Mass Shooting at Va Tech. 33 Dead, 15 Injured [reportedly]

[TeamDunn]

Thanks, Redsfanva...

Looks like "this" is what he did in the two hours before the second shooting....

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/from/ET/

Gunman contacted NBC News during massacre

Sometime after he killed two people in a dormitory but before he slaughtered 30 more in a classroom building Monday morning, Cho Seung-Hui sent NBC News a rambling communication and videos about his grievances, the network said Wednesday.

Network officials turned the material over to the FBI and said they would not immediately disclose its contents pending the agency’s review beyond characterizing the material as “disturbing.” It included a written communication, photographs and video.

The network said it would release a statement shortly.

Cho, 23, a senior English major at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, killed 32 people in two separate attacks Monday before taking his own life.

[TeamCasey]

Originally Posted by GAC

This is not an immigration problem, nor a gun control issue.

I absolutely disagree with you that this isn't a gun control issue! It sure is a case for gun control but that will never change in this country.

[paintmered]

Originally Posted by TeamCasey

I absolutely disagree with you that this isn't a gun control issue! It sure is a case for gun control but that will never change in this country.

That's a discussion for another board.

[TeamCasey]

Originally Posted by paintmered

That's a discussion for another board.

I didn't bring it up .... but you're right. I imagine this thread will head there soon.

To ignore it is to not see the elephant in the room.

[paintmered]

Originally Posted by TeamCasey

I didn't bring it up .... but you're right. I imagine this will head there soon.

As long as discussion revolves around the events that occurred, (i.e. news) and doesn't morph into debates about pseudo-related issues (like gun-control), this thread will remain open.

In other words, keep the thread on topic and there's no worries.

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by WilyMoROCKS

I'm fine with immigrants owning guns.

Non-citizens on the other hand, I've got a problem with that.

You do realize those two frequently overlap, right? I'm failing to make a distinction between a non-U.S. citizen immigrant and a U.S. citizen who immigrated here. I find your argument about background checks unconvincing, particularly considering the number of handgun crimes committed by U.S. citizens who supposedly passed their background checks without issue. I'm also unaware of any studies which point to non-U.S. citizens having a higher proclivity to using a handgun in a crime.

Therefore, as I previously mentioned, any ban on handguns aimed specifically at non-U.S. citizens seems discriminatory to me. So long as we're going to remain a country armed to the teeth, we might as well be fair about it.

You can, however, know what you can't reasonably know.

You'll have to explain this to me, I'm afraid. What is it I should know that I can't know? Put another way, what should we have known we couldn't have known about the South Korean shooter that would have ostensibly led to preventing him from obtaining a gun?

[WMR]

Originally Posted by registerthis

You do realize those two frequently overlap, right? I'm failing to make a distinction between a non-U.S. citizen immigrant and a U.S. citizen who immigrated here. I find your argument about background checks unconvincing, particularly considering the number of handgun crimes committed by U.S. citizens who supposedly passed their background checks without issue. I'm also unaware of any studies which point to non-U.S. citizens having a higher proclivity to using a handgun in a crime.

Therefore, as I previously mentioned, any ban on handguns aimed specifically at non-U.S. citizens seems discriminatory to me. So long as we're going to remain a country armed to the teeth, we might as well be fair about it.


You'll have to explain this to me, I'm afraid. What is it I should know that I can't know? Put another way, what should we have known we couldn't have known about the South Korean shooter that would have ostensibly led to preventing him from obtaining a gun?

Originally Posted by WilyMoROCKS

Immigrants, generally, have a much shorter "track record" in regards to how much is known about their background and what they have been involved with in the past.

Many foreign police forces operate with little national centralization. Once an immigrant becomes a U.S. citizen, the "carrot" of gun ownership has been earned and should be made available to them if they so desire.

Somebody born in the U.S. can be a killer just as easily as a foreign immigrant, but I'd feel safer if those people permitted to purchase and own firearms are 'tied' to the utmost to our country and hopefully have established a lengthy track record of functioning as a law abiding citizen in American society.

At least with the groups you mention we can perform a background check. South Korea might have excellent record-keeping and reporting policies, but what about an immigrant from an emerging 3rd world country where widespread computerization of national public records is seriously lacking or non-existent?

[registerthis]

Originally Posted by WilyMoROCKS

At least with the groups you mention we can perform a background check. South Korea might have excellent record-keeping and reporting policies, but what about an immigrant from an emerging 3rd world country where widespread computerization of national public records is seriously lacking or non-existent?

What, exactly, do you think is examined during these background checks?

Whatever it is, they're evidently failing at their job considering the number of handgun crimes committed by citizens who are "tied" to this country, as you put it, who have passed their background checks.

Aside from your own fears and suspicions, I haven't seen any tangible evidence that points to the fact that depriving non-citizens of guns make sthis country any safer or better.

[BRM]

Originally Posted by registerthis

What, exactly, do you think is examined during these background checks?

Whatever it is, they're evidently failing at their job considering the number of handgun crimes committed by citizens who are "tied" to this country, as you put it, who have passed their background checks.

Aside from your own fears and suspicions, I haven't seen any tangible evidence that points to the fact that depriving non-citizens of guns make sthis country any safer or better.

I'm pretty sure all that is checked is if the prospective buyer has a criminal record. Is there more to it than that?

[vaticanplum]

Originally Posted by GAC

My only question is that when the school discovered the first two shootings, which were around 7:15 AM or so, why they didn't take better precautions based on what they did know, not what they didn't.... two people were shot, the shooter was still loose somewhere. It doesn't matter what they were being told or assumed. They have a responsibility to that campus and those students/faculty present. Not second guess. Not in these situations.

I'm not saying they "lock down" the campus. That is almost an impossibility. But they could have had the police/SWAT teams in there as soon as possible, providing surveillance, setting up checkpoints, or at least guarding/monitoring entrances to several of the main buildings/classrooms on campus. For crying out loud, make an effort to provide some sort of security/safeguards until you know more.

If this guy had walked back to his dorm to do whatever, do you think he would have, some two hours later, been able to walk into that other building if there were trained (and armed) police patrolling the campus and/or set up at some of the entrances?

The more I delve into this situation I realize it would have been almost impossible to stop the initial shooting. But that should have been enough of a warning to these administrators to act more decisively. Even if they went somewhat overboard in their actions to secure the campus, it would have been justified and at least understood by the masses (and parents) due to what just transpired. I'd rather be condemned for doing too much then too little in these types of situations.

I cannot believe what I'm about to say, but I agree with GAC here

Let me be clear that I do not in any way blame campus authorities for what happened, and I'm also a firm believer in not second-guessing life too much (what's done is done, revenge is futile, this situation happened the way it was meant to, etc.) I also know that we do not have details on the entire situation yet -- probably not even close.

However, I will say that from what we know at this point, I do believe it was very questionable judgment to wait two hours to send an e-mail out to campus. It is a huge campus, yes; but it would perhaps have been pertinent to send an e-mail to that dorm alone at the very least. Such an e-mail might have sparked something in someone nearby, caused people to notice and report things that they wouldn't in the absence of alarm...any number of little details that might have saved lives. I also find it unfathomable that campus police would attempt to handle a double murder on their own without immediately calling local police. From what I understand, this dorm was close to the edge of campus; for all they knew it could have been a non-VT person who committed the murder, and the VT security forces were, in my opinion, obligated to call the police not only for the safety of the campus but for the potential safety of the community.

They did not think they had the murderer in custody. They could not even have known for certain after two hours if it was a murder-suicide. Thus, a murderer was at large, and people should have known about it. I know that there is a fine line between informing and inciting panic sometimes, but trained professionals should know of ways to do this as best they can, for the most basic purpose of putting people on alert.

Again, I do NOT say this to chastise VT for their handling of the situation in the sense that this person was crazy, this person is responsible for the deaths, and there's nothing we can do about the past. But things WILL be handled differently in the future, at colleges everywhere, because of the way they chose to handle the situation. And that's as it should be in my opinion.

[GAC]

Originally Posted by vaticanplum

I cannot believe what I'm about to say, but I agree with GAC here

What? You're saying you can't ever agree with me? I agree with you on issues.

[GAC]

They don't need to outlaw guns. Just charge $5,000 per bullet.

[GAC]

Originally Posted by paintmered

Of course the campus police responded. It's their jurisdiction.

I agree. But when a murder and/or shooting is committed are they really properly trained for that? Shouldn't outside law enforcement, who are far better equipped, then be called in?

We have secuirty here at the plant. But these security officers are only trained to handle situations to a degree. We've had far serious incodents here where local law enforcement had to be called in and assist.

[vaticanplum]

I'm a little confused as to why this nut job keeps being referred to as Korean, actually. The kid had been here since he was eight years old. While not a US citizen (and seriously, I'm not even going to get into that...registerthis is speaking for me anyway), he was, for all intents and purposes, American. He spent most of his life here, he was educated in American schools, and no information that has come out so far related to his life betrays any overt "Korean influence", if you will...no references in his writing, no evidence of his belonging to any Korean-based groups. He was an English major, for crying out loud. No one has called him a Virginian, even though in terms of time and probably influence he was more Virginian than Korean. If a white person had committed the same crime and it turned out that he had emigrated from Vienna at the age of 8, I don't think the media would be referring to him as an Austrian.

Mental illness is one thing that doesn't discriminate, I guess.

[GAC]

Originally Posted by TeamCasey

I absolutely disagree with you that this isn't a gun control issue! It sure is a case for gun control but that will never change in this country.

Taking away guns from law abiding citizens is not gonna stop criminals or deranged people from getting them. Many years ago, and I know it's just as true today, I knew several "acquaintences" that made their living solely from dealing in selling guns and armament illegally. I've been in some houses where it would amaze you what was there and readily available. If they didn't have what you want, then they could get it.

If a person, like this nutcase, wanted a gun, then he could easily get one without having to walk down to the local gun shop and do so legally.

Gun control does not make it any harder to acquire guns if one is really intent on doing something like this.

And I say that as one who has never owned a gun, and never will.

We already have gun control legislation now. Is it working?