Firearm & Gun Forum -

Firearm & Gun Forum - (
-   The Club House (
-   -   Placing the blame on the VT shootings (

BrassMonkey 04-19-2007 12:40 PM

Placing the blame on the VT shootings
We all knew when we first heard about the tragedy at Virginia Tech that gun control advocates would exploit the incident for their cause. Over the last few days we have heard them crow about how what they perceive as lax gun laws allowed this to happen. The fact is that not one of the 20,000 plus gun laws in this country worked to prevent this tragedy. Will 20,001 change things in the future? The answer to that question in my opinion is no. Heres food for thought on the issue. In the 1980s and prior incidents of mass violence here in America were few and far between. Mass school shootings are a fairly recent occurance, and seem to be happening at closer intervals as time goes on, despite gun laws being far more restrictive than they were 20, 30, or 40 years ago.

As I was watching the video released by NBC made by the gunman between shootings Monday it hit me what one root cause may be. Around the clock media explotation of these tragic events. By airing the killers video, by releasing his screen plays, showing his photo every 5 minutes, and playing video coverage of the aftermath at every possible chance we have given these sick murderers exactly what they want.....instant fame. I fear that given the pattern other school shootings follow a copy cat will soon rise up and seek to recreate this tragedy with their own name and face attached.
In a era of YouTube, Myspace, endless message boards, and countless celebrity gossip based T.V shows we have become a society obsesed with fame. From Brittany shaving her head on "E", to the latest idiot gluing fire crackers on his chest for a YouTube video we see that people will attempt to garner recognition at any cost. It only seems logical to conclude that in the mind of a twisted would be killer seeking attention and living in a culture that romanticizes massacres such as Columbine, going on a shooting rampage is a good way of making your name known.

Now I do not blame the media 100% for what happened at VT. Guns certianly made the days event possible, but guns could have prevented it as well had just one student or staff member been armed and trained to use their weapon effectively. The parents of the killer who should have seen some indicator of mental illness in their son could have prevented it by seeking help for their son. The staff at Virginia Tech had multiple documented cases where the killer showed disturbing behavior. They could have intervened or expelled this student from classes. The police in my opinion did not do enough upon arrival at the scene to minimize casualties. But in the end it is my view that the media, and our culture of instant fame, and gratification provided the inspiration. Of course don't look to the media to ever point the finger at themselves.

mastershake 04-19-2007 06:06 PM

Rush calls them the "drive by media" and while I usually don't agree with Rush I think he is right on.

The news media used to report the news, now in order to get ratings they report on byproducts of news that they make up to exploit ratings. Sadly a lot of Americans watch it and get sucked into it. It's both sides of the spectrum as well both Liberal and Conservative. Both sides have their own media and both exploit things like this.

notdku 04-19-2007 07:21 PM

I don't agree with them airing his "manifesto". It will just breed copy cats who think they can become notorious through the media getting their rants broadcasted. NBC did it only for the ratings which is really pathetic.

Declaration Day 04-19-2007 11:38 PM

Excellent post BrassMonkey, but I'm not 100% sure this could have been avoided. The young man who did this was an adult, and could not be forced into any kind of counseling or treatment unless he was convicted of a crime or judged mentally defective. He was seriously disturbed and, unfortunately, others had to pay the price for his mental illness.

socialnorms 04-20-2007 02:48 AM

I remember thinking the exact same thing back when Columbine happened. Thank you, major media corporations.

thornwolf 04-25-2007 06:09 PM

It could have been stopped
The whole thing could have been stopped in that classroom by any of the students in that class who had carry permits. I read that there were several students in the class with carry permits but they didn't have their guns with them because VT fancies itself a "gun-free zone". Well, apparently it's not, since nut jobs can have guns there -- but not law-abiding people.

My feeling is that this incident starkly illustrates why law-abiding people should not be disarmed. There was an incident a few years ago at a law school (I think that was in Virginia as well -- I should look it up) in which a crazy person with a gun was about to start trouble but was stopped -- by students with licensed handguns. Most of the mainstream media left out that part about how the gunman was subdued, but a very few printed it and that's how I found it, by searching for the method used to stop him.

In my home town not that long ago, an couple in their 70s had their home invaded by thugs in their 30s who began to go through the homeowners' belongings and steal things -- until they were driven out of the house. The newspaper did not say just how the older couple managed to drive the 30-somethings from their home, but it doesn't take much imagination to figure it out. Clearly, they had a gun and weren't afraid to use it appropriately.

Just for the record, I'm pretty darn liberal, both politically and socially, but I just don't see the value or sense in disarming honest, law-abiding people, and I don't understand why people of liberal persuasion see taking guns away from law-abiding people as a practical idea instead of wishful thinking and the mistake it would represent.

I remember the Florida creep who was interviewed from prison on tv about why he only targeted rental cars (I guess he identified them by their license plates). His answer was most interesting. He said that he may be a criminal but he's not stupid. There are some grounds for debate there, but his point was that Florida residents can carry guns and that no tourist was going to have a gun and that a rental car was most likely to hold tourists. Point well taken, thank you.

On top of anything else one may say about people carrying guns, we all have a natural right to protect ourselves and our loved ones from imminent harm and to whatever extent is necessary to deflect the threat. That right goes all the way back in time. No one can reasonably say that someone does not have the right to protect themselves from deadly force directed at them. And unless a government can guarantee that not one person could possibly have a gun that could be used against me, well then I have a right to own one too.

tealc 04-25-2007 06:49 PM

totally agree withn your sentiments
does anyone have the satatistics regarding guncrime after Dunblane ive read somewhere that gun crime increased by 25% per annum after the kneejerk legislation to ban handguns:eek:

marmac 04-26-2007 07:57 PM


Originally Posted by Goldfinger (Post 479)
Yep, he went on to babble how it could all have been prevented if we were all disarmed. I tell you, not a day goes by that of all the guns I've owned in my life, and I've owned quite a number, not a single one of them went insane and killed me and then went on a rampage through my neighborhood. I must have gotten lucky, unlike the VT gunman who had the bad luck of buying not one but two guns who conspired to go on a killing spree together, dragging poor Cho with them.

Great post!! I thought the same thing myself, I guess it's being in A'Dale that makes you think RIGHT!! :D

I've had guns all my life, but I've never had one of them go walking down the halls of Auburndale High School shooting people!! It takes a NUT to use one to shoot people!! And, it takes people to protect themselves against a NUT by using a gun to protect themselves and innocent people such as students. And if someone had been armed, legally under our Constitution as our Founding Fathers intended, they could have stopped a slaughter!

As more anti gun laws are enacted, it will only get worse! The law abiding people will obey, but NUTS will find a way to kill!!


EagleSix 05-11-2007 05:18 AM

If just one student, faculty member or staff member had a gun and used it to defend against Cho, Iím not sure how many would have been spared, but I think it is fair to say at least some. In the best scenario, just one person with a gun willing to stand and fight could have stopped the rampage before the very first person was shot.

I believe if more of the over 30 people shot along with others who escaped injury would have acted to defend themselves and others sooner, there would have been less injuries. Despite the fact they were not carrying guns doesnít mean they were unarmed or defenseless. I think it does point out a trend in our society to, without question, hand over their responsibility to defend themselves by mistakenly wishing and thinking the local authorities will come to their rescue. Itís the sheep, sheep dog, wolf effect. They didnít want the sheep dog hanging around and were then at the mercy of the wolf. Even worse, apparently the people directly involved during this massacre failed to understand the power of a mob and continued with their selfishness hoping they would my some magic prevail.

I donít think the news media caused this incident, but I certainly agree they have contributed to our societies lack of taking responsibility and for the most part I think all the networks are rotten to the coreÖ..including Fox News.


fredzilla 05-18-2007 10:51 PM

The only person to blame is the man with his finger on the trigger

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:51 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.