Virginia Tech..........gun laws don't work......criminals will always have guns?

Carp

You are 100% correct. To the others that think guns would be harder to get, that's extremely naive. Have you ever seen a "no questions asked" chance to turn in firearms? Literally tons. There are millions of firearms with no record of who owns them or where they are. There a currently millions of criminals that posses multiple firearms. The world is a huge place, criminals will get them somewhere else. Look at crime in some areas where guns are outlawed, you will get a big surprise.

And access to mental health services will not help either. Mentally Ill get better because they want to. It doesn't work with out the persons will to get better.

A mentally ill person that wants to kill someone instead of getting help is going to do just that.

Armed individuals on campus would have had the potential to save lives.

disgruntled_penguin

Everyone knows that someone who is willing to apply for permits and have a background investigation done is going to be the one to pulling off mass shootings.

Heaven forbid you shoot 30 people without a permit to carry a gun. That would be illegal!

It's not just gun laws that piss me off...it's that the gun laws are always so STUPID and INEFFECTIVE.

EDIT: I agree with the first answerer. If guns were outlawed, they wouldn't be available! It worked with drugs, right?!

Aviator - THE Resolution

If guns make you safer, then why does the country with the most guns (US) have the highest violent crime per capita? If students were able to have guns, yes, things like what happened today would be avoided or stopped sooner. But you would see an increase in the number of shootings. Right now, you have lots of alcohol fueled bar fights in college where people get punched, fight, then wake up the next morning hung over. If they all had guns, you would see shootings instead of bar fights.

charliecizarny

The right to own firearms is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Many times I've reported gunfire or shootings, and in most cases the responding officer has asked, "Don't you own a gun?" It was understood that if I had shot the"perpetrator",that the police wouldn't have to put themselves at risk looking for an armed suspect.
Taking away honest citizens' rights is not going to stop crimes. It's just going to guarantee the ability for armed criminals to run free. I know how to shoot, and I hit what I aim at. When it comes to protecting my family or myself, I will do whatever I deem necessary.

Kesokram

After reading both the question as well as the first answer to this question, I am compelled to say that you are both right - to an extent. As a former employee of the Jefferson County School District in Colorado where the Columbine High School shootings took place, I have thought long and hard about this issue, so here goes:

We live in a country where WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO OWN WEAPONS BY WHICH WE CAN DEFEND OURSELVES IF THE NEED ARISES, which is more than citizens of many countries can say. Should there be a need for self-defense, then, we can take advantage of this right.

I like to think about it this way: Human actions being what they can be, who is willing to guarantee that some day, some group IN OUR COUNTRY - maybe even a leader with enough followers - decides their idea for America is better than everyone else's, and tries to use force against YOU AND ME to further their agenda? Or are you going to be safe in some situations if someone breaks into your home and you must wait for the police to arrive? Well.....I don't know about you, but my faith in our military's ability to right the wrongs of society or police response time is growing a little less stable every time I turn on the news.....

All I can ask is this: Do you want to put ALL your faith in our country's military or police to defend yourself and your loved ones? WITHOUT YOUR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING. Therefore......

The right to own guns is a good thing, I believe, but along with that right for a good citizen like you most likely are comes the possibility of other, less responsible (perhaps CRAZY) individual(s) might use that same right to do harm to innocent people like the unfortunate events at Columbine, or the tragic event like today. It's a tough decision, to be sure....

Though I hate to say it, no one can predict who is going to go off the deep end and shoot someone, but I do not believe it is the fault of the law that allows us to bear arms. I think, however, it might be our society, because it has become increasingly permissive and disrespectful of life. That is, however, an entirely different subject....

It truly is a shame that tragedies like this happen more times than we care to witness, but at the same time we cannot punish the millions of law-abiding US citizens who also own guns because of the vast minority who misuse this right and harm others. To voluntarily give up the right to bear arms makes no more sense than forfeiting our right to earn a driver's license because some day, some time we as drivers might be involved in a deadly crash...

hypnaughtiq

It is not the guns my friends it is us the people, Americans.
What was his reason? Anyone know?

Think about it if you give everyone guns you will have to bring the troops from Iraq and place them in every corner of the street.
To many stressed, overworked, depressed, confused and drugged Americans out there. No value for life, family or child.

We have lost it all. We need to clean ourselves up and soon.

p.s. I must agree with Aviator on this one

"Right now, you have lots of alcohol fueled bar fights in college where people get punched, fight, then wake up the next morning hung over. If they all had guns, you would see shootings instead of bar fights."

Kris L

Why are people concentrating on the 'availability of guns' in this shooting. They would be 'much better off' thinking of the 'mental health awareness' in this country ... and seeing a 'mental health professional' should not be a 'life threatener' but should be 'routine' enough that the 'shooter(s)' in this case and EVERY OTHER CASE could have GOTTEN HELP EASILY before going 'this far' and killing people. THINK ABOUT IT!

Ã—ithurtsogoodÃ˜

Yah, your hypothesis is crap.

Raul C

I'd say your answer is flawed in this case. Whomever this guy was, I think it's pretty clear he knew going in he was going to die.

For all other responders to this question, I'm sure many of you will rant about how if you don't like the laws you should move to Europe or Canada. That is not the solution for those of us that want to see change. Most of us could take the easy way out and explore this option but we stay and debate to see real change in our country.

Let's have healthy debate but let's keep our points clean.

nbrotonel4

Issuing a fire arm to people should be restricted. Should it be better if people use stun and tasser gun for protection instead? Yeah, there's a law that states people can carry a gun to protect themselves and their families. However, there are some people easily get heated or stir up and resolve conflict/confrontation by force / even worse. They could easily shot somebody and say "I just trying to defend myself/ my family."

When I think about guns, or when somebody says the word "gun," my mind thinks that authorities are the only ones that have them to protect their people against harm and vile humans.

I got fair share of experience about gun-shooting incidents last July 2006. I was 3 houses away from my house after coming from work; suddenly, 2 teenagers came from behind and hitted me with the gun's handle at the side of my head. They were chasing me with their bicycles while I'm running to my house. To keep the story short, my left arm and left upper thigh were shot. My brother called the authorities and they rushed me to the trauma center. The worst thing was my femoral artery was severed. But I'm fine now. Now, think about this, where do you think these 2 teenagers got their gun(s)?

There's a gun shop/pawnshop almost near to the highschool I used to go. I'd seen some movies (e.g. Dogma) where people could buy gun and bullets in stores. Man, there's something wrong about this.

Should it be better if we use stun or tasser guns instead? At least, when somebody harrass you, you could temporarily immobilized the harraser till the proper authorities handle the situation and punishment.

runlolarun

forbid guns now!

icantbelieveyouaskedthat

I'm not sure about your question but i don't think this is the guns fault. In a world without guns there are still thousands of ways to murder.If guns are to be blamed then its the violent TV shows with the world domination cartoons that the networks air for your kids to see. Besides,if i lived in America I'd want a gun so if i was in a 711 and a robbery was in place i could assist and shoot this robber in the back,no matter what Al Sharpton though of my actions!

bobobob

In the UK with a population of 57 million people there were 49 gun deaths in 2006. There were 100 more in New York alone. Banning gun works. Save lives today

cartoonrat

What can I say, man? People are being denied the right to defend themselves. That's why I say f*ck the law. Me and mine are more important than some gun-control law. Anyone who thinks gun-control will prevent a massacre like this is a dink. You'll never see sh*t like this happen a "BAD" neighborhood.

Mr$.Rob

We shouldn't have to bring guns on school grounds. That's why we have an escape plan during crisis. Where are the security guards? Where are the police departments? Where are the panic buttons? Dont most schools interview applicants? How the hell did that boy get in the school? Most of his classmates didnt know his name the whole four years he spent at Virginia Tech. "Question Mark Guy" was what they called him. Guns are dangerous when they are in the hands of psycopaths. In that case, its sad to say, but they should be banned to a certain extint. There are a lot of sick people out there. Some who are probably going to copy-cat thsi incident. Im not complaining about the gun ban proposals. I keep my faith in God and my pepperspray in my purse.

charlienoble92001

If guns were outlawed then only the government would have guns.

Not only do gun laws not work, the 'rule of law' doesnt' work either. It also seems the police take matters into their own hands and become 'judge, jury, and executioner' by out-right killing the gunman, thereby violating due process. So much for the much vaunted rule-of-law.

My state, Massachusetts, has the toughest gun control laws in the nation, yet we have had a three day shooting/murder spree in Boston's high-crime (i.e. black) area last weekend. Massachusetts is proof that law enforcement is not a deterent to crime and gun control only punishes the law abiding gun owner.

g_thurell

First answerer is wrong, a lot of them are stolen from gun makers and filed immediately, and Congress(repug controlled) passed a law Bush signed to allow gun makers to never be held liable when their negligence(IE no background checks, or inventory controls) causes the death by these type of firearms...watching CSpan live during this debate was one of the worst things I have ever seen. And to answer the askers question, are you mentally ill? This dude would have been scared off by others carrying guns?? Is that why he shot himself or got himself shot, because he wanted to live, your stupidity knows no rational bounds does it ape boy? is that you GW? And to the guy who says gun laws are stupid, why, doing a background check and making someone wait is dumb? Why? If anything, it allows for a less rash decision if you were planning something like this, right?

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: