Quote from: WakshaaniAnd benig rational is your friend.

I see you haven't met Nox yet. Nox, Wakshaani. Wakshaani, Nox. Or as we lovingly refer to him "that raving lunatic who makes people want to get rid of the Off Topic forum just so he'll shut up about politics, racism, and countless other idocies."

As a veteran to these boards, I feel it is my duty to inform you that all attempts at reason with him on matters political, social, and generally non-RPG will be met with failure. If these types of situations upset you, the best bet is to ignore him in the OT threads. He's a useful member of many RPG threads though.

Quote from: StumpydaveDon't tell us.  Tell them.

Wailing on an rpg message board isn't going to change anything.  Send your views to those who can do something about it.  Like the media, the anti gun lobby themselves etc.

"People seem to think that by posting in threads and agreeing with other people they are changing the world. They are not. They are posting in threads online. The universe will not be altered by forum threads, even those which are very wry. Being outraged online is a form of entertainment, and refreshing a thread to receive a hit of consensus packs the thrill of genuine activism without requiring any sweat.  I'm afraid this test may require more from the community than a sardonic jpeg. "  -- Jerry "Tycho" Holkins

Quote from: Dominus Nox(The shooter was a chinese national over here on a visa, so no doubt retards like pundit will accuse me of anti-chinese "RACISM!!!"  for speaking on this issue, so let me don my white robes and hood, and light my mini flaming cross on my desk so as to let them know how little their mindless chant of "RACIST!!! RACIST!!! RACIST!!!" means to me.)

All of which has nothing to do with the rest of your post, other than underscoring the fact that the murderer in question was a non-citizen in the US on a student visa.  There you go looking for a fight where there is none again.  Knock it off.

QuoteSince this guy was apparently here on a visa, he could not have bought guns legally, meaning he acquired his weapons ilegally in all probability. This means that laws would not have deterred him from getting guns and comitting his rampage.

But let's put all that aside for now.

Let's not.  This statement undermines your whole argument (if there is one, really).  The anti-gun lobby certainly doesn't advocate the sale of firearms to non-US citizens.  You're right on one count, and that's that, in all probability, in the current environment of gun ownership and sales in the US, gun control laws may not have had a deterrent effect on this fellow's ability to obtain firearms illegally.  The anti-gun lobby would agree with you there.  So what the hell are you bitching about?

Oh, right.  That calls for tighter controls on the sale and responsible ownership of firearms -- not the outright abolition of gun ownership by any stretch of the imagination -- makes you angry.  That some lobbyist or activist spending his or her 15 seconds of fame on a sensationalist media broadcast makes you angry.

Whatever, man.  As I've been going round and round with my workmates recently, eliminate your confounding variables, isolate your root cause, and stop attributing "failed" results to the entire system.

!i!

He was a Green Card Alien (permanent resident) and therefore perfectly within his rights to buy a gun. The 9mm was bought on March 13 (so this wasn't a crime of passion, most likely, but pre-planned - as evidenced by the chains for the doors). The .22 was bought more recently.

The thing I object to is the uninformed who make it sound like anyone can just walk into a Wal Mart (sure, why not?) and buy a gun and walk out with it. We've got 7-day waiting periods on firearms in this country, and they didn't stop this guy. Nothing would've stopped this guy. If you're going to kill people, you're going to kill people. And don't give me that crap about guns making it easier to kill lots of people. Yes, of course. So do cars. So do bombs. So does anything if you've got the will to use it. And there are SO many guns in this country already that they're like illegal aliens - no way in hell you could get rid of all of them. So, using the same logic, I say we don't even try.

Quote from: WerekoalaWe've got 7-day waiting periods on firearms in this country

3 in Illinois for pistols, 1 for long arms.  I agree we have waiting periods, but they are not uniform by any stretch of the imagination.  By making gun laws a local issue, the entire country is a crazy quilt of contradictory laws.  The only laws you can really ever understand fully are state laws and the laws of your city/county of residence.

I thought Federal was 7 days. Brady Bill and whatnot, or did that finally expire? Haven't bought a gun in a few years.

The 7-days was to make sure there was time for a background check, but with the more automated records I guess they shortened it?

Point is, he was checked and he had no record. A 25 day waiting period wouldn't have mattered.

Quote from: WerekoalaHe was a Green Card Alien (permanent resident) and therefore perfectly within his rights to buy a gun.

Thank you for that clarification.

QuoteAnd don't give me that crap about guns making it easier to kill lots of people. Yes, of course. So do cars. So do bombs.

Why not?  Buying a gun is easier than making a bomb. A gun is concealable and more convenient and practical than taking a car onto a campus or into a building.  There's also a cachet to guns in our culture that makes it downright attractive to fantasise about meting out punishment with impunity.

