'Cops help kill 32 Students', claims furious blogger

Re: How are the police to blame?

So...someone rocks up and casually shoots a couple of college kids then walks off. He is not apprehended, and no-one knows who he is. It is not known whether he has left the campus, and no-one knows whether the incident is over (the decision that it's an "isolated incident" sounds more like wishful thinking than analysis). The police and the university authorities meet nearly two hours later and only after 2hrs and 11 minutes have elapsed do they finally get around to sending out a vague warning BY EMAIL. Email, I ask you. Hardly the best choice for a potentially time critical warning. http://www.tannoy.com/ anyone? The gunman is to blame for pulling the trigger, certainly; but to suggest that the initial response of the authorities was appropriate is farcical. There's sufficient prior examples of spree killings that start off with an individual homicide and then go on to be mass killings (Whitman killed his mother with a knife before he went up the clock tower with a rifle) that to not have immediately treated the situation as an ongoing emergency and WARNED PEOPLE loudly is unconscionable.

Gun free

As far as I can see, the police could have acted in several ways, which might have stopped this tragedy from happening. However just like us, the police can't look into the future.

Instead of looking at the police, look at the university, a gun free zone, where a single person with a gun can apparently kill 32 people without being stopped. If even a single one of those had a firearm and had known how to use it, there is a good chance that this tragedy had been limited to the 2 killed in the dormitory.

Americans won't learn

No matter how many people die in these tragedies, Americans will only ever respond with the usual line, "this proves we need guns to protect ourselves". It's in the Constitution - that unchangeable, set in stone document written many, many years ago - so it has to be relevant, right? Wrong.

Take the guns out of the hands of these people and the shootings cannot happen.

The gunman went to the campus with a gun because he thought his girlfriend was cheating on him. He had the intention of using the gun. If he didn't have the gun, the most that would've happened is the other guy would've got beaten up. But the gunman certainly wouldn't have been able to beat up 30 other people two hours later.

Re: Gun free

"If even a single one of those had a firearm and had known how to use it, there is a good chance that this tragedy had been limited to the 2 killed in the dormitory."

Or, alternatively, you'd have several armed students shooting each other, assuming they were taking out the "bad guy".

Oooh boy

"If even a single one of those had a firearm..." - I don't know about you, but when I think about going to the library, or the gym, or for lunch, I don't think "Must remember to pack a weapon in case some looney gets jilted". No denying this is a tragedy involving a lot of innocent people who didn't deserve to die, but please let's not let the pro-gun wacko's use it as another excuse for all and sundry to wander about with oozy's hanging out of their pockets...

How precious

The NRA extends its condolences. Big fat deal !

I just wonder how many more massacres will have to take place before the NRA is officially told to take a hike, and a measure of gun control is imposed on all those high-strung hotshots with a death wish.

Unfortunately, the American love affair with guns will probably go on forever. Too bad for the untold thousands that die every year.

Eh ?

Chris writes that "Take the guns out of the hands of these people and the shootings cannot happen."

WHAT ?

or more correctly, please explain how it can be achieved ?

In the UK here we have gun control laws that seem to have stopped legitimate sporting use - ie stopped (previously) legal use by law abiding people. What they have spectacularly failed to do is stop illegal use by criminals.

I have every sympathy for those affected, but those calling for gun control laws are seriously misguided if they think that is the way to prevent similar events in the future. The UK statute book is now littered with laws and restrictions that do nothing to prevent a criminal from ignoring them, whilst being a right nuisance to law abiding people.

NRA

Good of the NRA to express concern. Hopefully they'll step their efforts up next semester and start a "Sidearm for Every Student" charity drive so that this kind of tragedy can be nipped in the bud next time.

NRA

I find it horribly insensitive that the NRA even opened their cursed mouths regarding the incident. They hold some measure of responsibility for all their lobbying and ensuring that guns are easy to get. The gunman himself holds all the responsibility for his actions, of course, but you have to take down the drug dealer as well as the junkie.

I don't get this either..

How are the cop the blame? The guy who pulled the trigger is dead and he is culpable.

Hindsight is a very comfortable place from which to point fingers and blame. Too easy. And from behind a keyboard it is even easier. Pathetic how people get pissed about this..and yet how many die each day in Iraq/Darfur or from drunk driving in the 'States and those deaths are ok. Or it seems to be - none of those deaths rate the media coverage this incident is getting. No one seems to be recalling the Kent State shootings.. We all see what we want to see.

Don't get me wrong. This is a horrible incident. I have been on that campus many times in the early '90s. Great place !

