VPI Tragedy Entry (6:23pm Update)

6:23pm (the reference frame blog) – Supposed student account with SPECULATION of the gunman’s identity.

6:15 pm (AP) — List of deadliest campus shootings.

5:30pm (SFN) — Press conference just ended in Blacksburg. There was a student reporter from “15 minutes down the road” that you could identify as an amateur a mile way. The kid should not be allowed back to the 7:30pm briefing; he was horrible and embarassed himself beyond reproach.

5:20pm (BBC) — Eyewitness emails.

5:20 pm (Michelle Malkin) — You can also see an eyewitness email here. It is pretty amazing. The author calls the response from authorities “exemplary”.

5:15pm (ABC) — ABC News is running a fascinatingly perverted poll asking if the shooting is grounds for more gun control? I don’t understand this at all. Guns are already banned at Virginia Tech. They are ‘illegal’ in Norris Hall (where the murders occured). How is the solution to defend yourself against a deranged murderer who doesn’t care about ANY laws to tighten restrictions to keep guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens? (For the record, I have never owned a gun.)

^ This was pretty easy to call. Many pundits were predicting it almost immediately. The following comments were interesting.

As the initial shock wears off you can bet that the anti-Second Amendment people wall be coming out of the woodwork. By the time the evening network newscasts hit we will have no shortage of spokesmen for various anti-gun groups stepping forth to issue their tired call for an end to the private ownership of handguns.

…earlier this year the Virginia General Assembly failed to act on House Bill 1572. This bill would have allowed college students and employees to carry handguns on campus — with appropriate permits, of course. It died in subcommittee. Larry Hincker, a spokesman for Virginia Tech, the site of today’s carnage, said “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.”

How’s today for safety?

If it had been legal for students, employees or faculty members with permits to carry guns on the campus, is it at all possible that there might be some students alive today who didn’t make it through the carnage? Do you think the actions of the Virginia General Assembly stopped the gunman from getting his guns and carrying them to the campus?

This is undoubtedly the worst school shooting, high school, college or otherwise, in the history of our country. There are some facts, however, about some of these school shootings of which you probably are not aware. Do you know, for instance, that at least three shootings in high schools were stopped by civilians with guns? Civilians, not law enforcement. In one case a civilian was traveling past a school when he saw children running from the building. One told him that there was a student inside shooting people. The civilian pulled his gun, ran in side, and confronted the student. The student put down the gun and surrendered. In another case a high school vice-principal heard that there was a student in the hallways with a gun. He sprinted a half-mile to his car. He had a gun in his car so he had to park off campus. He then sprinted back with the gun to confront the student. Lives saved.

The point here is that you are never ever going to get the guns out of the hands of those who want to use them for carnage. Never. Gun control programs will only succeed in getting the guns out of the hands of people who want them and need them for self-defense. Never, in the history of America’s gun control movement, has anyone set forth a viable program to get the guns out of the hands of those who would use them to commit crimes. Similarly, the gun control movement will never give any fair coverage at all to the people who use guns to save their own lives, or the lives of others.

Perhaps it is prudent to recall some history related to today’s situation.

Late Afternoon (ABC) — 33 people confirmed dead. ABC News has some of “the first pictures” from the tragedy available here.

1:20 pm (ABC) — At 1:20pm ABCNews reported at least 32 fatalities with the number expected to rise.

Police at Virginia Tech say that the shootings happened at a dormitory and a classroom on opposite sides of the university campus in Blacksburg, Va.

Virginia Tech Police Chief Wendell Flinchum said that one person was killed in the first shooting, just after 7 a.m. at West Ambler Johnston Hall, a large dormitory. Flinchum said that at least 20 more people were killed in a later shooting at Norris Hall, an academic building.

(CNN) — The Virginia Tech police chief said at least 20 people were killed in twin shootings on the Blacksburg campus Monday morning. “Some victims were shot in a classroom,” Chief Wendell Flinchum said, adding that the gunman was dead.

(SFN) — Our prayers are with any and everyone with any connection to Blacksburg and VPI.

About StateFans

'StateFansNation' is the shared profile used by any/all of the dozen or so authors that contribute to the blog. You may not always agree with us, but you will have little doubt about where we stand on most issues. Please follow us on Twitter and FaceBook

General

111 Responses to VPI Tragedy Entry (6:23pm Update)

  1. bTHEredterror 04/17/2007 at 4:23 PM #

    The fact that HUMANS are going to control the “inanimate pieces of metal” is the concern redfred. By that rationale, lets drop the concern for Nuclear proliferation, after all, nukes are just inanimate pieces of metal too.

  2. branjawn 04/17/2007 at 4:27 PM #

    noah: “Uhh….the WH press briefing yesterday????”

    “Dana Perino, a White House spokeswoman, deflected questions about gun control Monday by saying the administration is focused on “enforcing all of the gun laws that we have on the books and making sure that they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.” “If there are changes to the president’s policy, then we will let you know,” Perino said. Congressional Quarterly

    “I believe this will reignite the dormant effort to pass common-sense gun regulations in this nation,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein said Monday.

