Virginia Tech shooting discussion |
Loading ...My oldest son (17) and I discuss when and what he heard about the Virginia Tech shootings.
Hmmcast #96 mp4
Update 7:49pm PST: Apparently the Google Video upload failed. Please follow the mp4 link above to watch the complete video. Thank you to those who messaged me about the issue.
8:13pm PST: Recompressed and uploaded Hmmcast #96 to Google again:
via The Denver Post:
A gunman opened fire in a Virginia Tech dorm and then, two hours later, shot up a classroom building across campus today, killing 32 people in the deadliest shooting rampage in U.S. history. The gunman committed suicide, bringing the death toll to 33.
Internet postings about the event appeared almost immediately and the Washington Post has a timeline of emails.
This is the worst mass murder by a lone gunman in US history.
Simple solution, ban weapons for all.
Comment by Forser — April 16, 2007 @ 11:50 pm PST
Yeah, then only the bad guys have the weapons Forser. That has been tried and it doesn’t work.
Comment by TDavid — April 17, 2007 @ 8:31 am PST
I have to agree with TDavid here.
Besides, does banning weapons for all mean we ban weapons from the police as well?
Also, then if you ban guns, then there will always be illegal operations to bring in guns.
Besides, with millions and millions of people in the US, we’d have to make a pretty big sweep to get rid of every single gun.
Comment by Kathy — April 18, 2007 @ 6:51 pm PST
i think living in NY and through 9/11 makes me feel desensitized and detached to a degree, yet sometimes there’s sadness, other times anger and outrage in my mind. the media blitz is presenting so many arguments and counterpoints- trying to understand, and perhaps explore what preemptive measures this country should be taking- but it feels likes the violence grows more senseless, the incidents more severe as time goes on. you take away one weapon, there’s another. people who intend harm find away, despite what is available to them. i don’t know- i just don’t think there’s an answer anymore.
Comment by mikull — April 18, 2007 @ 8:43 pm PST
First of all, the United States should stop having guns available like they were candy. Secondly, if someone is known to have serious mental illness that makes them a threat to themselves and society, as did this disturbed individual, they should be locked away from the public for a very long time, and drugged 24hrs a day for all I’m concerned. If that would have been done, a situation like this could have been avoided.
Comment by Al — April 18, 2007 @ 9:42 pm PST
Al — wayyyy too much Monday morning quarterbacking.
Comment by TDavid — April 18, 2007 @ 9:45 pm PST
This incedent could be looked at from MANY different ways, people love to state the “whys” and the “only ifs”. But when it comes down to it, what I think the most sickening thing to come out of a tragic event such as this, is all the agendas and exploitations people use to strengthen opinions. A favorite of the “gun control” topic always refers back to columbine shootings, about how guns should be taken away, and if so blah blah blah. People need to focus on the here and now. We first need to let some time pass, let the dead be buried, and the familys mourn in peace. Once enough time has passed, we can then go into the IMPORTANT issues that relate to this. For one there will always be this type of person in the world. Simply put as.. Good And Evil. All man, I truly believe are born good. But with todays influences, to many people are born to Drug addicts/Psychopaths/Rape/Abuse etc. etc…. When a man or woman is a child, what they learn during that period of time will set the course for the rest of his/her life. Everyday todays youth is subjected to negative influences, what differs the rational from the irational, is the counter “positive” influence they get when they get home, simply put, todays world is so sick, that for a kid to look at it, and not be horribly damaged, they need a guiding voice of some sort to counter the negative effects of the world. THE PARENTS. Todays illegitamate kids are absorbing all the negative influences, only to go to their “Home”(A safe place one can refrence to in a time of need) and see their drugged out, or non caring parent sit on their ass and not give a shit about what their kid just saw. THIS is where it comes from, THIS is where all the corruption is started. The question we need to ask ourselves after an event like this is, what can WE do to ensure that todays youth doesnt grow up in a negative environment, fuck global warming, fuck gun control, fuck it all, when it comes down to Adults, THE most important thing in this world, is the Children…… PRIORITY #1======KIDS we need to refine the childcare system. orphanage, and foster care isnt enough. Establish a refined system one that intensivly checks A: Mental Health (probably the most important) B: Financial health (gotta feed, clothe, shelter the kid) B: Marital status (important for a child to look up and see BOTH mommy and daddy, not just the one). C: Teqniques in parenting (societys negative influence is very strong, a good parents influence and discipline must be even stronger) These all must be evaluated about the person(S) before handing over a child. And I believe it must even go to the extent of having to take an Exam before the insemination is made. If you fail… No kid for you, sounds harsh, but we got to protect the children to many people are having “unplanned” childbirth. Probably will cost tax payers money, but whats more important, our kids, or our wallets? I can only imagine what Chos childhood mustve been like, and “what if” he did have a stable childhood? Then there would be 33 more people alive today.
