web analytics

Ever Heard of a Mass Murder at a Gun Show?

By ATWadmin On April 18th, 2007

Thought not. Mass murders seem to take place where people are fairly helpless, in schools, in “gun free” zones.  A psycho with a gun would not get far at a gun show.  Virgina Tech’s gun-free zone made the killer safer, not the students.

Let’s look at some history (quoted or paraphrased from the article entitled “Gun-Free Zones” by David B. Kopel from the print edition of the Wall Street Journal, 4/18/07):

Virginia Tech:  a “gun free” zone and now the site of America’s worst killing spree.
Trolley Square, Utah:  a “gun free” private shopping mall where a killer walked past the “no guns allowed” sign and shot 5 people.  Fortunately, an off duty-officer, Kenneth Hammond, had also ignored the sign and was in the mall with his gun.  When he realized what was happening, he immediately opened fire on the gunman and stopped him in his tracks.
Pearl, Miss. : At the Pearl, Miss. High School, in 1997, Assistant Principal Joel Myrick retrieved his handgun from his car and apprehended a school shooter. (The option of storing a gun in the car was outlawed at Virginia Tech)
Appalachian Law School in Grundy, VA:  in 2002 a mass murder was stopped by two students, one of whom retrieved a gun from his car.
Edinboro, Pa.  : a nearby merchant used his shotgun to force an armed school attacker to desist.

Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 1997:   Cites that Americans drive-off  home invaders with firearms half million times annually .

Utah – where there are no “gun free” zones (expect for private property like Trolley Square) there has never been a Columbine- style attack on a school. Nor has there been any of the incidents predicted by self-defense opponents such as a teacher drawing a gun on a disrespectful student or a student stealing a teacher’s gun.

Israel successfully uses armed teachers as part of a program to deter terrorism.

To quote the old bumper sticker:  Guns don’t shoot people. People do.   Until we find a way to eradicate evil, we have the right to  defend ourselves.
 

93 Responses to “Ever Heard of a Mass Murder at a Gun Show?”

  1. Patty,

    I just read the most sickening euroweenie article in the supposed "right wing" UK newspaper – The Daily Mail. The headline for the op-ed is "There’s only one real "freedom" in America – the freedom to kill one another" by Russell Miller. In it, he argues that the NRA is in essence evil, that there is something wrong in the collective American psyche because it won’t abandon the right to self-defence and that it guns weren’t so readily available then this "tragedy might never have happened".

  2. David: The NRA opposes even the most basic attempts at gun control. I naturally do not subscribe to the anti-American sentiments of mr. Miller, but I don’t suggest you hitch your horse to the NRA wagon. As far as I am concerned, they are one letter off your least favorite organization.

    Patty: Did the campus have police who were in fact armed? That would seem sufficient protection, however it may have failed in this case. I don’t know anyone who has gone into a gun show and started shooting up the place but I do suspect we’ve had mass murders who have walked out of them with their guns.

  3. David: When I was very young and naive, I was all for gun control. Theoretically, it sounded so reasonable, so civilized. But like communism, I think it’s dangerous wishful thinking. Even Barbara Boxer (another San Francisco Democrat) has seen the error of her gun-controlling ways. From the article I quoted in the post above:

    "After the Sept. 11 attacks in the US, long-time gun control advocates, including Senator Barbara Boxer agreed that making airline cockpits into "gun-free zones" had made airplanes much more dangerous for everyone except the hijakers."

    I’ve become like my parents! (A no-nonsense hard-a**)

  4. Patty: I’d love it if all gun owners go through the same screening and training and registration that piolts do. Good idea.

  5. Mahons: the campus police were permitted guns. But VIrgina Tech is a school, not a prison, and the guards were not patrolling the grounds.

    Look, most people are ordinary law abiding citizens. WIth enormous good will for one another. How am I sure of this? Just merge onto a LA freeway with cars going 70 MPH and think about how much trust there is between you and them. Or cross a busy street and realize that the drivers are looking out for you, not hitting you if they can help it.
    Why take the means of self-denfense away from law abiding citizens? So wolves have easier access to their prey? This makes no sense.

    I feel safer knowing that fellow citizens are armed and ready to defend against evil.

  6. Why has no one ever shot up a gun show? Well mostly because gun shows are full of teenage rambos and middle aged red necks two groups that inspire personal animosity not group hatred. They dont go and shoot a lot of rednecks because they prefer to shoot the one redneck they hate and its usually in the comfort of their own home with their own gun.

    These mass murders dont choose gun free zones they choose places that are full of the group of people they hate. Whether its female engineering students in Canada or just every day engineering students in Virginia these groups were targeted specifically by a mad man and they werent chosen for their gun free status.

    However Patty now that you have thrown out the chalenge I fully expect a demented american attak on a gun show. People love a chalenge

  7. Patty: Bad example. I would have no trust for people on an LA Freeway, and isn’t 70 mph on an LA Freeway called "parking"?

    I attended college and obtained a post graduate degree in two relatively high crime areas, the Bronx and New Orleans. There wasn’t a gun in site among the many students. We didn’t live in fear.

