Deadly shooting at US university

I am talking about the Gun Culture here

Agreed there are whackos every where but not every one get access to GUNS so easily except in USA

This country should serioulsy tackle the gun culture and i worry how many sad lives have to be lost before they even think of a law banning guns

I watched his documentary about Sep 11, find it interesting..will def. check this one as well

If you watch Bowling for Columbine, you will learn that your statement is not necessarily true.

I think Bowling for Columbine is pretty underrated especially compared with all the money Fahrenheit brought in. But most people don't understand Bowling and definitely don't see the clear connection it has to Fahrenheit. Michael Moore's movies are a far cry from a documentary, but interesting nonetheless.

It is sad what happened today. And OZ Virginia, is actually one of the states that anyone can obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon in public. So the right of the students to bare arms on campus was there. It really just has to do with one horrible person lashing out for some reason. I hardly think that something is wrong with the US.

So you're saying that if we just had stronger gun laws, wackos wouldn't be able to shoot people? That's terribly short-sighted. Guns will ALWAYS be around, either through legal sale or the blackmarket. Even if guns were completely eliminated from the country, idiots could still use knives, bombs, grenades, etc.

We are at a point in our society where the supply of a gun is so available that if they outlawed them, then the law abiding citizens would turn over their guns but the criminals would not. I would love for the carrying of fire arms be restricted to only law enforcement officials, but that just is not realistic. Plus, there is a positive to having the "right to bare arms", there is VERY little crime committed with in a person's house (when they are present) from an intruder do to the fear of being shot.

so u think it is better to allow every one to have a gun and put these horrific loses as collateral damage?

Agreed -there will still be damage but allowing guns makes it even worse

schools/universities /offices get attacked with HAND GUNS by some psychos --and the common thread --they all have access to GUNS AND AMMUNITION --No Any one can go and buy a gun...

And all of you think there is still nothing wrong with the guns laws in USA

Let's simmah down. simmah downa. simmah, simma donna, summer donna

one a lighter note:

Of course I would feel horrible, but that really isn't relevant to this discussion.

Like I said, crazy people could still get guns even if the US outright banned them. You don't think terrorists would love selling guns to people in the US through the black market?

I didn't say there was nothing wrong with them. I'm just not too stoked about getting attacked on the board (again).

Though I will throw this out there: there are more fatalities from in-home accidental shootings than from intruders coming into occupied residences.

Regardless if guns were banned or not, people could still get a hold of them and would use them still. If you made carrying a gun a life long sentence in jail, in this situation it would have done no good, the guy died anyways during his act. I think that if this was hundreds of years ago fine, outlaw guns, but not, honestly it would be a lost cause. Plus, as the picture above illustrates , the right to "BEAR" arms is in our constitution.

First of all, I feel for the people affected by the shootings.

On a lighter note:



You are too controversial. Get used to it and use it to your advantage.

Cheers. L.

There was an episode of the Simpson's from a while back. I don't really even remember the premise of the episode (they all run together for me), but at the end all weapons were eliminated from the world and there was peace. Seconds later, some alien landed, picked up a stick and became ruler of the world. Seconds after that, another alien picked up a stick with a nail in it and became ruler, and seconds after that things elevated to firearms, bombs etc.

Everyone can argue about the underlying message, which is that that regardless of the tool, people will always find ways to assert their will over others through force. What cannot be argued is that the US constitution is widely regarded as the seminal document on modern government, and that one of the fundamental rights is the right to bear arms. People might argue that the right to bear arms is outdated and was only necessary for a revolutionary period, but to dismiss the right to bear as a fundamental flaw of a particular society is shortsighted.

One need only look at the countless flags that include AK-47s on them to understand that the ability to defend a piece of land is central to both liberty and freedom of any country. It's a valid point to question whether there is any need to bear small arms, but again it's ignorant to dismiss a society entirely because of individual views on a single subject.

I recall an episode of Law and Order where McCoy & the Angie Harmon character debated gun laws for about 20 seconds. McCoy stated his belief that if gun laws were tightened, all people would be able to protect themselves equally. The Harmon character countered (paraphrasing) unless you're a singe woman and some 6'5" 250 guy breaks in and attacks you. Again, the premise is that whatever the "top" weapon is, people will exert their will over other through force. If all weapons were eliminated, then physical size would be king.

One should also consider that if all weapons were eliminated and only agents of the government had arms, the ability to change the government could be severely compramized. I think a substantial portion of the population (even in the US) is more concerned about the government exerting too much control over their lives than they are about being shot in their own neighborhood; the situation is magnified in countries where the government is far less stable.

So, will eliminating firearms solve any problems? Possibly. Does public ownership of firearms have any usefulness in a society like the US? Possibly not. But simply it's ignorant to dismiss the issue without considering why people feel the need to own and bear their own arms.

US has one of the highest crime rates among developed nation. I think it is naive to assume that gun control will have no effect on fatal violence. Yes, people can still kill with knives. But killing with knives requires more skill and the killer needs to move his fat ass for hours to kill 20 people. I am usually a proponent of freedom of expression. Not in this instance.

You put it correctly..Thats my whole point..

The problem with this arguement is that guns already exist and so, the criminals already have them. If they have intentions of using them , regardless of it being a crime they would use them. I agree it would have an effect but minimal at best. If anything, gun control laws would affect accidental deaths the most.

What if he used his car? I bet someone could kill a lot more people by driving into a crowd with an SUV than with virtually any gun. Should we go ahead and get rid of those?

Off the top of my head, the most prolific serial killers have not used guns. If you think about Dahmer, Gacey, BTK, Green River, etc., their killings were precipitated by guile and misinformation. Perhaps we should outlaw all forms of communication - that would assure is that serial killers couldn't make contact with their victims.