-- Comment At Your Own Risk --
Dude- I'm still trying to figure out how this guy shot one, went a half mile across campus, and shot a whole bunch more two hours later. The FIRST notification of the original shooting came minutes before he started the second round. Someone at that school is in a whole lot of trouble.
MORE guns = LESS crime!
Had there been an armed citizen, there may be a lot less dead kids right now.
I agree. I take no joy in the fact that it happened in a bastion of liberalism but facts speak for themselves. If any of those victims had been allowed to carry, surely the death toll would have been smaller.
Gun bill gets shot down by panel
HB 1572, which would have allowed handguns on college campuses, died in subcommittee.
By Greg Esposito
http://www.roanoke.com/news/roan.../wb/wb/xp-
50658
A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly.
House Bill 1572 didn't get through the House Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety. It died Monday in the subcommittee stage, the first of several hurdles bills must overcome before becoming laws.
The bill was proposed by Del. Todd Gilbert, R-Shenandoah County, on behalf of the Virginia Citizens Defense League. Gilbert was unavailable Monday and spokesman Gary Frink would not comment on the bill's defeat other than to say the issue was dead for this General Assembly session.
Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."
Del. Dave Nutter, R-Christiansburg, would not comment Monday because he was not part of the subcommittee that discussed the bill.
Most universities in Virginia require students and employees, other than police, to check their guns with police or campus security upon entering campus. The legislation was designed to prohibit public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit ... from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun."
The legislation allowed for exceptions for participants in athletic events, storage of guns in residence halls and military training programs.
Last spring a Virginia Tech student was disciplined for bringing a handgun to class, despite having a concealed handgun permit. Some gun owners questioned the university's authority, while the Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police came out against the presence of guns on campus.
In June, Tech's governing board approved a violence prevention policy reiterating its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus facilities.
I agree, but I don't think gun control is the only contributor. Our elites go to great efforts to create a nation of sheep, then become puzzled when they get sheared.
As I said over at Bane's blog, there's not a law in the world that would've stopped this guy.
Here's what bothers me a bit: this guy had to stop at least once to reload, yet nobody took advantage of the pause in the action to tackle him or anything. There's a psychological conclusion to be drawn there, somewhere...
These shootings piss me off to no end! Ever since Columbine when the effectiveness of the State was proven...
I need to add that article Bill cites to my blog
Can you imagine what would have happened if guns weren't banned and shunned, but were treated with respect and used appropriately?
I can picture everyone armed.
When I do that, I don't see 32 dead. I see far less.
Sad.
I couldn't agree more. Part of me wishes to see some gun control supporters pay dearly for disarming their fellow man. Think about that, it's like declawing a domestic animal and kicking it out of the house to live in the wild. The people who would do that to their fellow man, without any provocation except their own paranoia, are sick.
How does an alien purchase a gun? I have a friend, Tiawanese with his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering, waiting to get his citizenship. First things he's going to do is buy a guy when he becomes a US citizen.
And I call BS on the whiners who say most people wouldn't do anything, even if they did have a concealed weapon. I believe that the 3 or 4 guys on each floor that would carry legally would have made a big difference.
And I know the intolerant gun haters have gun banning bills sitting on shelves for a tragedy like this. Once the shock passes, the bills will come forward and with a Dem controlled congress, they will probably make it to the desk of the Pres where I hope a veto is issued.
If Bush doesn't veto that bill, the Republicans can kiss the 2008 elections goodbye.
AJW, they'll wait for Shillary to get in office before they do that. For now they'll just rattle their granola bars at us and tell us how evil they are because they don't stand a chance at a gun ban the way things stand.
Don't forget, Al Gore would have won the presidency if he had taken his own state (TN). He didn't in large part because he's anti-gun.
AJW,
Who says that he didn't steal it or buy it off of someone in a cash purchase in a private sale?
Who says that he didn't steal it or buy it off of someone in a cash purchase in a private sale?
They traced the serial number, the gun shop had the records. It was a legit sale; he had a green card, ID and proof of address. Not that it matters, IMHO everyone without a violent felony conviction should be able to walk into Wal-Mart with cash and walk out with a pistol. There is nothing in this guy's past that indicates he should have been denied access to weapons.
My view is that people under 21 should not be able to purchase pistols/revolvers. And the age limit for long guns should be 18. So when people come to their senses and elect me Supreme Galactic Emperor, even then most college students wouldn't have pistols. But the professors would. I think a CCW should be about as difficult and common as a drivers license. And yes, I think a test and license should be required for firearm ownership, but I don't think guns should have serial numbers for any reason other than for whatever reason the manufacturer of the weapon wants/needs serial numbers.
Why do we take tests to drive cars? Because you can kill someone with a car. See where I'm going with this?
Why do we take tests to drive cars?
Because we're driving them on government property. I shouldn't have to take a test to own a gun to use on my property or carry on my person.
Taking a test and being issued a permit just allows the government to know who has guns. The criminals don't do it, why should we be subject to it. The police in New Orleans used permit records to go door to door and collect legally owned firearms. It didn't last long though. Still, the only reason for the government to have a list is so they can come and get them.
Taking a test and being issued a permit just allows the government to know who has guns.
Please point out where I even imply that registration is a good idea? Why do you automatically link registration and licensing?
I can picture everyone armed.