    I don’t think the answer to gun violence is more guns. Heck, most parents wouldn’t trust a college kid with a credit card, and some folks want them armed?

    Interesting idea for thought, but I don’t think it would work out as hoped. Plus, loads of folks get killed by previously law abiding gun owners.

  8. David: Regarding that article, wasn’t there a mass murder in Scotland a few years back? It seems the left’s (or in this case, the right’s? ) capacity for self-delusional is bottomless.

    But then the urge to get in a good America-bashing must be almost irrisistable! And, it probably sells papers.

  9. Sean: well, being as superstitious as you I qualified my statement with "seems" so it’s not a challenge. Besides, for obvious reasons, a gun slinging madman wouldn’t get far.

  10. Actually patty – the Darwin Awards contained one such moron who tried robbing a store – might even have been a tobacconists – where off duty and in uniform cops hung out. Guess what happened to the gunman.

    Was chatting to a US Friend – made this point –

    In my day crazy kids were self-destructive . Have to wonder if the diet of slaughter everybody video games and movies is a factor here ?

  11. Mahons: I’m not saying everyone needs to run out and buy guns if they haven’t already. I am saying that "gun free zones" did not work as planned and should be abandoned. And the right to self-denfense should be respected.

  12. Patty

    Virginia Tech may be a gun free zone but you are missing the point. The entire country surrounding it is awash with guns. The American "hard on" for guns is sickening to pretty much every other civilised nation on Earth.

  13. >> Let’s look at some history..<<

    But why stop there…

    Luby’s Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas 23 people killed
    Edmond post office, Oklahoma, 14 people.
    University of Texas Tower 14 people killed

    no gun-free zones there, plenty of dead bodies, though.

  14. SBK – I am sure I am not the first person to ever tell you that a hard on is not as big as you think.

    We actually have a majority in the US that favor gun control, the vocal and influential minority however has kept that in check. Our collective guilt, if there is one, stems not from a love of guns but a failure of resolve in addressing the issue.

  15. >>Have to wonder if the diet of slaughter everybody video games and movies is a factor here ?<<

    MR raises a very interesting point here, worthy of a separate discussion. Apart from gore films and video games, etc. I think the tough competition between news channels, each vying for the most shocking pictures from war zones etc. with instant video footage of gun battles, people being shot or even getting their heads cut off in front of the camera, etc. also has a very hardening effect on young people.

  16. Mahons

    In Texas to obtain a carry permit, you must undergo a stringent background check, have notorized gun training certification, swear to abide by a slew of regulations and pay a $200.00 fee. This process takes weeks for approval and they’ll turn you down if you have even 1 unpaid parking ticket. Carry permits are not easy or convenient to get in Texas.

    I’m wondering if the UK has banned knives or created knife free zones since their young folks seem to be cutting each other up on a daily basis.

  17. Daphne there are a slew of regulations governing Knives here. Size of knife, type of knife, whether one has a valid reason ( e.g. a game keeper or farmer ) affect whether or not one will be prosecuted

    e.g. from Hansard:

    <Q>Under section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, it is an offence to carry a bladed article in a public place. There are certain defences, including having a reasonable excuse or lawful authority, but that is the basic offence. It applies to knives with a blade of 3 in or longer. Earlier today, the prevalence of knife-carrying in schools was mentioned, but it is happening not only in schools but out on the streets. I suggest that the police, if asked their opinion, would say that knife-carrying is one of the fastest-growing offences at the moment. It is therefore essential to give the courts the facility to sentence people on indictment to more than two years in prison for this quite dreadful offence.

    Some statistics might be of interest to the House. Charges relating to bladed articles have run at between roughly 4,500 and 6,500 a year over the past five years. In 1999, about 4,500 people were proceeded against for carrying a bladed article, of whom about 3,500 were found guilty. In 2003, about 6,800 were proceeded against, of whom 5,311 were found guilty. One might have thought that more people would go to prison for such a serious offence. Being confronted at any time, but particularly at night, by someone carrying a blade in the street is the most terrifying experience. </Q>

    http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/vo051114/debtext/51114-17.htm

    In Scotland they have tightened up :

    http://www.crownoffice.gov.uk/News/Releases/2007/03/21094948

  18. Mad: Ha! Ha! the Darwin award..did you hear about the "contest" where the police sent out notices of prize winnings to AWOL criminals? Apparently, many of them reported to the police station to claim their prizes!

    Probably violent video games and the like are not good influences but.
    I have read that there really isn’t an increase in gun violence of this type. But because there is an increase in the news cycle reporting it (24/7) we have the impression that there is rampant murder (and child kidnapping etc.) . Actual statistics do not support this though.

    SBK: Sorry you’re sickened but I believe your media has given you the wrong impression. We are not "awash" in guns for heavens sake…well, maybe just a little "awash." Which civilized nations are you referring to?

  19. Daphne thats a blinder and you know it. Are you seriously expecting us to believe that people only carry guns if they have a permit?

  20. Daphne: Or cross the border into Lousiana where I think you get one with a driver’s license and cash. It may have changed since I was there.

