What would you do about Virginia Tech?

[Busted_Flat]

Just a couple of thoughts.

We are going to hear a lot over the coming days and weeks about how criminals will get their hands on guns even if gun laws are tightened. My question is this: Was the shooter at Virginia Tech a "criminal"?

I heard a report on the radio this morning that the guns and ammunition was obtained legally just days before the shootings. I cannot independently verify this, but if true, was this kid a criminal when he bought the guns?

In Virginia you can carry guns without a permit, but there is a rule, not a law, against bringing guns on campus at VT. Was he a criminal when he carried the guns on campus?

My contention is that this was an emotionally distraught kid who did not become a criminal until he started shooting.

This is the case with most of these school shootings. We do not have "career criminals" walking onto campuses or into schools and shooting people; we have emotionally distraught young people with easy access to guns shooting people.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
What is it about Americans- do we watch too many bad Westerns? The average person is DUMB.

[/ QUOTE ]

So everyone should be held down by the lowest common denominator?

[ QUOTE ]
They can't be trusted to freaking DRIVE properly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly; if you could trust other people, you wouldn't need to defend yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
Yet, Slim here is going to pick off some thug who's roughing him up. More likely Slim will pick off some innocent bystander. Or Wyatt Earp will have some road rage and pick off John Random Motorist. Or Slim Jr. will get to the gun and do something retarded. Give me a break.

[/ QUOTE ]

It happens every day. Regular people stopping crime.

[ QUOTE ]
Whether guns could practically be taken out of circulation is one issue, but in a perfect world they would be, and we would be safer.

[/ QUOTE ]



[ QUOTE ]
Note- prohibiton of alcohol in theory is also a good idea.
It's clearly a very dangerous drug. I think gun control is a lot more practcal, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

translation: I'd like to impose my personal preferences on other people and tell them what to do in other aspects of their lives, too, but I'll start with the things I think I can get the biggest mob to back me up on.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you really want to protect the homestead, use a knife or a bat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Old Lady vs. Young Thug

Give them both knives - who wins?

Give them both baseball bats - who wins?

Give them both guns - who wins?

The gun is the equalizer. It gives the weak a fighting chance against the strong.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you going to answer these questions?

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Banning guns would not result in a situation where there are no guns. It would result in a larger black market for guns and a defenseless population.

[/ QUOTE ]

The idea of a 'defenseless population' seems to be central for pro gun advocates. They seem to differentiate between those who need defense, and those who do bad deeds, when in fact, they are one and the same!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is the most depressing worldview I've seen expressed here. Everyone should be locked up! This is what happens when you look at aggregates and ignore individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about locking anyone up?

[/ QUOTE ]

So you don't think those who do bad deeds should be locked up?

[ QUOTE ]
There is a slight difference between personal freedom and the right to carry a lethal weapon.

[/ QUOTE ]

O RLY? What would that be?

[latefordinner]

[ QUOTE ]
I for one would like to review the process of granting student visas as a start.

[/ QUOTE ]

and it starts already...

[MoreWineII]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What is it about Americans- do we watch too many bad Westerns? The average person is DUMB.

[/ QUOTE ]

So everyone should be held down by the lowest common denominator?

[ QUOTE ]
They can't be trusted to freaking DRIVE properly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly; if you could trust other people, you wouldn't need to defend yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
Yet, Slim here is going to pick off some thug who's roughing him up. More likely Slim will pick off some innocent bystander. Or Wyatt Earp will have some road rage and pick off John Random Motorist. Or Slim Jr. will get to the gun and do something retarded. Give me a break.

[/ QUOTE ]

It happens every day. Regular people stopping crime.

[ QUOTE ]
Whether guns could practically be taken out of circulation is one issue, but in a perfect world they would be, and we would be safer.

[/ QUOTE ]



[ QUOTE ]
Note- prohibiton of alcohol in theory is also a good idea.
It's clearly a very dangerous drug. I think gun control is a lot more practcal, however.

