Gunman kills 21 on Virginia Tech campus




BLACKSBURG, Va. (AP) -- A gunman opened fire in a dorm and classroom at Virginia Tech on Monday, killing 21 people in the deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history. The gunman was killed, but it was unclear if he was shot by police or took his own life.

"Today the university was struck with a tragedy that we consider of monumental proportions," said Virginia Tech president Charles Steger. "The university is shocked and indeed horrified."

The university reported shootings at opposite sides of the 2,600-acre campus, beginning at about 7:15 a.m. at West Ambler Johnston, a co-ed residence hall that houses 895 people, and continuing about two hours later at Norris Hall, an engineering building.

Some but not all the dead were students. One student was killed in a dorm and the others were killed in the classroom, Virginia Tech Police Chief W.R. Flinchum.

The name of the gunman was not released. It was not known if he was a student.

Up until Monday, the deadliest campus shooting in U.S. history took place in 1966 at the University of Texas, where Charles Whitman climbed to the 28th-floor observation deck of a clock tower and opened fire. He killed 16 people before he was gunned down by police. In the Columbine High bloodbath near Littleton, Colo., in 1999, two teenagers killed 12 fellow students and a teacher before taking their own lives.

After Monday's shootings, all entrances to the campus were closed. The campus was to reopen Tuesday but classes were canceled.

The university set up a meeting place for families to reunite with their children at the Inn at Virginia Tech. It also made counselors available and planned a convocation for Tuesday at the Cassell Coliseum basketball arena.

After the shootings, students were told to stay inside away from the windows.

"There's just a lot of commotion. It's hard to tell exactly what's going on," said Jason Anthony Smith, 19, who lives in the dorm where shooting took place.

Aimee Kanode, a freshman from Martinsville, said the shooting happened on the 4th floor of West Ambler Johnston dormitory, one floor above her room. Kanode's resident assistant knocked on her door about 8 a.m. to notify students to stay put.

"They had us under lockdown," Kanode said. "They temporarily lifted the lockdown, the gunman shot again."

"We're all locked in our dorms surfing the Internet trying to figure out what's going on," Kanode said.

Madison Van Duyne, a student who was interviewed by telephone on CNN, said, "We are all in lockdown. Most of the students are sitting on the floors away from the windows just trying to be as safe as possible."

Police said there had been bomb threats on campus over the past two weeks by authorities but said they have not determined a link to the shootings.



My prayers go out to the families of the victims of this tragedy.

Jesse
Something is wrong in the world we live in. I just heard on the new that this is not the 1st time this has happen to this Campus. My prayers go out to the families of the victims of this Tragedy. God Bless us all.

Rudy

Jesse
Something is wrong in the world we live in. I just heard on the new that this is not the 1st time this has happen to this Campus. My prayers go out to the families of the victims of this Tragedy. God Bless us all.

Rudy
Something is wrong for sure!!!!!
Yes, some nut escaped from Deputies in Blacksburg last year and killed a Deputy. He is on trial right now for Capital Murder. they say the total dead today is now close to 30. Why? Is the question we will probably never understand!

Another very sad day in America! My thoughts and best wishes go out to all affected by this tragedy.

Why? Why do these things happen?

In a way we can understand when we hear about a Soldier getting killed in Afghanistan, or a Police Officer getting shot during a robbery attempt. Violent acts such as this are so horrible as they are so senseless.

Imagine being a victim's Mother, Father, Brother, Sister or Friend. Knowing that person was taken away from you simply because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I pray for the victims of this terrible tragedy.

This news is all over the place right now. It's sad this happened.

It is very sad. We should all say a prayer for the families affected by this tragedy...

Thoughts and prayers go out to those at Virginia Tech and thier families.

My heart breaks for the parents. I could never imagine the pain they are in. Awful.

Very sad indeed. I can certainly relate to what is going on there. I live in Denver and saw the heartache and tragedy after the Columbine massacre in 1999. My thoughts and prayers are with the friends and families of both the injured and the 32 who were killed by this guy.

Sending out my thoughts and prayers to all those killed and injured in this senseless tragedy...

Good time to tell those close, that you love them...

Interesting to see how the rest of the world views this!

World Reacts to U.S. Shooting
By PAISLEY DODDS
1 hour ago

LONDON - The deadly university rampage in Virginia that killed 33 people sent shock waves around the world Tuesday with newspapers and talk shows delving into the American psyche and raising questions about lax gun controls in the United States.

The gun control debate echoed across Europe, which has some of the toughest gun laws in the world.

Prime Minister Tony Blair offered his condolences to the victims' families.

"I would like to express on behalf of Britain and the British people our profound sadness at what has happened and to send the American people and most especially, of course, the families of the victims, our sympathy and our prayers," Blair said.

Two professors from India and Israel were among the dead at the Virginia Tech shooting, the deadliest in U.S. history.

Liviu Librescu, 75, an engineering science and mathematics lecturer tried to stop the gunman from entering his classroom by blocking the door before he was fatally shot, his son said Tuesday from Tel Aviv, Israel.

"My father blocked the doorway with his body and asked the students to flee," Joe Librescu said in a telephone interview of his father, who immigrated to Israel from Romania, and then moved to Virginia for his sabbatical.

A 51-year-old Indian-born lecturer in the engineering department was also among the dead, the man's brother told Indian media.

Most expressed shock at the shooting but few said they were surprised _ criticizing the availability of guns in the U.S., lax gun controls and the number of Americans who cling to the constitutional right that allows them to bear arms.

