Gotta love our dumbass officials who think that shit like this can't happen in the US... would it hurt them to put some security in schools?
Gotta love our dumbass officials who think that shit like this can't happen in the US... would it hurt them to put some security in schools?
Every major university has a police department.
Right, who didn't do shit while this guy murdered 30 people... and there were eye witnesses right? You really wanna tell me that they didn't call for help?
I call bullshit, that department must either consist of 5 people, or just a bunch of retards that shouldn't be allowed to be anywhere near a gun or a responsibility of that magnitude.
Not to jump to anyone's defense here, but if a person will steal, you can apply the slippery slope to them. Where do they stop? Stealing $100? $1000? Whatever they want? What if he breaks into your house with the intent of stealing some minor shit and decides he wants to rape your 15 year old daughter? If a person steals then they don't have any concept of limits. They see it, they want it, they take it. I'd shoot a man in the face to stop him from committing a crime like that. I think I could have shot the guy who killed all those people today point blank in the head if it would have stopped him, and slept easy tonight. Wouldn't bother me a bit. Some people are like rabid animals, and just need to be put down. It sucks, but thats the way it is.Originally Posted by Beckwin
Edit: 500th post, somehow thought it would be grander.![]()
It's a little quick to jump to conclusions about the VT police. They were probably still responding to the first murders when the guy started the second round.
From what I gathered, he killed those two people, and then came back on the other side of campus an hour or so later.
And during this whole time, no one noticed a guy with a gun and a bunch of ammunition? I'm not saying anything about the VT police in general, just the people who were supposedly in charge of protecting the students at that school.
Imagine how the parents must feel, when they supposedly send their kids off to college and are under the impression that they are safe there, only to find out some random jerkoff walked into their son/daughters' classroom and decided it would be cool to reinact the freakin' holocaust.
not in debate, you can't, because that's logically fallacious.Originally Posted by Melchiah
while in principle i would agree if we were saying if a person does X he has a higher probability to do Y and/or Z than a person who never does X, as far as debate is concerned slippery slope is no bueno.
ok... as far as firearms are concerned... I am deffinately a fan of keeping guns legal... but see, I am doing it from a hunting/spotsman stand point... so, in my opinion, there is no reason for pistols, uzis, well anything automatic for that matter. I have 2 shotguns ( one better suited for bird, and 1 better suited for larger things, like boar and deer). I want a rifle eventually for deer hunting... but I don't want/need an automatic... and if for some reason i wanted to hunt with a pistol, I would rather just get a bow and arrow... which I would like to do one day... but that shit takes some work...
but yeah... and then someone had brought up something about gun shows. You know with the internet, you should be able to set up a system, to apply for basically a permit to buy a weapon from a gun show, and then just have it verified when you walk into the gun show. done... or at least it would put some issues to rest... and once again, no real need for handguns...
they were two handguns and a best to hold ammo clips. If your going to shoot the fuck out of a place and not be noticed till you start doing it, that's the type of stuff you wear/bring cause it's easy to conceal.
And if you DO NOT kill people that break into your house they might accidentally hurt themselves and file a lawsuit against you.
Having respect for personal property is one of the most basic things necessary to be a member of society. I earned my DVD player by providing goods and services that people needed and being a good productive member of society. If you think i should respect and care about someone who wants to take that from me you are wrong.
It isn't a matter of being tough either.. it is just how it works. The midwest is a dangerous place for a criminal who wants to raid homes.
sorry for the double post... but it is super windy here, and he coulda easily just had a very large jacket and just looked like he was cold... but yeah...Originally Posted by Exoduso
Slippery slope isn't universal. How does it go... situation about a guy stealing bread to feed his family, etc. What about dumb teenagers who rob/vandalize too? What you're talking about with the shooter today doesn't really apply- I don't think anyone would have a problem shooting a guy who came into a school with a gun and opened fire. But the question is, should you aim for the head at the guy rummaging through your stereo equipment? I can understand fear/panic/suprise resulting in the (mortal) wounding of an intruder, but I just don't think that "I'll fucking bury anyone that enters my house" is the way to go about things. I'm pretty sure that firearm/self defense instructors would tell you that avoiding conflict if at all possible is very important too- and neither your life nor a common robber's is worth less than a DVD player.Originally Posted by Melchiah
I think they said the shootings were two hours apart? I thought I heard somewhere that the first two were his girlfriend and whomever she was cheating on him with, though this might just be bullshit speculation. idk. If it's true, then he went to the dorm room knowing full well what he would find, and he had already made his mind up to kill at least two people. I propose that after he killed the first two, for whatever reason, he went into despair because he really hadn't considered the consequences, and decided to go out with a spree. He figured he was already a dead man if convicted of a pre-meditated double homicide, so why not kill a few more and take your own life?. I think he was stable until he shot the first two, and then he really cracked, hence the second shootings two hours later. My final point is this. He took a killing weapon to the dormitory with the intent to kill. Had he not had a gun it would have been a knife from around a corner or in the dark, or an explosive device or any other means of killing the first two. So meh to keeping guns away from people.
Anyone can get pissed off and go after a bunch of people with a gun (assuming they have one). Using a bomb takes either significantly more skill or effort than a gun does, as well as more preplanning. Yes, a bomb is more efficient, but for most people it's not nearly as convenient, which was my whole point. Most people will find it a lot easier to point and shoot than build and ignite.Originally Posted by Melchiah
The first thing they teach you in firearm safety is that you only pull a gun in order to STOP a situation. You don't pull a gun to wound, dissuade, or run off an attacker. Guns are LETHAL and thinking otherwise is going to put yourself and others in danger and possibly get you killed.Originally Posted by Beckwin
Life isn't a video game.. hitting someones leg isn't that easy either. You aim at their center mass and that is.. that.
Only if:Originally Posted by Byrd
1) They already possess and carry firearms and sufficient ammunition
2) Are skilled enough with the weapon(not likely in a casual owner or a stolen weapon) to kill multiple targets outside of a closed area
You can buy the materials for a bomb at a hardware store and assemble in a short amount of time. Probably the same time it would take you to go home and get your gun and come back if you aren't carrying at the time of pissed-offednes.
So you're rescinding on your tough guy/in these here parts bullshit and agreeing with me, essentially. If you hear someone in your house at night, get out of bed and grab your gun, you don't hunt them down and kill them. When I said "aim for the head" I was more or less referring to an intent to kill... hell, gunshot wounds to extremities can end up being fatal. In our little scenario of a coming into a room and seeing a guy rummaging through your stereo equipment at the other end, you don't just pull your gun and shoot him. If he turns around and has a gun, you shoot. If he advances on you with some other weapon, you shoot. If he just hauls ass out of there? Nope.Originally Posted by Devek
Your logic fails because the time it takes you to notice whether he's got a gun or not, he will kill you.
Ideally, you're keeping yourself hidden. But either way it can be argued that if someone wants to come in your house and kill you, you really can't do shit about it and the .45 under your pillow won't do you any good.
I haven't rescinded anything. Having a stranger in your house is a scary situation you want to STOP. He may or may not have a gun.. he may or may not be alone.. too many times have people hesitated and gotten killed by the intruder. You aim toward the center mass and fire.