[/ QUOTE ]

translation: I'd like to impose my personal preferences on other people and tell them what to do in other aspects of their lives, too, but I'll start with the things I think I can get the biggest mob to back me up on.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you really want to protect the homestead, use a knife or a bat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Old Lady vs. Young Thug

Give them both knives - who wins?

Give them both baseball bats - who wins?

Give them both guns - who wins?

The gun is the equalizer. It gives the weak a fighting chance against the strong.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you going to answer these questions?

[/ QUOTE ]

What's there to answer? I don't know you personally but if you are the average American then you overestimate your abilities with a gun and all your macho posturing is just that. Simply put, I don't want idiots running around going vigilante because a bad guy + idiots running around chasing a bad guy with guns is more dangerous than one bad guy. Saying that increasing guns would prevent violence makes a lot of assumptions that there's no evidence for, a hell of a lot more assumptions than saying reducing guns would reduce violence.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
On another note, why didn't the university cancel classes today when they knew there was a known killer unapprehended on campus?

[/ QUOTE ]

Probably because it looked like a domestic homicide and the shooter had apparently left campus.

[/ QUOTE ]

It really doesn't get simpler than this. You have 1,000s of students, a murder on campus, and a murderer on the loose with a gun whose whereabouts are unknown. Do you really need to know much more than this to cancel classes and put everyone on high alert. Do you really need to put the above facts in context before you make a decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Come on. It's a 2600 acre campus with hundreds of buildings, and it looked like a domestic incident. When the cops descend on a homicide scene in a home, do they evacuate the entire subdivision? No, of course not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. I thought about it some more and I don't think a campus shutdown is automatic in such a situation. I was wrong and I retract my previous statement.

[Borodog]

Utah,

No problem.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if you really want to protect the homestead, use a knife or a bat.

[/ QUOTE ]

Old Lady vs. Young Thug

Give them both knives - who wins?

Give them both baseball bats - who wins?

Give them both guns - who wins?

The gun is the equalizer. It gives the weak a fighting chance against the strong.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you going to answer these questions?

[/ QUOTE ]

What's there to answer? I don't know you personally but if you are the average American then you overestimate your abilities with a gun and all your macho posturing is just that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Macho posturing? I'm asking about old ladies. Does the old lady have a better chance with a knife or with a gun?

What do you think the average criminal's proficency with a gun is like? Do you think most criminals spend a lot of time at the range?

[ QUOTE ]
Simply put, I don't want idiots running around going vigilante because a bad guy + idiots running around chasing a bad guy with guns is more dangerous than one bad guy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, a bad guy with free reign isn't dangerous at all. And of course, that's exactly what we're talking about, "running around with guns". There are thousands of regular people ("idiots" in your terminology) who legally carry guns with permits in the US every day. How often do they just spontaneously shoot people? Answer: not very often.

But it's easier to spout emotion-charged diatribes than actual facts.

[ QUOTE ]

Most critics cite statistics on deaths and gun types used, or the cost to society for injuries or deaths, but ignore the benefits. HCI, ( and others ) claim defensive guns are more likely to harm the owner than deter a criminal act. They often cite statistics from the US Department Of Justice National Crime Victimization Survey, (NCVS). This study has numerous faults, but chief among them is many crimes are not reported in the NCVS and the survey does not specifically ask about DGUs. Kleck and Gertz conducted an extensive study on defensive usage of guns.

In their study Kleck and Gertz carefully corrected mistakes in previous surveys by ensuring their sample only contained "civilian" DGUs against people and not animals. A fault common to all previous studies is respondents' reluctance to divulge data that could lead to prosecution, particularly in light of surveyors representing themselves as working for government. K & G studies eliminated cases with respondents seeking to "obscure" the data by not revealing all the details such as the type of crime being committed, if the respondent had actually confronted the criminal, fired a weapon, etc. They also eliminated police, military and professional security respondents .