Comment by Ryan — April 18, 2007 @ 10:54 pm PST
Only bad guys would have weapon, No they won’t.. Law enforcement would have weapon.
Hell, Almost every other country doesn’t allow the citiziens carry weapons and guess what? They don’t blow there head off every day either becuase? NO WEAPONS
Hell, USA’s old argument that they have a law saying that they are allowed to carry weapon to protect themself are so much self-centered.
But hey, go ahead, blow yourself up while i sit here, without worrying about getting shot up by any random moron.
Comment by Forser — April 19, 2007 @ 12:11 am PST
That a crock. Ban weapons? This whole problem could have been avoided if we had less gun control. Lets examine the arguments so far toward gun control - this is a typical conversation I often have:
Moron: Virginia gun laws are too loose, there is no 10 day waiting period.
Me: How would a 10 day cooling off period affect a person that planned this for months, and by the way, bought his guns far more than 10 days prior.
Moron: Clinton’s assault weapons ban needs to be re-enacted.
Me: I heard that he used a Walther p22 chambered in .22, and a glock chambered in 9mm. These are not assault weapons…
Moron: The background checks are not extensive enough.
Me: I know from experience that DOJ background checks take months, and obviously would not have stopped the shooter. Not to mention he would have cleared anyway.
Moron: Then what do you propose?
Me: I propose that the American people not be disarmed by the government, I propose that if one of the *other* students in that hall had a gun, they would have shot him dead early on. Banning guns only makes it so only criminally minded individuals are armed.
An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.
- Robert A. Heinlein
Comment by MAC — April 19, 2007 @ 12:33 am PST
Holyshit Robert.
I am very lucky that i don’t live close to you at all now.
But with your idea then every american would be dead pretty soon since they would shot each other for having a gun.
No, Ban weapons for average joe and problem is pretty much solved and LESS shooting will happen!
Of course, Criminals will have weapons, so will Law Enforcement, not the average gun nut that doesn’t know A from C.
Comment by Forser — April 19, 2007 @ 6:19 am PST
Forser, your response assumes the police are always the good guys and while that might be true, it isn’t always true. Part of our (Americans) right to bear arms is to protect us from all forces of evil, which includes rogue police and government forces. As much as I respect and support good police officers, I don’t believe taking guns away from citizens is what our founding fathers ever wanted with the constitution. I believe that they felt and it would be a severe violation of our freedoms. What makes America a great place to live is the freedom we share, Forser, and that freedom drives others crazy in other countries (and yes, even our own sometimes, sadly).
People like this Virginia tech shooter who meticulously planned his attack, making videos, sending out a package to NBC of his carefully prepared media would still acquire weapons somewhere even if the second amendment was repealed. Maniacs and deluded people exist everywhere in this world, not only in America. If well-trained professors had been armed this shooter would have been stopped a lot sooner, maybe that is one possible solution to these gun attacks in the school. The panic bars that allowed chaining the doors is another problem. Those panic bars should be banned. Schools should be a place that is EASY to escape in the event of fire (both gunfire and flames). Instead you have people jumping out four story windows. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
He or it — and I can’t even say this maniac’s name, that’s how disgusted I am with this shooter — was a complete coward not only attacking a group of people that he knew were unarmed but taking his own life before facing his heinous crimes.
Look at the text of the Second Amendment:
See gun control:
To reiterate what I said above, the vast majority of the people to give up guns are the people who should have guns: law abiding, mentally stable citizens. I don’t define “bad” guys as only criminals. There are bad guys in suits and ties and carrying esteemed and professional positions, bad guys in government, bad guys who wear badges. Our founding fathers understood this and had thoughts way ahead of time.
