What would you do about Virginia Tech?

[donkeylove]

[ QUOTE ]
Not much until we know more about the shooter. Reports are that he's a Chineese National here on a student visa, age 25. From what I gather they don't know if he was a student or not. I for one would like to review the process of granting student visas as a start. I suspect that government is highly disfunctional in this process. Could be convinced otherwise though. Obviously we don't want people gaining the priviledge of being here who are unbalanced and capable of blowing away 30+ people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Student visas from Islamic countries are obviously worth closely monitoring, but Chinese, or any Asian nationals causing problems in the U.S would be unprecedented in my memory. Every Asian studying in the U.S I ever met were peaceful and respectful. I understand China has the fastest growing Islamic and Christian churches in the world because of sheer population, but we have yet to see any spillover yet to the US. More likely to be over a girl than a god.

Now the logic of educating Chinese nationals that will go home and take advantage of bad trade policies to do economic war against us is a different argument. If it is a Chinese national, it would explain the lack of the shooters name and information. We knew everything about the Columbine shooters the same night it happened. The delicate balance that is US-China relations would explain the lack of information and attempt to control the story to avoid any backlash.

[nef]

[ QUOTE ]
Well. We have a society with an underclass and criminal element. Our gun laws are lax, and there are weapons all over the place. Said people have access to weapons, resulting in gun crimes. Also, unhinged loonies seem to have access to weapons. Gun crimes are common in this country. This leads me to conclude we would be safer without guns. We would also be safer with a more equitable society where people weren't so angry about things, but that isn't happening either.

Oh, and BTW, I am sure the reason that Nazi Germany and the USSR happened is because they rounded up the guns. Otherwise, there would have been a dedicated resistance against the tyrannical governments which would have overthrown them. Give me a break, can you say crushed like a grape?
Similarly, if there were a Russian or German Gandhi (and who knows, there might have been), he would have been the first lined up against the wall, along with the "armed militia leaders." Resistance is only effective against some forms of government.

This guerilla resistance pipe dream is a cheap excuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main problem with your argument is the disconnect between your policy preference and its results. 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. I have linked to just one UK story, it is a bit old, 2003, but it is relevant because it is from 6 or 7 years after their gun ban. You'd think an island, especially one without a traditional love of guns like the US would be able to have all the guns gone by then, right? Also, if you look halfway down the article there is a reader comment that a way to end gun crime would be to ban all REPLICA guns. Lol!?!

Gun Crime Soars 35% - UK

Gun bans are also not working in Australia...

HALF a billion dollars spent buying back hundreds of thousands of guns after the Port Arthur massacre had no effect on the homicide rate, says a study published in an influential British journal.

The report by two Australian academics, published in the British Journal of Criminology, said statistics gathered in the decade since Port Arthur showed gun deaths had been declining well before 1996 and the buyback of more than 600,000 mainly semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns had made no difference in the rate of decline.

Australia Study

You also dismiss armed resistance too easily. You need to also consider the deterrent effect it has.

The 'insurrectionist theory' label does not do justice to this aspect of the Second Amendment. True, the Second Amendment implicitly authorizes recourse to arms when less drastic means fail to attain or retain the proper ends of government identified in the Declaration. But the Amendment's greater value lies in the deterrent effect it would have, were it respected and enforced to the degree of its companion rights in the Bill of Rights. Although it implicitly authorizes rebellion-and explicitly provides the means of waging rebellion-the Amendment, if observed, should make rebellion less likely by making it less likely to be necessary. The Second Amendment should stand as a reminder to those who govern of the people's ultimate right to preserve or reestablish their rights by arms. One need not prophesy armed struggle by American citizens against their own government to propose that the citizenry's widespread ownership of firearms could safeguard liberty by deterring tyranny. The great value of the right is political, not military. This value lies not in the fact that the Amendment enables armed resistance, but that by enabling armed resistance it should make the conditions which would justify such resistance less likely to occur."


Second Amendment Article on findarticle

Speaking of Ghandi...

Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.

"In this instance of the fire-arms, the Asiatic has been most improperly bracketed with the natives. The British Indian does not need any such restrictions as are imposed by the Bill on the natives regarding the carrying of fire-arms. The prominent race can remain so by preventing the native from arming himself. Is there a slightest vestige of justification for so preventing the British Indian?"

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

[Kristian]

[ 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!

I hope everyone agrees that banning fire arms and regulating said ban, will reduce the amount of fire arms in the population. Fewer fire arms will result in less destructive power.
If you limit the destructive power of individuals, less people will be killed, it's really simple.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not much until we know more about the shooter. Reports are that he's a Chineese National here on a student visa, age 25. From what I gather they don't know if he was a student or not. I for one would like to review the process of granting student visas as a start. I suspect that government is highly disfunctional in this process. Could be convinced otherwise though. Obviously we don't want people gaining the priviledge of being here who are unbalanced and capable of blowing away 30+ people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Student visas from Islamic countries are obviously worth closely monitoring, but Chinese, or any Asian nationals causing problems in the U.S would be unprecedented in my memory. Every Asian studying in the U.S I ever met were peaceful and respectful. I understand China has the fastest growing Islamic and Christian churches in the world because of sheer population, but we have yet to see any spillover yet to the US. More likely to be over a girl than a god.

Now the logic of educating Chinese nationals that will go home and take advantage of bad trade policies to do economic war against us is a different argument. If it is a Chinese national, it would explain the lack of the shooters name and information. We knew everything about the Columbine shooters the same night it happened. The delicate balance that is US-China relations would explain the lack of information and attempt to control the story to avoid any backlash.

[/ QUOTE ]

What does the process for obtaining a student visa entail? I'm sure bkholdem knows but I doubt if he'll disclose that. What do we know about the shooter's psychological history and/or criminal history? It will be interesting to see what comes out over the next few weeks about this shooter.

[pvn]

[ 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.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
besides I think if you asked most people to consider if they'd rather live in a society where there were

1) one thousand gun crimes and zero property crimes
or 2) zero gun crimes and two thousand property crimes

they would choose 2

likewise

1) 1000 gun crimes and 0 stabbings
or 2) 0 gun crimes and 2000 stabbings

they would choose 2 as well

[/ QUOTE ]

How magnanimous of you to figure that out for them.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
if there were a Russian or German Gandhi (and who knows, there might have been), he would have been the first lined up against the wall, along with the "armed militia leaders." Resistance is only effective against some forms of government.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, Gandhi was pro-gun.

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest."

[ QUOTE ]
This guerilla resistance pipe dream is a cheap excuse.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. It could never happen.

[pvn]

[ 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.

[Osprey]

What is it about Americans- do we watch too many bad Westerns? The average person is DUMB. They can't be trusted to freaking DRIVE properly. 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.

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.

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 ]
[ 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 ]

[Kristian]

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