Knight

I wouldn't blame video games for any of this. It all comes down to parenting. I play pretty violent video games but never had the slightest thought that it would be cool to do any of the killing that is done in the game. As long as you are raised with a good moral base it won't matter what you play. So again, its parenting thats to blame not the games.

Its going to go whatever way God planned. If its fit for most of mankind to destroy it self then thats that. Best you can do is secure yourself with god and spread the word to others so they can do the same.

65205

Can't agree fully on the parenting thing. CNN this morning had a story on brain injury. 30 brains of killers had been studied, and they showed signs of frontal lobe injury. I think 40 or so Texas death row inmates were studied and they too had brain injury. The injuries can be from accidents, long term stress (causes brain to shrink) or other factors. Now-what if you could screen for this?What would you do as a society? Not everyone with these brain injuries go crazy. Are we going to lock people up because they MIGHT do something? Should background checks include brain scans? I'm not being a smart ace, I really don't know what we could do. I have a child away at school and this tragedy really has me thinking. Of course, this could happen in a mall, office building, or a church. We have to keep living I know, but I can't help but think something could be done. Maybe more expensive ammo,certainly a longer waiting period and more extensive background checks.Sorry for the ramble, just can't get my head around this one.

future9er24

THERE WAS NO BACKGROUND CHECK?!?! You're telling me this psycho walked out of the gun store, gun in hand, they day he bought it?!

When I bought mine there was a great deal of paperwork, an 11 day wait, a background check, mandatory purchase of a gun lock and lots of rules and such to go over. I don't beleive firearms should be restricted, but I sure as hell beleive that they shouldnt be sold as easily as candy. As something thats highly dangerous and fatal, they should be very difficult to get, time consuming, and should test the maturity and mental health of every buyer. They never checked my mental health, but if they had, I would have had no protests at all. I'm happy of all the restrictions I had and hoops I had to jump through to get mine. Keeps the lower end scum from getting something that can hurt innocent people.

+1 on charging more for pistol ammunition too. They are concealable and as we can all see here, highly effective. This whole situation ****es me off and my heart goes out to everyone out there who lost a friend, family member or otherwise loved one

HOSS429

sorry to cover you so quick but if that is the case who filed off the serial #s so quick

future9er24

It just seems so absurd to me that you can get one THAT easily. I'm all for the second ammendment, and I'm all for owning whatever type of firearm you wish, unless its classified military or somesuch, but come on, you have to be stricter about them. The old saying "With great power comes great responsibility" comes to mind

Emu Hunter

Correct me if I am wrong but even though there may not have been a waiting period there in VA, he bought the guns weeks ago prior to the shooting. The law only stops certain circumstances from happening. Determined nut cases can always find a way to get the guns, even if they are banned.

I agree with the eariler post by Faber, better to have a plan of response and some training of "what to do if", since these events seem to be happening with more and more frequency. Same goes with terrorists on planes, I don't mind if the pre-flight video includes 3 minutes airtime on what to do if the plane is hijacked (such as how to use your carry-on to properly bludgeon a hijacker)

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showpo...6&postcount=32

GottaHaveIt

True all in all its the trigger happy freaks fault, I think there should have been enough traing in place by now to have helped not let it get this far but like getting a weapon , how do you stop it ? Can't

HOSS429

i`m not that familiar with what they represent but i see that the WBC church is going to be at the funerals.. arent they the group that protests at american soldiers funerals who are killed in iraq

2005Stang032

Thats a very scary thought....would we keep an eye on those with that type of brain activity. Think Minority Report....... I think it is possible that some people are born more susceptible to committing voilence than others, but ultimately it comes down to the choices of the human. There was a Law and Order:SVU on last night that dealt with a case that were the criminal defense attorney claimed that the criminal's was genetically prodisposed to hating Arabs....I think if we blame it on genetics there will be no standard...instead of "The Devil made me do it" it would be "My genes made me do it"

n00bstang

I just turned 19, so I guess I'm part of the generation that is set up for "mindless slaughtering without compassion". I grew up on Power Rangers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. I've played violent video games like Grand Theft Auto, Resident Evil, and more recently Gears of War. And I listen to occasional metal.And I've watched violent movies like Saw, Hostel, etc.

