http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/6561335.stm
New is sketchy on this so far but television is reporting that the death toll is now up to 31!
Jim

I think that is an unappropiate title. I think that ALL thoughts and prayers should be for the victims and their families and not on how the fallout may effect anyone else.

This is a firearms forum and this will certainly be a firearms issue. No one here want's to see anyone harmed with a firearm and I for one have a great deal of sympathy for the families who lost members due to this insane violence.
However; You can bet your last dollar in assuming that as I type this the antis are discussing the best ways to capitalize on this horrific incident. My understanding is that these shootings were committed with two handguns from the sketchy information available at this time. Even If that's the case don't assume your shotguns will be safe from all types of restrictive legislative proposals.
Jim

It is a sad statement of the times that on every gun board everyone is asking "what does this mean to me and my guns?" It seems a lot more plausible to wonder what we can do to help - which may not be much at this point, but better to worry about the families, the other students and members of VTU than to worry about the next 2nd ammendment battle.

Brent

The sad statement of the times is the regular drumbeat of mass murders.

Thanks Brent, well spoken and seconded.

Why shouldn't I worry about the future hunting, shooting and collecting - I'm just a bystander in this all.
Btw, this is the second school shooting, that the cameras showed the police to be tree-huggers. If you know what I mean?

Everyone cares, for god's sake. As we care for killing of even more innocents every day In Baghdad or our own men and women in action: Canada lost eight soldiers in Afghanistan last week. Lowell is right. Why shouldn't we also be thinking of repercussions. The killing of 17 Montreal women engineering students gave Canada its long-gun registry. And in a later shooting in a Montreal high school, there were no police tree-huggers, no waiting to secure the premises. They learned from the previous massacre and went right in, pistols blazing.

All of us care, Brent. The truth is we can't do a darn thing about it. Do you think the antigun crowd is sitting around worrying about the families, praying and wondering what they can do to help? Of course they aren't! They're planning what new do-nothing gun control laws they can stump for, in the wake of this sad event. The real truth is that bad or crazy people do bad things and will continue to do so. The other real truth is that every time a major tragedy occurs, the anti's want to pass another law to restrict ownership by people who are not the problem in the first place. Get ready for more of it.

Jim, sadly you're so right.

Some of them, Yes.

All of them, No. But of course some will paint us with the same broad brush that we use to paint them. The brush paints indiscriminantly, on both sides.

It is sad to me that there can be no dialog, no discussion. So, some anti-gunners are probably rubbing their hands in anticipation, but hardly all of them. Let us simply try to do best by the victims and the survivors and set our battles aside for a moment. For certainly and sadly, we will fight those battles later.

Brent

I hope there is no guilt, because we hunt, shoot and collect.
The NRA Annual Meeting showed me a wide cross-section of those who do the above things. They're everyday people.
A horrid thing happened, but I'm not going to be held for ransom for every crazy thing that happens.

This is a sad day for thousands of people. The thirty killed and others wounded all had family, friends and other students who will be affected by this for a very long if not lifetime. The impact will be large and the loss equally as large. My family joins all here in wishing those left behind every comfort in this time of need. God Bless.

Jim Legg,
Probably less likely for this to happen in Utah. You are probably aware that the Utah Supreme Court recently published a decision striking down a rule at the University of Utah which made it illegal to carry guns on campas. Anyone can openly carry guns on college campuses in Utah. I doubt the guy could get through 32 folks there.
Jake

Brent,

Understand I mean no disrespect to you but we can not sit on our hands as the anti-gunners won't. There are already a number of 'polls' up on the websites of major news organizations asking if this shooting should be grounds for more gun control. The anti's have already started their next campaign. We can not wait for dialog or discussion. The only discussion the anti's want is WHEN we will have to give up our guns.

Example of such a 'poll'. Scroll down a bit and look for the link in the middle of the blue text box.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3045574&page=1

Jake,

That lawsuit was brought by the A.G. of Utah because the President of the U of U refused to listen to his bosses, the Utah Legislature. Said 'rule' was no more than an edict from the Presidents Office. It is a sad day when the A.G. has to bring suit to make a state employee obey state law.

FWIW - The President of the U of U looked the other way when CCW classes were taught on campus in rented classrooms. Hypocricy knows no bounds, even in Utah.

In the midst of copying the link the 'poll' I posted above it has been changed. Now it only shows percentages. A few minutes ago it showed actual votes. This may be temporary, I don't know.

Apparently they did not like the results of the first 'poll' so they have put up another.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/popup?id=3046251

It has come to my attention that it is possible for a hotlink on a site to lead back to pro-gun sites such as this one. So by posting the direct link they can/will know that it being posted on a gun owners site but I know no other way to post if for you folks to vote.

CNN already has started the stories about how we need more gun control. Just sickening.

Gentlemen,
First may I send my condolences to Everyone who as lost someone through violence with a firearm and that includes our serving soldier families.
Civilian firearm violence in the community (not including crime thugs)is invariably perpetrated by someone who as become unhinged.
Thirty years ago I lost my Uncle,Aunt, two cousins and two innocent Gas station attendants to an unhinged neighbor who should never have been allowed a firearms certificate,Michael Ryan (Hungerford) and Thomas Hamilton(Dunblane)were known to the licencing authorities to be ' unbalanced'.
The Authorities need to be staffed and run by Trained people familiar with the use, handling and purpose of smallarms.An applicants health needs to be known to the licencing authority.
Before I hear your cries of outrage about my proposed invasion of privacy listen to this.
If you are a law abiding fit and proper person to bear arms you will have nothing to fear from legislation.
Promote shooting as a recreational, enjoyable pastime, and get into schools and educate the kids, they are our future.

The problem is the people writing the laws are neither law-abiding, fit or proper. They are intolerant of anyone who does not agree with them and refuse to obey any law or constitution which might stop them from destroying the freedoms of others.

They are the people pushed through the Virginia Legislature the law banning legal licensed carriage of guns on college campuses and wrote the school regulations taking away the God-given right of self defence. This insures that the only opposition to criminals are the pitiful "campus cops".

If you define insanity as continuing to do something, time and again, after it's been proven not to work they are as crazy as that VA tech shooter.

This is so sad that when something like this takes place some groups want to go after the tool that was used. But when planes are hijacked(9/11), trucks are rented(OK.City)or mail is used (Unibomber) to use as tools of distruction, no one says a word about taking planes, trucks away or stopping the mail. Everyone rightfully wants to go after the criminal.

Brent's response is compassionate. However, each one of us is a participant the instant we are aware of a situation, private or public. We are not observers. Citizenship, commonsense and responsibilities require a response according to our abilities. As a fraternity under siege, with widely varying opinions, we know the tragedy will precipitate calls for stronger legislation and, more immediately, better emergency response than the feeble and craven action by university and police. Discussion of pro-con challenges here to the Second Amendment is entirely appropriate under the circumstances. Not to thrash and trash, of course, but as something more positive than hand-wringing i.e. salopian and Lowell.

salopian,

I have a passion for target shooting and plinking with pistols and semi automatic rifles. Could you arrange something like that for me the next time I visit your area?

