Police: 33 Dead After Virginia Tech University Shooting »
Posted by: lovelytxwoman 1 year, 4 months ago881 Comments Report this Story
At least 32 people are confirmed dead and at least another 21 are wounded after a shooting at Virginia Tech University Monday morning, federal law enforcement officials told FOX News. Campus police said there was only one shooter and he is now dead.
Read Full Story at foxnews.com
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 881
-
0%
ryan6011 year, 4 months ago
This is senseless and tragic.
And the worst of it is it need not have happened, if we simply had stricter gun control laws.
My heart goes out to the families of the victims. I read that at least one of the suspects was shot and killed (I've heard conflicting reports on the number of suspects), which is too bad because now he will never face justice. Having him sent to prison for the rest of his life seems to me to be a much more fitting punishment for killing this many innocent people.
Reply-
0%
lwjr1 year, 4 months ago
If we had stricter gun laws bla bla bla... and banning forks will cause Rosie O'Donnell to quit eating. Washington DC bans hand guns, yet over 100 people were killed by them last year.
My thoughts and prayers are with these families, yes this was a senseless killing. I hope somehow the authorities will find the reason other than the killer had a few wires crossed.
Reply-
-
-
80%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
It's harder to build an effective gun than it is to make bathtub gin.
Another specious argument.
Reply-
0%
protoham1 year, 4 months ago
They need to update this story, the death count is up to 31 now with 29 wounded.
My prayers go to the families and friends of these fellow Hokies!
Hokie '75
Reply -
-
-
-
0%
yuengling5211 year, 4 months ago
Well, if you feel that your suggestions are the answer to everything, then maybe you should be in politics. Maybe then you'll realize that there aren't enough resources and manpower to alleviate all of the problems you seem to have the simple answer for. I'm not saying that they're not good ideas, but stiffer gun control laws don't mean that people who shouldn't have guns will not be able to get their hands on them anymore. There will still be homicidal nutcases with guns in their hands shooting up our schools, college campuses, and workplaces. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Even if they don't have guns, they will still come up with many other ways to take lives - because they are psychotic!
Reply-
0%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
If you don't try to fix anything, nothing getsd fixed...and if you are too cynical to believe that anything can be fixed, you probably would still be living with enslaved African American, women who can't vote, gassed victims of the Third Reich, and another Republican Congress.
Disinfranchised much?
Reply-
0%
yuengling5211 year, 4 months ago
I'm not too cynical to believe it, I just like to think realistically. Not EVERYTHING can be fixed, especially not as easily as you make them sound they can be. If that was the case, we'd would be on our way to Eutopia, and I'm sure even you believe that's not a possibility.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Veritatis1 year, 4 months ago
deathray,
Like many millions, I have had guns all my life and NEVER shot anyone. Keeping me and millions of sensible others from having guns only leaves us "without any defense" if someone would ever attack us.
The answer is in Solid Families, Decent Child-rearing and sensible moral values instilled at an early age.
Reply-
0%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
V -
Wiyh all due respect, I advocate better enforcement and restricting availability of guns to those citizens like you, who are not likely to go postal...
...however, I would happily take all your guns away from you along with everyone else to have saved the life if one of the students at VT...is that fair?
Reply
-
-
-
0%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
LOL, tme4cange doesn't want border enforcement so he/she can get a weapon illegally.
How about that?
Reply
-
-
-
0%
jeffery11 year, 4 months ago
I disagree. Making an effective gun is easy, creating a society in which people refuse to use them, except to truly defend themselves, seems difficult.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Candida1 year, 4 months ago
eviln3d: "The number of cases of liver desease was siginificantly lower"
That may be true, but organized crime thrived, and the number of deaths from guns was probably up.
Reply -
43%
awizardalso1 year, 4 months ago
I don't see how you can see how prohibition was effective. Not only was alcohol available in mass quantities, it really only succeded in making crazy people, like Al Capone, rich, powerful, and more importantly, very deadly. Even to the point of being armed better than the police. Prohibition was an excercise in futility. Similar to the current 'drug war'. If there's a market, there will always be an entrepreneur willing to supply the product. I suggest you do some more research.
Reply-
50%
eviln3d1 year, 4 months ago
Actually alcohol was not available in mass quantities. It was realatively easy to get in large cities especially those close to the Canadian border. But it wasn't that easy to come by for everyone. And if you want to use that logic why not legalize crack, its as easy to get as booze was during prohibition? They're both drugs, they're both addictive, they're both responsible for countless deaths in this country... Come one, why not? Or is it just because you like to drink?
