Skip to main content
Help Center Community Shop

No rush for gun control!

Comments

15 comments

  • ljwrench
    While watching all the coverage, I keep hearing the newspeople say now is not the time to discuss the 2nd ammendment (I agree) but then they go on to report how easy it is to get a handgun and how this might have turned out differently if the brady bill was still law, ect., ect., ect. I have seen this on NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, and FOX.
    0
  • BigGun74
    So far, even though all the news organizations have been doing their best to bait the issue, gun control advocates have not yet been able to seize on this like they have before,considering the scale of the tragedy. The major figures in the Democratic party, as the article noted, have been burned on Gun Control before and don't want to jump on that bandwagon again unless there is overwhelming and sustained popular support. And for the most part it seems like this time around most people recognize the the killer would not have been stopped even if the most draconian gun control measures had been in place. It also helps that, from most of the comments I have seen on he cable news channel websites, responsible gun owners are rebutting the knee jerk gun control crowd with facts and not rhetoric or name calling and not rising to the bait when they get called names. Of course it is early yet and once the respect for the grieving has fallen to the wayside, it is likely this will turn into a knock down drag out legislative fight.
    0
  • BT3
    What if some (not all) of the professors were trained and carried like some (but not all) pilots are. Is thier a chance this maniac could have been stopped ? At the very minumn, they would have a fighting chance and may very well saved lives. IMHO
    0
  • sarge_3ad
    It stands to reason why the Dems don't want to touch the subject right now. They want the Whitehouse in 08. They are fearing any Gun Control legislation will ruin their chances to win.
    0
  • AZ9J
    Exactly, Sarge hit the nail on the head
    0
  • Cubslover
    quote:Originally posted by sarge_3ad
    It stands to reason why the Dems don't want to touch the subject right now. They want the Whitehouse in 08. They are fearing any Gun Control legislation will ruin their chances to win.


    Couldn't have said it any better.
    0
  • CA sucks
    32 people dead?
    More than 32 students in a classroom (a lecture hall will have at least 100)
    I doubt he could walk into a room and kill 32 people if the people all attacked at once.
    Sure it will take a few seconds to realize what is going on, and he might kill a few, but your options are:
    Herd mentality: people are going to die, but odds are it won't be me if I don't attract his attention
    Run: Get away as fast as possible
    Counterattack: In the end, the counter attack method will result in the least deaths, but is most likely to get yourself killed, especially if others in the crowd choose to cower or flee instead of helping you.

    This isnt long range combat, this is within a single room, heck you could throw a book at him to knock him off balance and give you time to close the ~15' to tackle him. Disarmed or not, there is no way 33 people should have died against a single attacker at close range.

    The real tragedy is not enough people stood and fought.
    There were what two people that took fire while trying to keep a door shut so others could live?
    That was heroic, as it leaves you as the only target left with no escape.

    If I were in that situation and had the presence of mind ot think clearly, and knew the guy was coming. Rather than choose to hold the door shut, I would have been waiting right by the door (especially if it opens inward, such that I am behind the door as it opens). Try to tackle him/disarm (or if behind the open door, swing the door into him then tackle). Hopefully other people would see you wrestling and help rather than hide.
    Of course he may just swing the door open and start shooting into the room, without walking through the door (where you wait on the other side in a hastily prepared ambush with a text book/pen to jab in his neck/anything you got).
    Then people die and you might have saved them by simply holding the door.
    0
  • rossowmn
    quote:Originally posted by BT3
    What if some (not all) of the professors were trained and carried like some (but not all) pilots are.


    I'm only being slightly sarcastic when I point out that all professors are opposed to guns, so how could they carry any?[}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)] Instead of shooting him, they would have reasoned with him, pointed out the abhorrent lack of diversity in shooting ONLY Virginia Tech folks, and offered him in-state tuition and a small scholarship if he'd step away from his weapons.

    (I'm a conservative, gun-owning professor at a typically liberal university, so I'm allowed to be sarcastic about the anti-gunners with whom I work. Actually, I do know several colleagues who are collectors and shooters, so we ain't all anti-gun.)
    0
  • zipperzap
    Something tells me that VA will shortly become the next CA
    in the Lib's sights when it comes to gun control. The North
    Hollywood Shoot Out did us in - that a was nothing
    compared to this.[8D]
    0
  • COLT
    ...BIG X-Ring Sarge! The libs are just laying low for now...[^]

    ...but some, as Boo Boo Boxer, and others, they just can't help their dumb azz lib self!...bet 'ol Dingy Reid was on the phone telling her and others...ssssh!

    ...The lefty press, and libs have manners(?) when? "allow the bodies to grow cold, naah, just looking to 08 is all...[xx(]

    ...As Boxer though, that liberal crap just oozes out of 'em, they can't hide the stench...[;)]


    ani-texas-flag-1.gif
    0
  • 220ackley
    All the North Hollywood shootout did was show the police were not prepared for a shootout! Patrick Pertty with a AK47 went on a shooting spree in a Stockton Ca, grammer school. that was the begining
    of the end for Califonia.

    Dirty Harry(Harry Reid) as we call him here in Nevada won't touch the gun control issue, because he is not very popular here and will lose his seat if he did. I do believe he will support a bill, but it would be from behind closed doors.

    Gun free zones are easy targets.I fear that like threw the nineties the copycats will all try to out do one another.
    0
  • Mossbergboogie
    Fewer but more outspoken thats the way it has to be.
    0
  • Slow_Hand
    quote:Originally posted by ljwrench
    While watching all the coverage, I keep hearing the newspeople say now is not the time to discuss the 2nd ammendment (I agree) but then they go on to report how easy it is to get a handgun and how this might have turned out differently if the brady bill was still law, ect., ect., ect. I have seen this on NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, and FOX.


    Yes, I had the displeasure of having to watch and listen to Stone Phillips on last night's edition of Dateline. My only real purpose in watching the show was to get a little more info about the tragedy.

    During it, the man (Phillips) went out of his way on several occasions during his interviews with the Virginia State Attorney General and with one of the victim's parents to goad them into speaking about guns, gun control, "lax" gun laws, etc. I'm happy to say that neither bit at the bait, even when he reiterated the question and pressed for them to say something "anti".

    I personally believe that many Americans - including more than a few antis - now regret that law-abiding citizens of legal age were not permitted to carry concealed on university and college campuses. It's tough to argue against being able to properly defend one's own life and those of others around against a madman.

    Plus, the police's alleged faux pas that morning, combined with a questionable decision by the VT admins makes legal CCW all the more a viable reality to be considered.

    BTW, Stone Phillips look a bit like "death warmed over". Man, has that guy aged poorly.
    0
  • dakotashooter2
    I think one of the reasons the media is getting nowwhere with this is because the gun ammo and extra mags were all purchased legally. All the proper steps were taken and some yahoo was still able to do this. The background check showed nothing cause there was nothing to show and a ten day or even 30 day waiting period wouldn't have made a difference cause he bought the guns 35-36 days ago. neither t buyer or seller did anthing wrong at the time of purchase. He supposdly bought several more mags and ammo at another business. Had the mag limit still been 10 it wouldn't have mattered, he likely would have just bought a few more. The "Brady Law" would have had absoulutely NO effect on the outcome of this situation and if they bring it up that will be demonstrated and only hurt their side. It has been kind of put on the back burner but I heard the term "bomb threat" somewhere in the mix. It is likely had he not had a gun he may have gone that route. And it still comes back to personal protection. This situation only reinforced that even when the ploice are in the area they can't always protect you. We need a way to protect ourselves.
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Recent Activity

Didn’t find what you’re looking for?