. The current report is that the man originally identified as the former girlfriend's "advisor" who was shot in the dorm room with the former girlfriend is now being identified as her new love interest. He is a black male named Ryan Clark. http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2007170635,00.html Quote
Swinging Swede Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 One of the victims, professor Liviu Librescu, was a Holocaust survivor. Quote
Son-of-a-Weizen Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 Race may have been a factor. I have no idea if the Chinese are more or less racist than anybody else. I dunno.....but if you're a white dude who happens to plant a few too many fun luvin' pecks on the cheek of some Indian film gal, they start going off the rails. Protestors in India Burn Richard Gere Effigies Fiery Reaction to Actor's Embrace of Bollywood Star By PRITHWISH GANGULY, Reuters NEW DELHI (April 16) - Richard Gere 's repeated kisses on the cheeks of Bollywood actress Shilpa Shetty in an event to promote AIDS awareness sparked protests in India on Monday with demonstrators burning effigies of the actors. 'This Is a Bit Too Much' Footage of the Hollywood star sweeping Shetty backwards in a dramatic embrace at the Sunday night event in New Delhi was repeatedly aired on news channels on Monday. Many saw the act as an outrage against Shetty's modesty and Indian culture, though Shetty herself angrily dismissed the protests as an "over-reaction" that made India look silly. Groups of men burned and kicked effigies of the actors in protests across India, including in the northern Indian cities of New Delhi, Kanpur, Meerut and Varanasi as well as in the central city of Indore. Some called for the actors' deaths. Others wanted public apologies. But Shetty, the winner of the "Celebrity Big Brother" reality TV show in Britain this year, said the reaction to the kiss made India look "regressive." "I admit it went a little overboard but that was not the intention," she said to a crowd of journalists and protesters that had besieged her film set in Mumbai on Monday evening. "He did not do anything obscene," she said of Gere, adding that they had since spoken on the phone. "He apologized to me and told me to tell the media that he apologized." She said Gere was only re-enacting his moves from the film "Shall We Dance" to entertain the audience and communicate in a Bollywood style as he did not speak Hindi. The clinch between the two stars had originally gone down well when it happened onstage at an event on Sunday night to encourage truckers -- seen as a high-risk group in India's fight against AIDS -- to wear condoms during sex. They whooped with delight and whistled loudly as Gere swooped down on a visibly delighted Shetty to kiss her on her hand and a number of times on one side of her face. "No condom, no sex," an ebullient 58-year-old Gere shouted in Hindi to thousands of truck drivers who roared his words back in unison at a dusty fairground in New Delhi. Indian authorities have been focusing on high-risk groups such as truckers, who have helped spread the virus across the country as many of them have sex with prostitutes during their journeys and infect their wives back home. Quote
Jazzmoose Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 One of the victims, professor Liviu Librescu, was a Holocaust survivor. And a real hero! Quote
ejp626 Posted April 17, 2007 Report Posted April 17, 2007 This is so fucking sad and disturbing. The newest accounts suggest that this kid did in fact make a number of bomb threats. More important is that he bought one gun, waited thirty days to buy a second one (legally) and then went on a rampage. So this was pre-meditated at pretty much every level. It is so hard to know what goes through people's minds, but you have to be totally sick and basically devoid of normal human emotions to be able to plan to murder dozens of people. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.