Virginia Tech Massacre (Worst in U.S. History?)

[Legal_Eagle]

I disagree totally that brutality is woven into the fabric of American society. I think the majority of Americans are normal, law abiding citizens and are not violent by nature. These terrible tragedies are caused by mentally unstable people who needed help and didn’t get it.

Jennifer

Been to the movies lately? Watched any TV? What about heavy metal or rap music? Read any history books? How many people do you suppose the governor of California has killed on the silver screen? Do you know how powerful the NRA lobby is? America is permeated with violence. From abortion to capital punishment to street crime to popular entertainment. It’s everywhere.

 

[mary_bobo]

Been to the movies lately? Watched any TV? What about heavy metal or rap music? Read any history books? How many people do you suppose the governor of California has killed on the silver screen? Do you know how powerful the NRA lobby is? America is permeated with violence. From abortion to capital punishment to street crime to popular entertainment. It’s everywhere.

Some of what you say is true, But please tell me what the NRA “lobby” has to do with violence in the country. I think you are repeating a sound bite from the Democrat Party that has nothing to do with reality.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Don’t know where you got your info, but Alaska is a permit required for concealed carry state. see dps.state.ak.us/PermitsLicensing/achp/IMAGES/achplaw.pdf

Alaska IS an open-holster state, however. Anyone who can legally possess a firearm may openly carry that firearm.

Your information is a bit dated. From dps.state.ak.us/PermitsLicensing/achp/

HB 102, signed by the Governor on June 11, 2003 changes Alaska Statute 11.61.220 to allow anyone 21 or older, who may legally carry a firearm to also carry it concealed without having to obtain a special permit. The possession of a firearm at courthouses, school yards, bars and domestic violence shelters will continue to be prohibited. **Alaskans may still obtain a concealed carry permit if they want reciprocity with other states or want to continue to be exempt from background checks when purchasing firearms. **

(My emphasis.)

An Alaskan does not need a permit to carry concealed in Alaska. But if he wishes to carry in another state that recognizes Alaska permits, he can get a permit for that purpose.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Been to the movies lately? Watched any TV? What about heavy metal or rap music? Read any history books? How many people do you suppose the governor of California has killed on the silver screen? Do you know how powerful the NRA lobby is? America is permeated with violence. From abortion to capital punishment to street crime to popular entertainment. It’s everywhere.

I’ll ask again, do you REALLY think there is more day to day violence today than in past history (think: middle ages, Wild West, height of the Roman empire, all the wars over the centuries etc)?? I truly don’t. Yes, media images can be violent but these images are all over the world, not just here. I won’t dignifiy the NRA comments with a response. Violence has always been with us from the Fall–remember Cain and Able–Ever read the Bible???

Jennifer

 

[Jennifer_J]

The problem isn’t the school board, but the underlying legal and social changes which have made the legal authority of the schools minimal.

And while not at our most violent, we are at our most criminal point in our history, excluding the Revolutionary and Civil wars. Suspensions for violence are on the rise. Drug offenses in schools are massively higher.

That this outsider, a non-citizen was able to procure a firearm is only vaguely related, but even more troubling. We have a drastically different nature of criminality, one which would likely have been dealt with quite differently before.

He was a green carded citizen of the country…not really a valid point.

I don’t buy for an instant that the community can’t step up and change the schools for the better. I’d like to see the stats for us being at the most ‘criminal’ point in our history…

Jennifer

 

[DanteAlighieri]

seekerz,

People cause violence, guns don’t cause violence on there own. Supporting gun control just takes away guns from those who abide by the law and gives guns to the criminals.

If guns were outlawed, those who abide by the law would have nothing to protect themselves and their families. The criminals would still get guns through the black market. Thus we would have a free-for-all for the criminals on law abiding citizens.

If those who support gun control are really anti-guns, then I would challenge them to rid their homes from guns and place a large sign in front of your home stating “We Don’t Have Guns” and leave the sign there permanantly.

Believe me, within a short period of time you will find out what the 2nd Amendment was all about — “Protecting Ourselves and Our Families”.

PLAL

Whaaaaa???

Banning guns does not put them in the hands of criminals.

Not owning a gun does not make one more or less likely to be robbed.

Putting a sign in front of your house advertising the absence of guns is not a reasonable thing to expect of someone who is anti-gun.

The 2nd amendment was about protecting freedom – either from a government that needed overthrowing or an invader that the military was unequipped to repel.

Banning guns makes it difficult to get one – which, in the case of a hot-headed or deranged potential assailant, might just keep him/her from committing a horrific mass murder.

If our society degenerates to the point that the average person needs a gun to be safe, it’ll be on the brink of collapse – and I admit that may be closer than we think.