    Would the uber guns rights folks here agree to more stringent laws against unlawful gun possession, unlawful gun sales and stronger penalties for crimes committed with guns?

  21. Daphne: 963 arrests of texas concealed weapons holders since 1996, 263 felony arrests, and according to the statistics I read texas concealed weapons holders weapons-related arrests are 2x the general population’s. Tell me why I don’t like Mondays.

  22. Daphne: My quick reference to Texas gun laws revealed no background checks at Texasgun shows, no limits on assualt weapons, no one-gun-a-month limit to prevent trafficking, no police registration, no requirement for child proof locks, no regulation of private sales and the Texas State Attorney General has no independent authority to regulate guns.

    One word – Duck.

  23. Daphne,

    In the UK, we lock up those who try and defend themselves. It’s a mark of uberliberalism.

  24. You can buy guns here with a quick background computer check at the gun store. Cash and carry! To legally carry a gun on your person, in your car, in your purse, etc. you must go through the steps I mentioned above. Law abiding people get the permits, criminals and nutjobs don’t. People with criminal records can’t buy guns at any store or gun show. They buy them from other criminals or steal them.

    Of course people carry guns illegally. We already have 20,000 gun laws on the books in the US contolling the sale, purchase and use of guns. Do you really think more laws are going to deter people with evil intent from getting their hands on a gun? We can’t control everything. I believe it is a personal responsiblity to protect yourself and your family, and to assist in protecting anyone else who is in imminent danger.

    If someone in your workplace goes postal with a 9mm wouldn’t you rather have someone who is trained and permitted in the next cube over be able to take the guy out safely before he gets to your desk?

  25. <Q> Would the uber guns rights folks here agree to more stringent laws against unlawful gun possession, unlawful gun sales and stronger penalties for crimes committed with guns?</Q>

    My friends here and in the USA who are into guns would have no problems with that Mahons.

  26. A nephew of mine spent last year in S. Korea, and he said that their addiction to violent hi-tech war games was phenomenal and universal. They are more ‘wired-up’ than the Japanese.
    The average internet speed countrywide is 20megs! Which allows them to indulge in the most graphic and realistic ‘snuff videos’ with virtually no censorship.

    He added that their society was actually very peaceful and the people quite unaggressive.
    Gun control is very strict indeed….which poses some interesting questions of what lies beneath?

  27. Daphne: Or "law abiding" people buy the guns for them.
    We can prohibt people from obtaining assualt weapons. There is no need for them among the civilian population.
    We can insist on real background checks to avoid guns slipping through to criminals.
    Who says the guy next to me won’t be the one who goes postal? I’d much rather he didn’t have his gun in the office.

  28. Patty –

    "Regarding that article, wasn’t there a mass murder in Scotland a few years back?"

    Yes. Thomas Hamilton used pistols and revolvers to murder 16 children and a teacher in 1996:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_Massacre

    It was THE incident which provoked the Conservative government of the time and Parliament to ban the ownership of pistols and handguns without exception. We have the absurd situation now where the Great Britain pistol shooting team must train abroad. Dispensation must be arranged to allow pistol shooting events to take place at the London Olympics in 2012. Of course, that dispensation will allow foreigners to take part in target sports in Britain, but not 60million Britons.

    Americans take note – since the 1996 ban gun crime has increased hugely in Briton. It has increased so much that the 1996 law and subsequent increase in robberies, assaults and murders with handguns have become a sick joke. Anyone who advocates gun control against the evidence of the United Kingdom is blind to reality.

    The perpetrator of Dunblane was licenced to own handguns, although he never should have been. The police were negligent in issuing him with his licence. All documents relating to his unfitness to own firearms have been hidden from public scrutiny for 50 years.

    The police got it badly wrong, a massacre resulted, hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Britons were forced to give up their sport on pain of imprisonment in a panic-led reaction and gun crime rocketed – as it continues to. Do not allow the same to happen in the USA.

  29. There are a lot of people asking if they could have done more to avoid this tonight and i feel very sorry for them all, especially the poor chap who sold him the gun, his face and expression spoke volumes and that in itself is so unfair. For some kid psycho, whose behaviour was reported and known, to be able to rock up and buy a gun is plainly mad. Whatever you think of the argumemnts for being armed what is emerging now is not good for the pro gun lobby. We live in an age where violence is casual and unshocking for kids – its almost entertainment. And university kids getting access to them because they look like ‘good clean kids’ and its ‘legal’ surely cant continue when it has so dismally failed. I hate people speaking with the benefit of hindsight but this guys history is uncomfortbale reading within an environment that has seen nutjobs let loose in the past.

  30. You cannot buy assault weapons in the US. Not in any store or through any gun show. The only people outside of law enforcement who have them are criminals who are buying smuggled weapons that come into the country through Mexico.

    The only suggestion/improvement I would make to my state’s background checks would be to tie the mental institutions’ former and current patient lists into the database.

    A 9mm is not an assault weapon. I own one.