Comment by TDavid — April 19, 2007 @ 6:47 am PST
Interesting viewpoints by all. I think you left out 1 thing in your list in the priorities there Ryan. There should also be a place for a spiritual life. We all seem to have this internal sense of whats right and whats wrong. This sense however, is different for everyone. One mans wrong is another mans right and visa versa. If it feels good do it.
The trouble with most of this is that there is no norm. No standardization, no set rules of what truly is right or what truly is wrong. I think this is some of what both creates this type of shooting monster, as well as a chaotic society. I’m not saying I disagree with the diversity we have as Americans. I think thats all great. But what I do think is a root issue in all of this is that people don’t have set morals. Having a spiritual base often times has definite rights and wrongs with no gray areas. Though shalt not kill etc etc.
IMO we have kind of contributed to this a few decades ago where people stopped going to their temples and churches, and began creating their own ideas of what their God should be like. Remember the cleavers? Yea - there was trouble with that too. All kinds of unsaid things going on behind the scenes. But there was still a moral fiber thick in society. What would happen if we all went back to those roots of whats right and whats wrong?
Interesting thread to read indeed.
Comment by Lestat — April 19, 2007 @ 7:23 am PST
People need to excuse Forser. He’s from Sweden. Obviously they don’t have crime there. :p
Comment by darkmoon — April 19, 2007 @ 8:57 am PST
I live in a non-right to carry state (California), one of only 10 states in America that do not allow carry. Collectively, there exponentially more crime in those ten states, then in the other 40 “shall issue” states. Is this an indication that we all would shoot each other? Statistics show that crime drops quite substantially as a result of RTC. One big example is Florida.
I do think that there should be some filtering and training regarding who is allowed to carry. If you cant aim, or even properly and safely handle a gun, you are a danger. As guns would become more commonplace, people would be better educated and less freaked out by them.
As TDavid stated, the criminals and weirdo’s will always get their guns, disarming the good citizens only makes it easier to use them.
Comment by MAC — April 19, 2007 @ 2:51 pm PST
I don’t think this issue is entirely about gun control, but I do agree with MAC. In addition we could also append that along with a limitation of magazine length? If you need a clip that holds more than 9-10 rounds, and you still can’t hit your target somethings wrong there.
Comment by Lestat — April 19, 2007 @ 2:58 pm PST
I really dont think Hi-Cap mags are a big deal. I think that if your gun can hold 15 bullets, then so be it. On the other hand while 30rnd 9mm mags could be fun, they are not such that a reasonable gun owner would tote it around town for any “good” purpose.
Comment by MAC — April 19, 2007 @ 3:09 pm PST
The mentally ill are looked at as a source of buckets of money for pharmaceutical companies and no effort is made to inform the public of the causal factors so that madmen could be prevented. We are going in the direction of creating more and more deranged people and we need to understand and research what causes madness. One factor is older fathers, the older the father the higher the risk, of course this depends on age of fathering in prior generations. Another aspect is PERC the neurotoxic dry cleaning chemical that Cho was exposed to since maybe the age of eight. Also was there mental illness in the family prior to Cho?
Comment by Leslie — April 19, 2007 @ 3:31 pm PST
I should clearify, I dont think that this incident is an issue of gun control at all. Though I do beleive gun control could do nothing but make it worse. The sad thing is this incident will be used as yet another basis for gun control, and people will buy this - because they fear guns. People view citizens with guns as people walking around thinking “I got a gun!”, just waiting for an excuse to use it.
The truth is I often forget that I am carrying (hopefully when I need it I will remember).
Comment by MAC — April 19, 2007 @ 4:01 pm PST
I LOVE Americans!! You guys give a retarded psycho a gun and then argue against gun control!!
L-O-V-E I-T !!!
Go kill yourselves some more while the rest of the world laughs at your stupidity.
There are reasons \”stupid american\” exists in the english lexicon
250 million SCHMUCKS.
Comment by neil — April 19, 2007 @ 5:06 pm PST
I think neil missed the point entirely. Gun control cannot stop this from happening, I don’t care what country your in.
Tell me where you are from so I can show you the darker side you may not even be aware of?
Comment by MAC — April 19, 2007 @ 5:33 pm PST
Hmm Neil, see how Canada compares (emphasis mine):
We love our Canadian neighbors as well
Comment by TDavid — April 19, 2007 @ 5:38 pm PST
Ive always wondered why people always think of high level solutions to problems as extensive as a unexpected shooting spree. From the news reports it appears that the classroom doors failed as a professor was killed through one and many of the doors were forced open. Instead of banning guns and instituting all sorts of new regulations and physical security why not just replace the doors with fire rated sheet steel hollow core doors with mortise locks and a positive auxiliary vertical latch. Just adding a steel fire door would prevent shoot thrus and the latch would prevent shootouts of the door locking mechanism and the mortise lock can be shot out but the deadbolt and latch are solid blocks of steel in a steel door and frame which would be hard to bypass. Also panic bars are technically more resistant to chaining than a double handled door its a exterior vertical latch that can be chained easier. However, improving physical door characteristics can only help mitigate fire and security problems prevention is also critical.
Comment by John Doe — April 19, 2007 @ 8:45 pm PST
Cho was right.
You people are all stupid, talking about gun control and even some idiot above discussing the physical properties of doors. Could you people be any more dense??
Do you honestly think that it would have changed what went off in Cho\’s head? Does anybody care about the events in Chos life, the experiences he had that brought him to this point?
No, of course not, because you all have your heads up your own backsides.
The problem lies with society, you, me and everyone. We segregate people, we isolate people, we criticize people who are different, who don\’t fit in, who arent like us. We love to gather in groups and pull down others who arent in that group.
This is what caused this massacre, it will cause more in the future unless something is done. And something can only be done by us. Dont point the finger at anyone else, point it at yourself. The blood of these people is on your hands, my hands, everyones hands.
Cho is Jesus, the only kind of Jesus that can get any attention nowadays. Do you think empathy and love gets the word across these days? 2000 years ago it did the trick for the Christos of Galilee but no-one gives a sh*t in this day and age. Cho chose the only course of action that would get his message across. He is my hero.
Heed his warnings, it\’s time you started taking responsibility for your world, before we all follow Cho and his 32.
Challenge me, if you can.
Comment by Paul Ashley — April 20, 2007 @ 4:54 am PST
That would be a bit like challenging a 6 year old girl to a fist fight. Yet another person that missed the point - it is NOT about gun control. Betters doors may have helped in this particular execuation of his crime, but not in the hundred other ways it could have been carried out. If someone wants to kill random innocent people, he cannot be stopped. All it takes is a blunt object.
Comment by MAC — April 20, 2007 @ 2:51 pm PST
Have been reading comments with interest, and must say, as a Brit I do not understand the US position on guns.
Hunting? OK, we have hunting too, but all you need for that is a rifle. Defending yourself? Well it seems to me that you only have to defend yourselves with guns because they are so readily available. I know you probably don’t like hearing it, but across the water here in Europe we survive quite adequately without having a gun at home. We have gun crime sure, but much, much less, because guess what, it’s not that easy to get hold of one.
This IS about gun control. Guns are designed to kill and to do so quickly. Whilst I agree that you can’t stop someone who wants to kill, you can limit the availability of weapons. A gun can be fired and re-fired, and is designed to do that.
You cannot create a civilised society where anybody could be carrying a gun. Contradiction in terms. Want to set an example for the world? We ALL need to start at home.
Comment by Jody — April 20, 2007 @ 3:20 pm PST
Gun control and profiling programs are meant to stop hundreds of events such as this but it is apparent that even with the current regulations it will take some time to catch even the textbook case of a spree killer. Its just that replacing a door is a lot easier and cheaper than changing all existing policies. Of course modifications to doors doesn’t replace policy change but if you think from a multifaceted approach changing doors in the interim would be relatively effective at isolating a spree killer or a variety of security and life safety problems. Do not forget no one has really considered using non-lethal weapons to stop killers you shouldn’t necessarily kill a person intent on killing. Problem is that just as with better doors non-lethal weapons are only effective under certain conditions and are generally more expensive than guns. Any disaster whether natural or human created has to be a failure on various fronts. IE(In the VA incident the highest level failure would have been the inability to remedy the mentally disturbed killer, second when the first shooting occurred he was not identified and his continued threat was not recognized, then no one caught him chaining up doors, then no one within the buildings could stop him from shooting, then the doors failed in a number of classrooms.) If any one of the conditions above want present at the time the event would have been anywhere between completely stopped to mitigated. (The thing is that certain conditions were unique to this case and solving some of the high level problems requires careful thought, while things like a door are only capable of mitigating but are easier to implement than new policy) Moreover with any regulation changes it is important to recognize that universities are places of open learning environment not an area that one should turn into a secure compound or mental assessment center.
Comment by John Doe — April 20, 2007 @ 8:51 pm PST
What works in other countries does not necessarily work here in the states. The high crime areas are densely populated, often with all the wrong people. Given the same populace, banishment of guns would do no good. On the contrary obtaining illegal military arms in Europe is very easy. There are many countries to choose from where these weapons are available wholesale. In the states getting an full auto AK-47 costs you some bills and you need to know the right people or build it yourself. In Europe, it will cost you a fraction and you don’t need to know anyone. You just need to know what country to goto and get them by the crate.
On the other hand obtaining legal firearms is much harder, and more expensive. What does that say?
Comment by MAC — April 20, 2007 @ 8:55 pm PST
Cansubscribe to Jody´s words. I live in Europe - in Portugal - and what happened in the US - both in Virginia as in NASA - stroked almost everyone in the EU as bizarre and sad. Bizarbecausese we can´t understand it - because weapons in EU are rare to find and almost everyone hates “real weapons”. Sad because we are talking about people - young people who are the future of US - already being marked by violence that, in some way, is a consequence of US “old-cowboy-weapon-laws” - beacause that kid in Virginia Tech, surely, wouldn’t be able to kill all those people if he didn’t had a fireweapon - that is obvious.
believeve that if US society, in general, would stobeingng so “warmongering”, so pro-weaponry, peoplwouldn’tnt be so afraid of their “neighbours” and wouldn’t feel the need to own a weaponBecausese that is what you all sound like. People with fear… talking about putting bullet proof glasses, bullet proof doors, bullet proof jackets, getting guns to kill others who also have them and may set a foot on your property. Man! Aren’t you people tired of being afraid? I couldn’t live like that - constantly afraid that my children, my parents, my brothers, my friends could be shot at any given moment because the store, school, museum, theater… were they could be was full of thousands of people - strangers, and that many of them were armed..
Firearms, generally speaking, are made to kill, not to defend yourself. Individual safety is in society and in how we treat others.
Comment by Bran — April 21, 2007 @ 1:04 pm PST
There are many opinions about what should be done about this problem. There are many answers, suggestions, etc but there is no real merit to the “take guns away” approach. Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. If this guy had used a steak knife to kill all these people, is the answer to not have any steak knives in our homes? How bout a screwdriver? Hammer? What if he choked them all with a mouse cable? Do we take away mice for all your computers? Where do you stop?
People who are against guns just use this very tragic and grotesque incident and the drama portrayed on Television as a platform to start their anti-gun campaign up again.
Here is where the problem lays:
• Responsibility – we are responsible to our children. To provide them with the best tools and principles to live a good life. The government is responsible to ALL U.S. CITIZENS. They have to be held responsible when the programs, services, etc they govern do not work or fail to protect the people that foot the bill. We can afford to pay TRILLIONS of dollars in a war, but can’t get the proper protection for our children in school? The reason: there is no ROI (Return on investment) as far as the government is concerned. Our own children are overlooked to a war that is misleading, poorly planned and reminiscent of Vietnam.
• Teenage Parents – kids having kids, trying to raise children with no help. Kids are left to figure things out for themselves, both as parents and child.
• Punk kids afraid to take a butt whoopin – so many kids today are so afraid to take a beating and lose a fist fight, in fear of what their peers might think. So they take it to the next level to “win” the situation and avoid getting beat up only to take a defense of:
o My parents beat me
o I am only a kid
o Whatever other excuses they can find to make people feel sorry for them. I am not one of those people!
This falls into the responsibility category as well. You did the crime, you do the time. Take responsibility for your actions regardless of how you were raised, what you were taught, who influenced you. This is how you weed them out.
• Media – be it computer games, console games, song lyrics, music videos, all the things that kids are attracted to and exposed to as young adults, even the content of the nightly news, kids at a very early age are exposed to sites and sounds that make lasting impressions on their personality and character. Media companies should be held accountable for airing information OVER AND OVER. Even though they don’t think it does, this promotes what happens and encourages others to follow suite. I believe the copy cat incidents from Columbine H.S., 9/11, and Virginia Tech incidents are a result of the overkill of news coverage. Report the day’s news and let it go! I believe ALL news reporting agencies should be restructured and NOT driven by newspaper sales, TV exposure, technological advances, etc as this creates an environment that is hostile and misleading to the very people it provides these services to. As I sit here writing this, there is a picture of “Cho” on TV. Almost a week later, they are still stating what happened and going over it…AGAIN!
• Parenting – what is right? What is wrong? What is proven to work? Get the government to spend money on children profiling and showing the people who are footing the bill, the best techniques and practices for raising children. Parents should pay closer attention to what they expose their children to. Quit worrying about keeping up with the Jones’ and yourselves, and pay closer attention to your kids.
• Dinner at the dinner table – it doesn’t happen as much as it should. This is where you learn most about your kids. A time to reflect on the events of the day and to find out the mood, moral, feelings of the people that are close to you and to provide advice (that you learned from the governments programs as well as your own experience) to the ones you love.
• Drugs – do I really need to even go here? There are more drugs available, and more drug dealers dealing than ever before. I think our government allows these drugs to come into the country and to be distributed to our kids as a means of sedating our opinions. Keeping the masses at bay. Nobody stands up against the cartels, pharmaceutical companies, drug dealers, etc. If millions of people are drugged up and in a state of mind where they are incapable of interacting with the world, they will not be voting and hence, we do not have to worry about them. The problem is, most of these people are poor to begin with, so this mentality, by definition, targets the lowest income families. Consequently, this promotes the WHOLE VICIOUS CYCLE all over again.
There are many more reasons. These are just off the top of my head. If we sit idly by and allow all this to happen, we are victims of our own doing. I can’t see how Americans just allow our money to be thrown away for a war brought on by false intelligence, misleading information and based on oil and profit. Put that money to work for the infrastructure of our own country. Take care of things at home before you go trying to fix everyone elses problems!
Just my 2 cents…
Comment by Jay — April 21, 2007 @ 1:10 pm PST
“Media – be it computer games, console games, song lyrics, music videos, all the things that kids are attracted to and exposed to as young adults, even the content of the nightly news, kids at a very early age are exposed to sites and sounds that make lasting impressions on their personality and character. Media companies should be held accountable for airing information OVER AND OVER. Even though they don’t think it does, this promotes what happens and encourages others to follow suite. I believe the copy cat incidents from Columbine H.S., 9/11, and Virginia Tech incidents are a result of the overkill of news coverage. Report the day’s news and let it go! I believe ALL news reporting agencies should be restructured and NOT driven by newspaper sales, TV exposure, technological advances, etc as this creates an environment that is hostile and misleading to the very people it provides these services to. As I sit here writing this, there is a picture of “Cho” on TV. Almost a week later, they are still stating what happened and going over it…AGAIN!”
- And where are the responsable parents to stop those children seeing violent stuff, or where is the right education to make them understand that violence? Now maybe there’s a real problem. Because in EU children see the same violence (the censorship in Europe is much more soft), and still we don’t have such problems with such intensity.
And Jay… You seem against the “no-weapon-policy” but you seem to go for censorship? “Weapons are not guilty - the media is”…come on.. Don’t you people see what is happening to your country? How more the bodycounts have to raise in shootings for people want to give a try for another policy other then that old one that is proving to be a failure - at least for those victims and their families.. It’s right: it is people who kill people, but give them the right weaponry and they transform a probable incident or even homicide into a genocide… there’s about sixteen probable killings inside a weapon that is in the hand of psycho.. And “good” “regular” people are not soldiers - you will never have a society where everyone sees someone pulling out of a gun, shooting someone else and suddently two civilians point him a gun screaming: freeeze! and shoot him if he doesn’t stops.. Who wants to live in that way? Wouldn’t it be better if that “shooter” just didn’t had a gun? Probably he would think twice, probably people could run, probably responsable agents of the law could gain more time to get there before it would become a bloodshed..