Peace,
Dante

 

[vern_humphrey]

Whaaaaa???

Banning guns does not put them in the hands of criminals.

But it ensures that crimnals with guns – or with knives or clubs – will have unarmed victims to prey on – as we saw at Virginia Tech, where guns are banned.

Not owning a gun does not make one more or less likely to be robbed.

First you say this. And then you say:

Putting a sign in front of your house advertising the absence of guns is not a reasonable thing to expect of someone who is anti-gun.

If you really believed that not having a gun wouldn’t make you more vulnerable to crime, you should have no problem with the sign.

The 2nd amendment was about protecting freedom – either from a government that needed overthrowing or an invader that the military was unequipped to repel.

It’s about self-defense – from foreign powers, dictatorial government, or criminals.

Banning guns makes it difficult to get one – which, in the case of a hot-headed or deranged potential assailant, might just keep him/her from committing a horrific mass murder.

And we see how well that worked at Virginia Tech. And how well it works in Washington, DC (where guns are outlawed) and in all other states and cities with gun bans.:whacky:

If our society degenerates to the point that the average person needs a gun to be safe, it’ll be on the brink of collapse – and I admit that may be closer than we think.

Peace,
Dante

No one is saying you have to carry a gun. All we ask is you not say we should be denied a basic civil right and prohibited from carrying if **we **choose.

 

[Montalban]

I have been to Wounded Knee and they have a huge metal sign descibing what happeened. Welded on the top of the sign is an obviously added section that says Massacre at Wounded Knee. I asked what this addttion covered and was told athe description used to say “Battle of Wounded Knee”

Sevral Medals of Honor were awarded to soldiers who massacred women and children there.

 

[wabrams]

Sevral Medals of Honor were awarded to soldiers who massacred women and children there.

Read your history first before you start throwing around the term “maasacre.”

 

[Stolen_Rutters]

Worst one in a school,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

I don’t know what people are talking about “worst massacre”. Here is a link to the deadliest act of mass murder in a school in the US. It used explosions, though, so they are probably talking about gun-only massacres in a school. I couldn’t find one with a gun that killed more than 33 people in a school.

What counts for worst depends on how liberally you extend the definition of “massacre”, whether you are allowed to use regular explosives (like the one I mention above), a fertilizer bomb, or an airplane to kill lots of people.

edit - oh, that’s what I get for not reading the OP carefully. This is actually a thread about abortion, not about what is really the worst massacre of whatever type. Sorry.

 

[st_lucy]

Worst one in a school,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster

I don’t know what people are talking about “worst massacre”. Here is a link to the deadliest act of mass murder in a school in the US. It used explosions, though, so they are probably talking about gun-only massacres in a school. I couldn’t find one with a gun that killed more than 33 people in a school.

What counts for worst depends on how liberally you extend the definition of “massacre”, whether you are allowed to use regular explosives (like the one I mention above), a fertilizer bomb, or an airplane to kill lots of people.

edit - oh, that’s what I get for not reading the OP carefully. This is actually a thread about abortion, not about what is really the worst massacre of whatever type. Sorry.

Thank you for the link. IT was very interesting and sad.

 

[dessert]

This person in the link was really irrational with dysfuctional thinking. If we meet someone like that it would be good to warn others and I think they maybe tried to do this in Michigan. If you compare to other schools it appears that this little school lost allmost half of its children which makes the statistics even higher at about 50%. And what percentage happened at Virginia? Not trying to say it was less of a tradgedy. Thank you for the link and maybe more of us can be aware and pray more for our children and continue to pray for our nation.
Dessert

 

[dessert]

Read your history first before you start throwing around the term “maasacre.”

This is listed as a massacre if you look in the wiki under the word massacre. There is a list of all the history of the massacres. This term is used for the people who are defenslessly killed. Not neccasarrily armed, and the Virginia is already on the list.
Where the insanity is, one person thinks that they are so right that they are justified in what they deem as neccessary.
Which is why I do agree it connects to the abortion issue although we may never know if this persons girlfriend was pregnant or speculate about whatever was going on in their life as they are all dead. It is very sad whether it is one or many. Dessert

 

[DanteAlighieri]

But it ensures that crimnals with guns – or with knives or clubs – will have unarmed victims to prey on – as we saw at Virginia Tech, where guns are banned.

So your solution is to have everyone carry a weapon everywhere – like it’s the old west?

Besides, your claim was that a gun ban would put guns in the hands of criminals – this shooter bought his legally.

If you really believed that not having a gun wouldn’t make you more vulnerable to crime, you should have no problem with the sign.

