VA tech shootings
 

This is a very dark day and a time to take stock of our country.
How can anyone in good conscience approve of guns. Hunting for food is one thing. Hunting for sport or to kill is not acceptable to me.
Parents need to know what their children are doing and question if they as parents, have instilled the right values.

Cigale, check out the lounge, there are several posts since this morning. Just be prepared, some get very political about gun control.

Who cares if it is acceptable to you.

It is acceptable to millions of Americans who in good conscience believe in the 2nd amendment and enjoy hunting as a sport.

Yes it is truly tragic what happened today but hunting has nothing to do with it.

Get off your soapbox.

I don't give a bean :) I'm not on a soapbox but acknoledging a terrible thing that has happened.
And I AM entitled to my opinion. and thanks for yours, Frank :)

Thanks Faina. I thought most would be more respectful here but F &B is a second name and a coward not to post under their usual one.

when you say that a person who has a gun and enjoys hunting does not have a "good conscience"...that is a soapbox and very offensive.

You did not just acknowledge that a terrible thing happened. You made a very deliberate point to say that anybody who hunts is not moral and you implied that they are somewhat on par with that sick person at VT.

Shame on you.

The second amendment refers to "a well-regulated militia" not the ability of every idiot or lunatic with several hundred dollars to buy an assault rifle - or worse - with no checks or controls.

The number of perople kiiled by guns in this country - either purposefully or accidentally is a national scandal.

And I don;t buy that "guns don't kill people, people kill people". It would be practically impossible to kill more than 30 people and injure more than 20 more with a knife, a bludgeon or even with a car.

We have changed the constitution in the past when conditions in the modern world made it obsolete, and I think it's long past time that the second amendment be revised to reflect current reality.

And I think whoever sold that gun to the perpetrator should have to stand trial for 30 counts of murder.

And - if people feel they need to use guns for hunting then appropriate hunting rifles could be sold, with licenses, to responsible adults who are not unbalanced - as is done in much of europe.

As for hand guns - no one but the police need them.

Yes - this is a very dark day. And unfortunately we can't just mourn those lost and pray for their families. Every time anything like this happens, there is a debate about gun ownership.

I got involved in the debate over in the lounge, but you know what? I am sick of the whole damned thing.

I am not a fan of guns; but since the criminals always seem to find a way to get them, what do we do to defend ourselves if someone breaks into our home with a weapon? I don't have a gun. This is just a rhetorical question.

orangetravelcat, guns kept in a house for protection are usually the ones found by children who wind up shooting themselves or someone else. Not to mention the fact that that gun can just as easily be turned on the homeowner as be used for protection.

Sometimes I feel the world has gone beserk and I just want to curl up under my comforter. This is one of those days.

I hear you, orangetravelcat!

cigarettes kill more people than guns. Let's get back to the smoking ban issue....

I'm not a hunter, nor do I own a gun. But the old saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people" is really very true.
It takes a sick person to do what happened today. But if he didn't have access to a gun, who can say that his anger and sickness wouldn't have manifested itself in another way? Maybe he would have poisoned the water system killing thousands instead? Or created a bomb that would have been infinitely more devastating. The gun was NOT the problem.

I don't see what the above comment has to do with the violent murder of people trying to improve themselves by studying in school?

Cigalechanta I agree with you 100%. What is happening to this country is downright scary and it has been for a very long time.

That's incorrect. Guns give people a weapon to kill many in minutes. It is a tool for mass murder. Would 32 people be dead with from a lunatic with a knife? I am so tired of hearing that tired false old line. There is no reason for any civilian to own a semi automatic rifle.

I'm leaving now but making bombs is also illegal, owning a semi is not which is disgusting.

Personally, I favor stricter gun limits and more education for those that want to own them, much stiffer penalties for those who are not responsible, and so forth...

This argument goes both ways, however.

On one side: Ban all guns. This guy would not have had one and this would not have happened.

On the other side: If you gave every student on that campus a gun, I assure you this guy would have been stopped long before the 32nd victim fell.

I sit in the middle. It is absurdly unrealistic to think banning guns will keep something like this from happening. It will only drive up the price of guns and be a business boom for the black market. We do not have enough limits now, however. Restrictions and penalties are far too lenient. Education and training is not always mandated. These are all steps that will help.

32 people were killed.

That's a national tragedy.

Shandy,

I have to think. You are probably correct that if every student on campus had a gun, the guy would have been stopped well before he killed 32 people.

However, how many others would have been killed by accident?

What a problem!!!!

I can see the issue from both sides and had a brief but good chat with a colleague in the UK about it today. It will definitely bring a conversation about gun control to the forefront.

"The second amendment refers to "a well-regulated militia" not the ability of every idiot or lunatic with several hundred dollars to buy an assault rifle - or worse - with no checks or controls."

Actually all males age 17 to 45 are in the militia, plus all women who are in the organized militia: per TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 311 of the US Code. There are two classes of militia: 1. The organized militia (National Guard and Naval Militia) and 2. the unorganized militia--all those not in 1.

The intent of the 2nd amendment is precisely that all able bodied men (at that time, men only) can own weapons and be proficient (well-regulated, like the regular army) at using them. This is not only to be able to oppose foreign invasion and internal insurrections, but to be able to oppose the national government if it becomes oppressive. The writings of the time that discuss and debate the amendment make this very clear.

The current debate shouldn't be on the meaning of the second amendment, as only the most intellectually dishonest debater (though dishonest in what they think is a good cause--banning guns for everyone except criminals) will deny the clear intent of the amendment.

The current debate should be whether or not the harm done by legal gun purchasers is greater than the harm that would be done by taking away the right of legal gun purchasers to buy guns--through a Constitutional amendment to negate the second amendment.

Show your support Friday and wear Orange & Maroon.

http://www.vt.edu/

A national movement started by the alumni of Va Tech.

I guess we need to ban fertilizer too since we know the right combination can be much more deadly as in the Oklahoma City bombing...

I think what we really need to do is stop stigmatizing mental illness and make care more mainstream.

I hate to jump into a political thread, because no amount of heated discussion can undo what's been done. However, I agree with the few posters who said that guns alone weren't the real issue. I don't own a gun and I don't support gun ownership -- but I don't think there's an easy solution. There are a million ways to align this tragedy to one's political beliefs about gun control, mental illness, immigration, violence on television, and so on. But there's no single factor to blame. It's a historically unprecedented tragedy. Any energy spent arguing about why it happened would be better spent comforting the affected families and helping students in every school feel safe again.

So... Ban guns cause someone used it to kill people?
Ban cars, more people die by those than by guns.
Ban knives, people cut/hurt/die by them.

Want me to go on?
The gun only provided the means.
The boy pulled the trigger.

Come on Kingbuff, handguns are used for one reason, to KILL PEOPLE!! How many drive by stabbings have you read about? Hmm. Also, using cars in your argument is inane. Please don't use the old story that we already have so many laws for guns now. Well, each law that have been able to be enacted has been so watered down and piecemeal that we are still have different laws in each state and states like Virginia are a big source for supplying more strict states. The NRA has blood on their hands...over and over. This time we mourn for the victims at VT, tomorrow it will be someplace else (maybe even on your own street!)

"Any energy spent arguing about why it happened would be better spent comforting the affected families and helping students in every school feel safe again."

I certainly agree that we need to comfort the families. But the only way we're going to make students in every school feel safe is to try to prevent this from happening again. And we can't do that without debate and changing our approach to guns, mental illness etc.

To clarify, CAPH, I never said we should rethink the way our country handles mental illness. I meant that I worry about people latching onto details like his depression or his nationality and judging other people based on that. There was obviously a perfect storm of factors going on here, along with pure sociopathy.

This was my point: How can we seriously expect to stop violence when people are so quick to attack each other's political beliefs on a <i>travel</i> board?

Just want to put in my 2 cents...
I hate guns and I hate hunting..and I'm allowed to have that opinion

Read your history and ask the victims of the Holocaust!
Oh, some now agree the shooter was insane?
M

mrsd, I absolutely agree that it's your right to have an opinion that is different than mine.

What I was upset with was the OP's statement that if you own a gun or enjoy hunting then you do not have a &quot;good conscience&quot;.

Well, I don't know about a &quot;good&quot; conscience, but you must not have much of one to kill animals...
And that's not to imply that you are a bad person..my brother hunts and he's the greatest person you'll ever meet.
JMO!!!

huh?

that is nice. Way to class up this conservation by saying that anybody that kills an animal is without a conscience.

If you read what I wrote Killing for food is one thing but for sport it's something else. I did not start this thread to be argumentive, so I hope the editors will remove this whole thread.
But I stand by that guns are bad when our laws are not adequate and that's MHO.

I didn't say you were without one...read again.
I just don't know how anyone can look at those beautiful creatures and kill them, that's all.
Anyway- This is about to get out of hand. I apologize if I offended you, not my intetnion. Just wanted to give my 2 cents.

You absolutely meant to be argumentative.

&quot;How can anyone in good conscience approve of guns.&quot;

I own a gun. You are saying that I don't have a good conscience...whatever that means by the way.

If that is not argumentative then I need to learn a new language.

whatever mrsd