Besides who will ever be able to say who can really carry a weapon or not? Even a “regular” guy has is own rage moments… having a gun around just makes it easier..
As I said above. You just sound like you all live in fear - otherwise you wouldn’t carry a gun..
Comment by Bran — April 21, 2007 @ 9:02 pm PST
And there we go….Gun Control.. Thank you MAC for Stating over and over THE ISSUE IS NOT GUN CONTROLL, the problems we have as a country is that we can always “Talk About” the issue of gun controll, but the simple, small fact is, that you will never be able to take the guns from Americans. And to the Brits and the Canadians… no offense to your contries at all, but theres a reason why we are considered the “greatest country in the world” and theres a reason why we have the highest immigration than any other country in the world. We have force, we have guns, we will use them, shame on us, yes…. but do somthing about it…..and theres your problem, you cant. But. a comment to Paul Ashley… my freind, you are truly misguided…. Cho was no “Jesus”, you DONT GET YOUR FUCKIN POINT ACROSS BY KILLING 32 FUCKIN PEOPLE. MAN THE FUCK UP PEOPLE ARE PICKIN ON YOU, FIGHT BACK, BUT DONT FUCKIN KILL 32 PEOPLE!!!!
Comment by Ryan — April 23, 2007 @ 10:40 pm PST
I meant to add more to the previous statement… Back to the point.. Theres people like Paul, poor baby, people pickin on you, secluding you from their group, “pullin you down”, man up this world is definately harsh, but u have to have a stronger mind, a weak mind (like cho’s) would be, be quiet, dont talk back to the mean kids, jus let it pass and they will get theres in the end.. they all will)
Comment by Ryan — April 23, 2007 @ 11:00 pm PST
This is the mentallity that cho had, he was a recluse, dont let it show and wait till the very end, and then burst. This is how a mind brought up to be weak, worked. A strong mind would take the higher road, yea these kids are insulting/secluding/degrading/putting you down/etc. but one can look at that and say, well they are only proving who is the better man. Only cowards take it to the level cho did…. “had to do somthing to get his message across” give me a fuckin break. People are pickin on you… whaaaaaa. People are makin fun of how you look…..whaaaaaa. if your that weak minded. Do 32 people a favor, and quietly kill yourself…… A comment to neil, lol “go kill yourselves while the world laughs at you”… i find this funny, because it seems to me the world laughs at us while they live in our country….. if thats the way you feel, go head go to france and laugh at us, because frankly, we dont care, we can do without any of you in our country, but again back to topic it all goes back to Chos childhood, yea he was different looking, but so is tons of other asian kids, the difference between the coward gunman, and the other kids is the parents that tell them to hold their head up, ignore, (or fight), and move on. What I hope to come out of this is a better look towards the children. What are we ignoring about this generations lives.
Comment by Ryan — April 23, 2007 @ 11:38 pm PST
it was a sad occurrence to be sure but a lot of people do not know that around the time this massacre was happening and was in the news, 200 Iraqis had died in Baghdad without even the flutter of an eyelid from a vast majority of the world population. it begs the question where the priorities of the media and the general population lie…
Comment by sandos99 — April 24, 2007 @ 8:11 am PST
Lol like i give a shit about 200 Iraqis dieng, they are the enemy. Sandos, Im guessing you dont live in America, but lets say for example u live in germany, and in germany 32 people get killed, wheres your countries attention going to go to?
Comment by Ryan — April 24, 2007 @ 11:23 am PST
Jay, couldnt agree with you more, we are on the same page here
Comment by Ryan — April 24, 2007 @ 3:04 pm PST
33 people lost their lives and members of their families too, and you are saying that this person is a hero you should be disgusted with your self that man was very selfish and took the lives of innocent people if he was going to do that then he should of done it to him self. how do you call that a hero if you can tell me then maybe you deserve to live. jackass
Comment by jp — April 27, 2007 @ 12:33 pm PST
I hear ya, Paul Ashley is one confused man…
Comment by Ryan — April 28, 2007 @ 10:37 am PST