This is a flawed argument. I believe I’m ok without a security system on my house; why would I advertise that I don’t have one? I believe I’m safe without a guard dog; why would I advertise that I don’t have one?

It’s about self-defense – from foreign powers, dictatorial government, or criminals.

In response:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

It was for protection of the country, bro.

And we see how well that worked at Virginia Tech. And how well it works in Washington, DC (where guns are outlawed) and in all other states and cities with gun bans.:whacky:

Again, I ask: is your solution that everyone walk around armed? Because we know how successful vigilantism was in the old west…

No one is saying you have to carry a gun. All we ask is you not say we should be denied a basic civil right and prohibited from carrying if **we **choose.

Oh, ok – you’re NOT advocating vigilantism…or are you…?

And didn’t the abolition of slavery pretty much guarantee that certain “basic civil rights” (as you put it) can become antiquated?

Peace,
Dante

 

[vern_humphrey]

So your solution is to have everyone carry a weapon everywhere – like it’s the old west?

What part of this did you not understand?

No one is saying you have to carry a gun. All we ask is you not say we should be denied a basic civil right and prohibited from carrying if we choose

.

Besides, your claim was that a gun ban would put guns in the hands of criminals – this shooter bought his legally.

Dead wrong. What I said is that under a gun ban, only criminals will have guns.

This is a flawed argument. I believe I’m ok without a security system on my house; why would I advertise that I don’t have one? I believe I’m safe without a guard dog; why would I advertise that I don’t have one?

Why to prove that you have the courage of your convictions, of course.

It was for protection of the country, bro.

It was for protection, period, sis.

Read the Federalist Papers and the Debates – there the men who wrote it explain in detail what it means. If is for both individual and common defense – in the latter case, defense against both foreign and domestic aggression.

Again, I ask: is your solution that everyone walk around armed?

What part of this did you not understand?

No one is saying you have to carry a gun. All we ask is you not say we should be denied a basic civil right and prohibited from carrying if we choose

.

Because we know how successful vigilantism was in the old west…

What’s that got to do with self-defense?

Oh, ok – you’re NOT advocating vigilantism…or are you…?

You are the first person to bring up that term in this discussion.

And didn’t the abolition of slavery pretty much guarantee that certain “basic civil rights” (as you put it) can become antiquated?

Peace,
Dante

Slavery was not “antiquated.” It was abolished by the XIII Amendment to the Constitution.

 

[LeahInancsi]

It seems Catholics have gone overboard when they compare 4,000 babies killed through abortion with the senseless deaths of 32 college students. Let’s get real. These college students have proven they have something to offer society, while 4,000 unborn babies haven’t. :banghead:

 

[vern_humphrey]

It seems Catholics have gone overboard when they compare 4,000 babies killed through abortion with the senseless deaths of 32 college students. Let’s get real. These college students have proven they have something to offer society, while 4,000 unborn babies haven’t. :banghead:

The idea you are advancing is called “Utilitarianism” – the concept that a human being’s intrinsic worth is based on his usefulness to society. That same argument could be advanced to justify killing instead of treating a drug addict, so as to save money for educating one of those unborn children.

 

[Rach620]

Sorry for the long post, I’ve been trying to collect my thoughts.

I think we can recognize that at the heart of both of the topics of this thread: the VT massacre *and *abortion, is the horrible reality of the culture of death in which we live.

It is important for us pro-life Catholics to always remember that abortion is not the only issue we are battling. It is a horrible reality, and I believe it is the genocide which our generation will be indicted for when history judges us.

But abortion is only indicative of an even deeper sickness–even worse *evil *affecting our society. We’ve taken God out of the picture and in the process have destroyed human dignity. We see nothing valuable in life (you can hear this in the killer’s words), nothing in ourselves and therefore cannot possibly see anything of intrinsic value in others. We don’t truly care about anything.

So despair and indifference are the hallmarks of our culture of death, and where better are they manifested than in this incident?

We can see this in his own explanation for carrying out his attacks, but I think also in the circumstances leading up to them. Did anyone actually take the time to befriend this troubled man? Yes, he was ‘recommended for counseling,’ and professors noticed that he was ‘troubled’–but did anyone trouble *themselves *more than the bureaucratic mechanisms of the university required? No one can survive and flourish without human friendship.

I am in NO WAY seeking to lay blame on the VT community–this is still, and always will be, a senseless attack. I know that it was a personal choice he made to carry out this attack, and that whatever explanation he offered is not sufficient to explain it away.

