Author Topic: Gunman kills 30 at US University (Read 16317 times)

StreakInTheSky · « **Reply #40 on:** April 18, 2007, 02:40:09 AM »

lol I thought of that, but don't think it's going to go as far as that. Though I could see some backlash from this. It's kinda funny cause when they first showed the guy's photo on TV, some guy walked in front of me who looked a lot like him.

THUNDERDUCK · « **Reply #41 on:** April 18, 2007, 02:48:54 AM »

A friend of mine called me and said the killer looked like you. Reinforcement for women that "he's Asian, so he's probably boring and psychotic."

arun.yothin · « **Reply #42 on:** April 18, 2007, 02:51:21 AM »

It won't go that far. There will be a few ignorant people who will take it that far. This doesn't seem like an "Us vs. Them" motivated kinda thing.

Guchi_Jnr · « **Reply #43 on:** April 18, 2007, 03:23:29 AM »

Just by reading this thread, you can tell who's most likely American and who's not, by the ones that say America doesn't need to review their gun laws. :shakes head:

Back in '96, Martin Bryant went on a killing spree in Tasmania, Australia. 19hrs later, 35 victims had been fatally shot. Because of this, Australia's gun laws were promptly changed. But still, it was one too many shooting sprees.

How many more shooting sprees need to happen in America before they realize their constitution is seriously outdated??

nop · « **Reply #44 on:** April 18, 2007, 03:53:47 AM »

Nagasaki mayor was shot dead yesterday in Japan by a lone elderly yakuza gunman. He was shot at the subway station during mayoral re-election campaign. Japan also prohibit gun ownership for individual.
US needs to tighten gun control law. But terrible things like this will never stop.

StreakInTheSky · « **Reply #45 on:** April 18, 2007, 03:57:05 AM »

I never said gun laws don't need to be reviewed. I think the whole Bill of Rights needs to be reviewed to some extent. I still think qualified trained people should be able to have a gun if they wished and must keep it away from access to other people.

But you can't prevent a person from going mad and killing people by changing gun laws.

Do we even know how this guy got the gun in the first place?

There are a lot more details to this than just "oh it's cause he could just buy a gun at the local wal-mart when he wanted to".

arun.yothin · « **Reply #46 on:** April 18, 2007, 04:02:15 AM »

They know that he did obtain one gun legally. I haven't heard anything about the other one though. Even with better laws, he could have gotten guns illegally.

Ching1670 · « **Reply #47 on:** April 18, 2007, 04:17:24 AM »

But still, don't you think better gun control regulation would reduce the % of people getting shot randomly?

arun.yothin · « **Reply #48 on:** April 18, 2007, 04:23:31 AM »

It would decrease the occurrence, though I don't think by a huge amount. I think more for the spur of the moment murders. Ones that are planned out would probably decrease by a little. A little bit is better than nothing. I never said that we couldn't benefit from better laws. Before, people made it seem like the only reason this happened was because our gun laws are so loose.

Guchi_Jnr · « **Reply #49 on:** April 18, 2007, 05:18:54 AM »

Due to the "right to keep and bear arms" crap, America just has a stupid amount of guns per capita, which in turn makes it possible to sell and buy illegal firearms so easily. (sell and report it stolen)

Again with Australia, after the Port Arthur Massacre, the government introduced a "Gun Buy Back" scheme where people could sell their legal/illegal firearms back to the government, no questions asked.

Zhanmadao · « **Reply #50 on:** April 18, 2007, 06:16:05 AM »

Horrible, how people are judging people by their race. I read the comment on how "Asians are going to become the new Muslims". How narrow-minded you are to say such a thing like that.

1. Not every person who follows the Islam faith is a Radical Muslim, such as the suicide bombers and such.
2. I am certain that Seung-Hi did not attempt this because of his faith.

Take Charles Joseph Whitman for example. He killed 15 people and attempted to kill 30 others. I've yet to hear that the Americans are the terrorists, bad guys or whatever. What makes a person a killer is their own mind, not because of the race they were born into.

StreakInTheSky · « **Reply #51 on:** April 18, 2007, 07:34:33 AM »

Quote from: Guchi_Jnr on April 18, 2007, 05:18:54 AM

Due to the "right to keep and bear arms" crap, America just has a stupid amount of guns per capita, which in turn makes it possible to sell and buy illegal firearms so easily. (sell and report it stolen)

I agree that that part of the US constitution is stupid. But the constitution will not be changed because many of those people don't want restrictions on them being able to have a gun.

States and cities though are allowed to have their own gun laws. California itself has some of the strictest gun laws in the nation, but some of the cities with the highest rate of gun violence is in California. Of course these are not televised like this particular incident. Many of these cases are of a smaller scale and happen more frequently with many of them done by illegally obtained weapons(I've personally been affected by stuff like this). If we were to adopt a stricter policy as Australia did, I don't see much change going to happen as it will do little to stop the black market of firearms distribution already established and will probably make things worse.

