atleast 20 killed in campus shooting at Virginia Tech
POSTED BY: Feity
UPDATED: Friday, November 7, 2025 15:59
VIEWED: 17813
PAGE 9 of 12
Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
The world is a dangerous place and to pretend otherwise is pure madness, so there's nothing wrong with taking reasonable, rational precautions to mitigate those risks, it's no different than carrying a spare tire in your trunk - it's something you'd rather not need, but the realities of life make it wise to do.
I'm not going to weigh in on the gun control debate, but one point that hasn't been mentioned: Don't you think the size of his weapons (i.e. handguns) allowed him to conceal them and be less conspicuous than if he'd had, say, a rifle? Which thereby allowed him to walk around campus and up and down hallways without anyone seeming to realize he was armed? If handguns were really hard to get, criminals like this guy – no previous criminal record, no "underworld" connections, no drug running or gang activity – would probably have to get hunting guns (etc), which makes you a visible threat LONG before you actually begin firing. Of course some criminals will find guns, just like some guys from VICE showed up at an arms market and bought a dirty bomb, but having concealed weapons as opposed to visible weapons is probably more dangerous, even when taking into account one's desire to protect him/herself.
That said, Frem, I think you present yourself articulately and intelligently, even when I disagree with you. Way to lend some legitimacy to the RWDF.
Don't make faces.
http://amaranton.wordpress.com
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The US has a higher level of ECONOMIC "freedom". But if you have to carry a gun, are frightened of 10% of the people you meet, can't go into large parts of the city, lock your doors and windows at night and install a security system... how free are you?
The US also has a higher level of personal freedom than many Europeean-socialist countries. In the UK as I understand it you are taxed at 100% after a certain amount of money is obtained, which is why many UK actors & writers come to the US.
---------------------------------
Always look upstream.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
CELLPHONE VIDEO OF SHOOTINGS AT VA TECH: NO POLICE SIRENS, NO PUBLIC ADDRESS WARNINGS
www.liveleak.com/view?i=f59_1176748483
Student bloggers blamed Virginia Tech president, police and ban on guns for the tragedy:
http://thewtfblog.blogspot.com
www.collegemedia.com
www.planetblacksburg.com
Cathy O'Brien was a CIA mind-controlled presidential-model sex slave. She and her daughter Kelly were models for River Tam in Firefly/Serenity. Old news.
Cathy O'Brien knows all about Blacksburg Virginia, the little town where giant Virginia tech is located. They wrote about it in their 2nd autobiography, ACCESS DENIED FOR REASONS OF NATIONAL SECURITY, about her daughter Kelly being lobotomized by Vanderbilt University Medical Center, under court order in Knoxville Tennessee (my home city).
Quote:
From Mark & Cathy - April 16, 2007
www.Trance-Formation.com
Hi ... sadly ... though predictably ... it is major D.C. diversion time again to focus folks away from what Congress and the Executive branch are infighting about today: More $ for the wars being waged against countries that have never done anything against the US.
Below this intro are some direct quotes from our book "ACCESS DENIED"...about a tiny little town in Virginia ... Blacksburg we felt strongly would eventually become "news"!
WHY.... because Blacksburg houses (underground in the side of a local Blacksburg mountain!) the best kept US government's ABOVE TOP SECRET laboratory for developing/applying (as in Cathy's case) such weapons such as human robotic mind control programming.
Ask yourself... "how ironic" that a tiny little town, as disclosed about in ACCESS DENIED in Virginia could HOST the worst school massacre in US history on a day of extreme importance that a so called "showdown between Congress and the Pentagon/Executive Branch" over the war funding and pulling our troops out ... to most likely divert the people's attention away from what is being perpetrated against all of u.s.
PLEASE consider why we entitled this chapter (22) (your) "NEED-TO-KNOW"!
Please, we beg of you ... consider today ... do it now ... strongly recommending our book "ACCESS DENIED For Reasons Of National Security" to everyone on your mailing list as a MUST READ NOW ... as they have a "need-to-know the facts that support why we include such "notable mention" of Blacksburg, Va., population 48,595 minus 31.
From "ACCESS DENIED For Reasons OF National Security" , chapter 22, page 160, 2nd edition
Cathy: What’s DARPA?
