Posted on 04/17/2007 3:40:18 PM PDT by NapkinUser
A gunman who shot dead at least 30 people before killing himself at Virginia Tech university was a resident Asian student.
Police have named him as Cho Seung-hui, a 23-year-old from South Korea.
Survivors and witnesses have expressed anger towards the university and the police for waiting too long to alert people a gunman was on the loose.
President Bush said the US was shocked and saddened by the attack, while in the UK Prime Minister Tony Blair expressed his profound sadness at the terrible loss of innocent lives.
How can such incidents be prevented from happening again? Does this incident raise questions about gun control? Is this a problem unique to the US? Send us your comments.
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 21:16 GMT 22:16 UK I feel sad for all the victims of this senseless masacre.I just don't understand why gun control is a political issue in the US ? It does not make sense that a student can walk into a shop and buy a gun. How many more must die before the 2nd amendment is over turned. Why is it so obvious to everyone outside the US but thought of as being anti American to many Americans. Is being American being pro gun...I cannot believe that. They just said 30000 people die each year because of guns.
Martin Spedding, Basel, Switzerland
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 21:15 GMT 22:15 UK While making the "world safer" the US govt has forgotten its own back yard. How long are they going to wait?? until more innocent lives are lost in such incidents
Ajith, Ghana
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 21:14 GMT 22:14 UK Massacres in the US are tragically too frequent and the unfortunate Dunblane massacre in Britain has never been repeated although gun crime is still a problem here. However in the US it is argued through the powerful firearms lobby that every American citizen has the right to own a gun. Tougher control should be put in place to stop massacres or shootings of any kind and politicians should acknowledge the desperate need for this.
Beth Mortimer, Leeds
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 20:48 GMT 21:48 UK One report said he was identified from the receipt for the guns in his backpack. Another report said the University was concerned and had recommended him for counselling. If the store had had to check "is this is a suitable person to be carrying firearms" then the result would undoubtedly been different. Why doesn't the gun lobby promote and maintain a voluntary but effective code of conduct for purchase, storage, ownership, and use of guns? How many have to die?
David Singer, San Francisco
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 20:41 GMT 21:41 UK Obviously no society is free from violent crime. Incidents such as Columbine and Dunblane were planned and a problem all societies are burdened with. Yet if the US cannot swallow its pride and stop the wide avaliablity of guns then these people would have died in vain.
Carter Taylor, London
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 20:38 GMT 21:38 UK This is terrible, my thoughts go out to all the families effected by this. Surely it's time to re-write the constitution, the public have no need to bare arms. This 200 year old law is irresponsible in these modern times.
Steve, Manchester
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 20:37 GMT 21:37 UK if people are allowed to carry guns with them, these incidents do happen and will happen again. No one should be surprised at all.
Eric, HongKong
His parents really should have been more involved in his upbringing.
They just said 30000 people die each year because of guns.
Not time to rewrite the Constitution. Course, if someone had an education, they would realize that the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. Who cares what some idiot who doesn't even know English thinks.
Eric in Hong Kong I hope you read this: The death toll was so high because the people were NOT allowed to carry guns onto the campus.
Ummm, correction.... who cares what a bunch of foreigners think of our Constitution, period.
My sentiments exactly. But there probably some people in the U.S. who think we DO need an amendment for the right to “bare” arms (ha ha).
Not to mention that guns are verboten on campus. But that didn’t stop the killer.
Added: Tuesday, 17 April, 2007, 20:38 GMT 21:38 UK
This is terrible, my thoughts go out to all the families effected by this. Surely it's time to re-write the constitution, the public have no need to bare arms. This 200 year old law is irresponsible in these modern times.
Steve, Manchester
Never mind his other grammatical errors and punctuation errors --- NO NEED TO BARE ARMS!
FOTFLOL!
The BBC is relentlessly anti-American in nearly everything it does. Even in matters unrelated to the US, they strain to try and put an anti-American slant on a story any way they can.
People of other countries don’t like our Constitution. I guess that’s why they all want to come here???????????
I was wondering the same thing.
Today in Nagasaki, Japan, the mayor was shot and killed. Guns are outlawed in Japan. The shooter was a member of the crime underworld, had access to guns and did not care for or obey the current laws.
When guns are outlawed, only the criminals will have access to them.
Does this have any meaning or application for the US?
Tell me about our archaic laws and outdated ideals the next time a genocide occurs in Europe and the good citizens of that land are unable to defend themselves or protect others.
Yeah, laws don’t prevent crime. Criminals don’t care if something is illegal, they’re going to do it anyway. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be criminals.
So the black market will thrive and civilians will get slaughtered.
I am disgusted by the meadia blame game. Some want to blame guns. Some want to blame the VT security plan. Some want the VT President resign. It goes on and on.
Rarely will you hear anyone blame the guy who did the killing. This is where the blame lies. Here and only here.
Heck, arm everything. Time to stop this madness. No repeat offenders.
But, but, but VT is a Constitution-free zone therefore the only person with a gun was the criminal. He would have had them no matter what. He went through legal means to buy them, but if he couldn’t have gotten them legally it wouldn’t have stopped him.
The victims were fish in a barrel, sitting ducks, however you want to put it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.