But we must ask ourselves: How did he slip through the cracks? How were true human relationships so lacking in his life that he felt alienated and compelled to carry out these attacks? Many of his tirades against his victims and the broad ‘you’ he rails against in his disturbing videos are the obvious product of a disturbed person–but when he talks about the hedonism, wealth, and self-absorption of our society, can we really say that he was wrong?

Modern American (or really…just Western) society has destroyed true communities where people care for the good of one another, where they love their neighbor. We are only shaken into a realization of this when a violent attack such as this, one which is so truly EVIL, that we pay attention. But isn’t our pro-death culture–in every sense of the word–one which allows, and in one sense encourages, his kind of thoughts and behaviors to flourish, unhindered?

 

[Rach620]

It seems Catholics have gone overboard when they compare 4,000 babies killed through abortion with the senseless deaths of 32 college students. Let’s get real. These college students have proven they have something to offer society, while 4,000 unborn babies haven’t. :banghead:

See my previous post for where I believe the connection lies: the culture of death.

But why must human beings prove their worth in order for the loss of their lives to be considered tragic? We are valuable ONLY because we are created by God, in His image. That is where the worth of the human person lies.

We do not merit human dignity (or salvation…) through anything we do in this life (though our actions do reflect the state of grace of our souls). It is all a miniscule achievement in God’s divine plan of creation and salvation.

I am good because God created me and blessed me with His grace so that I may do good; my actions, in themselves, do not make me good. It is all the grace of God. Killing me is wrong because it is a denial of the goodness of my creation by God.

But it ensures that crimnals with guns – or with knives or clubs – will have unarmed victims to prey on – as we saw at Virginia Tech, where guns are banned.
…
And we see how well that worked at Virginia Tech. And how well it works in Washington, DC (where guns are outlawed) and in all other states and cities with gun bans.:whacky:

As a college student at another campus, I can safely say that I would not feel one ounce safer if there were guns in classrooms. I don’t want them there, or I at least don’t want to know that they’re there. (I honestly have no idea what Indiana’s weapons laws are.) It would probably make me feel more unsafe to have to carry my ID everywhere to get into buildings, have my bags searched as I go through metal detectors, and know that in that little black box under the podium there is a locked and loaded gun, ‘just in case’.

Can anyone imagine what this would practically be like on college campuses? Training professors to use weapons? Training students?

Look, if someone wants to carry out this kind of attack, it’s going to happen. Having a gun in the classroom to ‘engage’ the attacker…not going to work. For someone wielding two semiautomatic weapons and with murderous intent, the locked handgun in the hands of a relatively un-trained faculty member is probably just going to get them killed.

 

[seekerz]

Sorry for the long post, I’ve been trying to collect my thoughts.

I think we can recognize that at the heart of both of the topics of this thread: the VT massacre *and *abortion, is the horrible reality of the culture of death in which we live.

It is important for us pro-life Catholics to always remember that abortion is not the only issue we are battling. It is a horrible reality, and I believe it is the genocide which our generation will be indicted for when history judges us.

But abortion is only indicative of an even deeper sickness–even worse *evil *affecting our society. We’ve taken God out of the picture and in the process have destroyed human dignity. We see nothing valuable in life (you can hear this in the killer’s words), nothing in ourselves and therefore cannot possibly see anything of intrinsic value in others. We don’t truly care about anything.

So despair and indifference are the hallmarks of our culture of death, and where better are they manifested than in this incident?

We can see this in his own explanation for carrying out his attacks, but I think also in the circumstances leading up to them. Did anyone actually take the time to befriend this troubled man? Yes, he was ‘recommended for counseling,’ and professors noticed that he was ‘troubled’–but did anyone trouble *themselves *more than the bureaucratic mechanisms of the university required? No one can survive and flourish without human friendship.

I am in NO WAY seeking to lay blame on the VT community–this is still, and always will be, a senseless attack. I know that it was a personal choice he made to carry out this attack, and that whatever explanation he offered is not sufficient to explain it away.

But we must ask ourselves: How did he slip through the cracks? How were true human relationships so lacking in his life that he felt alienated and compelled to carry out these attacks? Many of his tirades against his victims and the broad ‘you’ he rails against in his disturbing videos are the obvious product of a disturbed person–but when he talks about the hedonism, wealth, and self-absorption of our society, can we really say that he was wrong?

Modern American (or really…just Western) society has destroyed true communities where people care for the good of one another, where they love their neighbor. We are only shaken into a realization of this when a violent attack such as this, one which is so truly EVIL, that we pay attention. But isn’t our pro-death culture–in every sense of the word–one which allows, and in one sense encourages, his kind of thoughts and behaviors to flourish, unhindered?

Very eloquently put. Perpetrators of such acts are products of our increasingly godless and impersonal society, not invaders from a distant planet.