Federal Officials: At Least 32 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting

I like revolvers, and speed loaders. You're quite right, it is easy to send lead down range fast fast fast.

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
The simple fact of the matter is that the human body can sustain a great deal of punishment. the shooter was probably being overly mythodical, using a rythm of sorts to pace his efforts. Will it turn out that he was trained in basic firearms use? I don't know. The average person can be lethal with just a few minutes of training.

The speed and pace of his attack suggests that he had a high degree of intent as he engaged. The fact that he wasted so many rounds on doors suggests that he was running on raw hate and agression. The timing of his suicide suggests that he had some idea of just exactly when he wanted to do it. We're never going to know for sure.

Methodical _and_ raw hate and aggression?

Raw emotions make for raw nerves and that leads to just going crazy. Being methodical means you have to detach yourself to a certain extent to not let the base parts of you take control and drive you into tunnel vision, which anybody with combat training will attest to being a very deadly thing. I suspect he may have started out with a calm approach but as it became obvious that the police were there and making ready an assault force he probably abandoned methodical in favor of a panic which would eventually lead him to take his own life rather than be put on display/trial. No tears lost however, the scumbag is going into a box and we don't have to pay for his lifetime imprisonment or execution.

The prolific output of the liberal, anti-gun media coupled with the tendency of Congress to introduce knee-jerk, emotionally reactive leglislation just to get their names before the public more frequently, compounded by the huge surge in public attention and emotion following a tragic event like the Virginia Tech murders will very likely lead to a concerted and sustained attack on guns in general. Forget the fact that countries such as the U.K. and Australia saw a growth in crime following their gun bans (And, If I'm not mistaken a growth in homicides as well). Those bans will be spun by the media as good, beneficial laws. Meanwhile, the anti-gun lobby will find several "scientists" eager to publish biased anti-gun studies. The end result of all the above may well be a ban on firearms in America. I Sincerely hope not, but the pattern is all too familiar.

There is no doubt that anti-gun forces will make a play that is designed to take advantage of this crisis. That's why we need to remain civil and articualte. Answer with intellect. Don't answer with frustration.

Well Justin I have to admit I am frustrated. (The next statement will likely lead to my lynching, but here goes.) Mostly I'm frustrated by the apalling ignorance and apathy of the American public at large. I think perhaps Isaac Asimov (?) may well have been correct when he wrote that in a true democracy the public will vote for only two things--bread and circuses. I keep hoping the Internet/World Wide Web will lead to a resurgence in the involvement of ordinary people in the governance of their countries--and in all honesty, it may. However, I'm not the most patient of men.

I have not talked about this tragedy on ATS much, but I would like to add one thing.

When something like this occurs we should be looking at what provoked this individual to go on this rampage in the first part.

It is not about the guns, the weapons etc.

People need to start listening to "troubled" individuals. As much as I have heard, this individual supported the idea of counseling. One of his teachers actually walked with him to the event.

I think he could have been helped. Yes he was disturbed, but I think he could have been helped.

Gun control / law is not the answer either.

Take this Canadian example:

Dawson College Shooting

All of the weapons Gill had in his possession can be legally purchased and owned by a civilian in Canada. However, because of the Cx4 Storm's legal classification, specific criteria must be met for different configurations of the carbine. As manufactured by Beretta, the Cx4 Storm is a semi-automatic, pistol-calibre center-fire carbine with a 422mm barrel length. As such, it is categorized as "restricted" in Canada. Any person possessing a firearms license (PAL) with restricted-class privileges may purchase this weapon, subject to the approval of the Chief Firearms Officer of the respective province.Kimveer Gill did in fact have a restricted-class firearms license and his weapons were registered with the Canadian gun registry. Therefore, he owned the weapons legally under Canadian law though he did not obtain an ATT to bring the firearm to the school so it was transported illegally.

What do you do when the shooter obeys the law?

Originally posted by Astronomer70
Well Justin I have to admit I am frustrated. (The next statement will likely lead to my lynching, but here goes.) Mostly I'm frustrated by the apalling ignorance and apathy of the American public at large. I think perhaps Isaac Asimov (?) may well have been correct when he wrote that in a true democracy the public will vote for only two things--bread and circuses. I keep hoping the Internet/World Wide Web will lead to a resurgence in the involvement of ordinary people in the governance of their countries--and in all honesty, it may. However, I'm not the most patient of men.

To me Its not that the American public is ignorant, more over the majority of the public just do not care what goes on in the government. The American people live in there own little world, and most are content with that.

Dulcimer I need not remind you that anytime anyone in any place picks up a firearm with the intent to use it illegally then they are not following the law. However, your point was that the person mentioned followed all the rules proscribed by law until he actually went berzerk (or something). All I can reply to your question is that men are not perfect and therefore they do not and cannot pass perfect laws. Short of some perfect psychological screening process for all would-be gun owners we are never going to be able to completely stop such incidents from happening.