Reply
-
-
-
50%
PsychoHosebeast1 year, 4 months ago
"Simplistic answer. That's what they said about Prohibition"
What the hell is that supposed to mean?
Reply -
0%
Shirtless1 year, 4 months ago
What we need to do is prosecute vigorously those persons who use guns for illegal purposes. Also, if a person commits murder in the first degree, the presumptive punishment should be death, unless the murderer demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence why death is inappropriate. If he succeeded, he should sentenced to life imprisonment without possibility of parole. Of course, that is not the current death penalty jurisprudence in the United States. Too many liberals on the courts and elsewhere for that.
Reply-
0%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
The prisons are full of people who used guns in the pursuit iof some violent crime, even with the Model Penal Code guidelines in effect.
Prosecution after the fact doesn;t seem to help either.
As far as the time it takes to carry out an execution, so many people convicted and on death row have been exonerated by DNA evidence that would have been unwarranted executions if the appeals process did not take a significant period of time, and those executions would be miscarriages of justice.
Reply-
0%
deathray1 year, 4 months ago
Apparently time4change doesn;t support DNA testing of convcted people to establish innocence.
LOL, excellent!
Reply -
100%
madmaxine1 year, 4 months ago
You just made my case for the death penalty. Because of DNA we can now be extra certain that we are sending the right person to the chair.
The problem is not that to many law abiding citizens have guns, the problem is we slap to many murderous criminals on the hand as if they were three and just stole a cookie.
Someone from my area robbed a store by claiming he had a bomb, and was caught speeding away from the cops with enough crack to distribute and he is facing less then nine years on his SECOND CONVICTION!
If guns were more common some of those kids in Virginia could have put an end to this murderous jerk earlier.
Reply-
-
0%
gamahuche1 year, 4 months ago
He was in a crack store?!
And kids should be sitting in class with loaded guns??
And this is supposed to be an advanced, civilised country?
And U get 3 positive votes for your opinion.
Give me a 3rd World slum anyday rather than that!
Reply -
0%
SitNlook1 year, 4 months ago
madmaxine...I was just called to jury duty a few days back and the judge started to talk about the counts against the guy and by the time he got to 19....slam the door I knew he was ready for time....but the counts were high but this guy was still on the streets. Scarey stuff here.
Reply -
91%
PsychoHosebeast1 year, 4 months ago
"You just made my case for the death penalty. Because of DNA we can now be extra certain that we are sending the right person to the chair."
...only when DNA evidence is collected at the scene, and it can be proven to belong to the killer.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
Coatl1 year, 4 months ago
I'm aganist death penalty because noone can assure that the 100% of the people who is executed are indeed guilty.
Reply-
-
-
33%
PsychoHosebeast1 year, 4 months ago
This has degraded into what is quite possibly the most idiotic, senseless argument I've ever read.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
67%
starryplough1 year, 4 months ago
My reccomendation (for what its worth) is to reinstate public executions for killers, rapists and child molesters. A swift and visible example is the best deterrent. Our legal system is a self-serving money making racket run by lawyers who do not serve the public interest.
A few months of that and you can send your kids back to public school and outside to play again.
Reply -
0%
eviln3d1 year, 4 months ago
lots of liberal democrats voted for the war so take your credit too libby boy.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
eviln3d1 year, 4 months ago
Sorry but your wrong, each year inmates kill other inmates and guards. Total isolation doesn't exist. Even someone put in solitary will at various points during the day have contact with a guard. The only safe inmate is a dead one.
Reply
-
50%
archeojoel1 year, 4 months ago
Bet you call yourself a "right-to-lifer," don't cha? Yeah, this is part of what the shrub calls our "culture of life." Hipocracy at its highest.
The truth is that stricter gun laws won't stop this kind of madness anymore than stricter drug laws have stemmed the tide of usage/addiction in this country. Just like outlawing abortion won't stop it from happening in back alleys (again).
Reply
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 4 months ago
I'm only against the death penalty for one major reason. I feel sorry for the person whose job it is to get up every day and execute someone, who is no threat to them, hasn't burglarized them...is essentially no danger to them when they are in jail and incarerated. I feel sorry for the executioners.
I'd favor putting the jerk in a jail cell with a hang noose, with the pictures of the victims just outside the jail cell. When they themselves are overcome....there is the noose. Hang yourself!
Reply
-
-
25%
awki1 year, 4 months ago
YOU FOOL! death sentences only convince criminals that killing is acceptable! If they see the government kill, they will do it as well. Besides, all these gunmen commint suicide anyway.