But nothing can be done about blaming and doing pointless what if's - especially by us in the peanut gallery. Mourn, yet. Worry yes. But you have a better chance to be killed tomorrow by a drunk driver than this kinda of thing occuring again anytime soon. Let it go.

Who's to Blame

After reading the WTF blog it saddened me to see the police being entirely blamed for this awful tragedy. Hindsight is always 20-20 vision and when you read the timeline of the events on virginia tech's website, I'm not sure what more the police could have done.

The campus is 2600 acres in size, has over 100 buildings and 25000 students. You'd need an army to quickly lock an area of this size down.

The killer was not identified after the first killing, and if he was carrying a concealed weapon how do you identify him from the other thousands of students going to classes in the morning?

It's terrible to see what one nutter with a gun can do, but I don't see a practical way to stop someone who is hell bent on doing this.

"Eh?"

SImon Hobson, we're not talking about criminals though are we. Criminals will always find weapons regardless - that argument is irrelevant.

What we're talking about here is the act of a formerly law abiding student seemingly going mental as his girlfriend was cheating on him. Take the gun away (reports seem to agree it was a legally owned weapon) and there's no deaths. This tragedy was entirely avoidable.

what nonsense some people talk

"In the UK here we have gun control laws that seem to have stopped legitimate sporting use - ie stopped (previously) legal use by law abiding people. What they have spectacularly failed to do is stop illegal use by criminals."

Not true. Try resarching per capita deaths from shootings, where the US has something like 80 times the number of deaths of the UK.

Re: Eh?

Simon says "In the UK here we have gun control laws that seem to have stopped legitimate sporting use [...]. What they have spectacularly failed to do is stop illegal use by criminals."

That's a pretty heavily loaded statement.

Yes, career criminals will always get guns, whether from other criminals or from seemingly legitimate sources. However, there's nothing to suggest that this guy was a career criminal, rather than just some poor sod who got hurt and lashed out. Thousands of people do this every year, but most grab the nearest thing to hand -- a knife, a chair, a heavy pan -- and the incident rarely even goes to trial.

In the UK, when a so-called "crime of passion" involves a firearm it's almost invariably a shotgun, legally held for hunting/pest-control purposes. People in a rage do not seek out criminal gangs in order to buy handguns.

Gun control laws could easily reduce this sort of tragedy, but no, they wouldn't stop organised criminal groups. But then police action can stop organised crimes through undercover stings etc, but those would hardly be effective against individual "postal" cases.

Outlawing guns won't do anything

Chris writes that "Take the guns out of the hands of these people and the shootings cannot happen."

If you are intent on committing a murder, or a murder suicide, do you think you'd be worried about getting caught with an illegal gun or what you would have to do to get one (making them illegal will not make them go away).

If someone is going to commit random mass murder, they will find a way. He could of just as easily made bombs from household chemicals, should we ban those too?

I'd hate to say it, but you can almost make the comparison to how DRM has *stopped* music/movie piracy. Punishing the law abiding citizen never stops the determined criminal.

Availability of guns

"But if someone gets jilted, he won't have a gun on hand"

You've overlooked that fact that in the UK - where handguns are banned - it is still possible to 'go around the corner' in parts of South London (according to a local resident interviewed on the news the other night) and buy a gun.

We all go on and on about 'bannning' guns (ie stopping individuals from legitimately owning them)...

... but NO-ONE ever talks about stopping companies from making them, or stopping the arms dealers from selling them. The politicians will never go there because these companies have so much influence over them, and innocent people will continue to die on the streets.

I once went on an anti-arms protest outside the 'international arms fair' in the docklands, and no matter how peaceful the event was the metropolitan police 'special group' thugs were still sent in to kick the sh*t out of us.

Guns don't kill people ...

I heard an American academic 'talking head' on this morning's BBC News banging on about gun control and pointing out that, in the US, gun control means an entirely different thing to what we in the UK understand. However, tellingly, when confronted with the idea that no amount of gun control would prevent the 'lone nutter' scenario (I paraphrase, obviously) she fell back on her argument and admitted that these sorts of massacres should be "viewed like societal bad weather" i.e. they were unpreventable and Americans should just learn to live with them. So, she's quite willing to advocate gun control, even though it would have no discernable impact (she feels) on the problem under discussion, and as far as school shooting massacres are concerned - well, sh*t happens!

If the hunt is now on to find the police guilty of not anticipating that a 'routine' double homicide on a US campus would turn into a killing spree that would kill a further 30 innocent people, are those involved not then tacitly agreeing with her assertion? That is, any shooting in the US has the potential to turn into this sort of massacre and by failing to automatically make that assumption, they are somehow derelict in their duties. Cripes!

In 'Bowling for Columbine', Michael Moore asserts that in Canada there is a similar access to guns amongst the population, but they don't spend a fraction of the effort or time killing each other as people do in the US. If this is true (and believe me, I take a lot of what Mr. Moore claims with a hefty pinch of salt), then there must be something else at play here besides the availability of the weaponry.

So, until all the various camps (both pro-gun and anti-gun) get off the megaphones and start thinking rather than shouting, I can't see the problem going away soon - even if you remove all the Marilyn Manson/Judas Priest/<insert Rock Satanist du jour here> music from all the shelves in America.

In evolutionary terms, something in the US environment has changed (this is the 19th such episode in the last 10 years, according to one news report I heard) and Americans need to understand what it is before they start kicking off those knee jerk responses.

Alternatively, if you are the sort of American who denies science and believes in 'intelligent' design, it's a message from God. In which case, what is he trying to tell you?

Weapons of mass destruction?

How long before guns (especially automatics) are sensibly classified as WMD?

"Weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a term used to describe a massive weapon with the capacity to indiscriminately kill large numbers of people."

We've seen that even little bombs have been classified as WMDs now, so what next?

At the risk of pushing the 'fat American' stereotype, should the definition read :

"Weapon of mass destruction (WMD) is a term used to describe a large(ish) (or not) person holding a weapon with the capacity to indiscriminately kill large numbers of people."

Something is Wrong

Some of the very first reports on the news cited the possibility of a second shooter. "As a matter of policy we are continuing to search for another shooter, however we are confident the only proven shooter has been apprehended and is in our custody".

They knew that there was another shooter, they just couldn't find him. Now they are trying to cover it up. Look up news on Google from yesterday morning and see for yourself. Not cool.

Crime of Passion

First, this was not a crime of passion. The student called in 2 bomb threats last week to gage the response time of the campus police.

He bought chains and padlocks so he could padlock the doors from the inside so people couldn't escape.

Second, he was not a "law abiding student" as one of the previous posters suggests. He was not a citizen of this country, he was a foriegn national here on a student visa. Only citizens can buy or own guns legally in this country. So he had already broken the law by buying guns.

So, how does more guns laws help? He broke the laws already on the books. He couldn't legally buy a gun, own a gun, or posses a gun. So explain to me exactly how more gun laws help.

And yes, we Americans have "a love affair with guns". And hopefully we always will. Because it is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check.

Maybe if we closed our borders and kicked everyone the hell out that wasn't born here, we could get back to the "You leave us alone, We'll leave you alone" attitude from our early history. We could pull out of Afghanistan and Iraq, and worry about protecting our own soil. Let the rest of the world deal with their own mess for a change and let them live with the consequences.

My $0,02

This debate seems to be polarizing around "Guns created this tragedy" and "More guns would have prevented it". Most situations can't be looked at purely in black-and-white terms, it is or it isn't, etc, but I'm going to weigh in with my 2 cents anyway on the side of the Anti-Gun lobby.

Take the guns out of society, firearm deaths will *drop* on average, not go up. Consider example of America vs. Rest of World as a practical demonstration.

To paraphrase from the book "The Trigger", by Arthur C Clarke;

"Having a gun myself, does not give me back what his gun takes away."

Meaning: even though the force equation would appear to be neatly balanced (gun = gun), the status quo is not nearly as stable as it was when neither party had a gun.

Get the guns out of society.

Ok slightly more than $0,02 but you get my drift.

Regards,

Re: Crime of Passion

"And yes, we Americans have "a love affair with guns". And hopefully we always will. Because it is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check."

Isn't that what the US Army is there for? Or are you suggesting that the gun owning members of the US public are itching to go charging around the world to take care of "tyrants".

I'm no expert on constitutional law but this appears to stretch the definition of a well regulated militia to breaking point.

Re: Crime of passion

I'll take you up on that last paragraph's suggestion. The world would probably be a little more peaceful then.

Why don't you spend some time reading e.g. your own Fukuyama. I can't say I agree with him, but he does have a point in saying that the US people make a mistake when they think the world just doesn't understand them. A large part of the world does. And it still doesn't like you. ;-)

/Prathlev

Premeditated Homicidal lunatic or jilted lover?

“Not true. Try researching per capita deaths from shootings, where the US has something like 80 times the number of deaths of the UK.”

Actually, Simon is perfectly correct in his assertion that what UK Gun control has “spectacularly failed to do is stop illegal use by criminals”. He was talking about the increase in serious gun crime in the UK, not comparing UK Serious Gun Crime with the apparently trigger happy nature of the Americans (I’m not disputing that per capita figure – sounds scarily right).