"The Queen was shocked and saddened to hear of the news of the shooting in Virginia," Buckingham Palace said. Queen Elizabeth and her husband, Prince Philip, are scheduled to visit Virginia May 3-4.

British Home Office Minister, Tony McNulty, earned a masters degree in political science at Virginia Tech in 1982.

"I think if this does prompt a serious and reflective debate on gun issues and gun law in the states then some good may come from this woeful tragedy," McNulty said.

Many families expressed relief when they heard their children were safe. Some were still waiting for news.

"He sounded OK. I think they had been very shocked all day _ struggling to get in touch with their friends," Charles Barnwell of Birmingham, England, whose son George, 20, was locked in his dormitory with eight friends during the shooting.

Australian Prime Minister John Howard said the shooting underscored the problems of a U.S. "gun culture."

Howard staked his political leadership on pushing through tough laws on gun ownership in Australia after a lone gunman went on one of the world's deadliest killing sprees 11 years ago in his country.

"We took action to limit the availability of guns and we showed a national resolve that the gun culture that is such a negative in the United States would never become a negative in our country," he said.

The Times of London ran an editorial delving into the American psyche and the weak gun laws across the country.

"Why, we ask, do Americans continue to tolerate gun laws and a culture that seems to condemn thousands of innocents to death every year, when presumably, tougher restrictions, such as those in force in European countries, could at least reduce the number?"

Gun crime is extremely rare in Britain, and handguns are completely illegal. The ban is so strictly enforced that Britain's Olympic pistol shooting team is barred from practicing in its own country.

Britain's 46 homicides involving firearms was the lowest total since the late 1980s. New York City, with 8 million people compared to 53 million in England and Wales, recorded at least 579 homicides last year.

"What exactly triggered the massacre in Virginia is unclear but the fundamental reason is often the perpetrator's psychological problems in combination with access to weapons," Swedish daily Goteborgs-Posten commented.

The shooting drew intense coverage by media in China, in part because the school has a relatively large Chinese student body and because U.S. reports said the gunman may have been Chinese or Asian.

Private citizens are forbidden from owning guns in China.

"Why are there were so many shooting incidents in American schools and universities?" said a comment posted on the popular Internet portal Sohu.com. "People should think why an American-educated student would take revenge against America?"

Yuan Peng, an American studies expert, was quoted by state-run China Daily as saying the shooting illustrated America's problems with gun control and a lack of security at American universities.

"This incident reflects the problem of gun control in America," said Yuan, from the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, a Beijing-based think tank.

Only 7 percent of the more than 26,000 students at Virginia Tech are foreign, according to the school web site. But Chinese undergraduate and graduate students comprise nearly a third of that. There are about 600 or so students and teachers and their family members from China at the school, said Xue, the Chinese student union president.

In Italy, leading daily Corriere della Sera's ran an opinion piece entitled "Guns at the Supermarket" _ a critical view of the U.S. gun lobby and the ease with which guns can be purchased.

"The latest attack on a U.S. campus will shake up America, maybe it will provoke more vigorous reactions than in the past, but it won't change the culture of a country that has the notion of self-defense imprinted on its DNA and which considers the right of having guns inalienable," Corriere wrote in its front-page story.

In Italy, there are three types of licenses for gun ownership: for personal safety, target practice and skeet shooting, and hunting. Authorization is granted by the police. To obtain a gun for personal safety, the owner must be an adult and have a "valid" reason.

Several Italian graduate students at Virginia Tech recounted how they barricaded themselves inside a geology department building not far from the scene of the shooting.

We don't need to outlaw guns. We need to outlaw crazy people. :roll: I doubt the shooter was Asian like part of the article speculated. I'll bet anything he's white because it's always crazy white people that do things like this. ;)

:censored: :censored:

Authorities ID gunman in Va. Tech rampage
College president says gunman was a student; 33 killed, 26 wounded.
The Virginia Tech Police Department identified him as Cho Seung-Hui, 23, a senior in the English department.

Well, I guess I was wrong. :red:

9mm, 18 round mags, 22 cal, unknown mags capacity
min of three shots per person that was hit (how many may have missed?)
60+ hit

Think it was planned?

You do the math.


OH, guns don't kill people, it's the idiots holding them.

This is truely a shocking event of historical proportions. Those effected by this tragedy are in my thoughts and prayers. This has shaken allot of people up here at my college.

A little insight:

Gunman's Writings Were Disturbing
By ADAM GELLER, AP National Writer
36 minutes ago

BLACKSBURG, Va. - The gunman suspected of carrying out the Virginia Tech massacre that left 33 people dead was identified Tuesday as a English major whose creative writing was so disturbing that he was referred to the school's counseling service.

Cho Seung-Hui, a 23-year-old senior, arrived in the United States as boy from South Korea in 1992 and was raised in suburban Washington, D.C., officials said. He was living on campus in a different dorm from the one where Monday's bloodbath began.

Police and university officials offered no clues to his motive in the massacre, the deadliest shooting rampage in modern U.S. history.

"He was a loner, and we're having difficulty finding information about him," school spokesman Larry Hincker said.

Professor Carolyn Rude, chairwoman of the university's English department, said she did not personally know the gunman. But she said she spoke with Lucinda Roy, the department's director of creative writing, who had Cho in one of her classes and described him as "troubled."

"There was some concern about him," Rude said. "Sometimes, in creative writing, people reveal things and you never know if it's creative or if they're describing things, if they're imagining things or just how real it might be. But we're all alert to not ignore things like this."

She said Cho was referred to the counseling service, but she said she did not know when, or what the outcome was. Rude refused to release any of his writings or his grades, citing privacy laws.