  3. noah 04/17/2007 at 4:36 PM #

    Exactly. Thansk for that. I was watching it on C-Span as she said it. She might as well have worn an NRA t-shirt while she did it.

    I’m still not sure where the Patriot Act comes in.

  4. branjawn 04/17/2007 at 4:43 PM #

    Noah, you seriously misrepresented the President in saying “And of course, the president of the US…even before expressing horror or sorrow for the victims…sought to assure the NRA that he wouldn’t be urging more gun control.” Unless “sought to assure the NRA” is code for a WH spokeperson responded to a question from the media.

  5. branjawn 04/17/2007 at 4:44 PM #

    Maybe she WAS wearing an NRA t-shirt. you know, like Clark Kent wears his tights under his suit.

  6. branjawn 04/17/2007 at 4:44 PM #

    The Patriot Act has nothing to do with this, agreed.

  7. redfred2 04/17/2007 at 5:24 PM #

    Well, since no one has used for them gathering food for centuries and there is really only one intended purpose for a nuclear warhead, bTHEred, I would say that your argument doesn’t hold much water. On the other hand though, if people were out there randomly lobbing those nuclear warheads without any education or fear of consequences, I could then see how that relates to where right now, right here, in the good ol’ US of A.

  8. redfred2 04/17/2007 at 5:27 PM #

    ^to where “we are”…

  9. bTHEredterror 04/17/2007 at 8:24 PM #

    The principle is the same, redfred. “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people” was an implied statement you made. Sub in any weapon and you have the same principle, although admittedly nukes have been handled differently than guns.

    And Cho is good comparison to Iran in my argument. You control nukes because not every government is responsible, and the consequences are dire. Responsible gun owners are not and never have been the problem, in much the same way America and Russia are not the problem with nukes.

  10. redfred2 04/18/2007 at 8:57 AM #

    bTHEredterror, please bear with me here, this is another of my convoluted posts, but I think it makes my point.

    As far as the nuclear issue, in a perfect utopia, they wouldn’t exist. I’ve said it on this thread already, I welcome and have no problem whatsoever with better and more thorough gun controls. I just happen to believe that certain people are so busy working overtime to make sure that we have free and unfettered access to so many sources of information/entertainment that are possibly more of dire consequence, and while doing so they are also giving our children free access to those same sources, that some of those kids are being swept away well before their minds are able discern what is actual reality. Then, after years and years of disregard, without monitoring, everyone thinking it’s probably all OK, along the total denial that these sources may have done irreparable damage to certain members of our society, all of those sources and contributing factors are STILL being very much denied as part of the problem right now. And those same people come back again AFTER the abhorrent effects of their own denial have played out in our society, and then try to boil it all down to an absolutely ignorant and totally oversimplified issue of gun control.

  11. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 10:28 AM #

    So, after hearing about how psychologically unstable this guy was (not to state the obvious) and how he had been referred to counselors, psychs, and the faculty/admin had been made aware of his disturbing writings, I think a starting point for dialogs is finding a way to keep people showing these symptoms from getting a gun. How about a blanket rule, if you are on drugs for depression, NO GUNS. For the record, I am a gun owner, and I think it would be in our best interest to take measure to keep the guns out of the hands of psychos (not out of the hands of those who could have stopped this carnage though).

  12. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 10:43 AM #

    So his English teacher (subject, not language) is said to have taken him out of the class b/c the other students stopped attending out of fear of him. So she took him out of the class, and taught him one-on-one so that the other students would feel safe. Why not expel him from school if he is so creepy and unnerving that other students stop going to class out of fear of him? I’m pretty sure going to college is not a right protected in the Constitution. I’m not saying it would have kept him from snapping, but at least he wouldn’t have had a “base” on campus to work out of. There are so many lessons to learn from this tragedy. It seems nothing was learned from Columbine though.

  13. BJD95 04/18/2007 at 11:45 AM #

    I would just like to resoundingly approve of what VA Governor Tim Kaine said, as reported by The Washington Post:

    Kaine warned against making snap judgments and said he had “nothing but loathing” for those who take the tragedy and “make it their political hobby horse to ride.”

  14. redfred2 04/18/2007 at 11:56 AM #

    bran, I agree, common sense is totally overruled by the court of law. You just can’t infringe even on one disturbed individual’s rights, no matter how many people it puts in harms way. This a case of wrecklessly pushing the rule of law and potlitical correctness well beyond the ideas on which they were written, with total disregard for those they were wriiten to protect, and in order to everyone equally, even this guy. It’s done without any regards towards common sense or even considering the consequences. Just a run amuck, bunch of crapola.

  15. bTHEredterror 04/18/2007 at 12:01 PM #

    redfred I gotcha. Both my parents are teachers, and they feel the kids nowadays are a little over stimulated by all the media resources thay have.