When I do that, I don't see 32 dead. I see far less.
Maybe zero dead. This guy may not have even attempted his killing spree if he knew people were carrying.
Even so, the cowardice of this generation is alarming. Pictures I've seen of distraught guys hugging each other make me sick. The psycho had no training, no automatic weapon. They lined up like sheep and let him execute them. It's mind-boggling.
Our enemies have nothing to fear.
You take a test to drive a car so that the government can force you to pay the state money for licensing, registration and insurance - and the Government knows where you live and how to collect on that.
From what I've been hearing, it was the anti-depressants the guy was taking that had him hearing voices and walking in dreamland.
They lined up like sheep and let him execute them.
If you have a gun and I think you're going to kill me, I'm not getting up against the wall; I'm going to disarm you or die trying.
Please point out where I even imply that registration is a good idea? Why do you automatically link registration and licensing?
Bill, if the government controls and regulates licensing, they know that you're a likely gun owner and coming after you when they decide to confiscate. You're "on the list".
There are lots of things that can kill or injure people that no permit or licensing is needed for. Knives for example. Britain now wants to start regulating knives and essentially outlaw swords. Why? Because the fire arms ban is driving the violent types to other weapons.
Next up! Stick regulation!
I should be able to simply walk in to a store and buy a gun with no government interference whatsoever.
Another purpose for liscencing is to get you used to the idea that you have to ask permission. You don't have a right to carry a weapon concealed without state permisison to do so. If they can grant permission, they can withhold it.
Dif, I think that if you wanted your point to get across to the supporters of gun control, you should have connected the dots for them (i.e., pointed out that an armed bystander could have taken out the shooter before the body count got to 31). Otherwise they'll just think you're nuts, because they assume that controls would have kept the guy from getting his guns in the first place.
The rest of us know better, but we're not the ones you referred to as "you".
I should be able to simply walk in to a store and buy a gun with no government interference whatsoever.
And statements like that will ensure that nuts like yourself never run things. No society based on such "rules" would last till Christmas.
And statements like that will ensure that nuts like yourself never run things. No society based on such "rules" would last till Christmas.
Bill, that's the way things were in this country for a very long time.
that's the way things were in this country for a very long time.
Really.
That is so wrong it's funny. I mean, I can't believe you actually think that! Nobody should be that historically ignorant.
Here in Maryland, as in the rest of the country, laws restricting gun ownership far precede the founding of the United States of America.
Quoting from Maryland law of 1715;
No negro or slave within this province shall be permitted to carry any gun, or any other offensive weapon, from off their master's land, without license from their said master.
And at various times and places during the 1700's it was also illegal for children and imbeciles to posses firearms. There were also a spate of laws passed during the early and mid 1700's banning Catholics from possessing firearms or gunpowder. The 1798 Kentucky Comprehensive Act required a license for blacks to own weapons.
In short, there has never been a time in American history when there were not widespread restrictions on gun ownership. Of course, in frontier areas there was a lack of laws in general, so there were no laws against criminals owning guns, children owning guns, or blacks owning guns. But this was not the norm and didn't last.
If what you mean by "You want the government to treat us like children?" you implicate a smack on the ass and hugs later - YES, Yeah I do 
Bill, there is no doubt there have been local restrictions on guns in various communities and states. What I was saying though is that they were freely sold with no interference. Mainly I meant tracking, licensing or oversight.
In regards to the law prohibiting slaves from carrying guns or other weapons, please note that slaves were property and the law said they were free to do it with their masters leave. Hardly an indictment of my statement.
In short, there has never been a time in American history when there were not widespread restrictions on gun ownership.
Widespread restrictions? Those sound like very narrow, specific restrictions to me. Clearly laws banning Catholics from owning guns is unconstitutional and only proves my point that the government has no business regulating or monitoring such things.
Wonder Woman, the government may treat us like children but it is an abusive parent. 
The smacks come easily but the hugs are few and far between.
"Quoting from Maryland law of 1715;
No negro or slave within this province shall be permitted to carry any gun, or any other offensive weapon, from off their master's land, without license from their said master."
Notice it applies only to slaves. The first gun laws enacted upon the poeple of the US were racist and directed initially at slaves only, not free men. If you read quotes from Jefferson and the like, they not only implied that you should own a gun, but you better damn well know how to use it. No restrictions.
I agree that gun ownership should not be tracked, hence my statement that "I don't think guns should have serial numbers". This is an entirely different matter than the legality of individuals purchasing firearms. For instance, I have to provide proof of age to purchase vodka, but (to my knowledge) nobody keeps track of individual bottles of vodka. As long as I can prove to the store owner that I'm legally able to purchase vodka, I can hand over cash and walk out the store with it. That's how it should be with guns.
As a society, we should determine what reasonable restrictions should be placed on firearm ownership. This is not to say that criminals will obey this anymore than outlawing murder prevents it, but it does outline what the standards are. Preventing children and known violent criminals from easily purchasing handguns is the target.
Wait a second: How did they trace the guns if the serial numbers were filed off?
How did they trace the guns if the serial numbers were filed off?
A trivial task for even a novice investigator. They pay someone like me a pile of money (in my dreams), and I read the serial number.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnaflux
So there's enough stressed induced to leave the numbers there?
Huh. Learn something new everyday.
I guess I'd better file mine down more.
Commenting by HaloScan