Even after corrective factors eliminated almost 60% of the reported cases, Kleck and Gertz concluded there were in excess of 2.16 million DGUs per year . The K & G study found that only 1.125 percent of adults had used guns defensively an average of 1.472 times each during the five year period surveyed. In a population of almost 300 million, guns saved over 3 million individuals by the most conservative estimation. But the Kleck and Gertz study offers even more data we can use.

BASED UPON 2 MILLION DGUs PER YEAR:

1. Only 24% (480,000) reported firing their guns. This means 76% (1.52 million ) times the gun deterred crime merely by its presence.

2. Wounds occurred in less than 8% of the cases., or less than (300,000)

3. Most DGUs occurred in the home, 37% ( 740,000) vs 27% (540,000) away.

4. Property was lost in only 11% (220,000) cases. Guns successfully prevented theft in 89% of the cases or 1.74 million times.

5. In 84% (1.68 million), cases the perp displayed a weapon or attacked before the DGU. Eleven respondents reported using gun only after being injured by the attacker.

6. Only 18% (360,000) reported criminals armed with guns, but 53% (1.06 million) reported facing multiple assailants in DGU incidents.

7. Assailants had weapons other than guns 48% of the time, ( 960,000) in DGU cases. In 18% ( 360,000) of the cases the assailants were armed with guns.

From the statistics garnered by Kleck and Gertz we can conclude guns succeed in preventing crime. Defensive gun users only used guns as a last resort, often only after they were injured by their assailants. Contrary to allegations by anti-gun activists of CC gun owners turning "vigilante" and acting like "Rambo", statistics show the opposite. They shoot less, kill fewer, and cause less incidental damage than police. Guns are extremely successful in preventing theft. They succeed almost 90% of the time, most often without being fired, or the thief injured.

Guns are effective against multiple assailants. Individuals reporting DGUs faced armed assailants over half of the time, often multiple assailants. Few of us can honestly say we could take on multiple unarmed assailants, let alone armed ones, and emerge whole. Women, the elderly and the handicapped face even greater risks of physical harm.

Finally, we can conclude guns save society money - over 2 million times a year. These statistics are based upon rigidly screened, reported DGUs. Crime data indicates unreported DGUs may well exceed 50% of reported incidents every year.


[/ QUOTE ]

(source)

[ QUOTE ]
Saying that increasing guns would prevent violence makes a lot of assumptions that there's no evidence for, a hell of a lot more assumptions than saying reducing guns would reduce violence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Because you say so?

[Valerio]

You can't compare banning handguns to banning knives or cars, because handguns have as their primary purpose to kill human beings.

I don't think this incident could have been prevented one way or another through gun control, because the shooter was obviously sick in the head, and had planned ahead.

That said, I am for gun control because firstly, as I said earlier, handguns are simply designed for the purpose of killing people, so I am opposed to letting people own them on principle.

Secondly, while not reducing premeditated killings, gun control reduces "heat of the moment" killings. Just do a google search on "road rage shooting" and look at all the incidents. I'm sure they could have all been prevented if people weren't carrying guns in their cars.

[Kristian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The idea of a 'defenseless population' seems to be central for pro gun advocates. They seem to differentiate between those who need defense, and those who do bad deeds, when in fact, they are one and the same!

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, this is the most depressing worldview I've seen expressed here. Everyone should be locked up! This is what happens when you look at aggregates and ignore individuals.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who said anything about locking anyone up?

[/ QUOTE ]
So you don't think those who do bad deeds should be locked up?


[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe, it would be impossible to generalize. My point is that there will inevitably be conflicts between members of a population. The level of violence in these conflicts is determined by the destructive potential of each individual. With deadly fire arms being available to the public we ensure that these conflicts will be deadly at a higher frequency.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a slight difference between personal freedom and the right to carry a lethal weapon.

[/ QUOTE ]

O RLY? What would that be?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you don't think it is obvious, I don't think I can ever convince you.