Virginia Tech school shooting

Would you mind if we put a sign on your front lawn that read,
"This is a gun-free household"?
The apartment complex where I live is very safe and I do have other means of defending myself, so no not really. It would probably be taken as a bad decoy anyway. :p

The better question is why people who have them don't advertise the fact if they really want to keep criminals at bay....
 
Outstanding post Pachipro! 👍 👏


Please have at least one large cold Asahi on me! :gulp:
 
A few messages from our Founding Fathers, as relevant today as then:
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed." -Thomas Jefferson
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States." - Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principles of the federal Constitution (1787) in Pamphlets to the Constitution of the United States (P. Ford, 1888)
"Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." - Luke 22:36 quoting Jesus of Nazareth, from KJV
"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania
"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria
"To disarm the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave them..." -George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined...The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might
have a gun." -Patrick Henry
This is just propaganda for independence and self rule. Quite useful when the Brits and the Red coats loom over your ambitions. The founding fathers said a lot of inspiring things....wasn't Thomas Jefferson the one who wrote all men are created equal and all that good stuff....but in the end black people were considered as 3/5 human and he himself had monticello full of slaves and indulged in many sexual escapades with his female slaves....
"You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass." - Japanese Admiral Yamamoto, 1941
I don't think this something to be proud of...especially now in 2007...this is a statement to condoning the prevalence of ignorance in a civilized country and society.

Furthermore I don't understand what the right to bear arms has to be with taking appropriate measures so that "suspect" individuals can get a gun so easily. The guy was in a mental institution for god's sake...if there had been some kind of laws and regulations requiring to purchase a gun then maybe this might have been avoided. Background checks that only look into your criminal record is not enough. There are limitations even on the first amendment, that of freedom of speech, i.e. one can not yell fire in a movie theater and so forth, so why not make limitations on the right to bear arms as well...

Lastly, I think the ammo question also has to be answered...if you can buy bullets at wal mart for 25 cents each and what not, that's a recipe for disaster, in fact in this shooting the killer had shot 175 bullets....
 
Furthermore I don't understand what the right to bear arms has to be with taking appropriate measures so that "suspect" individuals can get a gun so easily. The guy was in a mental institution for god's sake...if there had been some kind of laws and regulations requiring to purchase a gun then maybe this might have been avoided. Background checks that only look into your criminal record is not enough.
As a technical matter, Cho was never confined -- only involuntarily commited and immediately released to outpatient care. Federal law requires any one that has been declared mentally ill to be flagged in a national background database. But Virginia law does not and it is precisely this loophole that under Virginia law allowed a deranged man to escape detection. A seemingly minor discrepancy that went unnoticed until today.

Either way, though, he wouldn't have been disqualified from buying a gun privately or through a gun show.
 
This is just propaganda for independence and self rule. Quite useful when the Brits and the Red coats loom over your ambitions. The founding fathers said a lot of inspiring things....wasn't Thomas Jefferson the one who wrote all men are created equal and all that good stuff....but in the end black people were considered as 3/5 human and he himself had monticello full of slaves and indulged in many sexual escapades with his female slaves....

I don't think this something to be proud of...especially now in 2007...this is a statement to condoning the prevalence of ignorance in a civilized country and society.

[snip]

The Gun Cult is quite fond of overwrought propaganda, posturing, rhetorical fallacies and numerous other types of intellectual dishonesty. Quoting Thomas Jefferson is a typical example of that. Jefferson had other tendencies that might be embarrassing to "proper Christian patriots" (and their useful idiots). For example, he said many highly negative things about Christianity and organized religion in general, although it is nearly impossible to get American Christians to acknowledge that.

Also, the Benjamin Franklin quote make no sense in the context of a "gun rights" argument. What exactly is the "safety" involved? The Gun Cult pretends that they want to amass guns in order to "defend" themselves, that is to make themselves more safe. But it seems that as long as they can throw around words like "freedom" and "liberty" in a way that they find useful, they will do it.

