Virginia Tech and Gun Control....?
how long will it be before left-wing radicals seize upon this tragedy to insist that more gun control will prevent all violent crime?
Assuming the killer obtained the guns legally, he carried them illegeally, brought them onto the campus illegally and went about shooting 32 people (also illegal). but apparently some think more laws will do the trick.
how about this... what if more law abiding citizens carried weapons to defend themselves? if a few VT students had been carrying, maybe the killer would have been stopped sooner.
for some reason the left-wing wants to leave innocents defenseless and only allow criminals to have guns.
- 1 decade agoBest Answer
This comes down to the age old question of whether the socialist idea of being able to create a perfect human being is a possibility - as so many left wing liberals continue to believe, it is; this ideology says its not the individuals fault who shot all the people, its society and the gov't's fault and somehow someone messed up; man is science and he can be perfected with the right system.
Alternatively, as many classical liberals believe, humans are imperfect and fallable and make choices. This ideology chooses personal responsibility and accountability over victims and excuses.
I tend to respond with the latter; this kid made alot of personal choices and its about time we start standing up and saying that this 23 yr. old killed a heck of alot of other people, the guns were merely a means. Removing the means does not solve the problem. Left wingers may rally for more gun control, in a self fulfilling sense that they accomplished change, but more regulations curb more law abiding citizens' freedoms while doing nothing to solve the real underlying problem.
- rmagedonLv 61 decade ago
The brainwashed want to leave people in the defense of the congress, the congress wants to leave you defenseless from them. Those are the facts.
The 2nd is about defending yourself from a tyrannical congress, period. ANYONE who goes after your weapons is seeking to either support or become a tyrannical government. Just look at Hitler and others, they took the weapons first.
I believe that VT is responsible with its rules about weapons on campus, it is a violation of the 2nd amendment. The supreme court ruled that all amendments msust be supported and allowed on schools, anything to the contrary is a violation of the law.
Congress has done two things here that make them culpable, the allowed aliens to have constitutional rights, and they will not let anyone search your medical records to see if you are being treated for mental defect prior to purchasing a weapon. I do not want any restrictions on the 2nd but might be inclined to have people verify mental fitness by examination of all medical records.
This could not have been prevented. Laws do not prevent crime. Police do not prevent crime. Only an armed citizen could have prevented or at least mitigated this tragedy. And the school and the congress have prevented that from happening.
- liuxuandeLv 41 decade ago
The killer was a legal permanent resident with a green card, and therefore, he did obtain the handgun, a 9mm Glock, legally. Gun control laws would make obtaining such a weapon harder to do, if no illegal altogether. If it's illegal to obtain the weapon, then all the illegal actions that occurred after wouldn't have occurred.
It's not a good idea to guns in everyone's hand and hope they shoot the bad guys. You never know what might happen if everyone had a firearm, especially on a college campus. Not that I'm against or for gun control, I just think that your suggestions are outrageous.
- 1 decade ago
Gun Control will come in increments
This Awareness indicates that instead, the approach would be to disarm them in small increments, taking away certain rights, requiring registration of guns and so forth, beginning with what is obvious: the disarming of children, which is obviously a necessity, and moving from there to the next step, registering guns and investigating gun buyers before selling a gun to them, et. cetera. By creating many little laws regarding the ownership of guns, the hope is that there can be a gradual changing in the consciousness in regard to licensing and regulating gun ownership, and if entities can be licensed, then everyone who owns a gun is known in terms of location and the ownership of the gun, which makes it easier for ever future government to locate those people having guns,.
There can also be taxation placed on guns at some future date, and there can also be the action of government control over the bullets, and in so controlling the bullets and the making of the shells for these guns, the government can make the guns useless, or near useless. This Awareness indicates that there are many ways whereby the government may attempt through one increment after another to disarm the people, even if they cannot get them to give up their ownership of their hand-gun.
This Awareness indicates that it is something that entities may wish to consider and to watch carefully in terms of what is coming next in the attempt to disarm the people. This Awareness indicates that when people are totally disarmed and the ownership of guns are only in the hands of criminals and government forces, then the people will be at the mercy of the criminals and the government forces.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
Speaking of left-wing radicals, I think Republicans already have a strict gun control program in place. It's called watching the gun shops and shooting ranges like a hawk for anyone they consider left-of-center. Or, don't you think a Black man who is not in law enforcement will raise some eyebrows at a shooting range? Nevertheless, all the berserkers seem to come from the right. I support gun control in NYC which makes possession of a handgun a felony--an invaluable aid to law enforcement. Beyond that, national gun control--even if it were judged to be desirable--is a pipe dream. It seems wrong that the VT victims should be such easy victims. Maybe requiring faculty to bear arms--much against their natural bents no doubt--is not a bad idea.
- 1 decade ago
Your assuing this guy got a gun legally! Here in Detroit I can go downtown and get a handgun in about 20 mintues illegally.
No law for or against gun control is gonna make one bit of difference either way.
Beside we can't have armed law abiding citizens carrying weapons around! That would scare the crap outta the police who are too busy enforcing things like the Patriot Act who this very moment are wiretapping us all case we type in the word GUN!
I mean jeez whatever were you thinking! Your thoughts borderline crimethink citizen!
Good luck all and remember to be inside before curfew cause it is now a punishable by death offense.
- characterLv 51 decade ago
I got your back Rat P. When the laws here made it esier for law biding citizens to be armed, Concealed, crime against individuals dropped significantly, especially against women.
There are no laws to protect against the maniacs in this world, and especially not against the people who are victims themselves, of the drug companies pushing Drs to prescribe anti depressants of dangerous nature. This shooter was on prescribed meds for depression, same as the kids at Columbine.
There are plenty of laws about the possesion and use of fire arms. The laws only make a difference to law biding citizens., not criminals or maniacs. I want to be able to shoot back if someone shoots at me. I want my family members trained and able.
Lord Vel, he had a reciept for one of the guns, a legal purchase, don't know about the other gun, there were two...
- dapixelatorLv 61 decade ago
Our society will not easily support total gun control as it is in say some EU countries or say Japan. Even IF we were able to implement their level of gun control, there would still be issues. And if there were no gun control, there would be the same (or greater issues). Culture in the US is not the same as in other countries. We have a high crime rate than many other countries and its not just because of gun control/or lack thereof.
- kelchnerLv 43 years ago
in the experience that your detrimental to the 2nd modification then do no longer very own weapons. the reason human beings have firearms tiers from own protection to to sport. in spite of in case you like or no longer peolpe have those rights. I imagie somebody who has been the sufferer of two violent crimes may be extra sympathetic to the appropriate to bear hands. yet another component to contemplate isn't anybody lives in a considerable city the place police respond at as quickly as. In rural factors weapons are the two a convention and a necessity. I too used to stay in NYC, so i will relate to 3 of what your asserting. even though, residing in a rural Southwestern section, wild animals are actually my greatest threat, and on accasion making use of a firearm has been necessary. What human beings do no longer seem to understand is, that no matter what share gun rules you bypass, you could no longer legislate what absolutely everyone seems to be going to do with them while they purchase one.
- 1 decade ago
They are jumping at the bit now.
So far, it looks like he did purchase them legally. But He only had a green card, was not a citizen of the US. I dont feel that non citizens should be allowed to buy or posses guns here.