Mark: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency[1]. It’s the most Top Secret special weapons development lab in the world.
Cathy: I’m glad I don’t know about that one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From "ACCESS DENIED For Reasons OF National Security" , chapter 22, page 161, 2nd edition
Below is the exact recorded dialog between Mark & Cathy while driving to a Washington D.C. speaking engagement.
Mark: You’ve talked about, only not by name. It’s in a sleepy little town in Virginia.
Cathy: Oh, that place, I shuddered. I guess I didn’t Need-to-Know the name when I was there. Isn’t it called Blackbeard or Blackbird or something like that?
Mark: Keep looking until you see a road sign in memory.
Cathy: Blacksburg!
Mark: Yes! I was aware of it when I was couriering file tapes for Ampex. My perception of DARPA is that it holds the key to what is eroding the soul of America- and the world. Everything I know may still be classified.
Cathy: Then I won’t ask you what you saw. I said, aware that laws of Sedition could result in his imprisonment if anyone found out he was talking.
(footnote on page 161) [1] Wear anti-virus firewalls if/when seeking further information online regarding DARPA!
Thank you, for your time to read this and pass it along to everyone you know ... and for your help to reach ones who are not so well informed as you.
Peace,
Mark & Cathy
www.trance-formation.com
Naked Cathy O'Brien and Kelly were hunted by Dick Cheney's Most
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Only allowing bodyguards, etc to carry is actually appropriate. Keep the guns in the hands of the people who are protecting, and try to keep the guns out of the ones trying to do the killing.
There were 15,000 student on that campus. One was a killer, the rest law abiding citizens. Campus rules don't allow students to have guns on campus, thus there were 15,000 unarmed law abiding citizens and one armed killer.
Now suppose a reasonable gun policy, one that ensured that only folk with clean records and some training could carry and that there was no campus rule banning guns. Even if only half of 1% chose to carry that would leave the killer outnumbered 75-1. Much better odds then before.
It is sad but true that one armed law abiding student or professor could possibly (although not likely) have stopped this killer. But five, ten, fifteen, the more law abiding persons armed the more likely lives are saved.
H
In an ideal world that would be true. In the real world things get confused. Just off the top of my head I can see...
Student's shooting at students, each thinking the other is the killer.
Students being hit by "friendly" fire in shootouts between students and the perp/other students.
Police shooting armed students mistaking them for the perp.
And that's before we consider accidents and drunk frat boys settling issues with guns.
I know you're a prosecutor but I wonder if you speak to many cops on this issue? I married into a Chicago Cop family. My father in law believes in people having guns for home protection is a good thing -- though it complicates responding to some domestic or burglary calls. However, he dislikes carry permits because amateurs waving guns about are the last things cops want to have to deal with when responding to a call. Not only does it make it harder to ID the perp, the chances of armed civilian shooting cop, cop shooting armed civilian or civilian shooting innocent bystander skyrocket.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
The US has a higher level of ECONOMIC "freedom". But if you have to carry a gun, are frightened of 10% of the people you meet, can't go into large parts of the city, lock your doors and windows at night and install a security system... how free are you?
The US also has a higher level of personal freedom than many Europeean-socialist countries. In the UK as I understand it you are taxed at 100% after a certain amount of money is obtained, which is why many UK actors & writers come to the US.
If you live that way, you have a valid point.
There is a difference between living in fear & taking precautions.
Isreal has long had such problems, the UK has suffered such issues, terrorism has touched most countries.
The US has long suffered from the aspects of Terrorism, the vast majority of the US is simply unaware that we have had terrorist groups in this country since at least the end of our "Civil War".
We just don't call it that because it's inconvienient.
Caution is advisable no matter where you live, no country in the world can provide it's people with adequate "protection" it's a simple truth, I don't advocate being forever afraid, nor do I advocate the idea that "we the people" will ever be truly safe either...it's a fine line perhaps, but it's an important distinction.
Consider the fact that 32 people out of approx. 15,000 were murdered the other day...the odds were much greater that you weren't murdered than were.
Look at the incident this way...there were 14,966 survivors, not bad really.
I don't think it's much comfort to those that died or their families though, I also don't think the press would ever put it that way, do you?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
But if you have to carry a gun, are frightened of 10% of the people you meet, can't go into large parts of the city, lock your doors and windows at night and install a security system... how free are you?