It’s so sad that this happened, and by the sounds of it, was committed by someone who had problems. People recognized that he was having difficulties and tried to help him, but he still lashed out.

I know that it has been pointed out that guns don’t kill people, that it takes a person to do so. The problem with this argument is that the common denominator is guns. If guns were more strictly controlled, shooting deaths could be reduced. Just look at the statistics listed in a previous post to see what the situation is in the UK.

How was this troubled young man able to get his hands on a handgun? Perhaps because they are so easily accessible? It is a question that America is once again forced to answer. Does “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” give people the right to own guns that are only designed to hurt people.

Ban handguns and assault rifles.

This is coming from someone who has served in the Canadian Forces and knows full well how much fun it is to use assault rifles, machine guns, handguns, etc. I also know well enough to respect these weapons, recognize that they aren’t useful hunting firearms, and believe that they should not be available to the public.

Just my :2cents:

and here is my 2¢....

laws, only stop lawful people.
schools are "Gun Free" zones. its illegal to have on property. (see how well that worked?)

banning guns only denys people the right to protect themselves.

as for the article... i would love to find real stats. not this slanted crap and apples to oranges stuff [i know both sides do it]. (ie) comparing UK's gun crime to NYC homicides. hell 50% of those homicides could have been with a knife. speaking of which. last article i read about the UK was the gun ban helped little with gun crimes, and now knives were the weapon of choice. in fact UK govn't was concidering even kitchen knife regulation.

also lets not forget history.... we (U.S.) would be sending our taxes to the fair old queen, if it weren't for some brave souls with guns.

im sorry, but i refuse to let the govn't deny me my 2nd. i'd rather have a gun in hand, than a cop on the phone. (been there, done that)

Death rates: Here (http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html). Not very current but the newest I could find.

[QUOTE=SICKS.OH;139869]also lets not forget history.... we (U.S.) would be sending our taxes to the fair old queen, if it weren't for some brave souls with guns.


I agree guns helped Americans earn their freedom and helped feed many over American history. Guns have also caused alot of pain and sorrow such as the events in Blacksburg, VA on Monday. Guns are only as good/bad as the people behind them.

my 2-cents.

I'm originally from Canada, which has very strict hand-gun laws. Note HAND-guns are strictly enforced. It is nearly impossible to get one. Rifles have to be registered at the local cop-shop. As a result, gun crimes are very rare.

Now, everyone here has freely stated, guns dont kill people, it's the idiot holding it. Well, if the idiot holding it is unable to GET a gun, then he can't go on a shooting spree. Yes? If ALL guns are strictly limited, then the chance of some moron 'snapping' and going into the classroom and shooting it up are greatly reduced.

Do violent crimes happen in Canada? Sure. But, ironically, most of those violent crimes usually are stabbings. Why? Because that's the only weapon that is freely available. Do you think if those people who stab someone would shoot them if they had access to a gun? Absolutely. But, the good thing is, that it isn't, so when they DO snap, there is usually only 1 vicitim, as opposed to 5 or 10 or 30 because the only weapon they have is a knife.

So, the moral of the story is nut-jobs will use the weapon that is most-available to them.

As far as the 2nd amendment, it was put in place to allow the citizenry to defend our nation from foreign invaders (this was before we had an actual army to fight the British) and to overthrow our government by force. So, we have our 9mm hand guns and our hunting rifles to allow us the right to overthrow our government if necessary. Well, in case you haven't looked around lately the government has the Army, Navy, AF and Marines, with helicopters and machine guns and bombs. Do you think we citizens stand a chance against that? Do you think the armed forces are going to disobey the Commander in Chief if he decides to declare us citizens as terrorists or rebels? Nope. Do we need the citizenry to defend our nation against Canadian or Mexican invaders? Uhhh, not so much. It's the most ridiculous amendment in the constitution simply because technology has made it absolutely useless.

People will still get guns. Just because drugs are illegal that means people don't have access to them or do them right? :roll: How long have the various drugs been illegal in the US and has that seem to have stopped anything? If anything the drug problem has gotten worse over the years. Kind of like the governments attempt at prohibition that failed horribly. Did that stop alcohol? Where there's a will there's a way so banning guns just wouldn't work. It would just push everything black market and add to the crime rates. ;) Hell you can go into any army surplus store and buy books that tell you how to make guns out of pipes, end caps, and nails that even tell you what diameter of pipe you need for what caliber of bullet. Not to mention the ones that tell you how to make explosives and other deadly stuff. Gun laws aren't the answer to crime. :thumb:

Alot of ppl have disturbing writings, they are called Horror Genre books and movies..... Let's investigate Stephan King, Dean Koontz, and other writers of the Macabre.....

Alot of ppl have disturbing writings, they are called Horror Genre books and movies..... Let's investigate Stephan King, Dean Koontz, and other writers of the Macabre.....