No, the real issue here is not "self-defense". It is no coincidence that the American ultra-nationalists who are using the malicious "dissent equals treason" Big Lie are also groups who think they have the right to amass as many guns as they want. The aim is clearly to create a heavily-armed, ideologically-oriented (right-wing) paramilitary force that can be used to enforce the American ultra-nationalist politcal agenda.
 
The horse is out of the barn, too late.

With all the guns out there in America, there is no possible way to get rid of them. Outlaw them all tomorrow and you will see gun shelves emptied today and everyone out digging a hole tonight to bury their gun. Distrust of our government, military, and police and the desire to hunt and protect ourselves will always keep many Americans armed and ready. When my life or anyone else's is in danger, I don't plan to call 911 and wait 10 minutes for help to show up(or a lot longer), the 45 auto on my hip will solve the problem. As for a sign in front of the house, I like this one.

Uncle Frank

👍
 
Last edited:
The sign idea will never work because people are not going to be honest. If criminals don't threaten someone with a warning, they're going to go down to the little old lady at the end of the block.

If you want self defense, take a class or look into nonlethal means of debilitating without the danger of a fatal shot. Saves a possible innocent life of mistaken identity and no worries about facing trial for attempted murder.

The hunting culture is dying a slow death with the disappearance of rural America. That's about the only bright spot in this otherwise very, very bizarre and sordid picture.
 
Would you mind if we put a sign on your front lawn that read,
"This is a gun-free household"?

LOL! :giggle:

You are cracking me up!

That would be an invitation for even more crime and violence where I live, which has one of the highest crime rates in all of the United States. Right after Katrina, just about everyone was armed to the teeth. You had to be! The criminals had guns, were using them and had stolen many of the ones they had. The law abiding citizens were simply protecting themselves, their families, their pets (which are family too!) and their property (whatever was left of it!). For weeks there was very little law and much disorder. The law abiding citizens had to take the law into their own hands in many cases.
 
The sign idea will never work because people are not going to be honest. If criminals don't threaten someone with a warning, they're going to go down to the little old lady at the end of the block.

If you want self defense, take a class or look into nonlethal means of debilitating without the danger of a fatal shot. Saves a possible innocent life of mistaken identity and no worries about facing trial for attempted murder.

The hunting culture is dying a slow death with the disappearance of rural America. That's about the only bright spot in this otherwise very, very bizarre and sordid picture.

If the criminals go to the little old lady down the street, the Gun Cult won't care. It will just provide them with more opportunities for "Gotta have more guns!!!" propaganda. Or, the Gun Cult can blame the victim by saying "she should have had a gun."

I'm not so optimistic about the death of the "hunting culture" (as you put it). Even if they do go the way of Tyrannosaurus Rex, they will probably take a lot of people with them.

By the way, here is how a man named Charles Martin in Batavia, Ohio exercised his Second Amendment rights and defended his property rights:

Cincinnatidealer.com
http://www.timesreporter.com/index.php?ID=52113
 
I used to be totally against gun ownership, but this thread together with my interest in 17th century Holland has influenced my opinion. I want to share my view, which I will try to balance as much as I can.

You see, 17th century Holland is often seen as the pinnacle of society as it should be. There was great wealth, high literacy rates, its pretty much decentralized government was secular (we had NO monarchy back then), there was tolerance towards people with other religions, there was some form of a welfare state etc.. The people were proud to be a citizen of their towns/states.

One of the things that was very important for the Dutch was "social control" (which is a literal translation from the Dutch sociale controle), which basically means that with the lack of a central government and police state, people tended to look out for each other. A requirement for such a society was the fact that people should be armed, at the very least in their homes; if your neighbour gets robbed, you take your sword and slash the thief. In that sense, it is very noble to be armed. "Social control" allowed communities to engage in trade without too much hassle because of a mutual understanding of what principles people stand for, backed by a community of armed fellow men.