And I've never killed an animal on purpose...maybe some ants and spiders.
I've never even held a real gun.

Maybe it's not society, but it's the communities. I live in California and I maybe know 1 or 2 people that own guns. And the people that do own them have pretty good reason, too. I don't think there are Bloods and Crips in Virginia.

Now I realize hunting is fun and all, but I think being raised in a community where guns aren't that mainstream is probably the way to prevent this. My high school biology teacher was from Georgia and she already taught her kids about gun safety and how to shoot a gun (i think they're 9 and 11 yr. old girls). Things like that are what makes us vulnerable to crazy people. Because by teaching "safety" in reality we're enabling them to act out if they feel the whim.

It's just my opinion that the problem lies not in digital/media violence, but in actual, physical knowledge of real guns.

jsaylor

This only makes sense if you just like the notion of banning guns.The idea that high capacity clips or semi-automatic fire somehow makes these significantly deadlier against unarmed individuals is completely unfounded. The real advantage to high capacity clips and semi-auto fire is in close quarters against an armed opponent. The fact that the assualt weapons ban effectively did nothing during it's stint on the books should prove that

People who know guns will tell you that a semi-auto with a high capacity clip is inherently no dealier than anything else, it all depends on the situation. Give a guy who is a decent shot a bolt action rifle with a scope, put him somewhere high with a good viewpoint on a crowded campus and hewould sadly be in a position to wreak more havoc than this guy did. Heck, in this guys situation a pump action shotgun would have been a far, far deadlier weapon than those pistols assuming he simply took the time to learn how to reload it well. Modern weapons don't get any more basic than that.

The only way this will be fixed is by addressing the real problems which are far more complex, far more political, and therefore far less popular to discuss.

jsaylor

You've never been to the southern portion of the US have you? The Dems dropped this issue like a hot rock after 1996 for a reason, they want to stay in office. Things like this are tragic but many in the US take their right to own a gun very seriously. One of America's founding fathers stated that 'only free men own firearms' and that still resonates in many parts of this country.

65205

Funny you should mention Minority Report, it was the first thought that jumped into my head as I listened to the news program. I'm pretty sure the "my genes made me do it" has happened in court.I just really don't know. If we can't control people, maybe we need to control the weapons. Remember,we have a gun, I like owning a gun,it gives me security. This really has me debating my long held beliefs.

This guy had a history of mental illness. One reporter said that because he voluntarily entered a mental health facility it did not show up on the backgound check. He said had the killer been admitted by police or doctors it would have been a red flag. He bought both weapons weeks ago. All legal.

The shooter had been removed from a class at his prof. request because she was afraid of him. She was going to quit if he was not removed. Former roommates reported odd behavior to the police. His parents thought he was suicidal. Lots of signs/warnings nothing to stop it. Looks more and more like tougher gun/ammo control is needed.
Forgive me, I'm ranting and rambling.

GottaHaveIt

No not ranting and raving, I agree if we cannot control people as to many rights and such then it need be directed the other way, have a few stricter measures in place.

RobK

I'm sorry, but if you're committed to the concept of self defense and own guns for that reason, then you should also get the training and practice to effectively defend yourself against an armed opponent. I would be willing to bet that most assailants are not the best marksmen. I doubt very much that I would need 40 rounds to get the job done. Now if you live in the Bronx or South Central LA and you might find yourself face to face with ten guys that might be another story. I luckily don't. And I agree 100% that in the hands of a marksman an auto/semi-auto is no deadlier, but it gives the amateur a hell of a lot more of a chance to actually hit something/someone. That is the impetus of this entire thread. The law abiding citizens that own and handle guns are not an issue. I think in a situation such as this one, there would have been much more of a chance for someone to intercept him if he had to stop and reload. I could be entirely wrong or off-base. There are no right answers.

neil07gt

Grow a set. Stop blaming guns. One day you may have to actually protect yourself, your familiy, or your property.

future9er24

While I understand the sentiment Neil, you may want to be a little more civil in your voicing of said sentiment. It doesn't help the cause.