    I think what is apparent from the information about Cho’s writings is that he was announcing his problems for the world to see. I can’t fault faculty for not expelling him, either. Many “artists” thru the years have been misunderstood, and in our culture of inclusion we seek to allow opportunity even for eccentrics. Steven King’s writing can be disturbing, too you know. But the directed hate at particular groups, rich kids and religious people, was the cry for help. Terrifying to think he was so vague in his prejudices.
    In the end, we can use Cho’s writings to understand the mentality of the type of monster that would do this. Maybe we can prevent the next attack.

  16. BillyTheKid 04/18/2007 at 1:11 PM #

    A gun in the home is 4 times more likely to be involved in an unintentional shooting and 11 times more likely to be used to attempt or commit suicide than to be used in self-defence. A gun in the home increases the risk of homicide of a household member by 3 times and the risk of suicide by 5 times compared to homes where no gun is present.
    Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence, “Statistics, Facts, & Quotes”

    “We have cracked down on library books, cell phone calls, fertilizer purchases and wearing shoes in the airport, but we have done almost nothing at the state level to make it harder for either a terrorist, garden variety armed robber, or young person to get their hands on a handgun.”
    Sarah Brady

  17. redfred2 04/18/2007 at 2:10 PM #

    bTHEterror, I agree, at this point in time I can’t blame anyone at VT, or anywhere, except the shooter himself, for what took place up there. It’s just seems to be another stop on the road we’re now traveling.

    BillyTheKid, funny name, considering your post. “Unintentional shootings”, huh? What exactly is that? Is that like an unintentional knifing, while preparing a salad. I agree with Sarah Brady BTW though. Like I’ve said before, it is simple common sense and learned respect for an object. People who do not have any idea of what a gun can do, should never, ever own one. That includes if they bought it for self protection or otherwise. Also, every new or used gun, and especially handguns, should come standard with a matching numbered and separate trigger lock contained in the box. Then, the person who purchased it is held criminally responsible for all consequences and criminally liable for not having it in place whether damages occur or not.

    They have changed for certain, but it’s not that guns have changed that much since back when a ten or twelve year old boy used one regularly in his daily life. It’s that the focus of what they’re intended for within the general population, has been corrupted. The people who are allowed to have them nowadays don’t anymore know that idea, the hunting, target shooting aspects, or any first hand knowledge of what that firearm can do then the man in the moon. Neither then, does their kid, who picks one up after it’s carelessly left within their reach, an then shots themselves, or someone else nearby, simply because of their parents ignorance.

  18. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 2:25 PM #

    BTK, please provide evidence for your claims. In order to dismantle your numbers I need to know where they came from.

  19. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 2:26 PM #

    And if you say Kellermann, you might want to save yourself the embarrassment and log out.

  20. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 2:40 PM #

    Sorry, after reading that, it was mean and unkind. Seriously, I take that back. I get heated up easily. I disagree, and implore you to visit the validity of the data you are siting as it has many flaws. Once again, sorry for the harsh remarks BTK.

  21. BillyTheKid 04/18/2007 at 2:45 PM #

    Glad you like my name Fred. I think you have hit on something. The guns have changed. When you were 10 – 12 years old how many people owned semiautomatic/automatic handguns? In 2000, over 6,500 machine guns were registered in the state of North Carolina. What the #%#$ do we need machine guns for?

  22. BillyTheKid 04/18/2007 at 2:50 PM #

    Branjawn, I did tell were my clams came from. No need to say you are sorry, I’ve been called every name in the book:>)>

  23. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 2:51 PM #

    Do you know how hard it is to get a machine gun?? I know someone who owns, he is about 60 years old with a pristine “record”. According to my knowledge from him, he had to get a permit from The Sheriff (not the office, not the dept, Donnie Harrison) to purchase the machine gun. So, I don’t think they will get into the wrong hands. It’s tightly regulated. Most (if not all) are gun collectors.

  24. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 3:02 PM #

    BTK, I went to the ICHV site and yes, they use the Kellermann stats. All available data now (Kell’s research was gathered 1988-1993) indicates that the home gun homicide victims in Kellerman’s study were killed using guns not kept in the victim’s home. In other words, the victims were NOT murdered with their own guns! Also, it was found it was not the ownership of firearms that put these victims at high risk. Rather, it was the victim’s high-risk life-styles [such as criminal associations] that caused them to own guns at higher rates than the members of the supposedly comparable control group.
    http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/58tenn.pdf

  25. branjawn 04/18/2007 at 3:04 PM #

    Oh, almost forgot: Counting a gun suicide as part of the increased risk of having a gun in the home is appropriate only if the presence of a gun facilitates a “successful” suicide that would not otherwise occur. But most research suggests that guns do not cause suicide. Gun control sometimes reduces gun suicide, but not overall suicide. Japan, which prohibits handguns and rifles entirely, and regulates long guns very severely, has a suicide rate of more than twice the U.S.

Leave a Reply