From that perspective, it would be a form of fighting symptoms if you illegalize guns; the cause of the problems are the people not being able to handle guns. If you put a ban on guns you take away the right of the people to protect themselves and their loved ones against such deranged and dangerous people.

However, how much is being done to educate the people about the danger of guns? Is one taught to handle one? I believe that in Texas you just need to show some ID, and then you can buy one gun every month. That's twelve guns a year, which are unregistered, spawing an incredible amount of fire-arms. For what do you need a new gun every month? What I am trying to say that the legislation around guns do not seem to be coherent with the thought of protecting society.

Furthermore, and more importantly, there is little "social control" in the US, or in any western country. Protecting society has become the task of the police (or private, for-profit security companies), education is the task of schools and other institutions, and caring has been replaced by anonymous charities, welfare checks and psychiatrists. With increased social and geographical mobility, fueled by increased immigration and globalization, people simply do not have the will and opportunity to invest time and effort into their troubled neighbours. Alienation occurs and some people, not being able to handle their lives, go "postal" (remember that one?).

It would be too easy to say that by outlawing guns the problem is solved. No way. Apart from the political impossibility, there are just too many guns around now. There has to be some change of mindset in all of us so we can better evaluate the state of our society and our neighbourhoods, and the people that live near us. Every one of us has a responsibility here.

The nation state, being the main disseminator of culture in present times, also has a major responsibility. The people should be educated not only to get high grades and to perform financially, but also to take the time to keep an eye out for your fellow citizen. The government could take a leading example in this by imposing at least some restrictions (to align the strategy "protecting society" with ease of gun ownership), by registering the purchases of guns and requiring some sort of license. People need a driver's license to drive because cars are supposedly so dangerous, why not a license to handle something that is created to kill, or at least harm?

PS: "Tolerance" in 17th century Holland is relative. One religious sect was still prosecuted throughout the period, and Jews had no civil rights. In other countries however, there was a certain state religion and all the other religions were prosecuted. Jews in the rest of Europe had no rights at all. Also, before someone starts talking of slave trade: that was after the great economic boom in Holland, and represented only a small part of its financial performance. It is regrettable, but it is not correct to state that Holland's "Golden Century" was built on slavery.
 
Thanks for that explanation, leonmarino. I agree that people in western nations need to get back to a more community-based existence and take more social responsibility, instead of leaving things to "authorities". I don't know yet what I believe about gun ownership, but it's very interesting that crime is down in places where everyone owns a gun.
 
Thanks for that explanation, leonmarino. I agree that people in western nations need to get back to a more community-based existence and take more social responsibility, instead of leaving things to "authorities". I don't know yet what I believe about gun ownership, but it's very interesting that crime is down in places where everyone owns a gun.
I personally would have to warn against the concepts of citizen arrests or vigilante justice in what leonmarino advocated. We do, though, have thousands of community watch programs in the US that patrol/keep vigil for any unusual neighborhood activity in close coordination with sheriffs or other professional law enforcement but without taking on their executive functions of interferring with an ongoing crime. Any group of individuals or security firm that is not charged or duly appointed to detain suspects is going to run up a lot of civil liberties problems getting into the business as amateurs.
 
Crime is not down specifically in places where everyone owns a gun. In general crime came down everywhere in the US after the 80's and 90's.
 
to reiterate, not that anyone here is disputing my previous post (since the corporate media is louder than any of us)

May 2, 2007
Historical Amnesia - Worst U.S. Massacre?



The reporting of the Virginia Tech massacre reveals that an ignorance of American history is not only a problem affecting American students but extends to our most influential newsrooms, even those with archives extending back to the 1800s....