Reply
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 4 months ago
Unless you're a Border Patrol Officer, then if you shoot a drug dealer running away, you'll go to jail, even if afterward they discover the other two Border Patrol Officers were in cahoots with the drug dealer. Can you say I smell a skunk long before you see them? That situation smelled too.
So does this one.
Tragic, and nothing about gun control laws will ever help this situation. You need to look at the motivations behind the fingers on the triggers. I've owned guns all my life, my father, his before him. None of us ever even thought about something like this. Burglarize my house? Yes, they'll carry you out in a body bag, no question about it, but this is just senseless...
Reply-
-
100%
gamahuche1 year, 4 months ago
I'm not sure who called you paranoid.
I'm sorry that you feel fearful.
I've only been seriously afraid 4 or 5 times in my 60 years of life, which included Nazi occupation [and being a little Jewish..] living in great cities of the world, including, in the US, New York during the time of crack madness and roaming homeless on the streets. Living in the wilds of Montana, rural VT, the mountains of Mexico, hitchhiking all over including across the US and to Guatemala and back. For a year and a half in NYC I moved crackheads off my block, bunches of 8 or 10 at a time, at any time of the day or night, frequently when there was no one except me and them on the street
I've been robbed violently once, in my bed in London, harrassed on the subway in Philadelphia late at night on racial grounds. Apart from that my worst experiences were with corrupt cops in Michigan who "found" some pills in my glove compartment which were nothing to do with me and were not there before..
Reply-
50%
gamahuche1 year, 4 months ago
NEVER, EVER, have I wanted to own a gun, felt that I would be safer with one, nor have I ever been threatened with one, except by bent cops!
How is it that the US has become the home of this kind of incident which just occurred?
Its true that similar events have happened in many other countries and there are cities in South America, for example, where there are definite no-go areas.
Oops - got to run for a train.
Apologies, long preamble and didn't get to the point yet.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
archeojoel1 year, 4 months ago
There is a major difference between then and now--that is POPULATION. The pressures caused by more people competing for the same resources will naturally escalate the problems we face as a society. It's simple math/statistics: more people increases the incedence of indecency.
You can't solve this problem by imposing your "morality" on others. It just won't work. Obviously in this case, the guy had some REAL f'd-up problems of his own. What he needed was some loving intervention. I wonder if the people in his life noticed? Could they have done anything to prevent his collapse? Maybe. I suggest we take more notice of the people in OUR lives.
Reply
-
-
-
100%
vulcan201 year, 4 months ago
The news this morning they identified the shooter as a korean citizen here on a visa. Doesn't federal law forbid selling a firearm to him. He had a receit for buying the pistol in his back pack.
Reply -
0%
blackolives1 year, 4 months ago
Statistics don't bear you out. When people have more guns, there is less crime. Florida passed a concealed carry law, and all the libs went berserk, claiming that the murder rate would skyrocket. Just the opposite occured. Chicago, NYC, and D.C. have the toughest gun laws in the country, and also the highest murder rate. In Canada they spent tens of millions of dollars to enact gun control laws, and the murder rate went up. In Switzerland, every single adult is required by law to own an assualt weapon (oh-my-god), and they have a virtually non-existent murder problem. Start locking up criminals who use guns in crime for a longer period of time, and you will have a greatly reduced homicide rate.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
PopEye521 year, 4 months ago
YES WE SHOULD WORRY ABOUT OFFENDING PEOPLE, CAUSE YOU NEVER KNOWN . THAT PERSON MIGHT JUST TAKE IT OUT ON 32 PEOPLE. PLUS NOW THERE IS A NEW RECORD TO BREAK. PS SINCE NOBODY CARES ABOUT INSULTING OTHER PEOPLE, YOU CAN ONLY EXPECT THE SAME THING TO HAPPEN AGAIN AND AGAIN.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 4 months ago
Who knows where this blogs put things....anywhere it feels like I think.
Reply -
40%
PsychoHosebeast1 year, 4 months ago
"Washington DC bans hand guns, yet over 100 people were killed by them last year."
And probably nearly every one of those guns was bought in Virginia...
