It's a sad day (Virginia University shootings, 16 April)

[Paul in NZ]

Seriously - people are beginning to scare me....

[jrandom]

Hah. This is both tragic and hilarious.

Imagine if this law had been passed a year ago, instead of defeated.

Made that Virginia Tech spokesman feel 'safer', did it? I guess he's eating his words now. If that law had passed and, as I posited above, a legally armed faculty member had confronted the gunman, the tragedy could have been significantly mitigated.

[imdying]

Works better if you solder in a tyre valve and pump in compressed air...

Duly noted, comrade.

[Mr Merde]

..........
And secondly, the Founding Fathers fucked up with the Second Amendment. It may have made sense at the time it was written, but the twentieth century showed that the times are a-changin'. Giving a populace the 'right' to go forth permanently armed is insane. It behooves other nations to avoid similar mistakes when considering the issue.

They didnt write it, they lifted it almost verbatim from the British "Bill of Rights" from 1600 and something

[alexthekidd]

close escape for aussie girl

http://stuff.co.nz/4029218a12.html

[alexthekidd]

"All I can tell you is that he's a male," Flinchum said, giving no details of his age or nationality. He also did not say how well-armed the suspected gunman was.

However, other reports said the gunman was Asian American, and carried two nine-millimetre handguns.

10 Characters

[jrandom]

They didnt write it, they lifted it almost verbatim from the British "Bill of Rights" from 1600 and something

1689.

Any 'right' is a moral convention held for the purpose of increasing the general good and needs to be seen in a broad social context.

The 'right' to be armed is not akin to, say, the 'right' to own property. All rights are not created equal.

For the record, I would support a careful move in NZ law towards allowing deserving citizens of good repute to arm themselves in self-defence. The key, I think, is realising that there are many who, for the greater good, should not be granted such a privilege.

[alexthekidd]

Cellphone footage of the shooting

[alexthekidd]

allowing deserving citizens of good repute to arm themselves in self-defence. The key, I think, is realising that there are many who, for the greater good, should not be granted such a privilege.

How would these deserving citizens be seperated from those people with gang connections, or those on P?

Sure you might get it right 99% of the time but for every 1% wrong then theres another Virginia shooting or Columbine

And what if these deserving people have depressed or fucked up kids who just want to go shoot up the local high school?

Having firearms in the house also leaves them at risk to being stolen and falling into the hand of those less than reputable people you were trying to prevent getting the firearms in the first place.

[tri boy]

Muslim or Christian, Mullah or Pope, preacher or poet, who was it that wrote.
Give any one species too much rope, and they'll fuck it up.
Thoughts go out to the innocent.

[SpankMe]

Another one to add to the list.

[oldrider]

Hah. This is both tragic and hilarious.

Imagine if this law had been passed a year ago, instead of defeated.

Made that Virginia Tech spokesman feel 'safer', did it? I guess he's eating his words now. If that law had passed and, as I posited above, a legally armed faculty member had confronted the gunman, the tragedy could have been significantly mitigated.

Now that really was a "Tui" moment wasn't it!

Violence prevention policy: A ban on students or employees from carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them onto campus facilities!

Yes that will do it every time!

What a bloody joke, wake up PC brigade!

They took away any consequence for the perpetrator and gave him a free pass to kill at will, with no bag limit to slow him down until "he" was ready to quit.

Bloody do-gooder's, it's time they recognised the real world! John.

[WRT]

Just a little curious - in the photo half way down the page here:

http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/...260892,00.html

There is a man getting arrested by the police. How then, did he manage to "turn his gun on himself" with his hands cuffed?

[WRT]

Bigger pic of the guy getting arrested:

[ManDownUnder]

it's not guns that kill people, it's people that kill people

So you're saying the perpetrator would have been able to kill 22 people randomly without the use of a firearm?

Lets examine this for a second.

3 components involved in the shooting.
The shooter
The gun
The ammo

Can the ammo do this by itself... errr - no
The gun perhaps.... errrr no
The person - why yes! Look at that. The person has the requisite freedom of thought and movement to orchestrate use of the gun, and ammunition in a manner that kills people.

With respect Hitch - short sighted, and off target comeback.