I agree. I used to draw a lot of disturbing stuff back in school and when I was going to be a tattoo artist but I never would think of going on a shooting spree. I have had people tell me some of my drawing were the most vile, evil, and disgusting things that they had seen. Sometimes you can't judge a person by their art.

and here is my 2¢....

laws, only stop lawful people.
schools are "Gun Free" zones. its illegal to have on property. (see how well that worked?)

banning guns only denys people the right to protect themselves.

as for the article... i would love to find real stats. not this slanted crap and apples to oranges stuff [i know both sides do it]. (ie) comparing UK's gun crime to NYC homicides. hell 50% of those homicides could have been with a knife. speaking of which. last article i read about the UK was the gun ban helped little with gun crimes, and now knives were the weapon of choice. in fact UK govn't was concidering even kitchen knife regulation.

also lets not forget history.... we (U.S.) would be sending our taxes to the fair old queen, if it weren't for some brave souls with guns.

im sorry, but i refuse to let the govn't deny me my 2nd. i'd rather have a gun in hand, than a cop on the phone. (been there, done that)



Could not have said it better...my heart goes out to those students and their families....I still cannot get over the fact that he was able to kill 30 people with a handgun..... I thought for sure that an AK or a AR-15 was involved with that number of fatalities and 1 gunman

That 75 year old teacher is a hero for blocking the door long enough to let some of his students get out through the windows..


I found this very interesting...I found this info on another website and if true I think will haunt this guy


A Virginia Tech official in 2006 praised the defeat of a proposal to allow students with state-issued concealed handgun permits to carry their handguns on college campuses in Virginia. At least 20 unarmed students were killed on the VA Tech campus Monday morning by a single gunman.

...

"I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions," Hincker said on Jan. 31, 2006, "because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."




I know it is a well worn out statement but things may have been different if just one of those students was armed.......we might have had a different ending



Goose

can this possibly be a BLACK OP designed by the gubment?
could this have been prevented? 2 killed early in the morning, no warnings, bout 2 hrs later, then the other 30 killed? only ppl then realized that there was something happening on campus?

sad that innocent students died, but some on, you cant possibly swallow some of the story?

virginia tech banned guns on campus? hmm..now gun control freaks can flood the media with thier anti-gun progoganda...there was another shooting out there in which a massacre like this was prevented by another student with a gun who had a permit...good thing or bad? preventable or not?

too bad that bright minds in that engineering dept got killed; but i think virginia tech has some blood on thier hands..

We all know you can't protect everyone at all times. But, as a parent of two college students, I had to thank God my boys were safe. Here we usually worry that they're keeping up their grades, eating right, getting enough sleep, etc. Would we even consider having to protect them from a crazed killer?

I've been to too many college campuses to know how difficult it would be to "lock down" all the buildings. Many sit right in the middle of towns and there is no distinction on where the college campus ends and the town begins. The amish couldn't even protect their children from a gun-wielding nut and they are one of the most isolated communities of all.

After hearing stories about the victims on the evening news, you can only question why God would call home those with such promising futures. Maybe someday we'll all figure it out. In the meantime, we'll pray for the victims and their families!

It very sad, all my tought is with the familly,


As it been said we do have very hard policy on gun here, but still some people find way to get some, this sad day revive some memory here in Montreal, we had one in september (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/09/14/gunman-shooting.html)and other one few year ago Dec. 6, 1989 (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/09/14/gunman-shooting.html)at the Polytechnique Of Montreal. I go to College in Montreal, what scare me the most is that governement cut expensive on the public education, were do you think they cut first!? SECURITY, Want to college today and no one told us that there taking care of this new threat we have :eek: . As a exemple at the Montreal University there only 5 guard on duty :confused:

I hope that those sadly event will be take as exemple and that there will be action in way that we will never see that again .....

This IS an example of gun control. The bad guy had guns, the innocent trying/wanting to protect themselves did not.

I feel that those that believe we need tougher gun contol laws should be asked to put a sign on their front door, visible from the street, noting that this house is a gun free zone. I am pretty sure I know the answer that will be givin my most. If I was looking for place to pick to rob, I know it definately influence my decision.

The media and politicians should be proud to take an event like this to push the gun control agenda.

Just my :2cents:

Has anyone else noticed he has "crazy eyes?"

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/US/04/17/vtech.shooting/story.vt14.tues.ap.jpg


Just like:
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Video/050617/tdy_couric_wilbanks_050617.300w.jpg

And...
http://www.doublespeakshow.com/images/2006/07/cynthia_mckinney.jpg

I suppose it can make sense to think that tougher gun laws only make it harder for the law abiding to get guns, but statistics prove otherwise.

As noted previously, in countries with strict gun laws there is a drop in gun related deaths. If the laws in the US work so well, then why do these things keep happening? There have been shootings in Canada as well, but not nearly at the same rate. In Canada, the weapon of choice is a knife – not a gun. It’s pretty hard to kill 30 people with a knife.

The right to bear arms was included so that a well-organized militia could take on the British Army and secure an independent America. Well, the task is done. America has been independent for some time now, and I don’t think the British intend to invade. I don’t think Washington and Jefferson thought that the second amendment would be used to justify owning weapons that should only be in the hands of the police or other trained professionals.

If guns work so well in self-defence, why do so many innocent people get killed? Should everyone in the States be expected to own a gun, just because they may be forced to have to use it to protect themselves?

Gotta love when someone from another country talks about our American constatution:roll: I for one think its funny when someone does somthing like this they blame the whole country, but yet this person is not even from the united states, hmmm maybe we should keep americans armed and some people out of our country..Just my 2 cents

I suppose it can make sense to think that tougher gun laws only make it harder for the law abiding to get guns, but statistics prove otherwise.

As noted previously, in countries with strict gun laws there is a drop in gun related deaths. If the laws in the US work so well, then why do these things keep happening? There have been shootings in Canada as well, but not nearly at the same rate. In Canada, the weapon of choice is a knife – not a gun. It’s pretty hard to kill 30 people with a knife.

The right to bear arms was included so that a well-organized militia could take on the British Army and secure an independent America. Well, the task is done. America has been independent for some time now, and I don’t think the British intend to invade. I don’t think Washington and Jefferson thought that the second amendment would be used to justify owning weapons that should only be in the hands of the police or other trained professionals.

If guns work so well in self-defence, why do so many innocent people get killed? Should everyone in the States be expected to own a gun, just because they may be forced to have to use it to protect themselves?
Exactly...

The point is to make it difficult for the random idiot who "snaps" in a moment of rage. The determined killer will find a way to kill people, no matter what laws are in place. That happens everywhere, even places with strict gun laws. The REAL point of gun control is to prevent the guy who gets pissed at his wife because she burnt the meatloaf from pulling out a gun and blowing her head off. The REAL point of gun control is to prevent the guy who got a F on his class paper from going home and pulling out Dad's Glock 9 and going back to school and pumping bullets into his English class. If he doesn't have a gun available to him at that moment of rage he cant shoot people. Which is exactly why, in Canada, when people snap, they grab a knife and start stabbing people simply because guns aren't available. It's awfully hard to stab more than 1 or 2 people before the cops show up.

Taking the opposite approach and say EVERYONE should have a gun is the reactive approach. Meaning, after the gunman has already killed one or two or three people, THEN people can defend themselves. Gun control is a proactive approach. It seeks to prevent the gunman from having a gun in the first place. It's the philosophical difference between getting a flu shot BEFORE you get the flu, or taking Tamiflu AFTER you have the flu. It's cheaper, easier and more effective to prevent the problem from occuring before it happens that to try to stop it after it's started.

Those are the situations that gun controls prevent. And it's proven by the gun crime statistics of countries with strict gun laws. Acts of random gun violence are lower than here.

The other point is that the moment the gun owner pulls his gun HE has to defend himself LEGALLY. Because if he pulls his gun suddenly he's the focus; "did he need to pull his gun? was he really being threatened with grave danger? did he have non-lethal options?" Living in the most litigous society in the world, that's a VERY REAL scenario. If a gun owner pulls his gun in any situation but the most obvious case, the gun-owner is likely to find himself (at the least) at the receiving end of a life-destroying law suit, and more than likely facing criminal charges for unlawful discharging of a weapon or manslaughter or some other charge.

This was a tragic situation. I think everyone here will agree. It's amazes me that as soon as something like this happens, all the anti-gun law people come out. You want to make a good point, preach the day before, not the day after.

just because they may be forced to have to use it to protect themselves?

That is the key sentance right there.

Is the system perfect? Hell no. IS there a better system? Depends on who you ask. Would a different system helped in this bad situation? Maybe.

Bottom line, is if you want to get a gun, legal or not, you can get one. Most owners of guns that buy them legally, never harm anyone with them. Guns in different countries are harder to get. But they do seem to get them.

Gotta love when someone from another country talks about our American constatution:roll: I for one think its funny when someone does somthing like this they blame the whole country, but yet this person is not even from the united states, hmmm maybe we should keep americans armed and some people out of our country..Just my 2 cents

You're right... the last thing we need is someone else's perspective. The last thing we need is to learn from the successes and failures of other countries.

The answer is 'to keep them foreign'rs out of 'Merica."

... and "the ugly American" rears its head. No wonder everyone hates us.

:roll:

The right to bear arms was included so that a well-organized militia could take on the British Army and secure an independent America. Well, the task is done. America has been independent for some time now, and I don’t think the British intend to invade. I don’t think Washington and Jefferson thought that the second amendment would be used to justify owning weapons that should only be in the hands of the police or other trained professionals.

But if we allow the government to take away Constitutional rights then we lose everything America stands for! That's more than just some stupid pieces of paper with outdated laws on them. That is the very meaning of this country! If we allow the loss of our Constitution rights then what’s next? The loss of the 13th amendment so there's a return to slavery, the loss of our 1st amendment so we all have to be Christian and can't speak our minds, or the loss of our 4th amendment so police and military could just bust into your house whenever they felt for whatever reason they feel like with no cause or evidence? Do you see where I'm going with this? And who is to choose what rights to take away and what ones we should keep? I guess you have to be a true born American to understand and appreciate your Constitutional rights. :roll: I don’t own a gun nor do I want to but I’ll be damned if someone is going to take away my Constitutional rights in any form! :usa:

Will Canada adopt me? True born American here still waiting for MY RIGHTS!!

But if we allow the government to take away Constitutional rights then we lose everything America stands for! That's more than just some stupid pieces of paper with outdated laws on them. That is the very meaning of this country! If we allow the loss of our Constitution rights then what’s next? The loss of the 13th amendment so there's a return to slavery, the loss of our 1st amendment so we all have to be Christian and can't speak our minds or the loss, of our 4th amendment so police and military could just bust into your house whenever they felt for whatever reason they feel like saying with no cause or evidence? Do you see where I'm going with this? And who is to choose what rights to take away and what ones we should keep? I guess you have to be a true born American to understand and appreciate your Constitutional rights. :roll: I don’t own a gun nor do I want to but I’ll be damned if someone is going to take away my Constitutional rights in any form! :usa:

Do you know why they call them Amendments? Because the AMEND! They fix errors and omissions, and they themselves can be changed as the needs change.

The 2nd Amendment states quite clearly that the right to bear arms is based upon the need for a standing army (which the we did NOT have when we declared independence). Last time I checked, we now have and Army (and Navy, and AirForce and Marines) to protect us from foreign invaders... AND and National Guard for domestic operations.

Ironically the same people who have a problem with any infringement on the 2nd Amendment seem to have no problem with the "Warrantless Wire taps" the President authorized, and how it violates the 4th Amendment.