The real question is how much imperfection are we willing to tolerate in the name of individual liberty and freedom? When do we cross the line from not strict enough to too strict? And what the hell are the real trade-offs between the two?

Further to my last post..

If society wants to bend to the individual liberty and freedom side of, for example, the gun control issue, does that mean we should/must incorporate x number of hours of education on the issue into our school systems? We can certainly do that, but it will have a cost. How much are we willing to spend to try to mitigate the occassional shooting spree?

There are those who would argue that human lives are priceless, yet the medical/insurance organizations of the world have, by their policies and procedures, already established that human lives do indeed have a price. They may not have intended to set one, but set it they have. (You know as well as I that society simply cannot afford to keep someone on life support indefinitely--the cost is simply prohibitive. Both in terms of dollars, hospital space and critical/limited equipment utilization, as well as the time and attention of medical personnel. Others needs dictate that extraordinary procedures have a limited duration.) I have not sat down to try to calculate the costs, but it surely can be done. Likewise, the cost of public education can be calculated. So, again, I would ask how much are we willing to spend?

It is much more difficult to calculate the costs of passing leglislation that is overly restrictive, but such costs are none-the-less there. Just what is the going price of indivicual freedom?

Further to my last post..

What is the price of liberty and individual freedom? Throughout our history millions of people have died trying to maintain it. Scholars have written countless papers discussing it, even our Constitution is replete with the sancity of it. Are we today, so willing to simply leglislate it out of existence one freedom at a time? Some would argue that it's only one little thing that really doesnt't matter much since the core values would still be there. But would they? Discarding individual freedoms is sort of like peeling an onion. Remove one layer and not much difference is noticed. Keep removing them though and you quickly end up with nothing--there is no core, only layer after layer. Personally, I'm reluctant to start down that path.

Update on new of this today,

Seems that this boy was a loner, Also teachers had refereed him to councillor as they where disturbed by his recent writings in his English class,

A professor who taught a student whose gun rampage at Virginia Tech left 32 people dead says she warned university officials about his behaviour.
Lucinda Roy said she became concerned after Cho Seung-hui wrote disturbing pieces for a creative writing class.

The 23-year-old South Korean has been described as a loner and an introvert.

news.bbc.co.uk...


Its though he was possible on anti depressants,

He was also thought to almost *stalk* women,

More on this, Link,

Originally posted by Dulcimer

When something like this occurs we should be looking at what provoked this individual to go on this rampage in the first part.

It is not about the guns, the weapons etc.

People need to start listening to "troubled" individuals.

Dulcimer, I totally agree.

You have to stop and wonder.... how many more of these types of shootings or hostage takings, etc. may have ALREADY been prevented by some type of intervention or counciling.

How many more 'troubled' individuals are standing on the sidelines not recieving help.

As much as I would hope this to be the last episode of its kind, I trully think it is just one of many to come, as they have already come in the past.

With that sentiment in mind, you may find the most recent posting in this thread to be of some use.

Originally posted by asala
Update on new of this today,

Seems that this boy was a loner, Also teachers had refereed him to councillor as they where disturbed by his recent writings in his English class,

One of his writings can be seen here:

Virginia killer's violent writings

It isn't what you might describe as nice.

There seems to be two radically different ideals when it comes to guns...

(1) is the NRA/right wing attitude of guns guns and more guns the only way we will ever be safe is if everyone is armed to the teeth... which is patently absurd. Any society set up that was is not a society worth preserving, it is an armed and paranoid camp.

(2) is the ban all guns attitude which will never be implemented in this country, no matter what the screaming hysterics on talk radio tell you.

Then there is the middle road which encourages strong and enforceable gun control laws, but reasonable laws that everyone can live with. As I have said repeatedly I see nothing wrong with mandatory background checks and waiting periods, nor do I see anything wrong with limiting the number of guns one can buy in a month (unless they are a certified collector and/or gun dealer)... not a single one of those laws really impinge upon anybody if you think about it rationally.

I propose one more thing though... if we are going to have guns easily accessible in our society then I think that every single student from kindergarden through college should be required to take mandatory gun safety classes as part of their core courses... and there should be refresher courses required throughout the span of a persons life. Add to this mandatory psychological and socialization exams to keep track of the loonies. If a person is too crazy to carry a gun ban him from owning one and tattoo their forehead or put a chip in him to mark him as someone who is banned from owning a gun, and a mandatory death penalty to anyone who sells them one resulting is death or injury.

The current situation where any given idiot can easily get a gun is unacceptable.

It isn't what you might describe as nice.

either is Bret Easton Ellis' "American Psycho", but Cho was an english student. A work of fiction can't be used as evidence of a troubled mind. Maybe we should lock up authors who's work is disturbing.

I keep seeing posts pop-up blaming guns and fewer blaming violent video games but there seems to be another common thread that people are either overlooking or ignoring.

Perhaps all of these school shootings, if not simply the fault of the crazy guy doing the shooting, can be blamed on the schools and the state of modern educational institutions?

If youre going to start blaming things other than the jerk who commited the act then you cant just stop on the excuse that fits your particular cause or ideals ie guns and video games. You are obligated to keep scanning until all possible excuses have been identified.

Since this kid was a student there why not blame the system?

Lets say that guns do kill people. Something sent him down to the shop and moved him to spend $500 on two pistols, more on ammunition, more on his little outfit and something caused him to spend months planning an attack on his classmates. Did the guns do that? He didnt get the guns and then magically become crazy. Video games seem like a more reasonable culprit being that he most likely played them for years prior to this. But the schools? He's been in school his whole life. Im sure the schools had some influence on his behavior. At least I'm willing to bet the schools had more of a hand in shaping this boys character than playing video games or holding a gun in his hand.

the shape of things to come

increase in mass casualty shootings

followed by

Public outcry

followed by

Hysteria fuelled legislation banning possesion of firearms by private individuals

followed by

mass civil unrest as people defy the new laws

followed by

Martial Law

followed by

Implimentation of a plan such as The United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2

Out of all this horror that has gone on I would like to point something out and it's been bugging me for some time since this happened. People talk about the UK having some strict controls on guns well in a sense we do but when Dunblane happened it was a reaction to the media pressure that some one had to do something to prevent in from occurring again.

The government here in the UK has not targeted the people who had guns who should have been gone after ie the armed gangs and drug dealers etc. The laws banned those who owned guns for legitimate reasons i.e range shooters and some game hunters. I myself have done beating on pheasant shoots with my father locally and I am well aware of the security issues around guns used on them. There should be strict controls and there are here for those who are hunts like I have. This thing happened in a state where from what I have read it has little or no controls on weapons I that's not the case in all the US.

If the US is going to control it's guns and the people who own them then they need to toughen the laws against those use them for illegal reasons such as criminals and gangs. People who own them for legitimate reasons should be allowed to keep them but must also be placed under strict regulation and also have secure places in their homes to keep the weapons secure. The UK made a big mistake going after the people who owned the guns legally and those who had them illegally still can access them with some ease given the right contacts.

As for one offs like what has happened here as horrendous as it may sound with cold logic it's a terrible incident that is random in all that happened most people who commit murder know the person who they kill for sometime before they carry it out and that is not what happened there. This was a young man who was clearly over powered by what ever internal demons took hold of him and for that no one could have predicated what he would do. We can all say in hindsight they should have done this or that at the University but at the end of the day with some people what ever you do to help them will not prevent them from carrying such acts of evil. He clearly was beyond aid. At this time my only thoughts and prayers go out to those who lost loved one's and the rest of the students at VT the world is an evil place but there is also so much good in it and we can't let something like this start making each other play blame games. What is done is done time is the only healer I just hope nothing comes of the horrors that have happen in the future but some how I think it will

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
I keep seeing posts pop-up blaming guns and fewer blaming violent video games but there seems to be another common thread that people are either overlooking or ignoring.

Perhaps all of these school shootings, if not simply the fault of the crazy guy doing the shooting, can be blamed on the schools and the state of modern educational institutions?

If youre going to start blaming things other than the jerk who commited the act then you cant just stop on the excuse that fits your particular cause or ideals ie guns and video games. You are obligated to keep scanning until all possible excuses have been identified.

Since this kid was a student there why not blame the system?

Lets say that guns do kill people. Something sent him down to the shop and moved him to spend $500 on two pistols, more on ammunition, more on his little outfit and something caused him to spend months planning an attack on his classmates. Did the guns do that? He didnt get the guns and then magically become crazy. Video games seem like a more reasonable culprit being that he most likely played them for years prior to this. But the schools? He's been in school his whole life. Im sure the schools had some influence on his behavior. At least I'm willing to bet the schools had more of a hand in shaping this boys character than playing video games or holding a gun in his hand.

I did read your point about games being somehow involved and I find that hard to stomach and the other thing I would like to know is as I am a hardcore gamer. Is have you ever sat down and played any so called "violent" games yourself. It annoys me when I hear and I am not aiming this at you that somehow the games industry is always to blame when incidents of this nature occur and even more so when non gamers put their point of view when they have never even touched a so called "violent game" or any other game for that matter. I would never take a loaded gun or shoot any one with it and most gamers would say the exact same thing. We also play games to escape the world in which we live. Gamers are for the most part intelligent people who are well aware of the real world consequences of the actions they take in games and most would never do such a thing.

There are far more serious issues at stake than passing the buck onto the games industry and gamers alike. I would NEVER harm a fellow human being but I also love to lose myself in games because otherwise life would be very boring. The media is responsible violent content on all sorts of different levels be it passive or interactive. I just get sick of gamers being all tarred with the same brush!