It is my strong opinion here that a mental aptitude test, in adddition to a waiting period, background check, mandaroy purchase of a lock, and miles of paperwork, should be required to purchase a firearm. I don't think certain types of weapons should be banned either; if the owner is fit to handle such a potentially lethal device then that is the way they should be able to purchse it. I'm not sure exactly how coherent I myself am being, but as a legal owner of a firearm, I feel at least in some way involved. Events like this give other owners a bad rep, and it makes people want to ban guns, neither of which are favorable for anyone.

People need to be mentally and emotionally and legally sound in order to own a firearm. If those three qualifications were met, there wouldnt be such a thing as gun violence.

jsaylor

But now you've opened Pandora's box. Lets assume I buy your theory that semi-auto guns and high capacity clips helped this guy kill more people than he could have otherwise and that he is basically a firearms novice. If you feel the need to eliminate semi-auto guns and high capacity magazines so that these 'un-trained' assailants wont be able to commit such attrocities then it follows that we likewise need to limit any guns that could be used by anybody, including those who know how to handle a gun, to commit such a crime.

May I suggest that everything but single shot firearms and single action revolvers likely just made your list. The real problems are morality, or the serious lack therof, in our current culture, the ever increasing lack of respect for life in general in our culture, and the complete inability by our nation as a whole to create and enforce effective laws. Simply outlawing any type of firearm will do little more than ensure that relatively lazy, unstable, or ignorant criminals will have less access along with every law abiding citizen.

In that instance we will have effectively walked all over a right once considered signficant enough to be second on the mind of the greatest men in the world at the time in order to make up for the fact that we've degraded into a society with morals little better than those of an alley-cat, not to mention one which has no ability to create or enforce laws which were themselves once considered to be second only to morality as the bedrock of our society. I would rather live with the possibility that mad men can do horrible things than live in that travesty of an America.

jsaylor

I wouldn't disagree with that (and in fact don't disagreee with all of it) but for the potential for abuse made possible by some of that. Example: mental aptitude tests.

Right now you cannot have a history of mental illness and legally buy a firearm. Not as strong a law as you are asking for but a good start, right? Well, it seemed that way until the ATF decided that, if you are a military veteran and have ever seen a psychiatrist/psychologist for anything that can be remotely construed as post-traumatic stress disorder you can't buy a gun.

Put simply, if you walk in to a shrink and say "You know, I saw a lot of bad things happen to a lot of women and children in X war and that still makes me sad somtimes even ten years later...is that normal?" you can't own a gun. Of course, this is ridiculous, and I seriously doubt anybody here thinks that would be anything but a normal response to having seen something so terrible. But even if your shrink says you are the most normal guy on earth the ATF will happily abuse the Hades out of the law and prevent you from buying a gun. In fact the guy in the scenario above would have commited a felony if he tries to buy a gun. I am aware of no gun law ever put into place in the US that wasn't either seriously abused or virtually ignored because it couldn't be abused.

My honest advice is to do something about the men who make and enforce these laws before worrying about the laws themselves. They are far more likely to do something to infringe your rights than somebody like the nut-job at Virginia Tech is to harm you.

future9er24

I hadn't really thought of the potential abuse for such a loaw I guess. Thanks for the enlightenment. I see your point in the idea of having someone less likely to abuse the situation in charge, it makes a lot of sense.

I guess the real goal with my idea was just to keep guns in safe hands. But like all important goals in life, there doesn't seem to be a simple, quick or easy solution. *sigh*

Also, going back and reading your other post, I agree with the morality issue. I know violent video games and movies take a lot of flak, but really, if a parent is not raising the child properly in the first place, something lieka video game is the least of the situation's issues.

I wish people as a whole were just more responsible. I'm not saying I'm the perfect example of a responsible human beings either, I've made a fair share of rather large mistakes. It's just really sad that stuff like this happens, and has the potential to happen again