Do you know why they call them Amendments? Because the AMEND! They make changes to errors and omissions, and they themselves can be changed as the needs change.

The 2nd Amendment states quite clearly that the right to bear arms is based upon the need for a standing army (which the we did NOT have when we declared independence). Last time I checked, we now have and Army (and Navy, and AirForce and Marines) to protect us from foreign invaders... AND and National Guard for domestic operations.

Ironically you probably don't have a problem with the "Warrantless Wire taps" the President authorized, and how it violates the 4th Amendment.

Yes they amended it and it is now part of law so they can't take it away. If foreign enemies did invade (which I don't think will happen in our lifetimes) wouldn't you feel safer if you did have a gun to protect your family and yourself? Don't make assumptions because I definitely don't agree with the government invading anyone’s privacy and I'm no friend of the Bush administration. I'm a Constitutionalist. Like I said it is something you will never understand. Those laws mean everything to me. I do think there are too many guns plus too many crazy people and criminals with guns but I refuse to let anyone take away my Constitutional rights. All the people that died for our country's Constitution would be in vain if we started giving up those rights. I don't expect you to be able to comprehend that though. :lol:

good ol texas justice....

the texas leg. passed and i believe the govnuh approved the texas lethal force law....gives us citizens the right to shoot and kill

gotta love texas :thumb:

last time anything like ther virg tech thing happened here was in the 60s when charles whitman was on top of UT tower...

maybe something works in texas

Do you know why they call them Amendments? Because the AMEND! They fix errors and omissions, and they themselves can be changed as the needs change.

Close, An amendment is a change to the constitution of a nation or a state. Nothing to do with errors or omissions.

The 2nd Amendment states quite clearly that the right to bear arms is based upon the need for a standing army (which the we did NOT have when we declared independence). Last time I checked, we now have and Army (and Navy, and AirForce and Marines) to protect us from foreign invaders... AND and National Guard for domestic operations.

Again, close, but incomplete.

Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, declares the necessity for "a well regulated militia", and prohibits infringement of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

That "and" makes it totally different.

Ironically the same people who have a problem with any infringement on the 2nd Amendment seem to have no problem with the "Warrantless Wire taps" the President authorized, and how it violates the 4th Amendment.

Personally, considering the reason this went in effect, I have absolutly no problem with it. If you think the government is listening to you talk on the phone, then you must have something to hide. Hince the reason I have no problems with it.


You cut off one "right", where does it end? Killed speeding or DUI, ban cars/alcohol? Dies of a heart attack due to being over weight? Do you ban McDonalds or sue Golds Gym (one got him fat the other did take it back off)? Think rap music causes violence, ban it? At what point does it end? You want to have it changed, submit it. Convince the boys on the hill to change it. Then you can at least complain about it. I have raised arms to defend this country. I also enjoy the fact that I have arms at home. Would I defend it? You bet. You break in, I won't have to worry about being sued by you......

hmm well thats what makes me American I have an opinion and I can speek it thats why my husband surves my country everyday, so that I can speek my mind on this issue, ugly American maybe but then again thats your opinion

Do you know why they call them Amendments? Because the AMEND! They fix errors and omissions, and they themselves can be changed as the needs change.

The 2nd Amendment states quite clearly that the right to bear arms is based upon the need for a standing army (which the we did NOT have when we declared independence). Last time I checked, we now have and Army (and Navy, and AirForce and Marines) to protect us from foreign invaders... AND and National Guard for domestic operations.

Ironically the same people who have a problem with any infringement on the 2nd Amendment seem to have no problem with the "Warrantless Wire taps" the President authorized, and how it violates the 4th Amendment.

Well, as we all have heard time and time again,it is somehow Bush's fault. If everybody believes they use wire taps to find out what kind of pizza you just ordered, you are a little paranoid. If you are concerned about somebody listening in to your conversation, then don't talk so loud on your cell phone. There are stipulations to the wire taping as that they tap calls into and out of the US, not your darn pizza order. Do you not understand how much can be discovered using this? What about the banks that were handling money for terrorists and others that might want to do Americans harm. Well, a wonderfull liberal blew the whistle on that one and they keep making it harding to protect this country.

Again, we all know it is Bush's fault...global warming, terrorism, gas prices, hurricanes, earthquakes, polar bear problems, my bad back, and if it wasn't for DNA, probably Anna Nicoles baby's daddy.

Imagine if there was a conceal and carry law in VA. First of all, only law abiding citizens go for these, second, I would love the story to read:"VA Tech shooter, kills 1 and then is killed by conceal and carry individual" I am guessing those of you with the gun control reasons would want the person who killed the guy brought up on murder charges. If I have my weapon, and something like this goes down, maybe I should wait and be shot so I don't offend anyone.

Wait, I could blame Bush and the media and liberal left would back to the death.

Well, as we all have heard time and time again,it is somehow Bush's fault. If everybody believes they use wire taps to find out what kind of pizza you just ordered, you are a little paranoid. If you are concerned about somebody listening in to your conversation, then don't talk so loud on your cell phone. There are stipulations to the wire taping as that they tap calls into and out of the US, not your darn pizza order. Do you not understand how much can be discovered using this? What about the banks that were handling money for terrorists and others that might want to do Americans harm. Well, a wonderfull liberal blew the whistle on that one and they keep making it harding to protect this country.

Again, we all know it is Bush's fault...global warming, terrorism, gas prices, hurricanes, earthquakes, polar bear problems, my bad back, and if it wasn't for DNA, probably Anna Nicoles baby's daddy.

