I would like to start this topic to get all Members Opinions and Thoughts on these Shocking Murders.
I myself think it could not be avoided because of two Factors, Random and Surprise.
The Law Enforcement Agencies can't be everywhere,at any given moment.IMHO.
This is one of the reports we are getting here in Sydney.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/stor...5001021,00.html

Which is precisely the reason for citizens to be armed and trained to defend themselves when faced with such a situation. With gun ownership comes responsibility, responsibility for the weapon and its power, as well as responsibility to use that power when necessary. Someone should have dropped him! How many could have been spared agony? I can't imagine the heartache of the students and all the parents.

I am sure this sounds cavalier, but I will say it anyways: Come surprise me with a random shot in my direction, see what happens to you.

Everyday there is a battle, and often good and evil are clearly delineated. The more we restrain the hands of the good, the more evil wins out. Evil doesn't care for the rules, or feelings of its victims. But those that do are being made more and more impotent every day, because some person can't come to grips with the fact that often evil must be destroyed. I have no desire to kill another human being, nor would I rush to do it. But you better believe, if someone brings that $&*! to my doorstep, I will deal with them.

And I deal in lead.

No, this could not have been prevented. I agree DSTM, it was too random. But it could have been mitigated! After the first two killings, someone kills the assailant in the dorm, done! Or as he was marching across the campus. 30 more people died than had to. But we are afraid of death, of dealing and receiving.

Apparently, you didn't get the memo -

we are all required to use "20/20 hindsight" at all times and conduct ourselves accordingly.

Base all of your decisions on what you will learn in the future, not on what you know now.

Geez.

Well, based on some of the facts coming out, he could very well have been expelled from the school for some of the things he wrote, said, did.

Its impossible to say at this point that the situation could have been avoided. The issue now is the family's that are suffering as a result. We live in a growingly Godless society, and the "love of many" is "growing cold." May be time to dig out the "lesson book" and start teaching people the value of human life.

In the words of Martin Luther King Jr., "you can murder a murderer, but you can't murder murder." I agree. Reacting to violence with violence will only create more of the same.

Could this tragedy have been averted? The fact is, we don't know. "It is as impossible to predict the past that did not happen as it is to predict the future." Aslan to Lucy in Prince Caspian in the Chronicles of Narnia by C.S. Lewis.

Perhaps a radio announcement could have reduced the death toll, and then again perhaps not. Would the perpetrator have gone elsewhere and done even more heinous acts? Possibly. We really cannot know what was in the man's mind that contributed to his actions. All we can do is to act with strong love, mercy, and compassion toward everyone no matter who they are or where they are from.

Orange Blossom

There really is no true 'safety' in our world - but then again, there wasn't hundreds of years ago either.

And sadly, I suspect when police interview the hundreds of survivors they will discover that rather than the typical, "but he was such a nice, quiet neighbour". etc, they may find a lot of students and even teachers saying, "it doesn't surprise me" when commenting on this particular student.

This is NOT to place blame on anyone except the crazy that did the killing, but our society seems so complacent in many ways. IF one can believe the local news, they say this student showed severe signs of disturbed behaviour earlier - in fact, stalked female students and his writings in creative writing class caused concern with not just one but several teachers.

What ever happened to explusion from school when the teachers first became so concerned? Granted, apparently he was asked to 'receive counselling' - but would it have been so 'society unacceptable' to expell him or anyone else that causes teachers this much concern about his 'stability' with his not being able to reutrn until he'd received help? Being expelled and forced to receive counselling not have changed anything - we'll never know. But sadly, many 'silently walking killers' have been treated with compassion and understanding and love - and all this still has no bearing on the final act. So very difficult to comprehend. Huge, huge sad sigh.

I do know that, right or wrong, I am glad he killed himself for I'm afraid I would have little mercy towards him.

But my heart weeps not just for all the victims but for his parents and all those that loved him - their lives are surely destroyed as well.

It might have been avoided but how many kids are like him and become productive members of society. This kid wasnt exactly a sleeper I mean he had 2 interactions with campus police, a restraining order, and a stay in a mental institution but no one ever thought hed go off the deep end like this.

I think the police were way too slow in reacting to the first 2 murders. During the 2 hour wait between the first 2 murders and the next 30, the police should have locked down the campus, instead of interviewing some people and getting nowhere. The first 2 murders could not have been avoided, but the next 30 could definately have been toned down. Loser points for the police .

The police followed standard procedure for what was being recognized as a singular event. Events dictate changes in policy, and this event will undoubtabley change procedures for future violent crimes of campus.

Agree with what your saying,'Solaris32',regarding lockdown.Given that the gunman hadn't been caught,a lock down would be in order,I would have thought.
What I can't believe,given the time to shoot so many people and not one had an adrenalin rush to overpower this madman,which may have reduced the death toll.The Gunman would have had to reload,I would think.Was everyone more concerned in saving their own Butt than trying to save their Classmates.
Different people react to the same circumstance in different ways,in my opinion.
It's clear to me that no one even had a clue what was about to happen.This Surprise and Random attack,caught everyone off guard,so you can't really Lay the blame in one area.To me it was a combination.

