+- WineBoard (https://www.wines.com/wineboard)
+-- Forum: GENERAL (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-100.html)
+--- Forum: Rants & Raves (https://www.wines.com/wineboard/forum-12.html)
+--- Thread: Thank you, God! (/thread-13395.html)
- wondersofwine - 04-18-2007
That Nor'Easter (last weekend) brought a tree down on the day care center in Connecticut where my great-niece Meredith goes two or three times a week. Fortunately, it happened before the children were there. The rest of the building was spared so they center opened again on Tuesday. Meredith says "A tree fell on my school!"
On a sadder note, my nephew's neighbors were close friends with a couple teaching at Virginia Tech and the husband/father of the couple was the German teacher, Jamie Bishop, who was killed. The neighbor from Connecticut and his wife and the Bishops were to attend a seminar together this weekend. What a horrific tragedy!
- hotwine - 04-18-2007
It was indeed, Wonders. But such a gift the Rumanian professor gave his students, at the cost of his own life!
- wondersofwine - 04-18-2007
Yes, I was moved by that too. To think he survived the Holocaust only to be gunned down in his classroom in a small town in Virginia!
I'll probably start a tirade of angry replies with this but one tv station said that the New York Police commissioner calls Virginia's gun laws among the most lax in the country and says something like 80% of the guns used in crimes in New York were purchased in Virginia. That's why we need some consistent gun laws across the nation. In Virginia you can buy one hand gun every 30 days or some such. The shooter bought one hand gun five weeks ago, and is thought to have bought the second one last week. There is no waiting period to get the gun.
- Drew - 04-18-2007
So glad the tree did no physical harm, WOW, I know of trees and falling and such. Evil is evil and no gun laws in our free society would change a thing. Guns are very easy to buy legal and/or illegal, and where there is intent and motive there's available resource and, I apologize, I won't argue this point further as it's a no win debate. My problem with the school is that they had a double homicide which is very unusual for that area, no suspect in custody, no recovered weapons and they don't shut down the school? I'm sure there will be an ad for a new police chief and possibly a new administrator....I won't be applying.
Drew
[This message has been edited by Drew (edited 04-18-2007).]
- Bucko - 04-18-2007
"My problem with the school is that they had a double homicide which is very unusual for that area, no suspect in custody, no recovered weapons and they don't shut down the school?"
And we will hear a lot more about this. I too am very surprised as this glaring lapse.
Gun control? Nice idea that has no substance. Japan has very strict gun laws yet the mayor of Nagasaki was just killed by a hand gun.
Legislators also know it is political suicide to mess with the NRA. Like Drew says, it is a no-win debate that is futile.
- Thomas - 04-18-2007
I certainly don't want to get into a debate about gun control, but I have to say I find it rather ludicrous to reason that gun laws won't stop gun crimes and so they should not be considered. If that were the measure of lawmaking, then no law would have any value, since all laws can be broken.
I can't imagine any statement more specious in America than claiming a law should only be instituted if it can be guaranteed that everyone abide by it. Laws are made and enforced to reflect the moral and cultural bent of a society. If we don't want people getting easy access to guns then we should make laws to prevent as many people as possible from getting easy access to guns...if we don't think that's a reasonable goal, then we shouldn't make the law. But let's not make excuses for not facing the issue squarely.
- hotwine - 04-18-2007
IMO the real answer is to allow all majority-age students and faculty to CCW on campus, if they're trained, licensed and without felony convictions. One such person could have ended that tragedy very quickly. (FWIW - TX has the same stupid restrictions as VA.... concealed-carry on a school campus or at church is illegal.)
- Thomas - 04-19-2007
Gil,
I'm not addressing the specific incident; I'm addressing what I consider an obscurity of the issue. To say that a law is unnecessary because we already know it cannot be enforced is to say that we have a slew of pretty unecessary laws on the books already.
That kind of argument clouds the real issue, which has to do with moral and social values.
Just to be simple: Assume that I hate speeding laws and always break them. If enough guys like me feel that way, why the hell would we need speeding laws? I mean, we will all break them anyway. We have speeding laws because it's been decided that they do two things--prevent deaths and bring extra cash into the local law enforcement offices. [img]http://wines.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img]
On the spcific issue of the latest college shooting. Rather than have a shootout in the college, perhaps it would have made sense to prevent a young man from buying two guns within five weeks, a young man who also left a trail of mental instability and strange beahvior incidents. It seems perfectly reasonable that people like that are a risk.
The argument that criminals will get guns with or without laws has absolutely nothing to do with young people with unstable personalities. If a wall had been in place the young man would not have had easy access to weapons and since he was not a career criminal he probably would not have been able to get one gun, let alone two.
Again, it is a moral and social issue whether or not it makes sense to prevent people from acting rashly with relative ease.
I may be wrong, but my understanding is that this young man was neither licensed nor supervised and trained with firearms, so why was he able to buy two guns within a month or so?
[This message has been edited by foodie (edited 04-19-2007).]
- winoweenie - 04-19-2007
From what has been exposed in the press it seems this was mismanaged from over 2 years ago. This troubled young man was showing his paranoia and skitzie tendancies without getting any help. Gun laws, early reporting of the 2 murders in the dorm, the national guard or even Drew couldn't stop this maniac from his chosen path. The hospital should, or rather could have, made a difference last year. What an unimaginable tragedy and the heartbreak this troubled youngster has caused is beyond my comrehension. WW
- hotwine - 04-19-2007
From what I understand, even the campus security officers at VT are unarmed, in the interest of maintaining a "safe" environment. So much for that argument.
Am sure there will be plenty of rocks thrown at people involved in the young man's life.... his parents, the judge who failed to incarcerate him, the gun dealer, etc. None of that will bring the victims back to us.
I think we as a society need to assess our vulnerabilities to the loonies of the world. Where are we most vulnerable? How about - at school and at church?
- Bucko - 04-19-2007
No laws will stop a person bent on murder from committing same, be it a gun, knife, club or rock. A gun might make it easier, but it is only a tool. To blame guns is just, well, silly. Just as it is to blame purchases of same -- you can go to a gun show/swap meet and buy a gun under the table including directions on how to turn it into a fully automatic weapon. Laws are ineffective. New laws will just be more ink on worthless paper.
- Thomas - 04-19-2007
Gil,
I agree on that score. One of the issues this situation brings up is why school officials feel compelled not to take action...another social issue. They are also restricted by law from compelling a mentally unstable student to get help--they can only offer the help.
Bucko,
All I can say to your post is this:em read mine again. I am not making a case for gun laws, but I am making a case against specious arguments like the claim that a law does not stop a crime, specious because taken to its logical conclusion, then we don't need preventive laws at all. We only need laws for after-the-fact, after the crime has been committed. So, attempted murder would not be a crime, only successful murder.
A major argument for our so-called war on drugs is that illegal drugs lead to crimes. Like guns, drugs don't commit crimes--people do. Maybe instead of wiping out drugs, we should do some preventive people wiping out, and then there would be fewer crimes!
Just to add to the strange logic...why is it that restricting access to guns will do nothing to prevent certain crimes, but restricting access to drugs will do something to prevent certain crimes?
Again, I am not arguing for a gun law; I am questioning the specious arguments devised to keep things as they are.
[This message has been edited by foodie (edited 04-19-2007).]