Imagine if there was a conceal and carry law in VA. First of all, only law abiding citizens go for these, second, I would love the story to read:"VA Tech shooter, kills 1 and then is killed by conceal and carry individual" I am guessing those of you with the gun control reasons would want the person who killed the guy brought up on murder charges. If I have my weapon, and something like this goes down, maybe I should wait and be shot so I don't offend anyone.

Wait, I could blame Bush and the media and liberal left would back to the death.



Very well said!


Goose

Personally, considering the reason this went in effect, I have absolutly no problem with it. If you think the government is listening to you talk on the phone, then you must have something to hide. Hince the reason I have no problems with it.
.

Ok. Post up your address. If you have nothing to hide, then you'll agree to allow me, or anyone on this board, to come over to your house and search your things. My brother-in-law is a cop in Greenville, SC. I'll ask him swing by.

If you say no, then you must have something to hide.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Imagine if there was a conceal and carry law in VA. First of all, only law abiding citizens go for these, second, I would love the story to read:"VA Tech shooter, kills 1 and then is killed by conceal and carry individual" I am guessing those of you with the gun control reasons would want the person who killed the guy brought up on murder charges. If I have my weapon, and something like this goes down, maybe I should wait and be shot so I don't offend anyone.

Wait, I could blame Bush and the media and liberal left would back to the death.

There is a conceal and carry law in VA. The University of Virginia Tech does not allow those who have concealed weapons permits (Except Law Enforcement) to have weapons on the campus. I bet some due anyway. Would it have helped? I guess we will never know!

There is a conceal and carry law in VA. The University of Virginia Tech does not allow those who have concealed weapons permits (Except Law Enforcement) to have weapons on the campus. I bet some due anyway. Would it have helped? I guess we will never know!


I glad to hear they do have one. But unfortunatley, like here in Ohio, you actually can't carry it anywhere since every business has signs saying you can't have them there.

If it were me, I would much rather have a fighting chance than sitting under a desk waiting to get shot.

Ok. Post up your address. If you have nothing to hide, then you'll agree to allow me, or anyone on this board, to come over to your house and search your things. My brother-in-law is a cop in Greenville, SC. I'll ask him swing by.

If you say no, then you must have something to hide.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

Will you post a sign on your front door, big enough to read from the street, that says "Gun Free Zone"? Or might that let a bad guy know that you would be an easier target than the next door neighbor, that has no sign and might have gun/way to defend himself.
Not posting your address is as smart of a defense as not posting a gun free zone sign on your house.
The Bad Guys will find ways to get weapons. No matter how many laws are passed. Bad Guys tend to not be to concerned about the law. Just thought of something, there are millions of guns in America. If a ban were to pass, then who would be turning their weapons in....law abiding citizens. Ya think the bad guys will turn theirs in too? Mine are legaly purchased and registered. Just a hunch, but the bad guys who attain theirs illegaly, probably don't even bother to register them.

I have nothing to hide, but I will not give you my address. AND, I have given it to the government MANY times. As for my cell phone calls, nothin to hide. Bush can monitor away, its his fault anyway.

P.S. I noticed you didn't offer up your address as incentive.

At least the liberal media has managed to take a tragic event and use for the purpose of driving the gun control agenda.

I'm fairly liberal and I'm all for you owning guns. :thumb: People fought and died for your right to do so. With all the Constitutional talk I think some have forgot that those laws also protect us from our own government. They create a balance between the government and us. I am aware of my Constitutional rights and am willing to invoke them if need be. Everyone should fully understand their Constitutional rights and understand when to use them. We all need to take the Constitution to heart. As I stated before to me the Constitution is the very meaning of this country and what every American should stand for. That's part of why I get so pissed at modern politics. Modern politicians on all sides and a lot of authority figures take our Constitutional rights for for granted and don't expect the average citizen to understand or invoke their rights. :(

:usa::lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :usa:

Yeah.......It looks like it's headed there. :lol:

http://iviews.com/Cartoons/GUN_CONTROL.JPG
http://www.yauponcreek.org/GunControl/Bad_Gun.jpg
http://www.wku.edu/Library/onlinexh/sanders/cartoons/opinion/gun_control.jpg
http://www.survivalarts.com/images/gun_control_is_racist.jpg
http://www.nicholsoncartoons.com.au/cartoons/human_rights/img2.jpg
http://gifu.cool.ne.jp/gunnuts/img/gun_control_works2.JPG

At least the liberal media has managed to take a tragic event and use for the purpose of driving the gun control agenda.

Stop blaming everyone for all this. The Liberal media" as ya'all like ta call it AND the right wing media machine are both having a field day over this. Both side should cool it for a while at least until the bodies are cold and buried................

We are all doing nothing by bringing this cyclical no-win argument back again and again.

Yup, guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people. And according to some only the government and the bad guys will have them. According to others we should all be carrying and much respect and a safer world will occur because of this.

It is all so stupid to be arguing in this way right now. Have some respect for the dead. Don't politicize it. We are no better than all these scum media types. Liberal and conservatives should just cool it.
We are HUMAN. All other labels simply exist to divide us for political purposes.
Rant on if you will, but it degrades us at a time we should be perhaps being a bit nicer to each other and realizing how fragile our little worlds really are. But I guess you political types like to divide and argue...............wasted time on earth if you ask me...........

LIFE IS ONLY MADE OF TIME AND MEMORIES..WHY BE ANGRY SO MUCH?
Dunno,..going away now... I've said nothing and it will never matter anyway....................:roll:

Ok. Post up your address. If you have nothing to hide, then you'll agree to allow me, or anyone on this board, to come over to your house and search your things. My brother-in-law is a cop in Greenville, SC. I'll ask him swing by.