There were much bloodier massacres before Blacksburg:

-- In 1860, Bret Harte, a well-known California writer, had just begun his writing career, working as a newspaper reporter in Arcata (known then as Union). Harte was expelled from Humboldt County because he recorded the Gunther Island Massacre of Wiyot Indians, committed on Feb. 26, 1860, when a small group of white men murdered between 60 and 200 Wiyot men, women and children. The massacre was encouraged by a local newspaper. Extermination was once the official policy of the California government toward Native Americans, as Gov. Peter H. Burnett stated in 1851: "That a war of extermination will continue to be waged between the two races until the Indian race becomes extinct, must be expected..."

-- On April 12, 1864, at Fort Pillow, near Memphis, Tenn., Confederate troops under Gen. Nathan Forrest massacred 227 black and white Union troops with such ferocity that an eyewitness Confederate soldier said, "blood, human blood, stood about in pools and brains could have been gathered up in any quantity...Gen. Forrest ordered them shot down like dogs and the carnage continued. Finally our men became sick of blood and the firing ceased."

-- On April 13, 1873, 350 miles northwest of New Orleans in Colfax, Grand Parish, La., 280 blacks were victims of a group of armed white men that included members of the White League and the Ku Klux Klan. Known as the Colfax Massacre, it was said to be sparked by contested local elections, although more generally its cause was white opposition to Reconstruction, which in 1875 resulted in a legal ruling, United States vs. Cruikshank, an important basis of future gun-control legislation, because it allows that "the federal government had no power to protect citizens against private action (not committed by federal or state government authorities) that deprived them of their constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment."

-- In 1913, during another nationally publicized action known as the Ludlow Massacre, more than 66 people were killed, including 11 children, and two women who were burned alive. Sparked by a strike against the Rockefeller family-owned Colorado Fuel and Iron Corporation by the mostly foreign born Serb, Greek and Italian coal miners after one of their union organizers was murdered, it eventually involved the Colorado National Guard, imported strikebreakers and sympathetic walkouts by union miners throughout the state. The union never was recognized by the company, and a U.S. congressional committee investigation failed to result in indictments of any militiaman or mine guard.

-- In 1921, a year when 64 lynchings were reported, the African American Greenwood business district of Tulsa, Okla., was the site of shooting deaths of at least 40 people, most of whom were black, although the undocumented death toll is said to be closer to 300. This site was then known as the "Negro's Wall Street," and was home to 15,000 people and 191 businesses. The rampage took the form of a riot, and was caused by economic tensions, particularly sparked by an article in the Tulsa Tribune regarding an alleged rape incident between a black shoe shiner and a white elevator operator. Because of this riot, Tulsa became the first U.S. city to be bombed from the air, when police dropped dynamite from private planes to break it up. Whites took possession of most of the land, and the site has become part of Oklahoma State University's Tulsa campus.



.... A member of the New York Times' editorial staff is Brent Staples, a black writer who is an expert on the Tulsa massacre. There is no excuse for such historical amnesia on the part of those who have taken upon themselves the serious task of informing the public.
http://counterpunch.org/blank05022007.html
 
This happened just an hour and a half drive away from me. Many people I know go there, including someone very close to me(and a member of this forum), Hideki_Matsui_Beast.
Thank goodness he is ok, and everyone else I know is, but there are so many more people who have been affected by this. It's so hard to imagine this happening in this area, which is always seemingly so serene.
Virginia Tech is a beautiful, and normally, peaceful campus. It's in Blacksburg, which is a town much like the one HMB and I are from. It has been very difficult to swallow for everyone around here.
HMB is covering the story for our county paper, which is a weekly publication, and when it comes out online tomorrow, I'll post it so that you all can read it.
So tragic.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/virginia_tech_weapons;_ylt=AgyxNXCK7P4_ZvLaQrIHRfNH2ocA

It really was unexpected. Blacksburg is such a quiet town. Even though there was a more low-key shooting earlier in the school year, it was still very hard to believe that something this awful could happen in such a peaceful location.

I just felt lucky to have not been there at the time. I walk by the area where the shooting took place all the time, when I'm not skipping class.

Sorry for posting twice in a row. I think my JREF skills are rusty.
 
Back
Top Bottom