  31. Daphne: Hold your fire, I didn’t mean to imply a 9mm was an assault weapon. The Avon lady, Mormon missionaries and Trick or Treaters must love you.

    You have an interesting suggestion regarding the mental institution lists, but I don’t think the Republican party is willing to release its contributor’s list.

  32. Mahons,

    Interesting little dig in your reply to Daphne! – how about one at your party of choice, the Dems. some 30,000 gun related deaths, of all categories p.a. in the US. – and the world goes crazy! –
    (30,000 from a population of 300,000,000. = 0.01%)

    Deaths due to hospital and clinical negligence, some 150,000 plus deaths p.a. – Yet you rarely hear an outcry about that nasty little stat do you? – I believe that doctors are noted for their worthwhile contributions to Dem party funds!…
    (150,000 from 37,000,000 hospitalisations. = 0.41%)

    Sorry to introduce a trite note to the discussion, but – once again, it seems that things always come down to a slanging match along party lines.

    Of course, the unecessary deaths of so many, at one man’s hand is a tragedy, especially as it seems we are so helpless to prevent it being repeated.

    The unecessary deaths of so many at the hands of a professional group is far more tragic, as it is preventable…

  33. If someone in your workplace goes postal with a 9mm wouldn’t you rather have someone who is trained and permitted in the next cube over be able to take the guy out safely before he gets to your desk

    The point is in my work no one can go postal with a 9mm

  34. Mahons – They do love me, well maybe not the mormons, I chase them off with my Mary statue and rosary beads! The rapists and burglers don’t like me much, they don’t like my two 100 lb+ dogs either.

  35. Excellent comment Alison. Their are a million suggestions people will make as to who is to ‘blame’ for this massacre and some will take an absolute pro- gun stance and some an anti stance but each country has to view it’s own laws in light of the behaviour customs and cultures of it’s populations and act accordingly and not according to a dogmatic stance. My own belief is that a mixture of relaxing strict anti-gun controls in schools and colleges to allow trained individuals on campus to be available at short notice and at very short distance at all times in the event of such murderous intrusions coupled with much stricter general public access rights to casually purchase firearms are 2 necessary steps.

  36. Mahons –

    "Who says the guy next to me won’t be the one who goes postal? I’d much rather he didn’t have his gun in the office."

    The inescapable reality is that if the guy next to you wants to go postal with a handgun he will, whatever the law says.

    If you follow the news from here you will often read of black gang shootings with handguns, yet ownership of handguns has been illegal for over a decade in the United Kingdom. In that time gun crime has increased hugely. No law will make guns disappear, nor will it dissuade anyone with bad intent from using them.

  37. The questions I would like to have answered in Cho’s case are:

    Why didn’t the school counsler get that young man some mental health help, or call his parents and discuss his obviously disturbed behaviour? Why was he allowed to continue attending classes when so many people there had problems with him and were afraid of him? Doesn’t the school have some responsibilty when they were aware that this guy wasn’t right in the head?

  38. Pete Moore, the exact figure is that handgun crime has doubled since they were banned. Gun crime has increased ONE THOUSAND PERCENT since the start of the gun bans back in ’86.

  39. Pistol Pete Moore: If he can’t get the gun in the first place because they are made less available it will be harder for him to go postal, unless he attacks me with the stamp machine.

    Ernest: Sorry old chum but I am not a registered Democrat. Their follies make me wince as well sometimes. I am uncertain as to how you account for them being responsible for 30 thousand handgun deaths.

    I have no idea what you are talking about as to medical malpractice somehow being the fault of one political party. I also don’t know where you got the idea doctors are Democrats (the stereotype is Republican, but I could be wrong). Certainly if anyone has tried to reign in the medical profession it has been the Democrats.

    Daphne: A Mary statute, rosary beads and large dogs? Are you an ex-nun?

  40. Colm,

    Trained individuals! – no thank you! we have seen just what such ‘trained’ individuals can do – if the Met is anything to go by.

    A tightening of the criteria required before purchasing a gun would be a small step in the right direction, but would only be partial answer.

    We need to teach our children that adulthood, and the responsibility that goes with it begins at something like sixteen years of age.

    That we have all these so-called ‘students’ running around with adult tastes and equivalent purcahsing power, but with teenage mentalities, is all part of the problem.

    A saying I hear often when in the US is; ‘Him, oh! he is thirty going on fifteen!’…

    A couple of generations ago young folk of eighteen were considered fully adult, and capable of shouldering their responsibilities. Now we seem to be over-run by a flock ‘cuckoo in the nest’ types, spoilt in every sense of the word, and probably beyond redemption…

    We all, as parents, want better for our offspring than we had as youngsters, we all have plenty of those ‘good intentions’, – certainly enough to pave the road to hell…

  41. Mahons – Do nuns have a thing for dogs?!? Actually, after catholic school I ran away from the church as fast and far as I could for many years. I picked the catholic habit (haha) back up in later years.

    To all the anti-gun posters here –

    Do you think that law abiding citizens should not be allowed to keep a registered firearm in their homes for protection or hunting?