If you say no, then you must have something to hide.

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

:roll: Greenville has no authority here. And seems like he should know anyway. But if that is the way you want to handle this. Please re-read my post. You enter without my concent, well, like I said, you won't be albe to sue me. I shoot to kill.

Tell you what you list you addy and I'll list mine. But do you have something to hide? Me, nope, I've worked for the government for 24 years. Men with a lot more authority that you will ever know (or your brother-inlaw) have all my info.

And we have signs, big red and white ones that state: "Use of deadly force authorized by installation commander" So come on down.;)

LOL!!! Attack of the e-thugs! It's easy to be a tough guy on the intarweb, isn't it?

This sums up you being an e-thug on the internet:

http://newmedia.funnyjunk.com/pictures/ninjakid.gif

LOL!!! Attack of the e-thugs! It's easy to be a tough guy on the intarweb, isn't it?

This sums up you being an e-thug on the internet:

http://newmedia.funnyjunk.com/pictures/ninjakid.gif

Just as I figured.

Not only is it our right to own guns, but it is also our duty as REAL Americans to do so!

Not only is it our right to own guns, but it is also our duty as REAL Americans to do so!

So only "REAL AMERICANS" own guns? That's nice inclusive Texas style thinking. You sir are a uniter.:roll:

I agree. I consider myself a true American yet I have no desire to own a gun. I have no need for one. I support every Americans right to legally own one as laid out by our Constitution and I don't think anyone should be able to take that right away but that doesn't mean I feel I need to own one myself. There are way too many gun accidents and gun thefts to make me want to own a gun. It would be my luck that one of my children accidentally shoots themselves, I accidentally shoot myself, or someone steals my gun and uses it in a crime. The negatives outweigh the positives in my case. Chances are that I would never need to use it so why own a gun. I live in a fairly safe area and don't put myself in any situations where I feel I would need to defend myself with a gun. Sure there's the random mugger or whack job scenario but I'll take my chances.

:guns::lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :lockd: :guns:

Not only is it our right to own guns, but it is also our duty as REAL Americans to do so!

HELL YEAH

i have umm 5 in my house... 3 rifles and 2 handguns :nuts:

TEXAS LETHAL FORCE LAW... live it

I don't really care to disclose the amount of firearms in my home, but I can tell you this; all of my children are experts at handling and caring for firearms and respect them. My kids have been hunting with REAL guns since the day they could say the word, all of them are honor students and active in several charities, but love to hunt, and just go to the local range and shoot their guns. If you teach a child NOW how to respect firearms, they wont learn later from some video game or movie.

I don't really care to disclose the amount of firearms in my home, but I can tell you this; all of my children are experts at handling and caring for firearms and respect them. My kids have been hunting with REAL guns since the day they could say the word, all of them are honor students and active in several charities, but love to hunt, and just go to the local range and shoot their guns. If you teach a child NOW how to respect firearms, they wont learn later from some video game or movie.

Well that is the best way to teach the young , I would imagine. Video games will never teach respect that's for sure. Still, I've lived 46 years without a gun in my home and don't see getting one just to teach my daughter gun respect. All we need to know is they are weapons for killing and injuring. Keep away. :eek:

Good enough until the military coupe happens, then we go to my friend Matt's house with his fifty guns and a machine gun.:thumb: We'll learn what we need to then.
He makes pipe bombs too. I guess that's a skill?:lol:

we go to my friend Matt's house with his fifty guns and a machine gun.:thumb: We'll learn what we need to then.
He makes pipe bombs too. I guess that's a skill?:lol:

Sounds like he may be a bit of an extremist!:eek: Hunting for sport or for food with a machine gun or a pipe bomb is little too extreme for me. But then I guess you could wipe out a whole herd with just one shot. ;)

Yeah, he's just a Christian WHacko. Church. Leviticus and guns.Everyone need a friend on the fringe!:D
The pipe bombs stopped after he made a huge boulder go airborne and it came down in another friends kitchen a quarter mile away!:eek:
I've done the skeet thing with his shotguns and will admit to being a great shot, however I have no need of a gun.yet.............;)

I suppose it can make sense to think that tougher gun laws only make it harder for the law abiding to get guns, but statistics prove otherwise.

As noted previously, in countries with strict gun laws there is a drop in gun related deaths. If the laws in the US work so well, then why do these things keep happening? There have been shootings in Canada as well, but not nearly at the same rate. In Canada, the weapon of choice is a knife – not a gun. It’s pretty hard to kill 30 people with a knife.

The right to bear arms was included so that a well-organized militia could take on the British Army and secure an independent America. Well, the task is done. America has been independent for some time now, and I don’t think the British intend to invade. I don’t think Washington and Jefferson thought that the second amendment would be used to justify owning weapons that should only be in the hands of the police or other trained professionals.

If guns work so well in self-defence, why do so many innocent people get killed? Should everyone in the States be expected to own a gun, just because they may be forced to have to use it to protect themselves?

Interesting....

If there were no guns, there would be no killings with a gun.:confused:

There would be no hunting, least with a gun or rifle..:confused:

If there were no knifes, there would be no stabbings and knife killing..:confused:

If there were no hatchets, there would be no hatchet killings or accidents...:confused:

Without knifes for one thing, how would you cut your meat, veggies, fruits?:confused:

I guess we start eating with out fingers...:thumb:

Oh and what about bows and arrows.. tell that one to the native population.:eek: