Virginia Tech shooting

[Glenn]

First of all, I’d like to be on the record that I have absolutely no problem with guns in hands of responsible people.
I have huge issues with illegal guns and the ease with which these find their way into hands of people who really should not have them. And for that we have NRA to thank for.

The process that you described is precisely the kind of a procedure that one should go through to prove to the society at large that are you can be trusted and capable of using the deadly weapon in lawful way and knowledgeable enough to exercise good judgment with respect to the gun’s use. I know that gun owners grumble about the process but these barriers do keep at least some real knuckle heads from getting a gun and a legal way of carrying it.
Law abiding people will always have access to guns and self protection, despite the gun lobby’s propaganda.

My state (MA) has similar laws in place and I’m glad for it. It is however a real tragedy that very few states do have these common sense laws on the books. States that do not, as already witnessed at V. Tech in 2007 are more prone to tragic outcomes.

For instance, I really doubt that Seung-Hiu Cho (V. tech shooter on 2007) would have been able to get a gun permit here in MA. A local sheriff, just like in CT has to approve a gun permit just to buy the weapon. Prior to that, the kid would have to pass a certification course. In other words, there were at least two more screens before the NICS background check that Cho would have to pass in order to buy a weapon. As seen, the NICS system is far from being fully effective and in part this is also due to pressure from gun lobby.

But in VA, no such extra checks just to purchase a gun, which he did, twice. And down there, yes, it is just almost as easy to get a gun as going to your local 7-11 for a gallon of milk. You fill out one form and go through the instant NICS check. Gun is yours.
Granted, concealed permit is a different story, even in VA, but just buying a gun, no problem. Easy as milk at 7-11.

Gotcha. Now I see where you're coming from. As nick mentioned, it's certainly a hot button issue. And i think there will always be those who bypass the legal way of doing things and mess it up for those who do things correctly.

 

[Morwax]

For instance, I really doubt that Seung-Hiu Cho (V. tech shooter on 2007) would have been able to get a gun permit here in MA. A local sheriff, just like in CT has to approve a gun permit just to buy the weapon. Prior to that, the kid would have to pass a certification course. In other words, there were at least two more screens before the NICS background check that Cho would have to pass in order to buy a weapon. As seen, the NICS system is far from being fully effective and in part this is also due to pressure from gun lobby.

Imagine one student being allowed to have a gun on campus that day. Do you think the casualty rate would have been 32? Why were'nt any of those poor students allowed to protect themselves? MA..MA??? LOL ya theres never any gun violence in MA :roll:
What we need are fewer laws and litigation against law abiding citizens trying to protect themselves..there will always be crazy people and lets face it the police cant be everywhere all the time.

 

[BenedictGomez]

My state (MA) has similar laws in place and I’m glad for it. It is however a real tragedy that very few states do have these common sense laws on the books. States that do not, as already witnessed at V. Tech in 2007 are more prone to tragic outcomes. I really doubt that Seung-Hiu Cho (V. tech shooter on 2007) would have been able to get a gun permit here in MA.

SHC absolutely would have his gun in MA. Remember the mentally ill guy in Wakefield, MA a few years ago that killed his office workers? Legal gun.

The law is on the books, but many states (including Mass) do a poor job entering them into the Federal database. Sometimes it's a privacy issue, as some states wont report medical issues such as mental illness. Also, the mental illness lobby is solidly against preventing the mentally ill from owning a gun, and considers it a rights issue. Also, the public position of the NRA is that the mentally ill shouldnt be able to have a firearm.

Law abiding people will always have access to guns and self protection, despite the gun lobby’s propaganda.

Tell that to the millions of people in nations that have had that "access" taken away in the last 50 years.

A local sheriff, just like in CT has to approve a gun permit just to buy the weapon

I didnt know CT was that strict, but it saddens me that there are Americans that approve of the above, that believe that one man (literally) is all it takes to stand between another man from the ability to possess a weapon with which to defend his family.

You fill out one form and go through the instant NICS check. Gun is yours. Granted, concealed permit is a different story, even in VA, but just buying a gun, no problem. Easy as milk at 7-11.

Do you know where else it's easy to buy a gun like that? Vermont (and Alaska).

And in Vermont, you dont even need a "concealed permit" to carry. Last I heard, there arent 1000 shootings in Vermont per week. So your analysis that Virginia's laws help "cause" the shootings is flawed. The guns arent the problem, the individual human being (as has been stated by others in this thread) is the problem.

As for CCW, this varies across the nation, but in Manhattan, where I live, only criminals are "allowed" to carry a firearm. The incredibly strict gun control laws of New York City, sure as hell arent preventing the numerous shootings EVERY WEEK in New York City, just like the unstrict gun control laws in Vermont, Alaska, and Virginia arent causing numerous shooting every week.

I have huge issues with illegal guns and the ease with which these find their way into hands of people who really should not have them. And for that we have NRA to thank for.

What role did the NRA play with Eric Holder's illegal guns in Mexico?

I'm just stating facts. Based on your remark, I judge you to be rather uninformed on the issue. The facts are out there. Just open your mind a bit.

Yeah, and the facts are that there are infinitetesimily few shooting like this balanced against the large number of American gun owners.

 

[BenedictGomez]

Would Cho be able to kill 32 people and would some 24 others if he did not have two semi automatic hand guns and high capacity clips. The obvious answer is no.

First, it's not a "clip", it's a magazine, anyone remotely familiar with weapons knows the difference and wouldnt make this mistake.

Secondly, Cho didnt even have "high capacity" magazines in the VT shooting, so you're in error on that right off the bat.

Not to mention, magazine capacity is probably the dumbest of all gun control laws. People that dont understand guns think it makes a huge difference in these instances whether the pistol has a 10 round magazine versus a 30 round high-cap. The fact is, it takes less than 2 seconds (literally) to change out a magazine, and mags are very small, very lightweight, and very easy to carry.

There is absolutely no difference between a shooter with one 30 round mag and another with three 10 round mags. I'd rather a deranged shooter have two (**GASP**) 30 round "high-capacity" mags, than a shooter with seven 10 round mags. LOL.


Lastly, yes, even if Cho didnt have "two semi-automatic handguns" (again, I'm not sure you know what this means given the way you're strongly emphasizing it), he could have easily killed 32 people (or more). Rather simple if he had two 7-shot revolvers with a pocket full of speedloaders that cost a whopping.....wait for it...... wait for it...... $8 each. Especially given the fact nobody else had a gun with which to stop him.

These "dead-end crazy" shooters only stop when either:

A) Someone kills crazy person
B) Crazy person kills himself