There are all kinds of problems with guns in this nation, and none of them have anything to do with the mechanics of the firearms themselves.  I honestly agree with the tired old bumpersticker that reads, "Guns don't kill people -- people kill people."  And we are immersed in a culture that facilitates and even promotes the use of guns to kill people, whether it be for lawful or unlawful reasons, righteous or depraved.

QuotePoint is, he was checked and he had no record. A 25 day waiting period wouldn't have mattered.

How about a psychological evaluation?

!i!

There are too many guns bought and sold to psychologically evaluate every prospective customer. The best you'd have is scan tron questionnaires with the right answers being sold in seedy bars.

Quote from: James McMurrayThere are too many guns bought and sold to psychologically evaluate every prospective customer.

So does that imply too many guns, or too many customers?  Or both?  If it's effectively impossible to insure that they are being sold only to responsible and competent owners, then what does that say about the market for firearms in the US?

!i!

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaHow about a psychological evaluation?

I'll answer this one the same way I get involved with the cigarette debate. If they're THAT bad, ban them. Psychological evaluation for someone to buy a perfectly legal item is rediculous. Guns are already pretty well regulated (after all, he didn't use an M-16, but a typical 9mm pistol and a .22, fer chrissakes).

The fact that he killed so many people is a factor of a) chaining doors shut (ban chain?) and b) knowing what he was doing. He wasn't some random shooter, he obviously knew exactly what to do and how to do it. I'm amazed we haven't had MORE shootings with body counts like this, truthfully. Its really not that hard to kill a human being with a gun - you just have to know what you're doing.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaSo does that imply too many guns, or too many customers?  Or both?  If it's effectively impossible to insure that they are being sold only to responsible and competent owners, then what does that say about the market for firearms in the US?

What about the umpteen million guns already in circulation? You could ban all gun sales tomorrow and still have 100 million+ out there, somewhere.

Barn. Horse. We just have to accept it as a danger of doing business. Kinda like all the other things we'd like to "fix" that we can't or won't because it'd be too hard.

Obviously the best solution is for everybody to be packing.

"Hey, nutcase!" BOOM

Quote from: WerekoalaThe fact that he killed so many people is a factor of a) chaining doors shut (ban chain?) and b) knowing what he was doing.

We could ban knowledge.

Quote from: WerekoalaI'll answer this one the same way I get involved with the cigarette debate. If they're THAT bad, ban them.

I don't recommend that you hold your breath, but we're not that far away from it.  Certainly the popular campaign against them has seriously turned the tide in the last 20 years. I can imagine the same happening to gun ownership.

QuotePsychological evaluation for someone to buy a perfectly legal item is rediculous.

But they aren't "perfectly" legal, are they? The fact that a handgun's intended use is, at best, considered justifiable homicide belies that fact.

QuoteHe wasn't some random shooter, he obviously knew exactly what to do and how to do it. I'm amazed we haven't had MORE shootings with body counts like this, truthfully. Its really not that hard to kill a human being with a gun - you just have to know what you're doing.

Here I readily agree with you, and thus has it been throughout the ages, since long before the advent of gunpowder.

Look, I'm not an anti-gun nut.  A nut of some variety, perhaps, but I actually support the right to own and bear arms responsibly.  Now, I extend that responsibility a long way toward the type of firearm owned, the reason for the individual to bear it, and the manner in which they do both.

By some coincidence, I just had this discussion with my two children (ages 8 and 6) over the dinner table last night.  They'd recently been visiting their grandpa out in the country, been shooting BB guns, and watching my father-in-law and my wife fire off .22 rifles.  My son just recently shot and killed his first bird.  I started the conversation out by asking them to tell me what's good about a gun.  We all agreed that they're useful tools for hunting and protection, and that they can be fun to fire.  I then asked them what's wrong with guns, and they quickly conceded that they're dangerous when used wrong.  That was pretty much where I left the discussion, though I did go into some detail as to why their mother and I have consciously decided to not own any guns ourselves.

You know, my wife brought up the topic of the Virginia Tech shootings last night, and my finger-pointing consisted of this: Population Density.  Too many fucking people, living too close together.  It's driving us nuts, increasing the statistical likelihood of tragedies such as this, and it's only going to get worse.  Try to imagine a legislated solution to my assertion.  I suggested a 40% to 60% world-wide reduction in the human population -- as long as it doesn't affect me or my immediate family.

!i!

Population density of the US: 31 per sq km
Violent gun deaths: 18.57 per 100 000 (1993)

Population density of Singapore: 6 208 per sq km
Violent gun deaths: 15.77 per 100 000 (1994)