  42. Good points Ernest. However strongly the pro-gun lobby may feel, surely even they must feel uncomfortable at the ease with which young students like Mr Seung-Hui can just walk in to a shop and purchase such lethal weaponry. Yes as Pete Moore says above a determined individual can always buy guns illegally but is it wise for the law to make it even easier for angry young men to buy them.

  43. Mahons,

    Well, I probably misunderstood your comment to Daphne re their contributors. I thought you were placing the blame for the shootings at the Reps door.

    You don’t have to be registered to be a sympathiser!…:-)

    The majority of doctors I meet, when I am in Florida, are most certainlt Dems, – which incidentally, used to worry me rather a lot, especially when I went for my proctologist’s appointment, until a friend said I need not worry – as long as he, (the doc), didn’t have two hands on my shoulders during the exam!

    It seems to a mere outsider that different professions, have different political allegiances, they are probably also influenced by state as much as anything else…

  44. Daphne: I am not anti-gun, just want some control. I don’t object to lawful folks to have them in their homes so long as we have significant improvement in background checks, registration, and licensing. I’d also like to limit the type to hunting weapons and simple handguns. I don’t think AK-47s etc need be made available for the general public (by the way I don’t think your claim that you can’t legally buy assault weapons in the US is accurate).

  45. Daphne,

    ‘Do you think that law abiding citizens should not be allowed to keep a registered firearm in their homes for protection or hunting?"

    Most definitely – yes! – but make it a privilege, not a ‘right’…the privilege coming with responsibility

  46. Cynical Libertarian –

    Thanks for the figures. Let’s recap: a doubling of gun crime since the Banning of All Handguns Forever and Ever Act 1996, and a 1000% increase since the Guns are Bad Act 1986.

    Mahons –

    "If he can’t get the gun in the first place because they are made less available it will be harder for him to go postal, unless he attacks me with the stamp machine."

    Criminals are criminals because they disobey the law. No law can make handguns disappear and he will get a gun if he wants one. There isn’t much to understand.

    Here in Britain we’re standing in a bucket of dog crap telling you that dog crap smells bad and you’re telling us it’ll smell nice when you have your own bucket of dog crap to stand in over there.

  47. Pistol Pete: It isn’t dog crap. You are melting.

  48. Pistol Pete: Criminals will indeed be criminals, we don’t abandon our laws because they won’t prevent all crime, we try to make them efficient.

  49. Ernest – I dont agree with one part of your comment. Another dig at the Met. Sigh. Its an unfair comment in many ways unless you share what you know of the individual circumstances of those decisions – one in which police were told a man left a pub with a shotgun and another in which they believed they were chasing a suicide bomber The same decisions and mistakes are made in the US all the time. Split second decisions and unfair to point a finger as it is of the media to take the gun seller to task.

    The Met took the MSM to a training session in which they were asked to make split second decisions and they came away humbled by their experiences.

  50. Mahons,

    "I don’t think AK-47s etc need be made available for the general public"

    I’m curious about this – do the pro-gun types draw the line anywhere, and if so why? If I can have a handgun then why can’t I have an assault rifle? If I can have an assault rifle, then why can’t I have a tank or a stealth bomber? How about an ICBM, a nuclear submarine or a suitcase nuke?

    Indeed if rightworld believes we can’t control weapons (except for Iran), then why does rightworld also believe we can control drugs, when similar arguments apply? And vice versa for those who want gun control and legalisation of drugs. A lot of inconsistencies here.

  51. Look at the breaking news on this guy, he was in a mental institution and LET GO!!

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/print?id=3052278

    and

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/

  52. Frank: They believe you should be able to have your own tank. It boggles the mind. And I would call them anti-regulation rather than pro-gun.

    All sensible discussion is lost. The gun regulations that we do manage to push through or so watered down they are almost meaningless. I don’t harbor any illusions that the most recent tragedy will result in any real improvement. We’ll have to wait until kindergardens are regularly wiped out.

  53. "Assault weapon" is a meaningless term, invented entirely by the anti-gun lobby.

    An "assault rifle" is a specific term used to refer to a rifle chambered in an intermediate cartridge and capable of both semi and fully automatic fire.

    Assault rifles are strictly controlled by federal law. They cannot be made or imported, except for military and law enforcement. Only such weapons that were in the USA before 1986 (and have not left) may be transferred. The recieving party in any transfer of such a weapon must pay $200 and undergo a background check which can take up to two years to complete. An AK47 (an assault rifle) costs about $17,000 plus the tax stamp.

    Mahons said:

    "Pistol Pete: Criminals will indeed be criminals, we don’t abandon our laws because they won’t prevent all crime, we try to make them efficient."

    Making murder a crime surely prevents some murders but not many. But we keep it anyway. We keep it because it is wrong for people to murder. People who murder should go to jail.

    Do I deserve to go to jail for owning a gun despite having never heart anyone? I hope not.

  54. Good spotting Daphne. Now if he had been made to surrender his weapons or rendered ineligible to purchase same from that incident . . .oh well. Apparently he also made a video for NBC, I am afraid that will be played again and again.

  55. Cyn Lib: I’ll check out your stats on assault weapons, I don’t see the need for them among the general population in any event.

    I never advocated jail for gun owners. Just real regulation.

  56. Daphne

    It’s easy to exclaim "LET GO!!" with the hindsight knowledge we have now of what he consequently did, but we can never really know the twists and turns of how ‘non-standard’ individuals will behave in the future. Should we we keep everyone who has the slightest psychologial problems or personality disorders locked up forever just in case.

  57. Daphne,

    Be very careful how you answer 🙂

    "Should we we keep everyone who has the slightest psychologial problems or personality disorders locked up forever just in case."

  58. Well I suppose that could include half of the regular commenters on ATW…… but which half ?

  59. Colm: Half? That gross underestimate alone might qualify you for a padded room.

  60. Do you think that law abiding citizens should not be allowed to keep a registered firearm in their homes for protection or hunting?

    Wednesday, April 18, 2007 at 09:55PM | Daphne

    Yes and thats precisely Canada’s gun control laws

    but you don’t need a 15 shot 9mm its really just a small assault weapon designed to deliver the maximum firepower in close quarters. Its only designed to kill humans.

    Semi automatic AK’s are still legal to buy and sell in the US and take a drill a spring and 15 minutes to convert to full automatic. So really there is no control what so ever

    I dont technically own a gun bigger than a pellet gun but i dont see the need to restrict rifles and shot guns used for hunting but hand guns only serve one purpose whether legally held or not

    And CL Your gun attacks have doubled since the ban on handguns? but still they are 10% of the American rate

  61. mahons

    I was referring of course to the number with ‘slight’ problems….. as for the other half ???

  62. Sean – thanks for that bit on the semi-automatics. It seemed soemthing was not being told. Google led me right to a dealership in ten seconds.

  63. Colm: Of course. I read too fast. Perhaps David can offer ATW straight jackets as the next promotion.

  64. "Pistol Pete: It isn’t dog crap. You are melting."

    – Wednesday, April 18, 2007 at 10:18PM | mahons

    "All sensible discussion is lost."

    – Wednesday, April 18, 2007 at 10:31PM | mahons

    You don’t say.

    I know I shouldn’t, but I’ll answer Frank O’Dwyer’s silly question. Handguns, rifles, shotguns and automatics are personal weapons, meant for personal use and personal defence. That’s why individuals have the moral right to own them, unless good reason can be shown why they are unfit and ought not to.

    A stealth bomber or ICBM is an instrument of collective defence/attack, designed and meant for use in the national interest, one of the very few legitimate functions of government.

    Now you know.

  65. Pete

    There is no such thing as a ‘moral right’ as a definitive term , only a legal right.

  66. Pistol Pete: You quoting me reminds me of that old phrase Even the Devil can quote scripture. Cheers.

  67. Colm

    Piffle. The right to defend yourself against attack is a moral right. If the law attempts to deny you this, the law goes against nature and is morally wrong. I don’t care what the law says about such things, I’m concerned with right and wrong.

  68. ‘Do you think that law abiding citizens should not be allowed to keep a registered firearm in their homes for protection or hunting’

    Yes they should be allowed, but only after they prove they have them securely stored. A lot more people die from accidents in the home from gun wounds than from intruders.

    BTW, when the Korean nutter bought his gun he had to tick a box saying he didn’t have any mental problems. Wow – like that’s a deterrent!!!

  69. Pete,

    "Handguns, rifles, shotguns and automatics are personal weapons, meant for personal use and personal defence."

    Meant by whom? These are rather obviously tools that can be used for attack or defence, and though you say they are personal they could equally be used by a small army or militia.

    " That’s why individuals have the moral right to own them, unless good reason can be shown why they are unfit and ought not to."

    Thank for your (mere) opinion, but there is no logical connection between your first sentence and the second, even though you wrote "that’s why". You are just asserting your personal morality as fact. It isn’t.

    I was tempted to write "silly opinion" there but I didn’t.

    "A stealth bomber or ICBM is an instrument of collective defence/attack"

    I see you remembered that weapons can be used for attack there. Well done.

    Your distinction between personal and collective is self-serving and arbitrary, and worse yet the distinction you make isn’t correct. Obviously an individual who had control of an ICBM, or for that matter biological weapons, could use them for personal defence/deterrent against an individual or a collective enemy who had similar. By your strange argument he therefore has the moral right to have it, unless the weapon is somehow "not meant" for that.

  70. Sean said:

    "but you don’t need a 15 shot 9mm its really just a small assault weapon"

    No such thing as an "assault weapon".

    "designed to deliver the maximum firepower in close quarters. Its only designed to kill humans."

    Which is great, because some humans need kiling. You wouldn’t want to get attacked and have the miniumum firepower, would you.

    Sean said:

    "Semi automatic AK’s are still legal to buy and sell in the US"

    True. They may look the same as an assault rifle, but they’re not. It’s like putting a Chevy in the skin of a Ferrari and calling it a supercar. There’s no difference between a semi-auto AK, a so-called ‘assault weapon’, and a hunting rifle, except aesthetics.

    Sean said:

    "and take a drill a spring and 15 minutes to convert to full automatic. So really there is no control what so ever"

    Wrong. The ammount of work required to convert a semi-auto AK clone to full auto would be comparable to building an entirely new gun. In fact, you would need a skilled gunsmith to convert an AK-look-a-like to full auto, but anyone can make one from scratch.

    SMCGIFF said:

    "A lot more people die from accidents in the home from gun wounds than from intruders."

    Dosn’t that mean guns are working :S

  71. Which is great, because some humans need kiling. You wouldn’t want to get attacked and have the miniumum firepower, would you.

    Yeah but CL just like in this incedent, the person who is doing the killing is the person who needs to be killed more often then not.

    True. They may look the same as an assault rifle, but they’re not. It’s like putting a Chevy in the skin of a Ferrari and calling it a supercar. There’s no difference between a semi-auto AK, a so-called ‘assault weapon’, and a hunting rifle, except aesthetics

    Horse feathers they sell conversion kits on the internet if you look. And virtually any semi-automatic gun can be converted to automatic by your average backyard gunsmith and if you are willing to take the chance on ruing it, any fool hardy iodiot with pins,drills and springs

  72. ruining

  73. So long as guns exist people will get shot! People implying that had those other students been armed it mightn’t have happened, well, maybe more people would have died in a multi-student gun battle? Being law abiding and having a gun is fine, but its all about increasing luck, not self-defence – you could be the best trained self-defence expert and go out strapped with a gun and get shot in the back of the head by an escaped mental patient.

    Its clear having gun laws and restrictions are about reduction, not prevention, were guns exist and are freely available people will eventually get shot. Like it our not, there is a unique phenomenon in America of school shootings, its a problem no-one has the answer to it seems.

  74. Sean said:

    "Horse feathers"

    Everything I said is true. Semi-auto-AK-clones are NOT assault rifles. The only real difference between such a rifle and a hunting rifle IS aesthetics. Although, admittedly, the AK-clone will be much less accurate, reducing its utility as a sniper weapon.

    "they sell conversion kits on the internet if you look."

    These are illegal. People go to jail for selling these. Of course, just like illegal guns, illegal conversion kits still get sold.

    "And virtually any semi-automatic gun can be converted to automatic by your average backyard gunsmith"

    I’ve never met a gunsmith in a backyard, but yes, virtually any semi-automatic gun can technically be converted to fully automatic with appropriate parts and skill. The work, however, is considerable and not really worth the effort, not for criminals anyway.

    Perhaps a more elementary problem with this line or argument is that full-auto adds nothing to lethality. Indeed, it actually has the opposite effect. Full-auto was a fad amongst military types in the fourties and fifties. It soon died out when they realised that you can’t hit shit when firing on full auto and that semi-auto is far more effective.

  75. CJ: "People implying that had those other students been armed it mightn’t have happened, well, maybe more people would have died in a multi-student gun battle?"

    My post didn’t imply, it PROVED that owning a gun when faced by a maniac is less dangerous than not. A multi-student gun battle? Great imagination you have but it isn’t what has happened.

  76. These are illegal. People go to jail for selling these. Of course, just like illegal guns, illegal conversion kits still get sold

    lmao yes people are well noted for their desire to slavihly follow the laws

    My post didn’t imply, it PROVED that owning a gun when faced by a maniac is less dangerous than not. A multi-student gun battle? Great imagination you have but it isn’t what has happened

    only because there wasnt multiple armed students

    under your plan your post is missing one word "yet"

  77. This coming from an agency that admits its definitions for CA-UTI’s are ‘fuzzy’. If you are in IC you know what I’m talking about, the rest of you deadheads can go google it.

    An interesting, but buried bit of information concerning the sky rocketing homicide rate in Philly: Guns used in a homicide are more than likely not registered to the shooter.

    Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 1997: Cites that Americans drive-off home invaders with firearms half million times annually .

  78. "Daphne thats a blinder and you know it. Are you seriously expecting us to believe that people only carry guns if they have a permit?"

    "The point is in my work no one can go postal with a 9mm."

    Sean, think about those two statements. By the same token no one at Virginia Tech could go postal with a 9mm. Or for that matter at Dunblane.

    Newsflash: Criminals and South Korean nutters *dont obey the Law*. Typically Leftist thinking, that you can wave a magic wand and the entire population will fall into line like good little drones.

  79. ".. 15 shot 9mm its really just a small assault weapon "

    Well ditto no such thing as ‘assault weapon’. However a handgun is designed as a defensive instrument, and as such works only at close quarters. It has hardly any offensive power. A rifle on the other hand is designed for offence. This is so because the rifle can hit a target at a distance, and is cumbersome at close quarters, whereas a handgun can hit nothing more than a few yards away.

    So logically the prohibitioners should ban rifles and keep handguns. Of course if you can guarantee that your victims are all un-armed and defenceless cattle, you can walk around all day shooting at folk with a handgun.

    Assualt rifles – usually small calibre instruments (.22) designed to carry a lot of ammunition. Used to spray over the heads of opposing soldiers so they must keep their heads down, whilst your mates go round the back and pick them off using semi-auto aimed fire .

    It’s impossible to hit anything much with full auto. So logically prohibitioners would insist on full auto and ban semi and bolt action hunting rifles.

    Oh wait – mayybe they have a different agenda – ban full auto, ban semi, ban bolt rifles, ban handguns. Could that be it ?

  80. Sean, think about those two statements. By the same token no one at Virginia Tech could go postal with a 9mm. Or for that matter at Dunblane.

    No Patty the reason no one can go postal with a 9mm in Canada is because they are illegal here and have never been legal except for police officers. Simply put except for a few smuggled in from the US they do not exist in Canada

    Well ditto no such thing as ‘assault weapon’. However a handgun is designed as a defensive instrument, and as such works only at close quarters. It has hardly any offensive power.

    theres 33 people at Virginia Tech who would like to argue that point with you, but they are having a hard time speaking right now.

    So logically the prohibitioners should ban rifles and keep handguns. Of course if you can guarantee that your victims are all un-armed and defenceless cattle, you can walk around all day shooting at folk with a handgun

    Do you Honestly believe that this psycho is the only person on Virginia Tech Campus who was armed. Pull the other one it has bells on

  81. Governments don’t legislate for the individual. If they did heroin would be legal because to deny it would infringe somebody’s right to take it. They legislate for society, recognising that while some, even many, people can carry guns and take heroin without it being a problem for themselves or others, there is a significant minority that cannot. Where freely available guns have an overall negative effect on society, it is incumbent on governments to restrict them, the same way they have done with heroin.

    Its fairly obvious America has a bigger problem with gun crime than almost every other Western country. It is also one of few countries with guns freely available. It doesn’t take a genius to see the connection here.

    The government can’t prevent somebody going insane and deciding he wants to shoot up a school. It can try to prevent a person like that from having access to guns in the first place, however.

    Why do Americans support their troops abroad unquestionably yet justify the right to bear arms on the paranoid presumption that those same troops could turn on them at any minute at the government’s request.

  82. >>Why do Americans support their troops abroad unquestionably yet justify the right to bear arms on the paranoid presumption that those same troops could turn on them at any minute at the government’s request.<<

    That’s a damned smart question, Niall!

    I think it goes on our feelings that"tyrants love unarmed peasants."

    But just take the case here in the Southwest. The government has failed to protect our border with Mexico. Even though the US gover. has not turned troops against us, it has allowed a foreign invasion of people, many who are thugs. I friend of mine’s Dad was shot and killed last week by illegals.

  83. ".. Do you Honestly believe that this psycho is the only person on Virginia Tech Campus who was armed. Pull the other one it has bells on .."

    If there were any other armed people there, they didn’t seem able to point them at the perp. That’s quite consistent with the tactical doctrine adopted by the police, UK as well as US – officer safety paramount. Public can go hang.

  84. United States police officers have no legal obligation to protect the public. This has been upheld in the courts.

    Sean said:

    "lmao yes people are well noted for their desire to slavihly follow the laws"

    Let me get this straight. People don’t follow gun laws, therefore we should make a more gun laws. Riiiight.

  85. NO CL not more gun laws… less guns. get the picture

  86. Charles,
    Sorry about your friends Dad. I think the Republicans are tacitly in favour of immigration because it seems to be strengthening their votebanks. Even if I’m wrong, I’m certain there is ultimately a political reason for the admin not providing sufficient border police because it can’t be because Americans are helping to save Iraq, that just doesn’t make sense.

  87. So Sean, you are happy with American gun laws as they are today?

    If so, how would you like to reduce the number of guns without making more laws? Are we talking literally the number of guns or the number of people who own guns?

  88. Viginia Tech proves you either defend yourself or you die and any loved ones who happen to be with you.

    Stop being frightened wimps and get yourself prepared for what may come your way.

  89. Who is this ‘winghunter’?!

    Listen to him, wimps!!! Defending yourself is not a bad thing – it is a GOOD thing.

  90. Charles,
    While liberalising gun laws might solve certain urgent problems like crime caused by immigrants, might it not lead to greater problems in the long run, such as armed insurgent groups and terrorists operating within the US?

    We know that the days of conventional warfare are numbered – technology has made it ridiculous for any country to fight a conventional war against America. Three options remain – WMD, terrorism and a combination of both.

    I am convinced that the next strategy of the terrorists will be to build up their numbers WITHIN the United States and among its disaffected citizens. That will carry the conflict to a higher level, say, fifty years from now.

  91. >>it is a GOOD thing<<

    Monica, are you not content with putting guns in the hands of Sun-jyung Cho?

  92. Cunningham,
    Sun-jyung Cho
    That’s my favourite Korean recipe.

    The gunner was Cho Seung Hui I think but Monica’ll know better.

    Defending yourself is a good thing as long as you’re defending the right person.

  93. >>That’s my favourite Korean recipe.<<

    LOL OOps, sorry Adrian-

    "Defending yourself is a good thing as long as you’re defending the right person."

    Nice one.