It is illegal in the U.S.A. for someone with mental problems to purchase a gun. The problems arise from sharing that information (medical privacy laws) and for people that are undiagnosed. I do no want government bureaucrat making those kind of 'diagnosis'.

Here is what the Austrailian PM or whatever he is called has to say: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18149774/

I think it is terrible that at this time of mourning an ass wipe like this guy can blame our "gun culture" on this senseless act. I am sure his subjects are real happy their government took their guns and made them "safer" but much less free.

What really chills me is that a whole lot of people were forced to crouch under a desk and just wait to be shot. Did I hear that some lined up to be shot? Unbelievable.

Why are schools a great target for mad man like this chinese guy (what about the chinese "gun culture")? Maybe it is because they are "gun Free" zones.

I cant say for sure what I would have done in this situation. But one resolute man (or woman) with a gun may have been able to stop this killer at some point.

"Gun Culture": Who came up with that stupid term? I'm sorry for the rant but there are a lot of things that could be at fault for this act but our "gun culture" is not ome of them.

Mike, one size does not fit all when it comes to shooting or anything else for that matter. What our fraternity does in one part of the world may not be what society as a whole has chosen in another country i.e. United Kingdom and Canada. With acceptance by the shooting fraternity as reasonable. It should not have escaped notice that the heavy lifting in Afghanistan is borne by the Anglo-Saxons. We're brothers under the skin. Regards, King

My correspondent, Steve F., wrote regarding the mass school killing in Virginia: " I still have to wonder if the moron would even have considered taking his chosen course of action, if he realized the strong possibility that he would be facing return fire"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I replied:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Indeed. The more "shoot me freely" zones that are legislated by well meaning busybodies, the more our burgeoning mass-culture sociopaths will gravitate to them. We haven't even seen the surface but scratched, so far as mass "hands on" killing.

Whether it's "Instant Jihadi" as in the Mall shootings, or a crazed significant other who decides that killing everyone in sight is a feel-good operation, or the intentional and well planned massacre of an entire social unit of citizens -- the lowest common denominator will be that the intended victims are helpless and unarmed.

Otherwise, the ginks wouldn't even bother. Why chance getting killed before one can get all the thrills of the kill properly rolling? Instead of screaming and running and twitching bodies as a rewarding environment, the mass killer's last view would be the floor rushing up to meet him, beyond which is the black tunnel to oblivion or hell. Hell, preferably.

The way I see it, we have passed the tipping point of the cultural restraints with which us graybeard Boomers were raised. Ironically, we had a significant role of destruction and demise of such restraints. All for a good cause, yes? No? Instant gratification, pop culture music, violent video games, and indeed, the whole entertainment industry that developed to serve our spending power, have run us all right on into a living "Clockwork Orange". Good ol' 'ultra-violence' is the word, now.

In fact, in poor ol' England, while they are currently more disarmed than Soviet citizens in the latter days of the Evil Empire, the violence is at an all time high -- from youthful and remorseless young thugs. For fun and profit, nothing beats a good group mugging of victims unable to fight back. Besides, fighting back is illegal in Britain. However, even the pacifist Brit newspapers are complaining about the police inability to control the fun. Such enforcement of behavior by uniforms is far too little and too late, when the matrix itself has been run asunder.

T. S. Elliot's beast, slouching into our new century, has found that the center indeed, will not hold. As well, that morally collapsed rubble is a now a darkness, in which it can nest and spawn. In our search for personal freedom, we have abdicated the very responsibilities that enable a civil society to continue. Included in that abdication is a rejection of personal physical courage, of placing oneself in the front line of active defense against the terrorists: criminal or political.

Listen to the huge media outcry that this savage butchery will produce. Will ONE of the talking heads question why not ONE civilian adult on that campus was properly armed as the laws of Virginia allow? Nor will they ask why not ONE person was willing to "go to the sound of the guns" and stop the shooting. Ask yourself why that is? Because answering the call to arms, is what being a citizen in a community has always meant. YOU go to where the trouble is happening, and with your fellow citizens, YOU help make it stop -- even if some of you die in the effort to remove that threat.

That philosophy, that we as citizens are responsible for each other "in extremis" and under mortal danger, has been destroyed by the university intellectuals, the artistic media class, the entertainers, the talking head dispensers of wisdom, the religious civil pacifists, and politicians afraid of their own people. Therefore the scumbags, crazoids, jihadis, the bloodthirsty, the mass murderers, and other life-taking thrill seekers of the world understand perfectly well where to operate, and against whom to operate.

I have little faith that any politician or television blabbermouth will stand up and say, "It is your obligation under the historical meaning and covenant of the Second amendment, to have in your possession the means of personal and community defense, and to step forward so armed and so ready to lay down your life should that be needful, in the defense of said community."

One well placed shot from a simple .22 rifle, or a .22 target pistol, or even a flint-tipped arrow from a plain stick bow would have settled that killer's hash. All those things were commonly found in the possession of a student of the 1950s or early 60's at a college. Heck, they are still found in rural America's educational institutions, tho Federally not legal. Those kids go hunting after school, y'know? And, BTW, school shootings not only weren't done, I doubt that the idea ever entered anyone's mind.

Well, the heck with the whole mess. Whatever my support of the right and means to morally justified self-defense, there is every good chance that the 'Aunties' will eventually have us in all in 'jamies with feet, in a cute little yellow duck print. The public lies and deceptions and blames and evasions of responsibility will continue, until we live in some horrid sci-fi future where, as predicted long ago, the Morlocks will at last feast upon our enlightened descendants.

Yeah, like the Morlocks aren't here already, hunh?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For a better understanding of what has taken place, why, and why the guns will be blamed, everyone should read "The Seven Myths of Gun Control" by Richard Poe.

King,

I understand your point. My reply was a tongue in cheek attempt to show what legislation can get you when it comes to gun control.

Respectfully,

John, you make your point. It's the balance that disturbs me. Watching PBS last night of the split-second decision-making of an American soldier in Baghdad describing his responsibility to protect and kill while being fired upon was hair-raising. He was ready to blast one group and held his fire realizing it may be gawkers (it was) and then nearly held off too long when a RPG poked into view.

I agree entirely with your view of civic responsibility but that's not the world we live in. Thirty-odd people in a tenement watched and heard Kitty Genovese being murdered and said nothing. An university administration and faculty had a killer on campus and did the wrong thing. The police society delegated to keep civil order to replace vigilantes appeared timid of return fire.

This is not to denigrate police officers as much as to question their professionalism, their training for these circumstances. Nor do I express an opinion here on what another society, state or neighbourhood chooses concerning gun laws. I do have reservations about the killer acting differently if he thought he would face return fire or that vigilantes are the answer.

I think of that decent responsible American soldier in Iraq, consummately trained to protect and kill, who lived but could have as easily died doing the right thing, as it so fortuituosly turned out. A very brave man. They are in short supply. Canada does not approve of vigilante action or armed citizenry because on balance it's better to delegate killing to professionals trained to accept the responsibility.

Warm regards, King

King,

I find the use of the word vigilante to be extremely offensive. A vigilante is one who, after the fact, takes the execution of the law into their own hands. The word fails miserably to express the responsibility of citizens to take their own defense seriously. People will always die in this type of situation while waiting for police protection. The police cannot be outside of every door, nor do we want them to be. However, our society has trained those who are about to come unhinged that they will be unopposed in whatever they chose to do. I used to produce training materials for a large, national fast food chain. The store employees were taught to cooperate with an armed intruder. One store crew was herded into the walk-in cooler and all shot. No one resisted. They waited for their turn for the single bullet to the head. In Kansas, several years ago two guys who were accidently released from prison early, terrorized a group of twenty something friends for several hours before taking them to a soccor field and shooting each one execution style. No one resisted. They waited on their knees, naked in the snow for the single bullet to the head. One woman survived.

In my college dormitory more than half of the students were armed to the teeth with rifles, shotguns and handguns. There were no restrictions on posession of guns or ammo, in fack the schools had fields where we could hunt. One of the reasons we have crazy people wanting to shoot others is that they sense the fear that society has for guns which makes guns and their use powerful. Often the mental defective is a person who feels powerless. What better way to get power than have and use a gun?
Our problem is that we have created a fearfull society which is afraid to let its children play out-of-doors, touch anything dangerous,or even to be free to roam its neighborhoods. It is a bad situation and I don't know what to do about it except vote for the people who are not spreading fear, Turn off the stupid TV and read sensible newspapers. David

David Hamilton - Did you go to Hampden-Sydney?

David, because the word is extremely offensive to you does not make my use of it offensive. A self-organized group for maintenance of order in an imperfectly organized community could be comprised of vigilantes, according to OED. Other societies may not "take their own self defense seriously" in the way you do and choose differently. I disagree with you on what makes a more civil society, as many Americans do, but I do not find your opinion offensive. We've shared this board for five years. I do not contribute anything to be offensive. It's not the Canadian way. We're dull and polite.

King:
Perhaps it due to your location and the laws there but people with concealed carry permits here are certainly not viewed as vigilantes either by the public in general or the legal system in particular. One of the fundamental differences between us,law abiding citizens who choose to be armed and those who don't is the preception as to whether you have a basic right to defend yourself and members of your family. The right has been abbrogated apparentely in Countries such as great Britian where I'm told that personal assault cases have been skyrocketing.
A vigilante is someone who takes the law into their own hands in this Country. The law here to varying degrees depending on where you live affirms your right to defend yourself which hardly makes you a vigilante.
Jim

David, where do you find a sensible newspaper?

I'm going to "dump" mine with the exception of Polizei-Selbstlade-Pistole. I can afford to take 98% loss on value of that one. There is little future for handgun ownership in USA.
I like you folks, so part of the proceeds will go toward life membership in the NRA.
PS. Thornmaster, I would not worry about: SxS, O/U, bolt guns they're here to stay.

Jim, your words are as close to a consensus as we're likely to get on this issue on an international board. It's as hard for Americans and Canadians to understand each other on gun control as Canadians understanding what happened to our tough and individualistic colonial brothers in the wide expanses of Australia. We're different people and widely different throughout our own countries. As in all human affairs, one size doesn't fit all.

King,

You do not offend me and I am happy to share this board and to express differing opinions with you. However, you used the word vigilante in an offensive manner and then did not address any of the meat of my post regarding what precipitates acts of violence such as this one. While I respect your right to disagree with me, not all of your countrymen would defend your position. I know fine, law-abiding Canadians who still believe that gun rights and self-defence are important foundations of a polite society.

Best regards,
David

Gentlemen,

While I am certain the gun control issue will come up, the real issue lying underneath is MENTAL HEALTH. America (and pretty much everyone else in an open society) doesn't really have a pro-active approach to treating (i.e. jailing or pre-emptive confining/treating)people showing signs of violent behavior. Yes, people can ask for treatment, but even on Sunday there was a TV program about a guy that either went off his meds or his meds became ineffective, and whacked 5 people in New Mexico.

Guns are merely the scapegoat once again, but I think the issue of a pro-active mental health solution is needed in our time. I feel we must advocate some sort of solution before someone solves the problem for us by taking our guns away.

This is way off topic, I realize, but if someone "goes off the deep end" again, I'm sure they'll try to get a gun to do it.

Mike Doerner

I've read enough of this that I have to get a couple of things off my chest. First, all the media criticisms I've heard are directed toward the Police, the school (who is the school?), and guns. All three of these culprits are collective bodies. The way I understand the shooting is that at least one individual is responsible. Not once have I heard any blame placed on him. The police were more physically isolated from these shootings than a lot of individuals, yet those individuals who may have been able to stop the perpetrator made no apparent effort to do so. So, how are the police at fault? All the blame has been placed on collective villans and no individuals. That is what our country is slipping into. No individual responsibility - blame is always placed on a collective group so no one individual is responsible. That way no one is guilty and we can all feel good about ourselves. And in response to a comment made above regarding making wrong decisions in critical life or death situations, if you've never made a wrong decision in your life, you've never made a right one either. Life is what it is. When a decision is needed, honest and moral people make the best decisions they can under the circumstances. The results of avoiding a decision because it might be wrong can be a bigger disaster than a wrong decision. Now, I'm going to move on with my life with a good attitude and a smile on my face!

Exactly. And, Thanks.
Brent

The anti gunners come out every time somthing like this happens, I always wonder what would have happened if someone that legally carried a handgun was there to stop it before it got this bad.. I carry, I wonder how many on this board do as well..

The culprit is the easy availability of handguns and ammo for them. They don't exaclty check if certain dude missed his last shot of fluphenazine decanoate,..... I would support psychological screeing prior to handgun purchase.

Well jagermeister, I see on the Gun Control Vote thread you suggest we simply sell our guns to avoid future problems. Now, you're blaming easy access to guns and ammunition as the culprit instead of the shooter who was by the way recognized as "unbalanced" by his fellow students and teachers a year ago...but nothing was done to get him counseling. Finally, you propose that we give up our Civil Rights and submit to psycholological screening by the state to boot! Do you also think the 2nd Amendment should be overturned?

Mike, the evidence isn't circumstantial on mental health, the dismal record of these tragedies supports it. Your point isn't off-topic, either.

NOT ALL guns. I just sense that large inventory of CERTAIN GUNS might prove to be a bad investment in the future.

Jagermeister,
Everyone probably wishes it could be that easy, but it's not. In my police state they took away the right (years ago) to own a fully automatic weapon even with a Class III license. We have a Firearm Owner's Identification requirement to purchase, transport or possess a gun of any type. And the Brady Bunch with their waiting period is also in effect. Now our big city mayor has banned handguns, clips that hold more 10 rounds for pistols, and even shotguns that hold more than 5 rounds.
Better to support the NRA and take the stance that once one gun type is banned, the next step is to ban them all.
The Police can't help us. They only show up after the tragedy has already happened and you're dead. Far better to simply arm everyone so the next "whacko" can be stopped immediately with extreme prejudice.

Did the police move in, or did they just mop-up?
Can't stop murder from behind the trees eh!

I carry as well. Either a Colt Govt. .380 or a Colt 1911, .45. Mostly the .380 as the 1911 is a bit hard to conceal. I was schooled, tested, certified, and licensed in FL which is state sanctioned, not by county as it is here in PA. I was told by the sherriff here that I should keep my FL CWP as long as they will renew it. Florida is recognised by almost every state. It is my understanding that VA has the most lax laws for purchase, and no waiting period. However until this nut walked on campus he had broken no laws and purchased his weapons legally. I heard that the serial numbers were obliterated though and I can't figure out why he would have done that. The guns would have had to have a serial number to be sold so he had to be the one who scratched them out.

On another tack, I was at a gun show last weekend and the "black guns" were flying out the door. I'm no prude, but I see no use for weapons like that in the public sector. People are scrambling to buy them so they get grandfathered in when they get banned again, this recent incident should ice that one.

Wasn't there a school shooting a few years ago in Germany or is my recollection bad? If that's true it should show the fallacy inherent in the idea that more control can prevent this kind of thing. Germany and most other European countries have the most restrictive gun regulations in the world.

Dubble be careful not to fall into the Zumbo trap with your "Black guns" arguments. There may be many legitamate sporting uses for those rifles and pistols.

Of the info I just read, it makes it clear this guy was a nut. His writing class described his writing as sick and gruesome. He also lit a dorm fire recently. If he had used fire and not guns- it could have been a whole lot worse.

Could you name a few for me? Not trying to be an a$$ but I realy would like to know.

Service rifle matches.

Prairie dog hunting.

Small game hunting.

With one in the appropriate caliber (.458 SOCOM), big game hunting. A friend of friend harvested a wild boar with one just a few weeks ago.

Target shooting.

Plinking.

Is that enough?

Dubbletrubble,
Are you yanking us or are you sincerely pulling a "Zumbo"? If you wanted a fight, you've certainly started one now.
There is a time and a place for the black guns.
Varmints
Targets
Service matches
Plinking
Small Game
Home defense
and so on.

As far as the anti's are concerned, the black rifles are just a first step. You're sidelocks are just a little further down their list. If we're not united, we're divided and all gun owners will suffer the consequences of that.

BTW - The Second Amendment to the Constitution is not about hunting or sporting purposes.

33 people dead is the worst mass killing so far. But think about it. It could be a lot worse! Think about the people that have done these things and look at their firearms experience. This man purchased his 9mm about 5 weeks ago and I'll assume that that was his first gun purchase and experience in his life with firearms. If someone with no experience can do this think what someone with experience could do. How about a special forces guy or a navy seal flipping out. Someone who shoots handguns alot and is good. A man that is a decent shot and shoots competative high power or someone from THIS board who is good with his shotgun. The death toll could be MUCH higher under the correct circumstances. Thankfully most people and probablly more so with gun owners are level headed and responsable. Us that hunt have killed and have seen death up close. This probably gives that person a deeper respect for human life and prevents such mindless actions. The abillity is there,not the desire.
I can say this to the guys on this board. Those of you who think that the second amendment is negotiable and are willing to compromise their rights away must realize that the greatest mass murders in the history of the human race have come from the hands of governments. All of these mass murders are preceded by arms control measures. Cambodia and the pol pot government comes to mind with MILLIONS dead. The Nazi government with MILLIONS dead. Our government with the Branch Dividiens in Waco. Don't tell me it can't happen here,it already has. And there are many more as outlined in a book writen by Arron Zeldman from the Jews for Preservation of Firearm Ownership(JPFO). Our founding fathers wrote into the Bill of Rights the Second Amendment so that this could not happen here. There are always those that must have ALL the power. They reside in our own government today and they especially reside in the United Nations. They want ALL your guns and all the power. The Purdey and the AK47 will go into the melting pot together if they have their way. The Second Amendment probably protects assault type guns more so than our doubles because they are the arms of the Malitia. Is that why they are so hell bent on taking them? I think I would rather take my chances with the nuts, They don't scare me as much as the governments do.

Dubble,
It is a sore point with many to seperate guns by appearances. In the last 15 years I have seen some strange deer rifles in the field. The were similar to AK's and the Russian or Chinese military rifles. Some had been sporterized to a degree and the calibers were suitable for deer. I chatted with the hunters but never discussed there choice of rifles. I did catch their drift that they were securing provisions and weren't concerned with much else. I have my own preferences but that's for another time.
Best,
Ron

Ok points made, and I am NOT trying to start a fight, but could you not do all those activities with another choice of gun? Am I really that old fashioned for a 56 year old?
Should I really be preparing for armageddon?

Well said, Tanky! Ask the guys from Duke University who they are afraid of. Look how long it took to work that out. Never got a call from the IRS, but the state of Insanity (oops, I mean NJ) has an auditor who got me for $800. He needed to look good for his promotion and my accountant said pay it because it is cheaper than fighting it. I ain't stupid (at least I hope I am not) and paid it.

Look at our governor in the hospital. He is so powerful that he had his trooper driver doing 91 MPH (that is what the little black box under the seat in just about all our new cars said) in a 65 MPH zone with lights flashing on the official government SUV and he was not wearing a seatbelt. If you did that, they would probably take you down to the station and keep you there for a while.

Double,
You hit the nail on the head "choice", that is the key which we have to safe guard. I'm 60 and like pretty wood and rust blued metal but that is my choice. The Second Ammendment gives us the right to make a choice and I hope that it does not change. We as shooters and hunters once divided by our preferences will soon have few choices to make. This will be when someone else decides for you and I what our choice will be. I doubt that is the path we want to travel.
Best,
Ron

Dubbletrubble,
You certainly could, but isn't that the beauty of the whole thing? My safe has sidelocks, black rifles, elephant guns, revolvers, 1911's and all sorts of shotguns. They all do somethings well and other things not so well. The AR's are accurate, easy to shoot, and good for every critter from prarie dogs to coyotes. My M1A is a match grade rifle that rivals the accuracy of many bolt guns, if I do my part. The SKS in 7.62X39 has been called the updated version of the 30-30(or something close to my paraphrase). To characterize a weapon as good or bad is pretty subjective, don't you think? In my mind, a "bad gun" is one that doesn't work or shoot where it's pointed.
No one has mentioned Armagedden except you. But since you have and if it does come as a battle between "good and evil", do you want your single-shot falling block, or my belt-fed something?
And yes, you and I are both probably self-rightous enough to assume that we'll be on the "good" side in that battle.

Dubbletrubble,

I have a "Black Rifle". In fact I'm getting rid of one and building a new one for coyote hunting. I carried one for 14 years in the service and I'm more comfortable with it than with any other gun. And I can shoot it pretty well. Yeah, there are the Rambo wannabe types out there, but as with any firearm the vast majority are owned and used by regular people who use them in a responsible manner. AR's aren't pretty in the same way that a double is, but if you have an appreciation for a finely machined piece of iron (and aluminum) that will put holes in things at 500 meters with no recoil then you understand what AR owners see in their guns. I think the collectors of German guns understand the AR better than the collectors of Brit guns. Form follows function The new 6.8mm SOCOM round is pretty interesting. It's like one of the new short magnums in .270 only it's not really a magnum. Probably a decent hunting round though.

Interestingly the past firearms bans have been largely based on appearance. No banana clips. No thumbhole stocks, That sort of thing. Nothing to do with actual functionality. The sad thing is that if the antis do get new laws passed they will have very little to do with reality, and would have done nothing to stop the Va Tech lunatic. Crazy bad people do crazy bad things.

Oh and by the way.......you shouldn't make jokes. Armageddon really is just around the corner.......................

Best

Nick

I have a ruger mini 14 and comes in handy when coyotes come sneaking around..I am sure my dogs appreciate it, not to mention the deer that populate my yard (no I do not shoot them)

Gentleman,

The anti-gun crowd will be forming soon enough. I know that we all feel the same on this issue. What I don't understand, is why the powers that be are not asking why people are turning into psycho killers. Why they feel that the only solution to their problems, real or imagined is to shoot up their school or work place?

I have read and heard that this was partially over a girl. What gets into their heads? That is the question.

Don't blame guns. Blame the person. But then, we have to start to take a serious look at these:

The media, with their 24/7 up to the minute saturation of these tragedies.

Violent video games, where when you die, you just hit the reset button and start over. There is even one out now called "Super Columbine Massacre RPG".

Disgusting rap music and videos which glorify thug life, hatred of police, degradation of women, and gun violence.

Hollywood, which glorifies all of the above.

Instead of raising kids, and teaching them right and wrong, medicate them and blame it on some deficit disorder.

We have become a country insensitive to violence. 150 killed in Iraq? No problem, just change the channel to "Antiques Roadshow".

Sorry for the vent, but this is just another tragic incident, and even worse, probably not the last. We really need to look at what I mentioned before they pass yet another useless gun control law that will only pertain to law abiding citizens, and do nothing to stop these events from happening again.

Tell your kids and grandkids that you love them.

Kind regards,

In reply to a discussion on doublegunshop.com regarding those scarey lookin' guns; RE: the massacre in Virginia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My dear DblTrbl,

The Russian Kalishnikov system is prolly the most reliable firearm in the world. It's looks and military heritage notwithstanding, it is a superb invention that may be adapted to many tasks and calibers. The USA's AR15/M16 action is now used in the finest long range varmint rifles, and can shoot considerably less than sub-half inch groups --- results that competitive benchrest shooters of a decade ago would have paid any money to obtain.

Technology is not static. We don't hunt with Sixteenth Century wheel locks, unless we choose to build them and use them. Nor do we stop to think that a Winchester lever action rifle gave a revolutionary and shocking amount of firepower in it's day. However, the Russian soldiers that frontally stormed the .44-40 Winchester-shooting Turks in some 19th Century set-to, were horrified by their causalities in the face of fast firing repeaters.

Note that the shooting casualties of the War to End all Wars, other than machine guns and artillery, were primarily inflicted with bolt action rifles -- which are the basis for the same well-esteemed custom sporters lining any good gun cabinet.

From the WWTwice era, there are pretty much descended the commercial semi-autos of today sold by the Remingtons, Brownings, Berettas and the rest. The 'functional' argument against MILspec "looking" guns is a stalking horse, at the least.

I have promised myself to dip lightly into BBS's and to skim the least amount with which I may stay informed of my hobbies. BBS's are time-eaters and little is accomplished by engaging in such discussions as this, or "what wood finish would God use?"

However, it's obvious that nearly all casual sportsman and a good many enthusiasts have no, or little, understanding of the world-wide and well-funded antigun movement. There is virtually no planetary opposition it, no money, no staff, no cohesive monitoring of its progress within the European Union's bureaucratic structure, and no reporting to the sportsmen of world of the over 4000 international delegates to the annual conference on civilian disarmament. George Soros and his money has contributed to and fully funds a good deal of this activity, BTW

Nothing which has grabbed the sportsmen's attention severely, where it hurts, is published or being done effectively. Yes, the NRA has trickled this into it's general approach, and the NRA is good at fighting the Aunties. But, we need to WIN this political battle and we are NOT winning. It is an industrial and commercial battle that 95% of the world sees only in profitable terms, in which case the civilian weapon industry is a drop in the bucket -- in return for lucrative mass money trading concessions.

Hardly any government in the world sees the right to self defense and the ownership of civilian arms as being of any merit, period. Let alone, recognizing it as an inalienable right. In short, our Senate and House are mere footnotes in this business. We can place pressure on them, but even that will be at the arbitrary chance of political fortune. As will, incidentally, the Supreme Court ruling on the Second, when that finally does happen.

Now, about those un-aesthetic guns that look scary and cause repugnance among the well-washed. I would advise, that if you have an interest in continued ownership of that lovely blue steel and walnut and case colors in your gun safe -- that you research, most assiduously, the core goals of the antigun orgs. Don't want to? Fine. You do? Fine, too.

Want to take my word for it, because I did my own research? OK: plan on owning no guns at all, just as soon the very well thought out and incremental plans of the gun abolishers come to full fruition. And they will come to pass: there are layers of alternate routes, info and dis-info, and networking with the media to produce a 'shock' word of the month to continue the horror-the horror.

There is all sorts of fundraising, there are large UN funds for the orgs, there are allies such as the absolute genius that runs the Humane Society of America and has PETA under its wing, there's the liaison with the whole spectrum of 'special rights' descended from the Lefty-Marxo popular fronts, and finally a whole buncha scared non-hunting, non-gunowning suburbanites.

Not to speak of a 300 page United Nations paper recently produced by one of Soro's front groups which concluded that "There is no basic right to self-defense." This issue has nada to do with hunting, period. It's just that hunters will be peripherally affected, in that a new hobby will be in their future.

So...when a person decides that 'some' guns are bad, be aware that you are thinking exactly what the Aunties wish you to think. It's called a wedge issue, and it's very effective. I know hunters in my State -- Ohio -- that were appalled when CCW was approved. "Why, why would a person want to do that?" one fellow asked me at an outdoors show, where i was manning a petition table. "Well", I told him,, "so the next time I'm in a store that's being held up, I have a choice about laying down on the floor while hoping that the poor misunderstood felon doesn't blow my brains out, or I can just say "No".

John Meeker, a mere 62 years old,
at the West End of Lake Erie,
Make mine Tens, Chessies and waterfowl, please.

PS: My friend, King, thanks for your kind commentary. I understand the difference in cultures between CANADA and the USA, but believe that we are allies on the cause of human decency and the neccesity for a civil society.

And no Morlocks
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

These are just squables within our own shooting sports - when our backs are against the wall - we'll stick together - I'm sure of it!

OK, Zumbo Jr.....

Edit: Seeing your reply below, I'll retract my statement above. It certainly seems like you have an open mind and are willing to listen.

Well this has been a very interesting thread. I can say that I have learned a lot, as I always do here. Ron said it best, it IS about choice. I don't want to see any of us lose our guns ...whatever they be, as we all see them differently and have our own purposes for them. It's true "give them an inch...." and I don't want that. Your right "they " see my old doubles with the same eye as an assault weapon.

That being said, I see all of your points and respect them, this has been enlightening and I thank you. Keep in mind that in the first part of my statement I said I carry every day, another thing I would hate to lose. As another said "crazy bad people will do crazy bad things" and they will always find the means to that end. Gun control or not.

John, it sure is lonely being a gunner. My nephew and I are the only hunters in my immediate and extended family. We were all gunners when I was young. I'm seen as a curmudgeonly throwback in my community, a man with a gun and a black dog. No one is put out by my killing as far as I can tell. I suppose they reckon that the last will soon be gone. There isn't another soul with a gun within five miles of my home, not one on our road. An old man's musing should not be taken seriously but I believe it started with Walt Disney's Dumbo and Bambi and adorable skunks.

King, I just went to the NRA Annual Meetings in my hometown of St. Louis. I think it was the largest yet, the ranks were filled with both young and old. It was, a good sight!

Ouch!! That hurt.

Ok I'll just go back downstairs and do some rust blueing now. Let me know when I can come back upstairs.

Yeah, I posted it before I saw your well thought out reply.

Consider it withdrawn.

No harm done.

Very true, very true.

Well...as long as I am here....

King, you have hit dead on. The Auntie movement has its modern roots in the 19th century, around 1840. However the German [Austrian?] author of Bambi was militantly anti-hunting, and his illustrated book was an international best seller between WW1 and WW2.

Disney wonderfully adapted the story to antimation, and the rest is the history which you cite. Walt set out on that project with an anti-hunting agenda, which the company keeps to this day.

Most interestly, in a recent conversation with tw, of this board, he did a survey in his workplace some years ago, to find out how many folks still had rural roots. That is, relatives or close people who still earned a l;iving from the land. Out of 173, exactly two people could claim that remaining tie.

He said when he spoke of cooking rabbits or hunting doves, both good ol' country traditions, that the employees looked at him like a man with two heads. Between the vastly changed cultural matrix, the unprecendented moulding of it by entertainment propaganda, and the desire of the prosperous classes for their own continued comfort and security against the un-prosperous classes, then that the world which we once knew and valued for its goodness is a fading shade.

The new electronic world will be as different as a two-horse farm wagon is from an eight-wheeled tractor. The same land [sorta], but a new civilization: for better or for worse. As a fellow named Wonko the Sane usta say around here: "I'm glad I'm old, so I won't have to live to watch all that buxxshixx." :~`)

Forget Bambi you can still see the anti-hunting stuff in todays cartoon features like "Open Season". Although I live in a city where the males are feminized my son is male and all male. He loves to play guns, wrestle, and compete. As long as he's my son I'll encourage him to do those activities in a sportsmanlike manner.

I have no need for a para-military firearm now but I may need one in the near future so I'm going to buy one this week in anticipation of the idiotic response to the madman's criminal killing spree. Additionally, I'm going to obtain a concealed carry permit in order if I ever encounter such a demon at the mall I can dispatch him before he hurts others.

Gentlemen,

My position on this subject has, for the most part, already been expressed by many here. I am responding to be counted among those who have expressed dismay at the notion that the "gun culture" had anything of consequence to do with this tragedy. First- I would point out that the perpetrator, I believe, only owned his guns for two months and if when he was suspected of mental problems by his professors had been properly examined, may never have been able to buy them. Second- the anti gun culture was definately involved here! They made the serious decision to mandate the campus be gun free and then failed in the implied promise to protect those on campus. It is my firm opinion that once this decision was made the college administration and campus police became directly liable for the deaths of the innocent students and faculty by their halfway measures. What they did compares to tying the hands and feet of some one trusting you and then taking them for a ride in a boat with one big structural flaw. I am furious of the lack of action taken by the police in this matter! To commit these unarmed people to this environment then stand outside waiting for the gunshots to abate is criminal! The very idea that those who promised to protect these students did not even enter the building until this crazy man had done his worst, is to me a betrayal simular to a parent abusing a child! And then for some to blame it on a "gun culture" to evade their own complicity in this event is shameful. I use as support for my position the surviving victims on the Virgina Tech campus, young men and women the very age of our troops in Middle East. Our soldiers are rushing through doorways into darkened rooms in attempts to save lives and bring peace, while here at home we tell them "you don't need to worry we will protect you"- then stand out under the trees and wait. This is the standard that we are to live by? They will tell us that the problem they have protecting us is what goes on outside the campus boundry, the city limit, or the state line. Does anyone really believe that once the anti gun culture has its way we will be inside and safe? Did you get or anthrax vaccine yet? Your lawmakers did.

Kurt

Even if he had been found to be mentally unstable he would still have been able to buy those guns by saying NO to certain question in the paperwork. That's
The only guy on this board who could have made a difference would be KYJon using this trusty AH Fox.

I might be wrong, but if he had been legally determined to be mentally unstable it would have shown up during the instant background check.

Is this the state of police training today? I would have thought that some immediate action would be SOP. Sad if it is the state of the art.

These star wars looking police would be better off writing-up leash law violations.
The cellphone video showed a lot of huddling, all the while shots were ringing out.
Dressed to kill, and waiting for coffee?

The police have no obligation to protect you. The only obligation they have is to arrest the person that killed you and make sure your body gets hauled away. The Idea that police are hired to protect the population is another big lie.

Only if he'd been adjudged mentally incompetent by a court and committed to a mental institution.
And it is MUCH harder to do that today than 30 years ago, before advocates of rights for the mentally handicapped wrecked the mental health institutions of the USA, loosing a flood of "street people" or "homeless" on us. They were, supposedly, to have their needs met by community mental health centers which either were not funded or which they were too crazy to use.
Thirty years ago Cho's deranged, violent writings may have been enough for a competency hearing in Virginia. Not today.

Since I cannot express myself as fully or as elegently as I should I would like to offer some of the following thoughts by few interesting individuals.

“Though defensive violence will always be a ’sad necessity’ in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men.” - St. Augustine

“Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.” - John F. Kennedy

“If householders were required by law to own and know how to use revolvers, burglary would cease. It is an act of good citizenship to make crime dangerous — an encouragement of crime to remain defenseless.” - 1904 Iver Johnson advertisement

“The right to life means nothing without the right to possess the means to protect and defend one’s own life.” - James Mullen

“If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun.” - Dalai Lama, Tibet

“The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.” - Albert Einstein

“The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” - H.L. Mencken

"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity.” - Sigmund Freud, General Introduction to Psychoanalysis (Hear That Rosie????)

“The said Constitution be never construed …to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” - Samuel Adams

“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms…disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.” - Thomas Jefferson

“Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.” - Plato

“He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.” - Jesus, Luke 22:36

I think I will now go to my closet and sell some jeans.

Gentlemen,

I was called in to substitute teach at a local college prep school at the last minute yesterday morning. Apparently, someone sent a threatening email to faculty, students and administrators the previous evening, with reference to the shootings at VA Tech. I only found out about it during the course of the day after hearing bits of information pass between a few people and following up with questions, because I missed the morning assembly where the issue was presented by the head of school. There were several rent-a-cops present around campus and classes were held as usual. Was I thinking about my cache of long arms being taken away or wishing I was carrying myself? No. I focused on the task at hand and was grateful that it was an uneventful day. All of my kids and I got to go home.

While I strongly support our 2nd amendment rights, neither taking all of our guns away nor arming citizens to the teeth will prevent these kinds of events from occurring. That is not to say that I am simply resigned to accepting them, rather that is much more than a "gun or no gun" issue. And, as several of you have noted, these events are not peculiar to the U.S.

While you continue your discussion and debate, I urge each of you to consider the fellow students, faculty, administrators and police, including the rent-a-cops on that campus and every campus worldwide. If you are so inclined, you might say a prayer and hope that they have many more uneventful days.


skatr2

Some try to help. There was off duty NYS Highway Patrolman trying to stop armed robbery at a supermarket. He got shot to death with a .410 by another armed wacko. Someone mentioned Germany (I think the shooting happened in Scotland), I looked at figures from different countries adjusting for population differences and looking at number of serious gun incidients. It boils down to large number and easy availability of firearms. That's the difference, if you choose to have an open mind and adjust for variables.

I have a son at Va. Tech, he lived in the dorm in question and majored in engineering and had classes in the building in question. My wife is Tech Alumni. We talked about this a lot.

Per my son,

His opinion is that neither greater gun control nor more relaxed carry laws would have made a difference. Both sides of the arguement need to back away from this. It's not about guns it's about a psychopath. It's not about college security it could happen anywhere.

Regarding gun control, it's already easier to get a gun illegally than legally in many places. More laws wont help.

And regarding relaxed carry laws, we have already proven that we cannot insure that guns stay out of the wrong hands so why would we make it easier for potentially bad people from carrying in public? Even a professor carrying on campus increases the liklihood that an upset or angry student might make a grab for a gun and start a confrontation that instead of being ugly becomes deadly. Arming a couple thousand professors to prepare for a once in a billion possibility is illogical. This bad guy flew below the radar, why make it easier for a bunch more guys with the potential for violence to carry or grab a gun off a non LEO academic type?

Personally I know a lot of gun hobbyists that that I don't want carrying in public, and none of them have felony convictions or diagnosed mental problems. Having them own guns and keep them in thier homes, or cased on the way to and from the range or for hunting is fine. Letting them carry concealed is asking for trouble.

So nothing about this tragedy helps either side. It's a wash. No gun owner should try to spin it to their advantage as it only polarizes the issue and helps the antis paint gun owners as rabid and unreasonable.

I'm done,

Jeff

I'm done, too, Jeff, and thanks. Nova Scotians attend Virginia Tech. One of its faculty phoned to say all our kids were safe, not knowing that his wife, Dr. Jocelyn Novak, had been killed. Both graduated from teachers' college here and taught at Nova Scotia Agricultural College, he a brilliant teacher and researcher and his wife a passionate and dedicated French teacher. We may be separated by wide expanses but none is alone.

I believe you are wrong, there is no method that I know of for reporting this in a manner that NICS can use.

I for one see the horrible failures in our mental health-care system on regular basis. As a defense attorney and prosecutor I've come to the conclusion that MUCH of the drug abuse in our rural county is related to self-medication. I've dealt many times with people suffering from major depression, bi-polar disorder, and schizophrenia. I believe that most of them abused street drugs and alcohol in order to deal with their symptoms...one of the more disturbing was the schizophrenic that told me he drank because it quieted the voices.

Generally I believe that there are no gun laws that can or should be enacted at this point to make us safer, with the caveat that any person committed voluntarily or involuntarily for mental health issues is not (apparently) reported on NICS.

The gun grabbers will be yelling for our guns following this. We need to be the ones that the public views as having common sense and a reasonable approach to these issues. We need to make this a fight of logic, and not of emotion.

Todd

I heard on the Michael Savage program yesterday that this is not, in fact, the worst mass killing. His story was that in 1928, a school board member set dynamite charges over a period of weeks, in the school where he had some alleged grievance. Blew it all up, killing 45(including himself) and injured another 54. Michael Savage is conservatisms own raving lunatic, of course, and I have not way to verify this story. The important point is that in every case, the lunatic killer has shown signs of being a lunatic for some time and the signs were ignored by family and friends. Nobody just goes nuts and does these terrible things just because there was a sale on dynamite or handguns, etc.
We are unfortunately not completely safe anywhere, no matter how restrictive the country's laws are.
I also heard on the Glen Beck show that more kids are killed yearly in football(high school and college) than are killed in these awful shootings. Doesn't make this any less tragic, just some gives it some perspective. God bless their families and friends.

Jeff,
Your words are even being emulated by our politicians as we type. No one wants to use this event for their agenda. It will change as time passes. Years ago I remember reading an piece about 2 or three wemon held in a house by some armed nut. They managed to call police. The police sent a squad car to the house and didn't see anything out of the norm and drove away. Later after the event the ladies filed a court case directed at the lack of respose by the police. Eventually the higher courts found the police had fulfilled their responsibilities. The police have an obligation to protect society not the individual. This was the final finding and it pointed out to me what many don't seem to understand even today.
Best,
Ron

The only viable defense seems not to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Pray hard as this works for everything.
PS. I never eat at "fast food joints" becuase I don't want to eat .... and then die, that would truly suck!

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

Jim, Here ya go! The media is being very careful with their words. The VT tragedy is the largest school "SHOOTING" in our country's history. While the body count in the Bath Township massacre was far larger, the deaths were caused by explosives that were set over a period of months, not gun related. The media, particulary the liberal media, will only want to sensationalize the gun aspect.

Lowell et al
I apologize for my tirades, I have been having a rough time lately.
If I may be welcomed into the fold again, I agree, squabbles within, but we need to stand united. I believe it was Ben Franklin who said " Gentlemen, We must all hang together, or we
will all hang separately". If I am wrong in the quote, or in the caps, I aologize.
Mike B.

Your physician may know that you are as crazy as a bed bug and not be able to report it because of HIPAA privacy rules. Probably doesn't apply if he thinks you are a menace and a danger to society but that's a tough call and he may be betting his licsense to practice on it. Health care privacy and the NICS check are in direct contradiction in many cases.

EDIT: Well.....this is incredible. The guy was apparently ruled mentally ill by a court. This should have showed up on the NICS check. Wonder what the problem is and why it hasn't been corrected. If we are going to submit to a check , it should actually mean something. See link.

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

I think Bob B. is correct. However, the nut also probably lied on the 4473 form he filled out to buy the gun(s). There is at least one question about your mental competence. I'm sure Sarah Brady and Clinton will prosecute the dead violator of all the laws already in place, not to mention multiple murders, already slighty illegal.

This sort of thing is going to happen again, and it seems to me that we need to accept that it is inevitable that everytime that it does, that there will be discussions about what kind of gun laws might reduce this kind of violence. Rather than denegrating those who do not understand gun ownership and taking extreme positions like advocating that teachers and students carry weapons, we should engage in the debate in a rational manner. Do you really think it is a good idea for guns to be carried to a fraternity party, or a college basketball game? It is just plain stupid to state that most people who advocate stricter gun laws are using this just for political gain. It is just possible that most of these people are just as sincere in their beliefs as we are in ours. In my opinion, we do ourselves more harm by being afraid of these discussions, and by assuming that any sort of restriction on gun buying or the types of weapons which are restricted will automatically lead to eventual gun confiscation. I think that we all realize that gun resrictions will not prevent many murders, but it is reasonable to explore the possibility that some laws could reduce some types of violence. For instance, how many people really need 12 rounds in a clip? Could a law limiting the capacity of guns reduce the fatalities and give people a chance to get away or fight back? Would national laws be better than a patchwork of state laws? Would a waiting period for handguns in Virginia have made a difference? I don't know the answer, but we are fools if we automatically suspect the motives of everybody who asks these questions.

Springer,
Grab a helmit and flack vest. You know what is coming.
Best,
Ron

Springer,
I was with you on the part about guns in frat parties and basketball games and even allowed that there are people that just want reduced violence. But, when you start down the path of 'do we really need 12 rounds' you end up at one round eventually. Besides, I recall practicing for IPSC shooting years ago and getting so quick (2-3 secs) with a reload that 7 round mags were enough to make me comfy. I never did buy a 14-15 round gun...ever. Soon as this becomes obvious to anti's, removeable mags would be next.

If these people want to focus on a real hazard to their safety, they should put their efforts into automobile safety. Aproximately 42,000 people die each year on our highways. That's 115 a day. Those that lost loved ones are no less tramatized as a those that loose loved ones to gun violence.

The issue most of us have is not with those that ask whether or not these controls will work, but with those that demand that they be implemented because THEY say they WILL work.

It's a tough problem and obviously there has not been a solution that addresses all issues.

Springer- And anyone else who thinks it's possible to deal rationally with the anti-gun crowd:

Their goals are simple:
The first goal is containment thru legislation to limit firearms availability. The second goal is registration so anyone owning firearms is readly identifiable in a national database. The third goal is confiscation and the ultimate elimination of private firearms ownership.
This is being funded by wealthy ultraliberal leftists like George Soros who is the financing behind the United Nations small arms reduction ploy.
Jim

Welcome to the board MikeB.!!!!
All the best

It always makes me smile when foreign leaders speak out about America and just returning from a trip to Germany it always makes me think that people have no clue what America stands for or is about. Yet as JFK said we are the only country in the world that has to build walls NOT to keep people in but to keep people out!!
How F'n great is that!!!
All the best

Ozpa/Todd,

I am taking your last comments as though they were directed to me and to them I reply: look again at the news coverage displaying hundreds of armed police officers huddle behind car doors and trees as the students and faculty are murdered. Then ask the question, were any of them taking fire? Then asks your self, if my son or daughter was inside that building, what emotions should arise? Had you been there, what would have been your instincts even if you were unarmed? I stand by what I have said. Those who would disarm us use the fear emotion(of law abiding gun owners) to justify themselves. We are certainly more justified in our fear of insane criminals, complacent politicians and timid police officials.

They are adept at ignoring us now, but just wait till they get a chance to treat the otherwise law abiding as criminals because we own guns. Then you bet they'll spring into action!

Kurt

Mike B. good man!

http://www.bradycampaign.org/blog/

This might be a good place to have your voice heard, there are always several blogs going on and one now by Mrs. Brady, yes, you can post there. If nothing else some interesting points of view. The people who would like to remove all firearms most likely don’t read this site, the people who give money to the anti-gun cause read places such as bradycampaign.

Springer

When you are the only person at a gun fight what difference does it make if your clip hold ten, 12, 15 of 30? This shooting event took place over several minutes, not 60 seconds. Had he walked in with ten extended clips and shot 300 bullets in a minutes time, killing this many then your shorter clips might make sense. As it was he was the only one there with a gun and took his time. A sick person who did an unspeakable crime.

Most of us here are not camo clad weekend warriors with a big clip complex. But the sad fact that the only type of gun regulation that would have stopped him after he started shooting people would have been a legal concealed weapon by another student, teacher or police officer which is forbidden on campus and the regulation I am talking about would have been a small group in a vital area on him.

Springer,

Virginia has a one handgun a month law. It obviously did not work because he waited until he had two.

A waiting or "cooling off" period obviously did not work, because we all know that he didn't "cool off".

As for banning or restricting the capacity of magazines, they tried that with the now expired "Semi-automatic assault weapon" ban under Clinton. That did not work. People just bought and stocked up on grandfathered "pre-ban" magazines.

What would it have mattered if he had one or two 15 round magazines, or seven or eight 10 round magazines?

We, as a country, have to figure out a way to keep guns out of the hands of psycho's like this guy. The story is not guns, they were the tools that he committed this tragedy with. The story is WHY he was allowed to stay enrolled at Virginia Tech, and WHY he was allowed to live in the dorms, and WHY he was even allowed out in public with the DOCUMENTED problems that he had.

You need to understand that the anti-gun crowd does not want more restrictions, they want NO firearms, period.

Kind regards,

You'll not hear a peep from the left on how the school and police dropped the ball at VT. A well regulated, gun-less gov't run welfare state is what they're after.
...and some of your income for those who sleep-in a little durning the workweek.

Yeah, I got an earful lastnite from a friend. He bought a piece of property 7 yrs ago for $75k cash, and sold it last yr for $225k. When taxes were paid, he cleared $63k. Now that's supporting your local late sleepers! Needless to say, he's looking for a more creative tax man.

What has puzzled me is how that many people, in a room with one gunman would not make any attempt to rush the guy. Yes, one or more may have been seriously injured or killed, but they would have at least been able to stop this guy sooner and possibly have saved lives. Just think of what may have happened if those on Flight 93 remained seated instead of acting with great bravery.

I know it runs afoul of H.I.P.P.A. So what, HIPPA is just a "law". It is not a constitutional ammendment. In fact, until a few short years ago we got along just fine (actually better, IMO) without it. Write an exception to HIPPA and leave the guns alone.

Todd

No, they weren't really directed at you. I meant no offense and agreed with you with the only difference of opinion being on the medical reporting to NICS.

I've actually been through some of the training given to the police on how to conduct a raid in the event of a school shooting situation. I'd guess that the proper procedure (this is a guess) is for those officers who first arrived to put together an entry team, perhaps 2 teams. The remaining officers would be maintaining the perimeter, ensuring nobody else went in, and anyone exiting would be accounted for, either as a victim or as the shooter.

I can't fully imagine what my emotions would be if my son were in there. I doubt anyone could. If I were in there I hope that I'd have the courage to do the most good possible, whether that was by attacking the shooter or assisting others in escape, as did the Holocaust survivor.

Todd

You'll have to rethink your tactics.
Getting to the shooter is the only thing that counts.
God, I hope I never have to depend on these guys.
They're all show, and no go!

Exactly what i was thinking..I dont know about you guys, but I always at least have a clip knife on me, I would rather die trying then waiting for the end.. The folks of flight 93 tried, yes they perished, but how many did they save.?

Were all such real men here, monday morning quarterbacking a tragedy and what we'd do....give me a break.

Given the fact that complete surprise and over whelming firepower works on the battle field, imagine the effect on kids in a morning language class.

And, under the circumstances even curious comments about what happened in the rooms comes out as criticism, which is completely inappropriate at this point.

Cut them all some slack and put a sock in it.

Jeff, that sums it up nicely. Thanks for cutting through the BS.

Brent

Oh, how I wish I was better with words but here goes anyway. These were children. They may have been in the 20's with some a little older. The older teachers died tring to save others. They did what they could do. The young have no experience to draw from to help them make bold sacrifices. Society doesn't teach children that to die for another is noble. No one in the academic community was prpared for such an evil deed. Those on Flight 93 only raised up when they realized that two other planes had crashed into buildings. They were not children and even they had to learn from two other events. I'm sure every one has learned something from this tragic event. Let us hope it is enough to see each us through the next tragic event.
Ron