This whole affair is a huge tragedy but this was a premeditated homicidal rampage. Not a “spur of the moment” crime of passion. This guy picked up a handgun and went looking for two people, clearly with an intent to kill them. He then sat and thought about what he’d done for a couple of hours and was so remorseful he decided to continue. This is not someone who sounds like a) he was a sorrowful jilted lover and b) he would not have not gone out of his way to obtain a gun no matter what the Law said. He wanted to kill people… lots of people.

Blaming the police? Oh, right, that’s useful. What were they supposed to do? Lock down a huge campus and conduct Room to Room searches? That would have gone down well. Although granted, campus notifying people 2hrs later by email, probably not the best idea in the world (quite how they should have notified people, I am not sure).

Re: Crime of Passion

"Because it is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check."

You're an idiot

"Maybe if we closed our borders and kicked everyone the hell out that wasn't born here, we could get back to the "You leave us alone, We'll leave you alone" attitude from our early history"

You're a fascist, WASP American KKK, NRA Supporting nut case, you are the reason you attack the rest of the world, psycho christian pro-gun nut jobs that put Bush in power.

In the words of Jake Burns in the song, "Roots, Radics, Rockers and Reggae"

"Throw away the guns and the war is all gone."

Restrict access to weapons, shut down the arms trade, and people will stop killing each other. Its not difficult to understand, but your bloody constitution and right to bare arms which is a throw back to when the english kept kicking your arse is now irrelevant. Update your constitution, that is what amendments are for.

FYI, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE US ISN'T SET IN STONE!!! IT CAN BE CHANGED!

"it is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check."?!?!?!

Are you serious? - are you freaking SERIOUS?!

It is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check... - what PRECISELY keeping in check of the tyrant known as Bush have your guns acheived??

The man who has killed more Iraq's than the dictator he deposed - and so is a "worse" dictator by the ONLY credible measure is still in power DESPITE all of your guns.

Get real; criminals will ALWAYS get guns; it is EXACTLY this type of massacre that disarming normal people will avoid.

You leave us alone

It's the social view of guns, not the laws that help reduce gun use. it's not ok to own a gun and show it to your mates in the UK; even some of the more dubious and stupid members of my extended family would freak out if someone started showing off a simple firearm. It's true that you can't take the guns away from criminals with laws, but at least they don't have the bare arsed cheek to wield them in public like toys.

>> Maybe if we closed our borders and kicked everyone the hell out

>> that wasn't born here, we could get back to the "You leave us alone,

>> We'll leave you alone" attitude from our early history. We could pull

>> out of Afghanistan and Iraq, and worry about protecting our own

>> soil. Let the rest of the world deal with their own mess for a change

>> and let them live with the consequences.

This is a bit off topic, but it needs to be said: America is a coward, they will only stand up when they have superior fire power and can sit nice and cozzy in their bunker while they attempt to kill the enemy with WMD. Even their films show off all those heros and principles that they all know they don't have. I dare say there are still a few good men in the USA but you must hide them away in the hills. After every illegal and immoral war the country as a whole crawls away to lick it's hurt feelings and looks inwards, at it's own ego for comfort and support because it's the only place you ever find it.

What a sad culture you have created for yourselves, I pity your country and hope you all don't follow the above attitude.

Oh and hating the rest of the world and the people in it will not win you friends.

You got a bit of crazy on your face.

Virginia has a concealed carry law. It was disallowed on school grounds last year by a new law. Had the students been armed this wouldn't have happened.

This person wasn't legally carrying a gun so any idiotic liberal sheepish retarded banter is moot. Britian has proved that less guns don't lead to a utopia the way every hippy thinks it does. Criminals don't abide by any anti gun laws we make, cause (gasp) there criminals. The UK is working on banning samurai swords now cause with a lack of guns people are using them to rob people.

Bloody libs love there statistics so lookup the rate of violent crime in Britian and compare it to every other civilized country looks pretty high don't it. Must just be a mistake though, after all the guns are out of the hands of potential criminals (citizens).

If you feel guns are scary and loud, stay quiet and bleat with the rest of the sheep. Leave the rest of us wolves alone.

Why we Yanks need guns

Forgetting the fact that getting rid of all the guns in America would be about as easy as getting rid of all the tea in China, and the fact that "lone nutters" and other criminal types will always have guns and not be penalized by gun laws, the reason we Yanks need guns is simple: our government.

Do any of you in the UK, EU etc disagree that America has become a scary imperialist force in the world? How do you think the citizens of America feel? We're scared of our government too. And that's wrong. Our country was founded on the principle that our government should fear us. They're never going to fear us when all a law abiding citizen has to defend himself is a butter knife. Sad but true.

FWIW the news is now reporting that the serial numbers on both the shooters guns were removed....so they were likely stolen, like they are in most violent crimes.

Guns don't deter guns!

Guns don't have invisible force fields.

Posted Tuesday 17th April 2007 15:32 GMT

The thing that, surprisingly, hasn't been pointed out yet is that even the best marksman in the world cannot deflect a flying bullet!

My point is that guns are not a gun deterrent, for that matter knives are not a knife deterrent and wmd's are not deterrents to wmd's!

Gun control prevents murders springing from flared tempers, but I think this unfortunate incident could only be prevented by super paranoid monitoring, such as airport style security checks at every entrance to the campus.

Arming the students as a defence will only make the campus a dangerous place to be because we are only human, most of us can't control our thoughts or emotions. We are frequently given to emotional outbursts of anger, pride, jealousy, affection, sadness and happiness.

There will always be criminals and if you want to deter them from having or using guns you need to make it harder for them to get them.

Guns are not required for sport, not in this day and age of electronic games and paintball.

As for cutting America off from immigrants, wouldn't the natives have been better off if they had been able to do that before all us white folks came along to trash their paradise!

In reply to prathlev

"I'll take you up on that last paragraph's suggestion. The world would probably be a little more peaceful then."

Right, we are the cause of all the worlds problems. We started World War 1, World War II, we caused Stalin to slaughter his own people and Hitler to kill half of Europe. Yeah, without the U.S. the world does just fine on it's own.

But I do agree with you on one point, we should stay in the U.S., keep our military here, and leave the rest of the world to it's own design.

"the US people make a mistake when they think the world just doesn't understand them. A large part of the world does. And it still doesn't like you."

Good for them. To be honest, I really don't care if the rest of the world understands us or not. Like I said ealrier, we should get back to a 'we leave you alone, you leave us alone' attitude, from a government perspective.

And I also don't care if anyone in the entire world, past or present likes me. All I want is to be left alone. But don't expect me to come help you when your butt's in the fire later on.

In reply to DaveT

"Isn't that what the US Army is there for? Or are you suggesting that the gun owning members of the US public are itching to go charging around the world to take care of "tyrants".

I'm no expert on constitutional law but this appears to stretch the definition of a well regulated militia to breaking point."

The 2nd Amendment is not to protect the people of the U.S. against foreign powers. It is to there to establish our rights to bear arms, to regulate our own government. It is a part of the checks and balances. Who is to regulate the militia, if not the citizens?

Campus size not an excuse

I'm sorry but the campus size is NOT an excuse for what happened. I work at U of M ( A much larger University than this one. We have around 40,000 students compared with 25,000 and we DO NOT have a PA system like Virginia Tech does).

In the past when there has been emergencies we have never had this problem. Of course they don't just send out emails here. It is very simple, post notes to classroom doors. Make sure the teacher in each room is informed. Make announcements in public gathering areas like cafeterias and study areas. Let the RA's know to inform their floor. A small group of people can easily get the information out to a majority of the campus quickly.

You can't warn everyone, but you can reduce the number of people exposed. Informing the population may not have made a difference, but at least they may have had a chance.

Re: My $0,02

And that approach has worked so well for drugs, hasn't it? Nobody can score a dime bag of weed on any street corner in the U.S. Heroin just can not be found in America, can it. Crack cocaine is a figment of the media's imagination.

If criminals want guns, they will get them in to this country. It can't be stopped. By outlawing all guns, all you do is take guns from law abiding citizens.

Sense of security

'And yes, we Americans have "a love affair with guns". And hopefully we always will. Because it is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check.'

And which 'tyrants' have the American citizens kept in check, exactly?

Seems to me they're all running around killing you with guns. Face it - buying a gun gives you about the same false sense of security as buying a car alarm where everyone just walks right by anyway.

"Why we Yanks need guns"

I disagree that guns are needed to defend oneself against the government. You defend yourself against the governement at elections. If you miss that, it's game over, whether you have gun or not. I have not noticed a lot of uprisings by free citizens in hot anger against the PATRIOT act. Actually, the reverse is true: a good, fat old-fashioned fascist groundswell. Hmmm. Tasty.

Yeah, it fits:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040301fabook83239/robert-o-paxton/the-anatomy-of-fascism.html

Re: Re: Crime of Passion

"You're a fascist, WASP American KKK, NRA Supporting nut case, you are the reason you attack the rest of the world, psycho christian pro-gun nut jobs that put Bush in power.

In the words of Jake Burns in the song, "Roots, Radics, Rockers and Reggae"

"Throw away the guns and the war is all gone."

Restrict access to weapons, shut down the arms trade, and people will stop killing each other. Its not difficult to understand, but your bloody constitution and right to bare arms which is a throw back to when the english kept kicking your arse is now irrelevant. Update your constitution, that is what amendments are for.

FYI, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE US ISN'T SET IN STONE!!! IT CAN BE CHANGED!"

I am not racist. I didn't say throw out any race. I said people not born here. Not naturalized, not citizens. And for the record, it's hard to be a WASP and get into the KKK when you are of Native American and African decent.

And if throwing out all the guns does away with violence, why isn't England a utopian paradise? I guess there isn't a drug problem in America either. Hell we outlawed all of that over a century ago.

As for our constitution, it's ours, not yours. Yes, it can be changed, by getting the change throught the House, the Senate, signed by the President, the approved by quorem of 2/3's of the States. Not by the U.N., The European Union, The Eastern Bloc, or any other foreign power or national. Why should you make our laws?

And for the record, the English didn't kick our asses, we kicked theirs out of our country, then did it again in 1812.

"Already broke the law"

As mentioned earlier being a foreign national he should not have been able to buy guns. However I believe that in Virginia at least you can but guns 'off the shelf': no background check, no cooling off period. Also the semi-automatic weapons rule was allowed to lapse . So although it may not have prevent this tragedy, If they used the limited gun controls they had the lone gunman would have found it a lot more difficult to kill 32 people.

He may have had a limited choice of black market weapons, He would have been exposed to a much higher chance of detection before he got to pull the trigger, He would be unlikely to get a semi-automatic with unlimited ammunition.

And another thing, How old do you have to be to carry a side arm? Is the NRA suggesting all students should be armed. There have been similar shootings at high schools. It could make frat parties a bit eventful when everybody thinks they are Billy the Kid after a pull on the beer bong!.

Oh sure, isolationism is *always* the answer.

@: "Maybe if we closed our borders and kicked everyone the hell out that wasn't born here, we could get back to the "You leave us alone, We'll leave you alone" attitude from our early history."

Two of those foreign-born people you would "kick the hell out" were professors at VT, both fatalities in this massacre. One was a Romanian-born Holocaust survivor, who reportedly died trying to hold the classroom door closed as the shooter fired through it, certainly knowing that he would get hit in the process; a heroic action, in an attempt to save his no-doubt mainly US-born students.

In light of that, don't you DARE paint all foreign nationals with the same brush because the shooter was from outside the US.

Just about every other "nutcase goes postal with a gun and kills a bunch of people" incident in this country was carried out by someone born here. What do you propose to do with all those millions of US born who are obviously terrible people, because of people like Whitman or the Columbine killers?

Shut your ignorant mouth, check your facts, and go learn the history of this nation of immigrants before you even think about opening it again, because unless you're pure-blooded Native American (doubtful...does such a person even exist, now?), then some of your own not-so-distant ancestors were born elsewhere, too. Would you have thrown them out, I wonder?

I also wonder how fast this nation would collapse if all the legal resident aliens in academia, business and entertainment left, and took foreign-based companies and investment with them?

The shooter being a resident alien does beg the question "where in God's name did he get a pair of handguns and enough ammunition to hold off a small army?" If he obtained them illegally, then sure, no amount of gun control law would have prevented this.

What are the chances, however, that he was able to "legally" obtain the guns because the checking and control of them *is* so utterly lax in this part of the world? If that's what happened, I look forward to the NRA trying to 'splain that one away...

And yes, the shooter probably would have been stopped sooner if several students in the vicinity had been carrying weapons, but I wonder how many innocent people would have died in the crossfire or been hit by a badly aimed stray bullet, as poorly trained, overly stressed college kids engaged in a gunfight?

Re: Sense of security

"Face it - buying a gun gives you about the same false sense of security as buying a car alarm where everyone just walks right by anyway."

I disagree. Almost 20 years ago, 2 escaped convicts broke into my home. Rapists. They attacked my wife and mother-in-law. Thanks to the gun I had I was able to keep my wife an mother-in-law from getting raped.

Did I want it to happen? No. But without a gun, I could not have fought off to hardened criminals by myself. I chose to defend my family, and I do not regret what I had to do to this day.

A previous post said I was racist. I am not, but I will say this: Racists want to keep guns out the hands of minorities. Makes them easier to control. All races should have access to firearms. Everyone has the right to protect themselves and the ones they love.

Comment?

Reading the comments on this story, I wonder about the audience that shares The Register with me. On this - as on many other sites - this tragic event has been used as an excuse for anti-American rants using the United States' weapons laws.

I live in the United States and have a little understanding of why weapons laws here exist as they do. Arguing for the 'banning' of guns in the United States is irrelevant. Much, I suppose, as is argung for a little restraint on such a tragic occasion.

Re: How are the police to blame?

To the second poster, Nick,

I live in Chicago and work on the UIC campus near downtown. If for every double homicide in a 10 mile radius around the campus we "treated the situation as an ongoing emergency" we'd live in a constant state of emergency.

Americans stay home?

"But I do agree with you on one point, we should stay in the U.S., keep our military here, and leave the rest of the world to it's own design.

"the US people make a mistake when they think the world just doesn't understand them. A large part of the world does. And it still doesn't like you."

Good for them. To be honest, I really don't care if the rest of the world understands us or not. Like I said ealrier, we should get back to a 'we leave you alone, you leave us alone' attitude, from a government perspective.

And I also don't care if anyone in the entire world, past or present likes me. All I want is to be left alone. But don't expect me to come help you when your butt's in the fire later on."

Well, I think the rest of the world would like you to do that too, but you won't because you are just about to run out of oil, and will need to invade other countries (i.e. Iraq, Iran etc) to steal theirs. Perhaps you should use all your guns to get control of your government as others are saying, and stop them invading and interfering in other countries, or do you like driving around too much?

Sorry, a bit off topic.

err what?

Good ol' Nazi Radio and The Wingnuts (right wing nutters) have already begun their assault on the left, suggesting that

1/If every student had a gun, no one would ever get killed in a school or university - after all the sort of people that do this are obviously rational and would never shoot anyone if they knew their victims were armed.

2/We arm all the teachers, and force them to pledge to protecting their students with their lives. Apparently this is more important than knowing stuff, after all this is America and we're suspicious of anyone that knows how to read. If the teacher was armed this would never happen because his gun would protect him from being shot first, without warning - and help matters by allowing students to scrabble around in a panic looking for it.

3/Protect the Constitution at all costs - except for freedom of speech, protection from illegal search and seizures, cruel and unreasonable punishment... ok, cross through line one and tear off after line 2, keep the rest.

4/Make sure everyone knows that only criminals shoot people. Law abiding gun owners don't kill anyone except by accident on hunting trips.

5/Blame Hilary Clinton.

6/Blame Bill Clinton.

7/Blame the University and the victims for not voting correctly last November. If Republicans had control of Congress this would never happen, after all Republican controlled government spends all its time trying to resolve the problems plaguing America, and none of its time trying to divvy up tax collections between themselves, their friends and their family.

Still trying to see how these ideas are helping, no doubt someone can explain it all to me.

All pro gun control are hypocrits

Do you realize that some of your family members are in Iraq spreading 'freedom' and 'democracy'? For the record this country is a Representative REPUBLIC, but do they even teach that anymore? And guess what they use: bombs, weapons, the works. Meanwhile some idiot comes in and shoots people on a 'weapons free' campus because you couldn't defend your rights like the soldiers are doing overseas.

And you think guns are bad? Look at the UK, they have a full gun ban...guess what, people are violent because of the society thrust upon them. In the UK they now have to ban kitchen knives, because people are killing each other with them. To top it off, in London you have 6 times the chance of getting robbed compared to NYC (and we know how good NYC has it, but its a gun free place too). And London back in the early 1900s when guns were allowed and it was the biggest city in the world, had 4 armed robberies in 1904...with 30 million people.

Are you already so spoonfed not to be able to take care of yourself? Do you know what common law is? Do you know what self defense is? A creator given right? Yes what happened IS sad, but with 26000 students (yes I went to VT - alumnus now) you would think that this guy would have been stopped earlier. This guy had to reload you know...A pencil can be a weapon, a fire extinguisher, tables, chairs...this is VT! The inventors of tomorrow, and they just cowered? No common sense of self preservation? There are bigger issues here than 'guns'.

Our 'leaders' of tomorrow are unable to defend themselves worth squat, so we are supposed to depend on them in the future to defend us?

Do you know that the Supreme Court ruled twice that the police is not liable to defend the individual? They are only liable to protect society as a whole? So if you die tough luck, you are a statistic. You can't sue the cops or anything. And here you are wanting them to defend you? You are alive...an individual, to defend yourself DUH. Wake up and drop the spoonfed attitude.

If you believe in self defense they can ban whatever they want. You will still find ways to defend yourself and criminals will find ways to do you harm, as long as the mindset and need are there (and history seems to back this theory). Be it a bat, a hammer, a plate, a trash can, a broken bottle. In China they banned fighting sticks, and those little Chinese people can tear you apart with their bare hands. Those should be banned too right? Actually lets just ban Chinese people if that logic is true (or maybe just their hands and feet). What about cars? So many accidents. Do you know that the number three death reason in the US is doctors? There are 400% more fatalities from doctors a year compared to guns. Ahh but accidents are 'accidental', but does the excuse matter? IS a life not a life? Should a death from a gunshot wound be more important than the people that die from doctor malpractice? Or car accidents? Don't families suffer from those situations just as much (since they were preventable)? Gun bans are already in affect, do they stop the 'bad' guys? Hell no, all it is when you really think about it is just another form of wealth confiscation. But that's another topic.

Very soon if you follow the UK, you won't be able to work because your hands can kill people. If you wish to say how many people can be killed by a gun compared to a knife....or hammer or bare hands. More people die from nail guns and drills. Should we ban those? Get real, your fear of what you don't know is the result, ie. gun control. If you don't have a gun, if you haven't shot, you have no right to speak on the topic because you don't have the self awareness to be self reliant or responsible for your own being or your own safety.

Simple concepts, wake up or cower in a corner and wait for the cops that don't have any reason to save you, come and save you.

And as a final notice, if society is disarmed, why is there an army, or police force that still has guns. Shouldn't we all be happy dovey and kissy kiss kiss? But history shows when a group holds the right of life and death over everyone else, they use that right malliciously to keep themselves where they are . This power be it, guns, swords, spears, bows, take your pick on the historic timeline, are ALWAYS turned against the masses, and great massacres occur. Usually the only ones to have weapons end up to be our trusty governments. Look at China, USSR, Germany, Feudal Japan (Shogun), Rome, Certain Greek city States, Egypt, Babylon, Sumer. Disarmed citizens are nothing more than volunteers. There are no victims.

Everyone in the whole country says politicians are crooks and liars (except for politicians). But while they can have armed body guards they can sell the gun control to the masses and everyone believes them. Michael Moore is anti gun but his guards are armed. Bloomberg is anti-gun in an anti-gun place (NYC) and he conceal carries. Are we not all equal or all of a sudden liars are more equal than all?

It is your creator given right to defend yourself under common law, the law of the land. Get that through your head or play the victim role.

Well that makes no sense!

"I said people not born here. Not naturalized, not citizens."

Yet again you lack any understanding of what you speak, and end up contradicting yourself.

FYI, it's *impossible* to become "naturalized" without first being born somewhere else. Hence, the INS: "Immigration & *Naturalization* Service".

On the other hand, it's entirely possible to be a US citizen but born elsewhere.

"And for the record, it's hard to be a WASP and get into the KKK when you are of Native American and African decent."

There goes at least part of your ancestry, back on the boat and off from whence it came, according to your rules. Though as someone else mentioned, the Native American part of your ancestry would have been a hell of a lot better off had they had the opportunity to close the borders back in the day.

Re: "it is only through guns that tyrants are kept in check."?!?!?!

"what PRECISELY keeping in check of the tyrant known as Bush have your guns acheived??"

Damnit! You stole my line! :-P

As an American, I can testify to the fact that the 2nd amendment rights crowd are the most fervent supporters of Tyrant Bush. Generally (and semi-stereotypically) speaking, 2nd amendment supporters are some of the most hypocritical people on the planet. In addition to being the most fervent supporters of Tyrant Bush, they are also fervent supporters of the most invasive, rights-abusing policies that are discussed in the US. For example:

1) Restriction of gay rights.

2) Restriction of minority rights

3) Capital punishment

4) Torturing suspected terrorists and criminals is acceptable, if not encouraged. (Our government would never wrongly accuse an innocent person of participating in crimes or terrorism, so lock 'em up in Guantanamo, without charges or access to courts, and torture them for 5+ years. They deserve it.)

5) Government spying on American people without oversight or court approval. (Once again, the people who are spied upon are guilty so they deserve it.)

6) Draconian immigration laws. (Keep those dirty foreigners out of my country.)

7) Erosion of the separation of church and state. (If people aren't christian, they don't count.)

8) Elimination of abortion rights. (Because they believe in the sanctity of life.....)

9) Stop stem cell research. (Because they believe in the sanctity of life?)

10) And of course, the war in Iraq. (Because we need to convert the world into America, at gun point.)

All of these things they don't have a problem with. But, heaven forbid you should take their guns away. Then, they get mad.