Would a background Medical check on all Pupils, pick up Mental Health Problems,and thus reduce the chance of this ever happening? I wonder.It should be implemented immediately if it isn't already.
And if this was adopted as part of the entry criteria,the Gunman would never have been enrolled,I would think.Maybe the Tech College was more interested in the almighty Dollar,instead of student safety.
You will never stop these types of attacks,but more has to be done to at least reduce the chances of it happening in the future.

These people were too busy trying to save their own lives by finding what ever cover they could. You need to remember that this guy had to hand guns, so if he was diligent he could always have one loaded.

The legal problems with your idea of blocking enrollment would be incredible, I shudder just thinking of what the ACLU would do. I entertained a similar thought for a couple of minutes before the list of reasons why it would never work became too large to even consider it. My thought was to make it harder for people like this shooter to get their hands on firearms and ammunition. Psychologist and Psychiatrist are required to report certain types of patient information to law enforcement, I would like to see them required to report patients who demonstrate the potential of violent acts. I would like to see legislation passed so that patients with this kind of documentation would not be able to purchase firearms or ammunition, and this information would show up in the background check.

I think find your statement about the Va. Tech being more interested in the money baseless and offensive. I get the feeling that you are just throwing out crap just to see if it will stick.

That's a great idea! Now, with one stroke of the pen a psychologist can eliminate someone's Second Amendment Rights, if they deem them pre-disposed to violence.

First I would like to say that many I have met in the shrink profession are in need of serious mental evaluation themselves. But hey, let's give them the authority to blackball someone because they display violent tendencies. Some of these people are so self-righteous and fed by their own bull$&!%, they couldn't find their butt with a handful of fish hooks.

Secondly, I don't think of myself as a violent person really. However, I enjoy practicing Martial Arts. I lift weights to be stronger, and I enjoy good-natured physical confrontation, as well as a challenge. Also, if anyone ever injured or killed a member of my family or close friend (in a way to cause severe torment in their lives) I would kill them. No question. Does this predispose me to violent acts? Should I be banned? (I have been shooting guns since I was 5 [no lie], and have never shot at a person or desired to).

Finally, now every person running your background for criminal history has access to your mental health? What an invasion of privacy. Maybe someone went through a bad patch and comitted themselves for a month to clear their head and get some help. Should that be publicly accessible knowledge in order for them to legally purchase a gun?

This sort of system would only strengthen and embolden the black market for guns.

And unless the guy had three arms, he would have had to take time to reload at some point. And dropping a mag and putting in a fresh one while bullets are coming at you is no easy task I am sure.

bg04

dc3, I don't mean for my response to belittle you as a person or to flame you. I am just tired of control, and how everyone runs to more oversight when something goes wrong. Yet, these things still happen, even with oversight. Only 3-4 months ago Virginia ruled that no concealed carry was allowed on campuses, and now we have a school shooting. So we only know control, and its not working. What about empowering people for once?

Sorry if my rant came across as offensive to you as an individual. That is not its intention.

Sincerely,
bg04

If some of those people would have had a gun and shot the idiot then yes 29 less people could have died.

If there would have been sufficient security it could have been stopped.

If the college had put the news out earlier then yes some less would have died.

Apparently you suffer from ionlyreadwhatiwanttosee, because if you had read the firs part of that you would have found my statement about it not being feasible much less the mention of the ACLU. This is just about as possible as some of the other suggestion that I've seen recently about banning firearms. My point is that there are no easy solutions to this problem, and it has been around since 1966 when this nation had it's first on campus massacre.

Obviously you have some anger issues yourself so I would guess that you're speaking from experience when you collectively rank the "shink profession" as needing evaluation.

Apparently Cho didn't need that third arm as he did exchange several magazines while in the process of killing thirty people. If this guy hadn't been as angry as he was he might have just walked into a classroom with a bomb strapped to his chest and blown everyone away.

bg04, no offense taken. This is a discussion, and when someone doesn't agree with what is said it's their right to express their feelings, it works both ways.

One of the problems that I see is that they imposed rules that they couldn't enforce. This was compounded by the state having some of the most relaxed standards for a background checks and no waiting period for purchasing a firearm. People are coming as far away as New York to purchase firearms there.

This thread is closed temporarily while Moderation is being discussed.

After Moderator's consult, we have reopened this thread.

May I direct all participants in this forum to the following cautions and guidlines.



Personal attacks will not be tolerated!

Please keep the "you" out of one's replies.

It's the subject that is to be discussed, not the individuals involved in the discussion.
Opinions are just that - opinions.

Well I guess i should pass but here we go.