Apparently freer in the US than most of Europe.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_per_of_saf_bur-crime-perception-
of-safety-burglary
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_per_of_saf_wal_in_dar-crime-perc
eption-safety-walking-dark
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This is perception of crime not actual crime statistics themselves. A kid gets shot in London and it's national news, a kid gets shot in Dallas and it's so commonplace that it might come second to a local council meeting on the local newscast.
Besides these figures are for 2000 when Clinton was still president, before 9/11 and when the economy was better in the US than in Europe. Wonder what it would look like with more modern figures?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Fletch2:
This is perception of crime not actual crime statistics themselves. A kid gets shot in London and it's national news, a kid gets shot in Dallas and it's so commonplace that it might come second to a local council meeting on the local newscast.
That's what SignyM's issue was, perception of crime - fear of crime.
Quote:
Besides these figures are for 2000 when Clinton was still president, before 9/11 and when the economy was better in the US than in Europe. Wonder what it would look like with more modern figures?
Probably not too different. Fear of terrorism is different from fear of normal crime.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The problem with this survey is that it's too vague. Did you ask people in cities or people in the country? Did you ask folks on the same day or different times of year? Had there been any event in the area you surveyed before you conducted it.
I knew a girl in college that would not go out a night during the winter, which meant in effect she tried to find someone to walk her back to her dorm any time after 4PM in November. In the summer it would get as dark around 10PM but she was happy to walk home alone at that time, I suspect because being warmer there were more people on the streets and she felt safer.
So, had you surveyed her in June 2000 she would probably have told you she felt safe on the street at night, asked in November she would say something different.
People become aclimatised to things. In the UK we lived with IRA bombings often targeting public spaces like stores and train stations. However after a while people wise up and do the math, if a million people pass though Waterloo in a day and an IRA bomb kills 20, the chances of you dying are staggeringly remote. Consequently even after a bombing people continued to do what they usually did. They were used to it. I was on one of the first flights out of DFW to San Franscisco when air service started after 9/11. There were 13 paying passengers of all classes on my flight. In SF the streets were relatively deserted --- you could ride the cable cars without queing. In the suburban area the malls were almost deserted because someone had said that they could be a target.
I doubt if you had asked many Americans if they felt safe at that time they would have said yes. This doesn't mean Brits are braver than Americans, just that repeated exposure means you do the maths and get on with living. Terrorism is so rare in the US it is uncalcuable (or was at that time) people feared the unknown. Likewise violent crime of the magnitude seen in US cities is unknown in Europe, so people fear it because their exposure is too low for them to have done the math. In contrast most Americans in big cities have done the math, take precautions and go about their business.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The problem with this survey is that it's too vague. Did you ask people in cities or people in the country? Did you ask folks on the same day or different times of year? Had there been any event in the area you surveyed before you conducted it.
I knew a girl in college that would not go out a night during the winter, which meant in effect she tried to find someone to walk her back to her dorm any time after 4PM in November. In the summer it would get as dark around 10PM but she was happy to walk home alone at that time, I suspect because being warmer there were more people on the streets and she felt safer.
So, had you surveyed her in June 2000 she would probably have told you she felt safe on the street at night, asked in November she would say something different.
People become aclimatised to things. In the UK we lived with IRA bombings often targeting public spaces like stores and train stations. However after a while people wise up and do the math, if a million people pass though Waterloo in a day and an IRA bomb kills 20, the chances of you dying are staggeringly remote. Consequently even after a bombing people continued to do what they usually did. They were used to it. I was on one of the first flights out of DFW to San Franscisco when air service started after 9/11. There were 13 paying passengers of all classes on my flight. In SF the streets were relatively deserted --- you could ride the cable cars without queing. In the suburban area the malls were almost deserted because someone had said that they could be a target.
I doubt if you had asked many Americans if they felt safe at that time they would have said yes. This doesn't mean Brits are braver than Americans, just that repeated exposure means you do the maths and get on with living. Terrorism is so rare in the US it is uncalcuable (or was at that time) people feared the unknown. Likewise violent crime of the magnitude seen in US cities is unknown in Europe, so people fear it because their exposure is too low for them to have done the math. In contrast most Americans in big cities have done the math, take precautions and go about their business.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME