TargetTalk

A Massacre of 30+ people at Virginia Tech today will be cause celebre for another round of anti-gun talk. Right now we have the Pelosi D-CA-attempt to renew the infamous Clinton ban some 16 years ago. The part of this bill is the actual mention of the Ruger 10/22 rifle which outlaws the receiver and classifies the gun as an automatic assault rifle. I love this gun and have spent big bucks modifying the Ruger to a beautiful tack driver, probably the only thing I kept from the original was the receiver---go figure.Here in New York State we call this week "Anti-Gun Week." The State Senate and Assembly are taking up a half dozen plus bills which will outlaw the .50 calibre rifles, make us register all firearms including long guns, black powder guns, and require us to provide a spent cartridges for all pistols and rifles including "collector grade" long guns as well. With the UN's own anti-gun agenda still on the docket, we soon may find ourselves in the pitiful state the UK, Canada and Australia are in, unable to defend themselves totally dependent on police forces that already cannot handle most situations that arise for the everyday citizen. Ain't life just dandy for the honest law abiding citizen, one woman with San Francisco "values" can attempt to destroy the 2nd Amendment of our constitution.

not to sound insensitive, but DAMN IT! it's idiots like this guy who f-it up for the rest of us. this whole act is disgusting and cowardly. already i saw on an online video talk of the clinton gun ban and how letting it expire allows for a magazine to hold an extra 9 rounds... it's all a tragedy.

i'm also surprised there isn't more talk out here about this.

My thoughts are with the victims. My school's athletic rivalry with Va. Tech seems pretty trivial right now.

This type of tragedy is what cost Australia and Great Britain their guns. One nutcase kills dozens and this the reason to take guns away from everyone. Emotion takes over. No common sense is used.

We need some more info to see how this happened. It appears that the shooter may have been a foreign national on a student visa. I don't think such a person is allowed under BATF rules to buy a gun so we will have to wait and hear how he got one.

Watching the news I was thinking about how the anti-gun people were going to react. However, maybe if there had been a law abiding citizen with a concealed weapons permit at the site of the tragedy, some lives could have been saved. It all depends on how you look at it.

My prayers to the victims and their families.

Carlos

PaulB wrote: It appears that the shooter may have been a foreign national on a student visa. I don't think such a person is allowed under BATF rules to buy a gun so we will have to wait and hear how he got one.

Friend of mine was in the U.S. for two years on some type of extended visa. He was allowed to purchase firearms.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker was happy to hear the bill was defeated. "I'm sure the university community is appreciative of the General Assembly's actions because this will help parents, students, faculty and visitors feel safe on our campus."

Yes, I am sure there was much safety felt today. Yes, I am bitter that delusional people who think the world all so nice, allow sick delusional people the right to do this sort of thing by creating vacuums where an ill inidividual can create havoc because he/she knows there is no one to stop him.

According to Fox News, this guy was a Chinese national, been in the country for one year. They haven't yet stated whether he was a student.

They compared this incident to the Luby's Caffeteria shooting in Texas. As with that incident, haven't heard anyone mention some lives may have been saved, had someone had acess to a gun. Schools are a perfect target, not allowing the teachers, much less the students, the means to protect themselves.

The Brady Bunch must be all a twitter!

A disgusted Paul

When a person, company or other organization prevents a person from carrying or possesing a weapon to defend themselves then it seems to me that the organization is taking on the responsibility to protect the unarmed person(s). When the organization falls down on it's assumed responibility they should be held accountable. Perhaps when they are held accountable in court they won't be so eager to assume the responsibilty.

As quoted by someone posting on cnn.com

"A school gun-free zone that is not patrolled by armed police is actually a school kill-zone".

The shooter was a South Korean national who has lived in the USA since he was 8 years old, he was 23, with a greencard, therefore able to purchase a pistol. Why he would bother filing off the serial numbers, and yet keep a receipt of the purchase is hard to imagine.

Of course it now comes to light that the content of his creative English classes was so extreme that that he was referred to a counselor. Also he was suffering from depression (one can only imagine what kind of anti-depressants he was on).

Sadly this trajedy could happen at almost any college campus in the USA.

Sadly this trajedy could happen at almost any college campus in the USA.

Actually, it could easily happen on any college campus in the world.

The Monash University shooting of a few years ago was done by a Chinese National who obtained a 1911 45 illegally. The media at the time claimed he was a licensed shooter, but seeing as he spoke not a work of English, this is garbage. That little incident led to the banning of a bunch of pistols and their latest round of buybacks in Australia.

Note how the media feeding frenzy is so international. Within a few hours of the shooting they had South African, Swedish and goodness knows what other nationalities of film crews descending on VT. Hundreds die every week in terrorist acts in the middle east and none of them bats an eyelid. Give them something that can give leverage against (horror of horrors) a gun-friendly society, and they trip over each other trying to sensationalize.

Yes, I repeat, this could happen anywhere in the world, but apparently it's more newsworthy when it happens here in the US.

I am not a terribly sentimental person by any means. But the fellow sitting next to me right now is a recent graduate. He is looking up articles and checking the VT website for information. I know several professors myself, having worked with them on business matters that included breaking bread and having a few beers after hours. Those professors were probably in the next building.

I see how this is affecting these people. Let us first think about the victims as human beings, as friends, etc. Feel that first, then let us think about what the anti-gunners will do to our sport. They will use our lack of showing compassion against us.

Bob, I grew up on Long Island, I know how bad things are. I am glad I live in Virginia.

But this massacre has affected me personally.

Sad as the incident was-I don't think it could have been prevented.It turns out he (the killer)was involved with the Police at least twice-STALKING.He was court investigated as MENTALLY unstable-Who let him out of the system?? He was asked to leave permanently from his class by his teacher-who feared he was DANGEROUS. He was turned in to the authorities,by his teacher-who felt his writings indicated he might be UNSTABLE and seemed -EXTREMELY ANGRY. I think there were enough signs out there for a reasonable history check on this man, that might have prevented the sale of these guns to him. Was this information,on him,INVISIBLE to the investigating authorities?? Perhaps the authorities didn't do that good a job checking his history as the law REQUIRES?? Because of ARCHAIC privacy laws in gun purchases?? Anyone out there think we need more gun laws when we can't or won't enforce the ones we have now?? We have met the enemy-seems it is ourselves.

Well, the "period of respectful mourning/healing" must be over. NBC (et al) are showing the multimedia "manifesto" from the killer (at least several family members have cancelled their interviews with NBC in protest). And the talking heads are in full rant over "How Could This Happen." And the push is on to Do Something. Book deals with the victims families (and ex roomates of shooter and victims) are surely under way.

The war drums are beating louder now- "best case scenario" we are going to see 1) "gun show loophole" closed (even though it was irrelevant to this case) and 2) modification to NICS system; liberalizing access from states to include disqualifying conditions.

States can already disqualify under NICS under the Prevention of Violence Against Women Act . . . I can see increased access to state agencies allowing disqualification for a wider set of issues.

The alarms this sets off are obvious of course- under NICS, the burden of proof is on the individual to "prove your innocence" and I'm not sure this level of prior restraint would be tolerated for any of our other civil rights.

And Oh By The Way- we are only a couple of years away from NICS disqualification being used as criteria for confiscation; i.e., your membership in NICS database "backflows" through states to local LE for action . . .

It all makes sense; it all seems reasonable; the vast majority of the public (shooting public included) will wholeheartedly endorse all three changes listed.

Indeed, several of the so-called "Conservative" talking heads are already calling for such changes to the law.

Steve

It's possible HR 1022 will pass, along with a lot of other idiotic gun control crap, but I think it's too soon to tell.

I agree, it's too bad there wasn't even one armed individual in there who might have stopped this, both because it's sad that so many young, innocent people were killed and because it might have more clearly made the case for why allowing concealed carry is good policy. Otoh, the VT spokesman going on record so recently to crow that disallowing lawful carry on their campus made everyone feel "safer" is a little too macabre for anyone to ignore.

At a minimum, the Democrats do still remember that the Clinton AW ban probably cost them the 2000 election. There also seems to be a growing realization that the statistics simply don't support such bans: These guns aren't the ones being used in crimes and the ones that are (e.g., 9mm Glocks like the one used by Cho) are simply too popular for it to be politically viable to attempt any ban on them.

My very guarded but optimistic opinion right now is that the most likely outcome will be no change in the legal environment for gun owners in the US and that if there is any change, it will be toward increased support for right to carry.

Ernie Rodriguez wrote:Sad as the incident was-I don't think it could have been prevented.It turns out he (the killer)was involved with the Police at least twice-STALKING.He was court investigated as MENTALLY unstable-Who let him out of the system?? He was asked to leave permanently from his class by his teacher-who feared he was DANGEROUS. He was turned in to the authorities,by his teacher-who felt his writings indicated he might be UNSTABLE and seemed -EXTREMELY ANGRY. I think there were enough signs out there for a reasonable history check on this man, that might have prevented the sale of these guns to him. Was this information,on him,INVISIBLE to the investigating authorities?? Perhaps the authorities didn't do that good a job checking his history as the law REQUIRES?? Because of ARCHAIC privacy laws in gun purchases?? Anyone out there think we need more gun laws when we can't or won't enforce the ones we have now?? We have met the enemy-seems it is ourselves.

we have to be really careful when touching upon this subject. first of all in hindsight we can see this adding up, however we can't make the assumption that everyone with these similar problems are going to become mass murders. then there's the whole aspect that you can't force treatment upon someone, and if you think that in some cases the government should be able to, you've just opened a pandora's box of problems. we talked a bit about this in class today. medical records fall under strict confidentiality laws. can a background check even tap into that, and would we really want our other rights to disappear like that? if you say yes, then where do you draw the line? yeah, they say he was a danger to himself and others, but they can't hold people in hospitals for more than just a few days, and to have someone committed takes a lot of proof, paperwork, and dealing with the legal system. the whole thing is a mess, but in reality there is no one source of blame. our society is trying to find one, but in this case it's not there. that's what's really scary.

I recently moved from Chicago to Cincinnati and have been looking for a club to join. There is a BIG problem now, though, thanks to lunatics like Cho; I am an ORIENTAL.

I miss my good old airgun club in Arlington Heights... I didn't do anything, but quite honestly, I am a little afraid of joining a new club now.

Do I have to give up my beloved sport because of murderers like this guy? It's just awful...

Makoto, I'm surprised and deeply disappointed to hear that the shooters at this new club would be giving you grief about being Asian just because of Cho. Were you getting nasty comments or outright harassment?

Hello Nicole,

No, no, I don't belong anywhere now. I am just afraid of joining a gun club, going to a gun shop, or a shooting range. Unfortunately, I do hear such racial comments like "Kill ALL Asians!" That will make anyone uncomfortable. It is really unfortunate.

I love target shooting, though. It's just so beautiful to learn to be in complete control of oneself spiritually and physically. Just the oposite of what this murderer did.

Then I hope you'll give it a try and go investigate this new club. You might be pleasantly surprised to find they're completely open and receptive. I hope so. At the club I'm at out here in WA, I know I'd be appalled and amazed and quite frankly, pretty angry if I learned that someone was having problems there just because of their ethnicity.

Shooting is obviously important to you; you shouldn't give up anything important without at least trying.