What history teaches us is a person that has no regard for their own life can accomplish many horrible things. Recently would be the IED in Iraq, the Palestinian suicide bombers, and a little further back Japanese kamikazes in World War II.
The police or campus authorities could have announced the murders over the internet, TV, and radio. Even over the, now popular, Amber Alert System almost every state has established. The simple fact is without knowing what he was going to do or who he was going to do it to would not have made a difference.
The analogy's of a Hijacked plane.
A person hijacks a plane a states if everyone cooperates no one will get hurt. In this example the hijacker claims he just wants to fly to Cuba.
Once in the air he locks the cockpit door and kills the pilot. Next thing you have is a plane flown into a building.
Now the same thing happens but the passengers have been warned, the hijacker is on a suicide mission. The passengers can make a difference, as we know, but the people on the ground can have little or no affect on the out come of the situation.
In the VT incident what would people have said if the murder would have been rushed after the third person was killed,(First person on the second location) the students had rushed him and he still managed to murder the remaining 29 victims? Would they have been criticized for inciting the shooter? Would they have been blamed for making an already bad situation worst?
The simple fact is without knowing exactly what the murder had planned there are limited responses that will not make the incident worst.
There is only one person to blame and he is dead.



Edit: Thanks for looking out for me KY.

IMO, Good decision not to pass,'Acklan'
Excellent Post.

You might know the saying, "You're damned if you do, damned if you don't."

Amen, brother. The shooter is the only one who should be shouldering the blame.

One more item to deal with here.

There is a tendency to "over-quote" by some... (In many forums.)

Shall we all only quote a relative sentence at a time?
The direct reference or response.

We all can read back and figure out what the reference is regarding.

Otherwise, Moderator's will just have to cut out posts entirely for the "over use of quotes".

(Please, don't make our work here any harder than it is already?)

In response to the topic question

a man upon hearing that there could be an attempt on his life reponded as follows
" any man so willing enough can kill another"
-Abraham Lincoln-
(or something to that effect), the point is if there is a will to kill there is a way. Because of the human factor of Determinations.

Oh no you didn't KY. That avatar is so wrong!

Glow little glowworm glimmer, glimmer Shine little glowworm, glimmer glimmer ...

This tragedy could not have been avoided in my opinion,because of it being random and the surprise factor,as I have stated previous.
Wonder if students were allowed to carry Stun Guns if they so wished,could the Death Toll have been reduced. In a class room,the Gunman could have been disabled, had some students hit him with this device.
Just a thought.

http://www.personalarms.com/stun_master_hot_shot.htm

I have not heard the entire story but from what I understand he entered the room and opened up without as much as a word uttered. He went through 15 to 17 clips (150 to 255 rounds depending on which clips he was using). I would believe no one was close enough to stick him with a pencil much less a stun gun.

I was thinking maybe in the confines of a classroom, given that a personal Stun Gun works effectively up to 15 feet,maybe someone could get close enough to put this Gunman out of action.
The only chance I would guess, would be while he was fitting another clip.
I don't know the full story either,but from what I hear, the Professor was the hero in all this.

I believe you have a stun gun or stun baton confused with a Taser®, which can fire two leads up to 15 feet (about 4.5m). The stun gun is a arms length weapon, much like a knife.

Your are right 'Acklan' I meant a Taser®.

So, we shouldn't arm everyone. And we shouldn't be un-armed. I agree with both of these statements.

A state must have the right to support the Constitution in the manner its citizens have chosen. The Second Amendment does grant the right for US Citizens to bear firearms. Thus, it falls on the State to decide how to qualify an individual for gun ownership. The Constitution only mandates that some qualifying method must be in place. If a Citizen disagrees with the actions his/her State have enacted, they must be able to vote for a change. If said change is not passed by majority rule, that Citizen must make a decision to stay or leave. The Residents of Virginia decided on the process for qualifying gun ownership, within their State. This must be respected. I do not know the life of BlackSpyder, nor he mine. Different circumstances surround us all. One blanket rule will never be able to meet the demands of all lawful Citizens. Unfortunately, the State legislators decided to interfere with the established rights of their Citizens. After much thought, I have concluded that some of us may be joining issues (myself included). We will NEVER know what would have happened had the student body been armed in accordance with the law. And, let me say, this event was a complete tragedy, in many respects. Foremost with regards to the innocents who lost their lives, and for those who must live with a hole in their heart.

The issue joined with the tragedy is the tragic erosion of Citizens Rights. Whether the unjust decision by Virginia lawmakers would have had an impact on the event at Virginia Tech is a question that will remain unanswered. That ignorance should not be confused with the fact that the Democratic Process was by-passed, and this is yet another example of our "leaders" taking matters into their own hands and deciding what is "best" for us. This reality is over-shadowed by the slayings at VT (and rightfully so, we must allow ourselves time to grieve). However, I would implore all US Citizens to open their eyes and ears to the peripheral elements of this tragedy. The lack of knowledge as to how legislator's actions truly impacted the day's outcome is not a justification for their wanton disregard of this Nation's foundation, the Democratic Process, Majority Rule, and State's Rights.

I do not believe this is off-topic. I think this facet is pivotal to progress as a collective, in order to attempt prevention or better reaction to violent circumstances. We will be hard pressed to move forward if we continue to assume that all circumstances apply to all Citizens equally. Leadership is one thing, power is quite another. Centralized leadership lends itself to cohesion and strength. Centralized power lends itself to tyrrany.

Respectfully,
bg04