Reply -
71%
saluki1 year, 4 months ago
I am sickened that you would take a very serious issue like this and cheapen it with your comments about Rosie O'Donnell. If you have a problem with her, put your comments on one of those topics. This not a time to make this a conservative vs. liberal issue. 32 people were senselessly killed. Let's stick to that.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 4 months ago
Actually that is smart, not to drink from plastic cups. It makes water taste funny and I like good clean water. So it stands to reason you might actually be getting poisoned from the water you drink. Everybody I remember when I grew up that didn't have good water usually died of strange diseases. Ours was very good tasting and fairly pure.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
100%
Unlucky3201 year, 4 months ago
So true, even if guns were banned don't you think anyone with some money could get one. Drugs are shipped in everyday from all over the world, so are guns. People have gone crazy, think about it people, we took religion out of everything, discipline is taboo now, you can't spank your child cause some doctor somewhere says it causes them to have psychosymatic damage. Please!!! I was spanked as a child, guess what, I'm not going out and shooting people, I'm not in jail, and I'm not some twisted maniac out here molesting kids. Does it mean that if you take your child to church and disclipine him/her when he/she needs it will stop all this, maybe not, but it sure can't hurt.
Reply-
0%
ProudBlueTexan1 year, 4 months ago
-
-
-
-
0%
LordyLordy1 year, 4 months ago
not so...all you do is disarm good people who would defend themselves against garbage like this... I know. I had a burglar in my house once, who came after me with an 8 inch knife as soon as I turned on the light. I lit him up with three rounds from my handgun. Don't worry though. He'll never burglarize you. I did take him out, but even to this day I still see that face. My options? Let him kill me? He didn't have a gun but had a knife. Without my handgun I rather suspect I'd be dead or cut up very nicely....
Reply-
-
0%
ProudBlueTexan1 year, 4 months ago
Uh, it's INNOCENT lives we want to save at the expense of criminal lives, if necessary. Which one are you?
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
spiralthrough1 year, 4 months ago
Nice witty little saying, and true to an extent, but if guns were outlawed less outlaws would have guns(they couldn't buy them legally, and there would be less to steal from honest people) and how many honest people who have guns actually find themselves using them to defend themself?
Reply-
0%
JackofallChems1 year, 4 months ago
Outlaws can make guns just the same as moonshine, and guns are actually less difficult to make because the technology is more available to 'ordinary people'. Feuding families in Pakistan have been making their own firearms in their own towers (yes, the ENTIRE family lives there) for so long that they even made it into a PBS documentary - complete with the cute little forge in the back yard and the machine shop on the ground floor.
Oh, and honest people use guns more than enough for defense against common criminals to justify the 2nd amendment - but since the 2nd amendment was meant for actions against criminals with big political connections, it's kind of pointless to pretend that firearms don't have a valid use or two in private hands. Ever hear about those WWII vets that got in a shootout with their own elected officials to stop ballot box stuffing? Read up on it.
Reply-
0%
spiralthrough1 year, 4 months ago
The technology may be available but the means isn't as widespread. It'd be a lot tougher to get your hands on one than now, when you can just walk down to a pawn shop and buy one. Also a semi-automatic or automatic weapon must be much more difficult to make. Your average thug wouldn't be able to do it.
If we ever came to a point where guns or ammo were prohibited (after the inevitable riots which would ensue) harsh penalties would have to be enforced and word gets around... If Johnny is building guns in his backyard (just an example) and selling them it couldn't be kept hidden for long.
'Oh, and honest people use guns more than enough for defense against common criminals to justify the 2nd amendment'
Maybe. It's tough to say without seeing statistics: self-defense shootings in the US (or whereever) in a year vs shootings by people with guns which have been stolen vs guns which would have been used as self-defense which were taken from the victim and used on them...etc
cntd
Reply-
100%
JackofallChems1 year, 4 months ago
The basics are covered in John Lott's book "More Guns, Less Crime". Some of the advanced stuff that applies to this shooting case is in a research paper professor Lott published a while back that has the full-blown, hair-pulling statistical analysis of mass murder shooting sprees like this one. The conclusion was that it was statistically indeterminate whether or not gun restrictions or lack thereof had the effect of suppressing mass murder plots by nutcases - but the data was trending toward gun ownership suppressing such actions, possibly because even the nutcases were timid about getting shot before they got a chance to take their best shot at everyone in the area. If I get a chance before bed, I'll try to dig up a link for that one - it's a trip to see how a statistician can avoid decisive conclusions just to have an excuse for more research on the topic!
Reply-
0%
JackofallChems1 year, 4 months ago
Found it (finally). The analysis is titled "Multiple Victim Public Shootings", and you're more likely to find the abstract than the actual paper in a web search.
http://www.thevrwc.org/JohnLott.pdf
but if you just want the short story, this might work:
http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel011701...
If you need some sleep tonight, just start trying to figure out what a "Simultaneous Poisson-Logit Estimate" is.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