But that's just locally. There are many places in the US and in California where you can't even imagine gun violence to occur. Most of those places have relatively weak gun laws and can probably benefit from stricter laws. Virginia is probably one of them. Though a doubt that would've prevented a guy with a clean record from eventually getting his guns.

The US is too big and diverse to apply a strict federal gun law on, I think.

Daisuki Daiiyo · « **Reply #52 on:** April 18, 2007, 07:51:53 AM »

lol Stricter gun laws would just make things worse.

People are stubborn by nature, when they're told not to do something, or if something is forbidden they're more likely to do it just because of that high they get from 'Teehee I'm doing something bad.' Some might not even give 2 shits about the gun itself, but might get one just to make that 'You can't control me blah-blah' statement.

I'm reminded of when America tried to ban alcoholic beverages a looong loooong time ago, and people ended up just drinking more and more. Moonshine or whatever became really popular and alcohol consumption went up and etcetc, so they just decided to make Alcohol legal again.

Anyway, point is that the more you try to restrict people, the more they're going to rebel. Maybe not because they agree with the cause, but maybe just for the sake of rebelling, because people are like that.

"Tell me something I can't do, and I'll do it."

Guchi_Jnr · « **Reply #53 on:** April 18, 2007, 08:21:45 AM »

^ I take it you're American. :p

harlock · « **Reply #54 on:** April 18, 2007, 08:55:25 AM »

lol internets. I love how something like this can turn into gun control policy dick-waving contest. I think instead of criticizing another country's policies, or wondering what gun control laws could of prevented this incident, we should be asking why someone would do this in the first place. I think it's more important to try to understand what could bring a person to do something so horrible, stop dwelling on the "how" and start looking for the "why". I doesn't matter how hard it becomes to get a hold of a firearm, murderous intent is not proportional to accessibility weapons.

(and Guchi_Jnr, seeing as you're so curious: yes, I am an American, and I think you should think about what you say before you say it.)

ctz · « **Reply #55 on:** April 18, 2007, 09:15:11 AM »

The problem is in the US anyone can get a gun. And now you say he would have done it some other way. Maybe... with a knife? 30 victims? Unlikely... A bomb... gas? Still kinda difficult and it needs some long term plans to kill people like that. But with a handgun you just have to snap once and you have tens of victims.

And yes, other countries have school shootings as well, but rate in the US is something extraordinary. In Finland there's the largerst guns/capita rate after the US and Yemen and there has been none.

sh15uya · « **Reply #56 on:** April 18, 2007, 10:12:43 AM »

President Roh Offers Condolence to US
President Roh Moo-hyun said Wednesday that he and the entire nation were shocked by a massacre at a U.S. university by a South Korean student, offering his condolences to the United States.

Tuffty · « **Reply #57 on:** April 18, 2007, 12:58:01 PM »

Quote from: harlock on April 18, 2007, 08:55:25 AM

lol internets. I love how something like this can turn into gun control policy dick-waving contest. I think instead of criticizing another country's policies, or wondering what gun control laws could of prevented this incident, we should be asking why someone would do this in the first place. I think it's more important to try to understand what could bring a person to do something so horrible, stop dwelling on the "how" and start looking for the "why". I doesn't matter how hard it becomes to get a hold of a firearm, murderous intent is not proportional to accessibility weapons.

Unfortunately the why is something I don't think many will understand. You can say he was depressed, disturbed and had a grudge on an ex-lover, but I'll never know how someone can have such disregard for human life.

You ask me, it just doesn't make sense that a student can walk in a gun store and buy an assault rifle. It's chilling. Why is this so obvious to those living outside of the US, but being thought of as anti-American to many Americans. Does being American mean you have to be pro-gun? I don't think so. It's understandable every person should have the right to defend themselves, yet people forget that these rights can be so easily exploited for someone to use the gun for ill intent against somebody, or in this case, many. Obviously tragedies like this is something every society is burdened with, but tougher control should be put in place to stop massacres or shootings of any kind by disturbed individuals like this and politicians should acknowledge the desperate need for this.

JTRIX · « **Reply #58 on:** April 18, 2007, 01:52:56 PM »

to those who are talking about the idea of changing "The regulation of gun owning/handling", remember that a person don't necessary need a gun to kill anyone... so changing or forcing more strict policy doesn't necessary help reducing crime/death rate.

Also as I have been reading different news about this tragedy on different newspapers, all people feel sad/sympathy to those there were killed by Cho Seung-Hui. But I wonder does anyone feel sad for Cho himself that led him to did this? I don't mean he has no guilt doing this, but what I tried to say is that I, personally, felt sad for this whole tragedy and all those (the innocents and Cho himself) who died/injured.

thatguy · « **Reply #59 on:** April 18, 2007, 02:40:54 PM »

WBC is rumored to protest the funerals.

say what you will about gun control or the decline of america, but in my opinion, organizations like WBC cause more damage to society than unforeseeable outbreaks of violence.